The President’s Inbox

This episode unpacks what strategy really is, the seven questions every strategist must ask themselves before initiating a military operation, and why war stays so stubbornly unpredictable. Host: James M. Lindsay, Mary and David Boies Distinguished Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy, CFR Guest: Eliot A. Cohen, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and author of The Strategist: How to Think About War and Politics We Discuss: What strategy can actually accomplish, and whether the outcome of war is ultimately a matter of chance. Why Eliot Cohen adopts a deliberately narrow definition of strategy—and why he has little use for the fashionable term “grand strategy.” The distinction between strategy and planning, and why execution is what separates a strategist from a planner. The seven questions every strategist must ask, from “what else is going on?” to “what is your theory of victory?” Why understanding the adversary—“Who are those guys?”—is a recurring American blind spot, including in the Iran war. How surprise, groupthink, and the limits of human judgment repeatedly derail even the best-led war efforts. What Carl von Clausewitz meant by describing war as the continuation of politics by other means. Why a classical liberal education may be the best training for judgment in an age of AI. Mentioned on the Episode: James M. Lindsay, "The 10 Best and 10 Worst U.S. Foreign Policy Decisions," CFR.org Carl von Clausewitz, On War, Princeton University Press Eliot A. Cohen, The Strategist: How to Think About War and Politics, Princeton University Press Robert W. Komer, Bureaucracy Does Its Thing: Institutional Constraints on U.S.-GVN Performance in Vietnam, RAND Corporation Peter Paret, ed., Makers of Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, Princeton University Press For an episode transcript and show notes, visit The President’s Inbox at: https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/presidents-inbox/the-seven-questions-every-military-strategist-must-ask Opinions expressed on The President’s Inbox are solely those of the host or guests, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.

This episode unpacks the deepening U.S.-Canada trade war, the collapse of a potential deal to end it, and whether decades of economic integration are rupturing. Host: James M. Lindsay, Mary and David Boies Distinguished Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy, CFR Guest: Rohinton Medhora, Professor of Practice at McGill University and Distinguished Fellow at the Center for International Governance and Innovation (CIGI) We Discuss: Whether the latest U.S. tariffs mark a genuine “rupture” in the U.S.-Canada relationship or just another rough patch in a partnership that goes back more than a century. How a nine-year arc—from the NAFTA renegotiation to USMCA—led to today’s standoff, and why Ottawa sees the U.S. national security rationale for steel and aluminum tariffs as a betrayal. How a mid-August deal collapsed, and what Canadian negotiators mean by the “ghost in the room.” Why Prime Minister Mark Carney chose to retaliate “elbows up” rather than follow Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum’s more conciliatory approach. How Canada’s “messy and noisy” federation—from Doug Ford’s Ontario to Alberta’s secessionist stirrings and Quebec’s election—shapes Ottawa’s room to maneuver. Whether energy exports are the “elephant in the room,” and how far Canada could go in using them as leverage. How Ottawa is courting U.S. governors, senators, and public opinion in states that depend on cross-border trade. What the unresolved fight over digital technology means for where the U.S.-Canada relationship heads next. Mentioned on the Episode: Ronald Reagan, “Radio Address to the Nation on Free and Fair Trade,” Ronald Reagan Presidential Library For an episode transcript and show notes, visit The President’s Inbox at: https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/presidents-inbox/elbows-up-how-canada-is-fighting-trumps-tariffs Opinions expressed on The President’s Inbox are solely those of the host or guests, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.