Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / Here are New Year’s resolutions for U.S. foreign policy
Grand strategy, Asia, Europe and Eurasia, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Middle East, Ukraine‑Russia

December 31, 2024

Here are New Year’s resolutions for U.S. foreign policy

By Daniel DePetris

The end of the year is always bittersweet. On the one hand, it’s a time of joy and happiness, when loved ones come into town for the holidays. Yet on the other hand, there’s always the thought of how it’ll feel to go back to normal after New Year’s Day, when the routine starts up again.

This period, however, should also serve as a moment of reflection. What did we do right over the last 12 months? What did we do wrong? And what changes do I have to make to become a better person? Compiling a list of New Year’s resolutions is as American as apple pie.

New Year’s resolutions aren’t only for regular people. They also apply to the men and women in Washington who are responsible for crafting public policy, particularly if they happen to be members of the vast U.S. foreign policy establishment. These policymakers have made their fair share of mistakes over the last year just like the rest of us.

The list of mistakes is as wide as it is deep. In the Middle East, the United States has very little, if anything, to show for its diplomatic efforts. U.S. officials expend significant time, energy and resources playing peacemaker in a region synonymous in the American mind with pain, sunk costs and crisis. The war between Israel and Hamas grinds on despite periodic cease-fire talks, with the Palestinian death toll approaching 46,000. Lebanon is only just starting to rebuild after Israel’s monthslong air and ground offensive against Hezbollah. A tyrant in Syria is gone, providing millions of Syrians with hope for a better future, but that future could still go either way. Iran, meanwhile, is as close to a nuclear weapon as it has ever been.

Read at The Chicago Tribune

Author

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Western Hemisphere

ExplainerAmericas, Air power, Counterterrorism

No GWOT-Narco

By Daniel DePetris and Christopher McCallion

July 2, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Americas, China, Iran, Middle East, Russia

How not to do multipolarity

By Anthony Constantini

June 28, 2025

In the mediaGrand strategy, Alliances

US reviewing AUKUS submarine pact as part of ‘America first’ agenda

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

June 11, 2025

In the mediaGrand strategy

Trump’s cost-benefit doctrine defines foreign policy, 80 years post-WWII

Featuring Edward King

June 3, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Americas

Don’t go down to Mexico

By John Kitch II

May 31, 2025

op-edGrand strategy

DOGE Has Its Sights on the Defense Department

By Gil Barndollar

May 9, 2025

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGreat power competition, Balance of power, China, Grand strategy, Middle East

Past Virtual Event: U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Past Virtual Event: Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved