The United States Is Still Addicted to War
Foreign Policy
by Stephen M. WaltMarch 2, 2026
AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary
The United States has a long-standing pattern of presidential administrations engaging in major military campaigns despite campaign promises to avoid war. This cycle has persisted through multiple administrations, with each leader eventually becoming entangled in conflicts regardless of their initial intentions. From Bill Clinton's missile strikes and no-fly zones to George W. Bush's Iraq invasion, Barack Obama's surge in Afghanistan and targeted killings, Donald Trump's continuation of the "forever wars," and Joe Biden's limited withdrawals while increasing military budgets, the trend remains consistent.
Historically, presidents have justified their military actions with varying rationales, often framing them as necessary for national security or global stability. However, these decisions have frequently led to prolonged conflicts without clear resolutions, draining resources and attention from domestic priorities like economic recovery and social issues. The article highlights how political rhetoric about peace often clashes with the realities ofU.S. foreign policy, which tends to favor military intervention over diplomatic solutions.
This pattern matters because it underscores the deep-rooted influence of militarism in U.S. politics and international relations. Voters may be drawn to candidates who pledge to reduce war, but once in office, the pressures of global security and political expectations often lead to renewed military involvement. Understanding this cycle is crucial for evaluating campaign promises and assessing the long-term consequences ofU.S. foreign policy on both domestic and international stages.
Verticals
politicsinternational
Originally published on Foreign Policy on 3/2/2026