{"id":2220520,"date":"2024-04-14T05:26:02","date_gmt":"2024-04-14T09:26:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/the-reagan-trump-roadmap\/"},"modified":"2024-04-14T05:30:45","modified_gmt":"2024-04-14T09:30:45","slug":"the-reagan-trump-roadmap","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/the-reagan-trump-roadmap\/","title":{"rendered":"Navigating from Reagan to Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">10<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fthe-reagan-trump-roadmap%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2220520&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The review of \u200d&#8217;We Win, They \u2064Lose: Republican Foreign Policy and\u2064 the\u2064 New\u2064 Cold War&#8217; by Matthew Kroenig and Dan Negrea \u2062examines the parallels between America&#8217;s victory in the \u2064Cold War with the Soviet Union \u200dand\u200c the current rivalry with China. The authors advocate for a Trump-Reagan\u200c fusion in GOP foreign policy to tackle\u2062 challenges and maintain America&#8217;s global standing.\u200b The review of &#8216;We \u2062Win, They Lose: Republican Foreign Policy and the \u200bNew Cold War&#8217;\u200d by Matthew\u2064 Kroenig and \u2064Dan Negrea discusses \u200cthe comparison between the Cold War victory against the Soviet \u200dUnion \u200cand the ongoing competition with China. It proposes a \u200dTrump-Reagan fusion within \u200dGOP foreign\u2062 policy to\u200b address current \u2062issues and\u200d uphold \u200cAmerica&#8217;s international position.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<h2>REVIEW: \u2018We Win, They Lose: Republican Foreign Policy and the New Cold War\u2019 by Matthew Kroenig and Dan Negrea<\/h2>\n<figure><figcaption> \t\t\t\t \t\t\t\tL: (Wikimedia Commons) R: (Chip Somodevilla\/Getty Images)\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div>\n<p>&#8220;My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple,&#8221; Ronald Reagan <a href=\"https:\/\/www.hoover.org\/research\/man-who-won-cold-war\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">told<\/a> Richard Allen, his future national security adviser, in 1977. &#8220;We win and they lose.&#8221; Reagan lived to see his policy come to fruition when the Soviet regime collapsed 14 years later.<\/p>\n<p>A new foreign policy roadmap by Matthew Kroenig and Dan Negrea is the namesake of the Gipper\u2019s famous words.<em> We Win, They Lose<\/em> could not have come at a better time for a Republican Party and a conservative movement looking to define its <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/elliott-abrams-launches-group-to-chart-gop-foreign-policy\/\" title=\"Elliott Abrams Launches Group to Chart GOP Foreign Policy\">national security policy<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>The authors draw a parallel between America\u2019s victory over the Soviets during the first Cold War and today\u2019s conflict between the United States and China, which they call &#8220;the New Cold War.&#8221; Defeating Beijing, they argue, must be the overriding aim of U.S. foreign policy. Few conservatives will disagree.<\/p>\n<p>Kroenig, an academic turned GOP foreign policy whiz, and Negrea, a defector from then-Communist Romania who made his mark in finance before serving in the Trump State Department, are direct in explaining how to relate Reagan\u2019s words to today\u2019s enemy. &#8220;America should strive for a situation where the Chinese Communist Party loses the will and\/or the capacity to challenge America\u2019s vital interests,&#8221; they state. Getting there is the focus of the rest of their book.<\/p>\n<p>Its pages have no <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/reflections-on-becoming-a-u-s-citizen\/\" title=\"Reflections on Becoming a U.S. Citizen\">starry-eyed idealism<\/a> or neo-isolationism. Kroenig and Negrea want to keep America secure, prosperous, and free. They also want to keep the U.S.-led world order because, they maintain, it has made Americans better off. The &#8220;We&#8221; in the book\u2019s title refers mostly to the United States, but it\u2019s also about the greater Free World.<\/p>\n<p>Besides Reagan, whom the authors revere, they see much to admire in the current Republican standard bearer. They call Trump and Reagan &#8220;the most influential Republican presidents of the past seventy-five years.&#8221; They\u2019re right to do so. Ford and Bush 41 were hardly Republican thought leaders. Bush 43\u2019s brand of compassionate conservatism did not endure. Although Eisenhower and Nixon were luminaries in their time, their influence on the party has faded. Reagan and Trump stand alone. As such, Kroenig and Negrea argue, today\u2019s Republican foreign policymakers should channel both men.<\/p>\n<p>To do so, they should embrace a &#8220;Trump-Reagan fusion.&#8221; By that, Kroenig and Negrea mean applying the best foreign policy contributions from each president. Take Reagan\u2019s loathing of communism and faith in America\u2019s greatness, which were two qualities he needed to defeat Moscow. As for Trump, he showed a lot of backbone in challenging the establishment\u2019s view of China. According to the authors, this Trump-Reagan fusion is what today\u2019s GOP most needs. It will unite conservatives around achievable goals and distinguish itself from the feckless progressive statecraft practiced by the other side. Much as Reagan\u2019s policies were instrumental in winning the first Cold War against the Soviet Union, this Trump-Reagan fusion will win the New Cold War against China.<\/p>\n<p>That said, the Trump-Reagan fusion isn\u2019t intuitive. Many claim that Trumpism and Reaganism cannot coexist. Prominent Reaganites deplore the MAGA camp\u2019s influence on the Republican Party. &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.wsj.com\/articles\/reagan-would-never-vote-for-trump-2024-presidential-election-744f6ca8\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Reagan would never vote for Trump<\/a>,&#8221; argues a recent <em>Wall Street Journal<\/em> op-ed by John Lehman, a brilliant maritime strategist who was secretary of the Navy under Reagan. Reaganite politicians like Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney long for the golden days of 2015, before Trump ascended down the golden escalator. The feeling is often mutual in Trump World. Younger members of the New Right in particular mock a &#8220;Zombie Reaganism&#8221; they say afflicts their fellow Republicans.<\/p>\n<p>In some ways, Trump and Reagan are indeed opposites. Trump upended Reaganite orthodoxy on trade and immigration and to a lesser extent international security commitments. Rhetorically they took very different approaches to foreign policy. Reagan denounced the Soviet Union\u2019s &#8220;evil empire,&#8221; whereas Trump heaped praise (and affection) on Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Kim Jong Un.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Kroenig and Negrea make a strong case that a Trump-Reagan fusion is desirable and attainable. Trump and Reagan are more similar personally than many would acknowledge. There is also a lot of common ground on policy. Trump and Reagan both advocated patriotism, excellence, and peace through strength. This book may make those who dismiss the Trump-Reagan fusion think twice.<\/p>\n<p>The fusion is found in the book itself. &#8220;The United States would be much poorer if it were to shut itself off from the global economy,&#8221; Kroenig and Negrea assert while sounding like traditional Reaganite free traders. Yet they add that Americans mustn\u2019t &#8220;be ripped off&#8221; and that they deserve &#8220;a free and fair international economic system&#8221; in recognition of the policies Trump has done so much to champion. Here they channel the Trump-Reagan fusion in capturing the Republican center of gravity on the trade issue.<\/p>\n<p>It is in discussing progressive foreign policy that Kroenig and Negrea seem to have the most fun. They relish criticizing the Left\u2019s na\u00efvet\u00e9 and self-hatred. One example is Democratic foreign policy elites\u2019 disproportionate attention to the woke cause du jour. Promoting progressive causes like DEI abroad is not just a waste of time. &#8220;It is also a mistake to push progressive social policies\u2014many controversial even within the United States\u2014on other countries with even more traditional values,&#8221; Kroenig and Negrea point out. That includes the Biden administration\u2019s decision to fly the rainbow flag outside U.S. embassies in Muslim countries. Democrats may feel good about themselves for spreading the progressive gospel, but they\u2019re alienating countries that the United States needs on its side in the New Cold War. Kroenig and Negrea also demolish the Democratic consensus on climate change. &#8220;Climate change is not one of the most important foreign policy challenges facing the United States,&#8221; they write, demonstrating that the impact of climate change will not be nearly as grave as other threats.<\/p>\n<p>The book comes up short in a few places. It is at times repetitive and inelegant. In their chapter on free and fair trade, for instance, Negrea and Kroenig write that &#8220;The United States and other market-based economies should selectively decouple from China.&#8221; Just two sentences later, they add that &#8220;The United States must continue to selectively decouple from China.&#8221; Despite the many endnotes, there is no index, which could have helped readers find specific issues quicker. Although some may take issue with the book\u2019s brevity, it\u2019s not supposed to be a hefty tome. Rather, the authors cover the basics in a way that will appeal to both foreign policy hands and non-specialists.<\/p>\n<p>Kroenig and Negrea articulate a strong vision for American victory in the tradition of two consequential Republican presidents. As Republicans consider what to do should they retake the White House this election, <em>We Win, They Lose<\/em> should be on their reading lists.\t<\/p>\n<p><em>We Win, They Lose: Republican Foreign Policy and the New Cold War<\/em><br \/>  by Matthew Kroenig and Dan Negrea<br \/> Republic Book Publishers, 220 pp., $29.95<\/p>\n<p><em>Daniel J. Samet is a doctoral candidate at the University of Texas at Austin and an America in the World Consortium pre-doctoral fellow at Johns Hopkins SAIS.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In the review of &#8216;We Win, They Lose: Republican Foreign Policy and the New Cold War&#8217; by Matthew Kroenig and Dan Negrea, the authors delve into Ronald Reagan&#8217;s straightforward approach towards the Soviet Union in 1977: &#8220;We win and they lose.&#8221; This philosophy shaped Reagan&#8217;s foreign policy strategies during the Cold War era<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3067,"featured_media":2220521,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/freebeacon.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/MixCollage-08-Apr-2024-10-44-AM-1020.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[544],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2220520","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-free-beacon"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/freebeacon.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/MixCollage-08-Apr-2024-10-44-AM-1020.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2220520","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3067"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2220520"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2220520\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2220521"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2220520"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2220520"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2220520"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}