War by Other Means: Geoeconomics and Statecraft by Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris

Croatian
International
Relations
War by Other Means:
Review
— Geoeconomics and Statecraft
CIRR _
—
XXVI (86) 2020,
183-186 By Robert D. Blackwill and
Jennifer M. Harris
2017. Harvard University Press. Pages: 384. ISBN 9780674979796
In October 2019, the US President Donald Trump announced

sanctions aimed at restraining the Turks’ military operation
in northern Syria, an assault particularly directed against
Kurdish fighters. In his sanctions announcement, Trump said
he was halting negotiations on a $100 billion trade deal with
Turkey and raising steel tariffs. “I am fully prepared to swiftly
destroy Turkey’s economy if Turkish leaders continue down this
dangerous and destructive path,”, he said. Two months earlier,
in August 2019, escalating further a trade war with China, he
declared he was ordering U.S. companies to “immediately start
looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your
companies HOME and making your products in the USA.” These
statements of the US President show how much the situation
has changed since 2017 when War by Other Means: Geoeconomics
and Statecraft was published.
The authors Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris from

the Council on Foreign Relations wrote the book in very
different times of conducting the US foreign policy. Just a
few years ago, they observed that “[w]hile many states are
repurposing economic tools for geopolitical use, the United
States is moving the reverse direction” (p. 47). The situation
changed dramatically as we have seen but it is necessary to
take a step back to understand authors’ motivation to write this
book. Frustrated by the US self-imposed constraint on using
geopolitical tools, they argue for the most part of the book for
employing American economic instruments again in a grand
strategic toolbox.
Nevertheless, it does not mean in any sense that the book

under review is obsolete under current circumstances. On the
contrary. Today, there are states that are entirely comfortable
183
Croatian
International
employing most of the tools of economics to advance state
Relations power. The Trump Administration is not shy to use economic
Review coercive pressure neither. Even the new European Commission
—
President Ursula von der Leyen speaks of “geopolitical
CIRR
— Commission” and mentions trade agreements as examples to
XXVI (86) 2020, exert the EU’s influence (Radosavljevic 2020). Considering the
183-186 developments, the book provides an important contribution to
a rapidly growing policymakers as well as academics’ interest
in geoeconomic matters.1 First, it defines “geoeconomics” as “the
use of economic instruments to promote and defend national
interests and to produce beneficial geopolitical results.” (p.
9) The authors further introduce a broad understanding of
geoeconomics at the beginning as they identify seven of today’s
leading geoeconomics instruments: trade policy, investment
policy, economic and financial sanctions, cyber, financial and
monetary policy, and energy and commodities.
Secondly, Blackwill and Harris examine the China’s approach

to geoeconomics, as the opposite and the strategic rival to the
United States while “the rise of China is arguably America’s
most important foreign policy challenge.” (p. 179) Alongside
its accession to the World Trade Organization in 2005 China
has also solidified its position in international investment
system since the embrace of “open door” policy in 1978. Today’s
China is an active investment policy-maker pursuing different
interests while its state-owned enterprises investing abroad are
increasingly under spotlight (Svoboda 2020: 1-12). Moreover, it
seems that an attention devoted to China and geoeconomics in
the age of the Belt and Road Initiative and the global debate on
5G networks will only further rise.
The third part of the book focuses on the United States. It

takes a critical view of the US foreign policy and, speaking
of 30 years of neglect, describes in detail how policymakers
in Washington lack geopolitical thinking in their responses
to current geopolitical challenges. For the authors, the US is
1 See e.g. Farrell, H., Newman, A. L., 2019. Weaponized Interdependence: How Global
Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security, 44(1). The authors argue
that economic globalization has generated powerful economic networks, which the
central actor can potentially exploit for coercive gain. O’Dea, C. R., 2019. Asia Rising:
Ships of State?, Naval War College Review, 72(1). The author examines the recent rapid
increase in Chinese port and shipping investments and the related emerging risks.
O’Dea, C. R., 2019. How China Weaponized the Global Supply Chain. National Review,
LXXI(12). The author describes how China is projecting power via global supply chains
based on the physical network of ports, ships, and terminals in combination with the
introduction of cyber-capabilities, including the installation of digital networks at
Chinese-controlled sites, typically by Huawei.
184
Croatian
International
underperforming compared to its present geoeconomical
Relations potential while the separation of economics from US foreign
Review policy and security policy reflects a shift from earlier American
—
experience (p. 176). To redress the situation, they propose twenty
CIRR
— steps covering various policy issues, for instance promoting US
XXVI (86) 2020, national interests through geoeconomic instruments, building
183-186 economic partnership with India as an emerging Pacific power,
addressing the climate change, preparing for the threat of state-
sponsored cyberattacks, refocusing development aid, adopting
new rules of engagement with the Congress and improving
university teaching about geoeconomics.
Still, there are a few points that are not absolutely convincing.
For instance, this reviewer does not share the authors’ optimism
concerning the “North America’s energy revolution” (p. 204).
As there is still no clear prospect of the US becoming a global
powerful energy actor, the OPEC countries still play a key role
in global energy markets. Furthermore, high expectations
regarding free trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment
Partnership (TTIP) have been fulfilled neither (p. 180-183). It is
right that it was Hillary Clinton, then a Secretary of State, who
once referred to TTIP as a possible “economic NATO” and TPP
represented a core element of Barrack Obama’s strategic “pivot
to Asia”. Moreover, free trade agreements could be perceived as
key tools of imposing transnational standards and directing
national trade policies. In this way, they are undoubtedly a part
of geopolitics and foreign policy instruments. Those claims
notwithstanding, trade and investment agreements currently
face various challenges in terms of rising protectionism and
populist backlash. It is thus even more difficult to conclude
them than before.
As the international economic order is transitioning away

from the post-Cold War Neoliberal Order towards a new
Geoeconomic Order (Roberts, Moraes, Ferguson 2019: 1), the
developments challenge traditional ways of thinking about
complex global economic networks. This paradigm shift
also informs foreign and security policy debates about how
to approach everything from energy pipelines to foreign
acquisitions of start-ups. In this context, the War By Other
Means by Blackwill and Harris provide a valuable theoretical
framework as well as an exposé on the current practice of US
“strategic competitors” – China and Russia (Department of
185
Croatian
International
Defence 2018: 1), full of compelling insights. As a well written
Relations study of economic statecraft it is especially pertinent to our
Review days.
—
CIRR
— Ondřej Svoboda2
XXVI (86) 2020,
183-186
References
Department of Defense, 2018. Summary of the National
Defense Strategy of The United States of America 2018:
Sharpening the American Military’s Competitive Edge.
Radosavljevic, Z., 2020. Von der Leyen fails to convince that her
Commission is ‘geopolitical’, Euractiv [online] 10 January.
Available at: https://www.euractiv.com/section/defence-
and-security/news/von-der-leyen-fails-to-convince-that-
her-commission-is-geopolitical/ [accessed 2 February
2020].
Farrell, H., Newman, A. L., 2019. Weaponized Interdependence:
How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion.
International Security, 44(1).
O’Dea, C. R., 2019. Asia Rising: Ships of State?, Naval War College
Review, 72(1).
O’Dea, C. R., 2019. How China Weaponized the Global Supply
Chain. National Review, LXXI(12).
Roberts, A., Moraes, H. C. and Ferguson, V., 2019. Toward a
Geoeconomic Order. Journal of International Economic Law,
22(4).
Svoboda, O., 2020. The End of European Naivety: Difficult
Times Ahead for SCEs/SOEs Investing in the European
Union?. Transnational Dispute Management, 17(2).
2 PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law of Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. This review
was supported by the Charles University’s project Progres Q04, ondrej.svobod@gmail.com
186

War by Other Means: Geoeconomics and Statecraft by Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

War by Other Means: Geoeconomics and Statecraft by Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

War by Other Means: Geoeconomics and Statecraft by Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Croatian

In October 2019, the US President Donald Trump announced

The authors Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris from

Nevertheless, it does not mean in any sense that the book

Secondly, Blackwill and Harris examine the China’s approach

The third part of the book focuses on the United States. It

As the international economic order is transitioning away

You might also like