Two of the most frequent criticisms or concerns that John and I hear when we present the Princeton Project final report are ones raised by Dan and Peter in their thoughtful and helpful posts. First is the charge that a multidimensional national security policy will have too many dimensions for the American people to swallow; that it will be trumped every time by the appealing simplicity of the war on terror with Islamo-Fascism as the enemy. That was the appeal of containment, the argument goes: it was wonderfully simple. We can argue all we want that we face multiple threats, but voters simply won’t buy a national security strategy with too many moving parts. Second, as Peter argues particularly, the votes just aren’t there for engagement with international institutions on any basis, a strategy that he characterizes as “substituting international partnership for national power.”

Not surprisingly, we disagree on both counts.