I'd disagree. Not sure if you're thinking about grand strategy as a plan written down or a set of principles but most states have both. If you're going to mobilise all your national resources you need to engage the public so it is actually more democratic than a piecemeal approach.

D9!

That said, I'm bemused that Simon Fraser thinks a US invasion of Greenland wouldn't be the end of NATO. As Fiona Hill implies, it would be a Hungary 56 or Prague 68 moment, but with Europeans able to leave.

That's basically where it all went wrong and productivity stalled 😅

That appears to be your job, no?!

Internet wasn't really a 90s thing. I managed to do a degree from 95 to 98 without having an email address and didn't use it at all. Only really became mainstream in 2000s.

He's already gone there...
m.youtube.com/shorts/Dcf2j...

You want me to provide evidence for the assertion that if you make something valuable easier to acquire, more people will seek to acquire it?

That's not a solution to the problem as they define it. If you make it easier to immigrate, you will increase the numbers coming in.

Unfortunately, there is no funding to look into hard security matters. Government doesn't allocate any and fellow academics/former officials gatekeep to prevent funding bodies from supporting that kind of research.

Yes, it was always a longstanding tradition but Blair's liberal interventionism and Brexit were seen as a departure - hence the attempt by Tories and Labour to hark back to it as a reset.

It's a common theme in British foreign policy Stephanie but often as a shorthand for Realism or a nonideological stance. We talk about it here (open access):
academic.oup.com/ia/article/1...

Starmer should begin contingency planning for the UK's response. If tariffs are imposed, a request to join the EU single market should be considered to offset the economic hit. This is not diehard Remainer rhetoric, just a recognition of reality: UK needs allies and reliable economic partners. End/