Every episode of Glenn Diesen - Greater Eurasia Podcast, briefed the morning after, with up to nine more shows in one daily email.

Free for 30 days. No card needed. $4.99 a month after.

John Mearsheimer: U.S. Grand Strategy After Hegemony

14 August 2026 · 1h 2m

Mearsheimer argues that the US faces strategic overreach because it refuses to prioritize vital interests over ideological commitments to global hegemony. He contends that the US must abandon the pursuit of liberal hegemony and adopt offshore balancing to prevent the exhaustion of its resources and the deterioration of its global standing.

What was discussed

Defining US Grand Strategy4:32

Mearsheimer defines grand strategy as aligning a state's vital interests, defined by a willingness to fight, with available military means while assessing threats, distinguishing it from broader foreign policy that includes all goals and instruments. He argues the framework requires identifying vital interests, assessing threats to those interests, and determining the military forces needed to protect them.

US Priorities Shift to East Asia13:59

Mearsheimer identifies the Western Hemisphere, Europe, East Asia, and the Persian Gulf as historical vital interests, but argues East Asia has superseded Europe since 2017 because China is now the premier peer competitor. He contends that the rise of a rival regional hegemon is unacceptable, making China's potential dominance the primary threat to US security for the first time in history.

Competing US Grand Strategies29:23

Mearsheimer contrasts four grand strategies—isolationism, offshore balancing, selective engagement, and global hegemony—arguing that no single approach is settled. He favors offshore balancing, which withdraws forces unless a local hegemon threatens a region, and criticizes global hegemony for treating all regions as vital interests and overextending US resources.

The Burden of US Unipolarity33:51

Mearsheimer argues that the unipolar moment after the Soviet collapse allowed the US to adopt liberal hegemony, leading to strategic overreach and ideological interventions like the war in Iran. He maintains that the US retains raw power but has suffered a severe decline in its ability to project power and win diplomatic influence, though he speculates this could lead to a renewed, laser-like focus on East Asia in the long term.

Russia's Strategic Alignment with the East42:35

Mearsheimer contends that Russia's current strategy involves forming a coalition with China, Iran, and North Korea to counter the US while sowing dissension within Europe to prevent collective action. He argues Russia views Europe as an enemy and aims to turn Ukraine into a dysfunctional rump state, a posture driven by the West's refusal to integrate Russia into a pan-European security architecture.

European Sunk Costs in NATO Expansion46:07

Mearsheimer claims the US and Europe are locked into NATO expansion by sunk costs and an ideological commitment to an open-door policy, preventing a strategic pivot despite war failures and reduced US commitment. He notes the West dismissed early warnings about the strategy alienating Russia and continues to refuse diplomatic accommodation, resulting in an inability to formulate a new policy.

Strategic Consequences of US Defeat in Iran54:21

Mearsheimer states the war in Iran has weakened US conventional deterrence in East Asia, forcing a doctrinal shift toward tactical nuclear weapons while benefiting China and Russia. He argues this military diversion will ultimately lead to long-term nuclear proliferation among allies like Japan as the US struggles to project power and maintain security umbrellas in multiple theaters.