Don't Worry About the Imaginary 'Frontier'

An imaginary frontier like this is never fixed. It grows to accommodate the ambitions of imperial policymakers.

Jakub Grygiel and A. Wess Mitchell ask the wrong question:

Then, as now, moments of violent upheaval naturally prompt debates about the character of geopolitical change and the right strategies to cope with it. How should a great power manage a lengthy and distant frontier under attack?

Thinking of modern U.S. foreign policy in terms of defending or policing a “frontier” is obviously not new, but it is always going to get the U.S. into trouble by ensnaring it in conflicts that have little or nothing to do with vital American interests. It is a mistake to confuse the borders of other states for our own, and that is what is this “frontier” thinking often does. Once you start arbitrarily drawing the lines of where this “frontier” is, it becomes extremely easy to keep moving the lines to include more and more territory. An imaginary frontier like this is never fixed. It grows to accommodate the ambitions of imperial policymakers. That was dangerous enough in earlier centuries, but in a world where the great powers also have nuclear weapons it is a recipe for disaster.