Strategic autonomy is having a moment.

European leaders are invoking it to justify a historic defense buildup; India’s foreign ministry has made it the organizing principle of a policy that buys Russian oil while courting American investment; and Canada is treating it as a “core objective.”

The phrase is everywhere in international relations circles, but the explanation is almost nowhere. So what does strategic autonomy actually mean? And why are analysts reaching for it now?

Leverage more than self-sufficiency

The first thing to note is that autonomy does not imply withdrawal from the international order or a severing or reduction of ties with Washington.

Take the European Union, for instance. As one of the few organizations that has made explicit its aspirations for strategic autonomy, the EU is boosting its collective-defense spending to hedge against an America whose long-term commitments can no longer be relied upon.

India still participates in the Quad strategic alliance alongside the U.S., Australia and Japan, but it conducts an independent foreign policy when its interests don’t align with Washington’s. Canada is diversifying its partnerships but not decoupling.

You can argue with the particulars of each case. But from Germany to India to Canada, the basic instinct driving these countries’ foreign policies is the same: seeking to increase their maneuvering room while remaining broadly aligned with the United States.

All remain embedded in the........

© The Conversation