In foreign policy, there are many ways to do more with less. Policy makers can, for example, use a mix of economic leverage and coercive diplomacy to get the results they want without a conflict or a trade war. In 2013, we will surely see more of these less risky, more cost-effective tactics as US, European, and Chinese officials resist entanglements abroad to focus their attention on domestic issues. But if they learnt anything from 2012, they will resist the temptation to pass off empty ultimatums as forceful foreign policy.
Consider some examples. The Obama administration has warned Syria’s Bashar al-Assad that “there will be consequences” if he uses chemical weapons to kill rebels. Leon Panetta, US defence secretary, says that “the whole world is watching”. Unfortunately, the world sees Washington drawing a red line that appears to imply that Mr Assad’s ongoing use of conventional weapons to murder his own people will not provoke a consequential response. It suspects that Mr Assad’s government will continue its fight to the finish, far more afraid that opposition forces will seize the capital than that Mr Obama will order airstrikes.
Mr Obama also says that the US will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapons capability. But this line was drawn mainly to protect the president’s political reputation at home. It will not persuade Iran’s leaders to renounce their nuclear plans.