The Duck of Minerva

Van Jackson

Van Jackson is a professor of international relations at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, and a think tanker at lots of places around the world: a distinguished fellow at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada; a senior associate fellow at the Asia-Pacific Leadership Network for Nuclear Nonproliferation & Disarmament (APLN); and the defence & strategy fellow at the Centre for Strategic Studies in New Zealand. He also hosts The Un-Diplomatic Podcast. Before entering academia, Van was a foreign policy practitioner, working as a strategist and policy adviser in the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the Obama administration and serving in the US Air Force as a Korean linguist and intelligence analyst. He is the author of two books on US-North Korea relations with Cambridge University Press, On the Brink: Trump, Kim, and the Threat of Nuclear War (2018) and Rival Reputations: Coercion and Credibility in US-North Korea Relations (2016). He has a third book forthcoming with Yale University Press titled Pacific Power Paradox: American Statecraft and the Fate of the Asian Peace.

Recent Posts

Antagonistic Trust, Asian Insecurity, and “Strategic” Competition

Antagonistic Trust, Asian Insecurity, and “Strategic” Competition

by | 18 September, 2022 | ,

I was on a refreshingly contrarian panel recently as part of Victoria Forum, this big shindig in Canada (at University of Victoria in British Columbia, not to be confused with Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, where I teach). The topic was “Trust-Building in Asia in an Era of Great Power Competition.”  Unlike most panels on “great power competition,” and I've been on a few, this one didn’t have anyone cheerleading for a new Cold War. Everyone had their own version of skepticism about “great power competition” as a meaningful framework. You can watch the panel below. My...

read more
To Fear or Love Multipolarity?

To Fear or Love Multipolarity?

by | 13 August, 2022 | , ,

The global distribution of material power changes from time to time. It’s something that happens, not something we should spend any amount of time pursuing or avoiding. I say this as someone who thinks the United States has done questionable good and much unquestionable harm with its former status as a unipolar power, so this is not a proxy argument about US foreign policy.   You might be wondering who wants multipolarity, and the answer is lots of folks.  Most versions of the coalition favoring foreign policy restraint implicitly seek a multipolar world....

read more
Geopolitical Rivalry: Great for Princes, Bad for Paupers

Geopolitical Rivalry: Great for Princes, Bad for Paupers

by | 17 July, 2022 | , ,

If you’ve spent any amount of time in Washington, there’s a good chance you’ve internalized a rosier narrative of the Cold War than the actual history warrants (I certainly had).  To correct that, I have an essay out in Foreign Affairs with Michael Brenes, arguing that the bipartisan cheerleading for great-power rivalry today is based on a jaundiced reading of Cold War history. The popular image of the Cold War—as a historical moment that brought out America’s productive energies and made us step up our democracy game—has a basis in truth but obscures more than...

read more
The Real Conservative Foreign Policy Debate

The Real Conservative Foreign Policy Debate

by | 8 June, 2022 | ,

There’s a battle going down inside the Republican party for what conservative foreign policy ought to be. The problem is that stakeholders in the debate are misrepresenting its terms, and journalistic onlookers are misapprehending what’s really going on.   A senior fellow at American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the neoconservative think tank, officially put it on wax that, yes, there’s a debate over conservative foreign policy, but it’s between “internationalists” and “isolationists.”   The way the New York Times tells it, what’s happening within...

read more