In my opinion, the United States needs a robust, active, and coherent foreign policy that is consistent with its interests, reasonably true to its ideals, and feasible within the constraint of the world's balance of power.

The U.S. could remain a beacon of freedom by showcasing its own commitment to democracy and human rights in its own practices. The U.S. would fully uphold its commitment to refrain from torture and continue to uphold the rights of its citizens. The power of example is too important to sacrifice to expediency.

In addition, the U.S. would remain a facilitator in improving world prosperity by retaining a commitment to trade liberalization and offering economic assistance that is consistent with its interests. It would play an active role in the international institutions to which it belongs. It would increase its foreign aid budget to levels that are consistent with the challenges that confront it. Such increases, in the long-run, would be far less costly than a sustained major conflict.

It would also seek to promote international peace and security by ensuring that its allies, along with it, retain sufficient power so as to maintain a credible deterrent over would-be aggressors. It would ensure that it maintains sufficient military strength so that no totalitarian state or combination of such states achieves military superiority over the U.S. and its allies. If necessary, the U.S. would defend its allies i.e., NATO countries, Israel, Japan, etc.

Overall, the U.S. would also leverage all of its foreign policy tools (diplomatic, foreign aid, trade, etc.) to address the challenges that confront it and its allies. Military force would be used when absolutely necessary, but only after diplomacy/non-military means have been given sufficient attention. Preemption would be consistent with the traditional doctrine in which a credible and imminent threat to the nation's critical interests and/or allies would need to be present. Theoretical possibilities e.g., what "might" happen would not cut the muster, so to speak. Non-military means ranging from economic sanctions to deterrence to maintaining/building a balance of power against a would-be aggressor would be employed when such criteria are not met.

The U.S. would also pursue good relations with the world's great military powers, and leading and rising economic powers i.e., Russia, China, India, etc. Coexistence and cooperation with respect to a shared interest in international stability is key to reducing the risk of conflict between these states and achieving aims that are of mutual benefit to these countries. Partnership would include a sharing of ideas and not one-way communication.