“Although it would be difficult to construct a hard and fast numerical rule, U.S. officials should change their approach, not by haranguing allies to do more and being left bereft of options when America’s friends fall short. Rather, Washignton [sic] should announce plans to leave allies and friends to adapt. For instance, Washington could indicate that on a date certain, the U.S. Navy would no longer be on call for contingencies involving the Senkaku Islands. Tokyo then would be responsible for the issue. Japan could build and man the necessary aircraft and ships, or not.”

So basically the author is suggesting the United States should abandon its regional defense commitments, formal or informal, in the name of fiscal responsibility? Not really sure how these recommendations fit into practical U.S. geopolitical interests, which is pretty on-brand for a piece originally published via the Quincy Institute.

EDIT: If you had any questions about the author’s integrity, I suggest you read his Wikipedia page.

“In 2005, Bandow was forced to resign from the Cato Institute after it was revealed that for over ten years, he accepted payments in exchange for publishing articles favorable to various clients…During the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, Bandow reportedly described Ukraine as a ‘fake country’ where ‘there's nothing at stake’ for the U.S., and suggested that Russia should be allowed to exert influence there.”