Should the U.S. Play Hard to Get?

How can the United States best influence the behavior of other countries? Stephen Walt thinks we're best served by playing hard to get:

The basic idea is simple: the United States is very powerful and fairly secure, and so our allies usually need our support more than we need theirs. If we understand that fact, we gain a lot of leverage over their conduct by making it clear that our support depends on their cooperation. If we forget that fact, or we start obsessing about our own credibility and need to demonstrate "toughness," we lose that leverage and others start taking advantage of us.

Whatever else one can say for this approach, this is not the prevailing view today. Washington appears far more concerned with staying engaged than in standing back and waiting (hoping?) other nations will invite us to the table. I think the fear of someone else muscling their way into our seat always trumps our confidence in the security and attractiveness of an alliance with the U.S.

But is playing hard to get always the right strategy? On the security front, perhaps, but I can't see how it would help us in, say, winning preferential oil and gas deals.