America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order

Although George W. Bush has gotten credit for the new face of American foreign policy his is merely a reflection of an intellectual movement that's been around for decades, solidified in the early 90's and really took hold after September 11th. The ideology is known as neo-conservativism and its adherents litter the White House and Pentagon. They are marked by an intense hatred of international agreements and organizations, diplomacy and the State Department. The neo-cons preach a black and white, good and evil (with us or against us) worldview and frame their arguments in moralistic terms. To them military force is the catch all answer for international problems with some neo-cons going so far as to advocate continual war. Americans forget or perhaps don't realize that Iraq was intended to be just the first in a string of wars that included Syria, Libya, Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern and African counties. Rather than an attack from the left `America Alone' is a measured criticism of neo-conservativism from the middle right. The authors point to an intellectual wattage drain in the second generation neo-conservatives. Whereas the first generation went through an evolution in thinking and prided themselves on intellectual experimentation the second generation seems to have been, as the author put it, born middle aged. Experimentation gave way to inflexibility to the point where neo-conservatives found themselves incapable of adapting to a new and increasingly open Soviet Union emerged. The new generation has by and large abandoned academia and moved straight into politics and policy making but operate like someone working from within a gated community. Almost to a man the neo-conservatives have spent no time in the military while continually choose the military route. Conservatives have long railed against small groups of experts, intellectuals or `elites' setting policy contrary to popular will yet this is exactly what the neo-conservatives have done. They have cynically manipulated public opinion on the Iraqi war using time tested propaganda techniques and brazen lies. There is an arrogance among neo-conservatives that the general public is unprepared for the lofty neo-con goals so rather than articulate their true agenda they offer answers designed simply to placate the populace. This was particularly evident in the WMD sales pitch for an Iraqi invasion. In the case of foreigners the neo-cons feel it's their right, perhaps even duty to completely alter societies that don't conform to western democratic free market capitalism. Although the neo-conservatives claim to be realists their liberal idealism is most evident in Iraq where neo-cons like Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle made obscenely rosy predictions about the outcome of the invasion and the so called `domino effect'. The neo-conservatives believe America can literally reshape the entire Middle Eastern region through sheer brute force and no amount of monetary or hu

This is a book that will appeal to conservatives, written by conservatives. It explains who the neoconservatives are, where they came from, and what they want. It documents the facts that Iraq was always on their agenda for several years and only when they were in positions of power and when the opportunity arose could they implement their plans, albeit by covert means, rather than by openly proclaiming their intentions and having a fair foreign policy debate. If you wondered who the neo-cons were, why we suddenly went from a war against Al Queda in Afghanistan to a war in Iraq, this book will answer your questions. If you are a conservative this will show you that the neo-cons do not adhere to traditional conservative philosophies, since when has invading countries for nation-building agendas been a conservative approach to foreign policy?

This book shows the Neo-Con agenda to be the bankrupt policy that it truly is - a 21st Century fable of the "Emperor's New Clothes." Except people - American GI's, Iraqis and Afghans - are dying because of this fable. For anyone who wants to understand this administration's foreign policy - and just how it has been hi-jacked - this is the book! This is a concise recording of ideology over reality. The facts be damned. The ideological agenda is what is important - not the reality of the facts. "Damn the torpedoes - Full speed ahead." (And after all, those of us in Washington and Academia who espouse this theory aren't the ones who must do the bleeding and dying. We have others to do that for us.) I think a few excerpts from the book explain our current foreign policy - and the reasons for the war in Iraq. A basic tenet of the Neo-Con movement is American Supremacy - military and other. Hence there is no need to be bothered with other nations or their interests. This is the famous "Unipolar Moment" which is now an "Era." This is the reason we need "no entangling alliances." "Having, as we have shown, more or less abandoned international cooperation as a means of achieving American objectives, having an almost religious belief in military power, and living by a historically anomalous selfish interpretation of American leadership, Neo-conservatives prefer to go it alone." (pg 272) On page 281 is a quote from a historical figure which is very apropos - "As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil then the good becomes indistinguishable from the evil they set out to destroy" - John Locke. (pg 281) We have very much come to this with the new permissiveness for the "invasion of privacy" under the PATRIOT and other laws put forward by this administration. And most clear and concise of all is this Clausewitzian statement found on pg. 282, "Terrorism neither occurs in a vacuum nor is it generally a product of outside agitation or ideologies. Rather terror can be seen to follow Clausewitz's dictum as politics by other means. Placed in a political context, there can be no military conclusion to a counterterrorist campaign." (pg 282) Witness Algeria, witness Viet Nam, witness Northern Ireland, witness Basque Spain, and witness Iraq to come. Neo-Conservatism is a bankrupt policy of military aggression and suppression. It can be explained to Iraqi's as "This is what is best for you." Is it no surprise that they reject it - and that our "allies" such as France, Germany, Korea and many others reject it also. The book is a real eye opener. You should not miss it if America's future is something important to you.

This book singlehandedly restored my confidence in the potential for reasoned political debate in our society, and by extentension the future of our republic. In a country where the likes of Sean Hannity scream in your right ear, and the likes of Michael Moore scream in your left, it becomes difficult for a reasonable, neutral citizen to make sense of what's going on in these our troubled times. In our frighteningly polarized society, the truth is easily drowned out by the din of the polemicists. Enter Halper and Clarke. These two self-proclaimed conservatives calmly and clinically dissect a perversion of their school known as neo-conservatism. Tracing their development from roots in Cold War liberalism to their apex in the Bush administration, Halper and Clarke's sober and authoratative analysis warns us of the dangers of neo-conservatives' proclivities to unilateralism, closed-minded self-righteousness, and brute military force. As a result, the American government has lost credibility both domestically and internationally, forfeited its moral high ground, and fanned--rather than extinguished--the raging fires of anti-Americanism and terrorism. I cannot stress enough the impartiality of this book. While they completely disagree with neo-conservatives, they do not launch into endless ad hominem assaults, throw out red herrings, or get red in the face. Quite the contrary, Halper and Clarke think that neo-conservatives genuinely believe that their policies are best for America. I suppose, in a sense, that this is damning them with faint praise. In the end, their analysis is rationally argued and compelling. This is an exceptionally important book for our times. The only qualm I have is that there are numerous typos--completely unacceptable and surprising coming from the CUP. Read this book though, please. Post scriptum: Pay no mind to C. Cotten "SimpleSimon." The book mentions Democrats maybe three times (and then only in passing). Their point is that unilateralism is a BAD idea, not that the Dems brought down the USSR. "SimpleSimon" clearly did not read this book.

It's refreshing to see two conservatives take on the neo-cons. Stefan Halper is a senior fellow at The Centre of International Studies at Cambridge University and served in the Nixon, Ford, and Reagan administrations. Jonathan Clarke is a foreign-affairs scholar at the CATO Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C. They carefully and compellingly illustrate how the neo-cons abandoned the successful foreign-policy model pursued under the Reagan and G.H.W. Bush administrations. Halper and Clarke's book should give any Republican pause for thought, and it seems that the Bush administration is finally starting to make a slow return to the foreign-policy model that served America so well under Reagan and Bush Sr. Highly recommended reading!