America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy

The present book is a compelling read and covers many but not all of the major issues on terrorism and Iraq. I feel like I have been on an overdose of these books just having read House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger - the biggest tell all blockbuster (my opinion), The Choice by Zbigniew Brzezinski (an excellent analysis), Disarming Iraq by Hans Blix, Noam Chomsky's Hegemony of Survival (truly a book that makes one think), Thirty Days (about Tony Blair) by Peter Stothard, and Price of Loyalty by Paul O'Neill (excellent book), Why America Slept by Gerald Posner, the very popular best seller Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke, and the Rise of the Vulcans by Mann and Mann. I put together a "listmania" list of the 25 best books - the best books - mainly non political taken together, no strong bias conservative or liberal - a spectrum of opinion when you take them all together. Many of the books are "gotcha" books that link Bush with some wrong doings or alternately books like Brzezinski that lay out solutions. This book is a bit different. It is more of a chronological history, and the book has been highly acclaimed by the Economist, NY Times etc. After reading I can see why. I started to read the present book and was unable to put it down until I had read it virtually cover to cover. It is a surprisingly good book and neutral in tone and a compelling read - for myself it was a page turner. It brings together the story of Iraq and WMD's in chronological order (all briefly). It starts with the Bush campaign and what he says in his run for the presidency regarding foreign policy, his philosophy, the team that he put together, plus the authors put in some historical perspective starting with Washington, then Wilson, Truman, etc. It then works its way through pre and post 9-11, Afghanistan and Iraq until late 2003. Surprisingly I found that this book is in almost complete agreement with some of the more recent "tell all" books (Blix, O'Neill, Clarke), and I would strongly recommend reading this book. The overlying theme or conclusion is that the intelligence was flawed and incomplete. Like the Hans Blix book there were no WMD's in Iraq. The Iraq war was pushed by Wolfowitz and others prior to 9-11, and can best be described as a distraction or even an incitement of Muslims towards anti-Amercian feelings. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan lacked realistic follow up plans for the post military invasion. So those conflicts still remain unresolved. Also, the more serious threats of Iran and North Korea remain almost unsolvable due to the potential negative consequences of a military solution for those cases including the threat of North Korea dropping nuclear weapons on South Korea. An excellent book and I highly recommend.

Collaboratively written by Ivo H. Daalder (a Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy Studies at the Brooks Institution) and James M. Lindsay (the Vice President and Director of Studies of the Council on Foreign Relations), America Unbound: The Bush Revolution In Foreign Policy asks the politically loaded question: "How did a man once mocked for knowing little about the world come to be a foreign policy revolutionary?" Presenting an unabashedly positive portrayal of President George W. Bush's foreign policy, America Unbound draws upon recent modern history to chart a course for the future -- while warning of pitfalls and problems that could stir the resentment of other powers. A stirring and thought-provoking exhortation of President George W. Bush as a bringer of global change, America Unbound is strongly recommended reading for political conservatives, political commentators, and students of contemporary American politics as reflected by the Bush Administration as it engages in a global war against international terrorism.

The Brookings Institute earns its reputation as a unique think tank that blends excellent scholarship, a dispassionate tone, and accessibility for the general reader. "America Unbound" is emblematc of the Brookings creed. Although many books have critiqued America's radical new approach to foreign policy, "America Unbound" is the only title that retains a neutral, even clinical tone.There are no ambitious arguments forwarded in this book. Instead, the reader is presented with a very thorough account of the Bush administration's foreign policy record, and the policy circles that have shaped it. The authors do, however, tackle two popular tropes; that Bush is a rube to his advisers, and that "neo-cons" have played Rasputin to that rube. The authors offer a account that portrays a Bush who is master of his own destiny, who has formulated a consistent vision, and who has synthasized a foreign policy based on the advice of a number of polcy cliques - democratic imperialists, assertive nationalists, and defensive realists.My only criticism of the book is the inadequate treatment of the underlying premise of Bush's vision, which the authors describe as "hegemonist." In defining the "hegemonist" philosophy, they entirely neglect the essential examination of "minimal" versus "maximal" realism models, which are really the heart of the debate over the wisdom of Bush's foreign policy approach. Minimal realism is the wellspring for many critics and alternative thinkers (Joseph Nye, for example), and yet maximal realism has been an ascendent paradigm among many. The subject is simple, essential, and relevant. The authors would have been wise to address it.The other quibble I have with the book its hasty conclusions about the fallout from Iraq. Though the rubicon has been crossed, the jury is still out on whether Bush will be vindicated or villified for the intervention. As well, with an election year coming, it is erroneous to conclude that Bush's soft pedalling toward Korea is a retreat from his "revolution." If Bush is reelected and a stabilizing Iraq emerges, it might just as easily be argued that a Phase III in the War on Terror is launched, with a commensurate second wind of flourish.

This one is of the best book criticizing Bush unilateralism. The two authors were staffers of the Clinton's National Security Council. Yet, their analysis remains as objective as possible. The book central argument is well accepted: the President unilateralism has produced quick victories in Afghanistan and Iraq but has fractured the world system and has exacerbated anti-Americanism. As a result, the U.S. is less secure. The authors make the case that "the fundamental premise of the Bush revolution that America's security rested on an America unbound was profoundly mistaken."The attacks of September 11, 2001, allowed Bush to refashion American foreign policy in a bolder fashion. But, his vision and goals really had not changed. His key assumption is the belief that states, rather than individuals or groups remain the essential force in international affairs. Bush came up with his phrase "Axis of Evil" when referring to Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. He also set his foreign policy in black or white "you are either with us or against us." This refers to countries supposedly supporting terrorism or not. Despite the evidence that al Qaeda is supranational terrorist network with few allegiance to specific State, the Bush doctrine is to fight such terrorist network one State at a time. While the connection between al Qaeda and the Afghanistan Taliban made sense following Bush vision that States do sponsor terrorism; The Taliban was the exception that confirms the rule. Typically, it is not the case, as terrorist networks operate beyond State boundaries. Yet, the conviction derived from victory over the Taliban sent Bush and the U.S. astray on an unbound foreign policy leading to the Iraqi invasion. Regarding Iraq, all the administration assumptions turned out to be incorrect. The U.S. administration three main assumptions where:1) Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat;2) Turning Iraq into a viable self-governing state would be easy. The Iraqis would welcome U.S. troops as liberators; and3) Once weapons were found and postwar normality returned even those countries opposed to the war would want to contribute to Iraq reconstruction.All assumptions were wrong. No weapons of mass destruction have been found. The Iraqi society has collapsed. U.S. soldiers are killed almost daily by Islamic terrorists infiltrating Iraq. And, the U.S. alone is bearing the fiscal and military burden of Iraq reconstruction. Another false assumption driven by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was that the peacekeeping occupation of Iraq would take far fewer soldiers (only 30,000) than the actual war did. This turned out to be a huge mistake. It quickly became clear that the peacekeeping occupation required more soldiers than the war (180,000 for peacekeeping, only 125,000 for the war). The soldiers ranks were quickly shored up; But, at a cost of more than $1 billion per week. We will need that many troops ther

Few people know as much about foreign policy from the inside as does Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution, a think tank in DC that actually managers to be genuinely non-partisan and therefore all the more authoritative. This book is thus all the more well-informed, judiciously written and scrupulously balanced than much of the rabidly right or rabidly left material pouring out at the moment. If you really want the inside scoop on what to think of George Bush's foreign policy, especially with a war on terrorism going on (and possibly not that well....) and a Presidential election looming, you could do no better to look at this superb and well though out authoritative book on Bush and his foreign policy. Christopher Catherwood (who once spent time in a similar institution in the UK, and author of CHRISTIANS, MUSLIMS AND ISLAMIC RAGE, Zondervan 2003)