American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy

A fantastic description of how U.S. policymakers have broadened their perception of U.S. national interests to be essentially unbounded. In reality, the book focuses primarily on the history of U.S. diplomacy, as opposed to the consequences of its pursuit of increasingly unlimited aims. Bacevich perceptively describes the U.S. as at heart a revolutionary power whose domestic myths, desires, and insecurities cause it to look outwards in search of a transformative mission.

This is one the better books of analysis done on America's place in the world. Its an honest attempt to put down on paper the realities of America's interactions with the world rather than the idealisms that many authors (especially neoconservative ones) present. What make the book so good is that it actually tries to be neutral and to look at things from an objective point of view. His coverage of the American Military is unmatched. He is one of the few writers that actually talks about the reality of the Military and politics in America. The only point the author misses is an understanding of how the very size of prosperity of the United States forces it into certain roles. Economic sucess at home inevitably leads to economic expansion overseas. And economic expsnsion leads to concerns about security outside of the country's borders. The other thing it inevitably leads to is confusion over what the interests of the country really are. Empires are not usually created by force of will. They are created by political and economic circumstances that require them. If America were to disappear tomorrow, the next most powerful country or group of countries would be forced to deal with the same problems and take on the same responsiblities. The weakness of the book is that the author's expertise is more on the military side than the economic. To really understand the American empire, its as necessary to understand the international monitary order, the "dollar" standard and the international flows of trade/money. Two examples of authors in opposition to Bacevich are Thomas Barnett and Robert Kaplin. Barnett's message is that there are no American interests, only Imperial interests. As a result (for example) the US should surrender all its interests and retreat from East Asia to show our good will to Imperial partner China. Kaplan on the other hand views the whole world outside the US as the wild west and sees the mission of the US to bring American civilization to the "savages". Those books are different than "Empire" in that they are blatently pushing political policies than providing analysis. In spite of its lack of economics, its still a better book than those produced by others. The neutral tone and analysis itself is worth the book even if you don't agree with the conclusions.

To many cynics, a book like the "American Empire" might seem like an exercise in futility. Who could have trouble believing, after all, that America's primary strategic objective is to create a global marketplace without barriers to the movement of goods, capital, ideas and people? But what starts as an exposition of this argument soon branches into various themes of diverse interest yet equal importance. Andrew Bacevich, a professor at Boston University, takes on conventional wisdom. For those who are baffled by the complexity of the post Cold War world and are dismayed by America's lack of a coherent strategy, Mr. Bacevich is reassuring: America's objective, now and in the past, has been to promote global openness; "this books finds continuity where others see discontinuity," he writes, parting ways with those who believe that globalization fundamentally reshaped American foreign policy priorities.While this theme is ever-present, Mr. Bacevich covers a lot more ground. Perhaps his most telling contribution is the resurrection of Charles Beard and William Appleman Williams as trenchant observers of American foreign policy. Both Beard and Williams offer their own hypotheses about why America is driven to this ever increasing need for markets abroad. And, after this voyage into intellectual history comes Mr. Bacevich's own argument about why America is compelled to this strategy of openness.All three reach the same conclusion: America's imperial quest is meant to overcome problems at home. Although Beard and Williams are polemic in their view that America's foreign adventures prologue the inevitable reckoning with domestic troubles, Mr. Bacevich adopts a more dispassionate view and offers merely a possible explanation: With America's national cohesiveness eroding, Mr. Bacevich writes, "an ever-expanding pie satisfying ever more expansive appetites was the only `crusade' likely to command widespread and durable popular enthusiasm." With this in place, Mr. Bacevich moves on to a different point: American military assets, he contends, are increasingly used to promote global openness. This heightened willingness to use coercion has elevated the role of the military in American politics, perhaps even more so than ever before. And, this increased militarization of American politics is playing a central, if underappreciated, role in formulating as well as executing foreign policy. For sure, all this is food for thought. Surprisingly enough, Mr. Bacevich has refrained as much as possible from judgments; in fact, writing a book on such a topic whilst remaining neutral is a feat in itself. All the same, Mr. Bacevich's military mind is evident throughout. A book whose aim is to show that America's chief purpose is promoting globalization would have done well to pay heed to dollar diplomacy as much as it has to gunboat diplomacy. Yet this minor objection could not abate the appeal of an otherwise outstanding book.

In American Empire, Andrew Bacevich provides a fine and historically cogent analysis of American foreign policy. Bacevich writes with clarity, skill, and historical understanding as he argues that a new Pax American - an American Empire - is at hand. While the definition of empire and whether United States is in fact an imperial power is debatable, the real value of Bacevich's analysis is its identification of continuity in American foreign policy and grand strategy throughout the Twentieth-Century. American Empire does this by identifying U.S. attempts to promote and preserve "openness" around the world. While this sometimes leads Bacevich to overemphasize continuity (such as ignoring George W. Bush's willingness to ignore and alienate allies not just through policy but through diplomatic tone), it nevertheless reveals a coherent grand strategy organizing U.S. foreign policy. Bacevich is also sometimes too inclined to describe "globalization" as tantamount to "Americanization," but these minor flaws do not mar his overall analysis, which is excellent. Some have argued that this book is anti-American, but any serious reader will find that it is hardly that. It is, however, a subtle yet hard nosed analysis of the underlying assumptions and strategy of American foreign policy.

The author provides a persuasive argument that America is indeed an empire, albeit not of the traditional colonial type. Bacevich demontrates rather convincingly that the U.S., since roughly the Spanish-American War, has pursued a grand strategy of reshaping the world in its image, through free trade, military dominance, and globalization. Particularly remarkable is the extent to which succeeding U.S. administrations have maintained continuity of purpose in achieving these goals. If you think Bill Clinton and GW Bush are radically different in their approaches to U.S. foreign policy, this book will open your eyes. In fact, Bacevich amply demonstrates that even presidents subscribing to the realist school of international relations have been greatly influenced by the idealism espoused by Woodrow Wilson before the First World War. In sum, if you are a student of U.S. foreign policy, political science, modern history, or just a concerned citizen of the "global community," this book can only serve to increase your understanding of how the United States achieved its current status of world dominance and what the implications of that are.