The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership

I feel like I have been on an overdose of these books having read House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger (excellent book) - the biggest tell all blockbuster, The Choice by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Disarming Iraq, by Hans Blix, Noam Chomsky's Hegemony of Survival, Thirty Days (about Tony Blair) by Peter Stothard, and Price of Loyalty, Paul O'Neill, Why America Slept by Gerald Posner, Against All Eneamies 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, no strong bias conservative or liberal - a spectrum of opinion when you take them all together. There is certainly a wide variety of views and all of these books are excellent. I have read and for the most part digested the views and ideas and I would strongly recommend any or all of these books to get a diverse view. One cannot begin to give these books justice in book reviews. In any case there are generally two types of books, i.e: the "gotcha" books which try to show how Bush has made errors or done something illegal such as the Craig Unger book, or the "solution books" like Brzezinski, Soros and Chomsky. Of all the "best seller" books on the market I would consider this present book by Brzezinski to be one if not the best books that deals with terrorism, the invasion of Iraq, and the future role of the US. Perhaps not the most exciting read (I think Unger's book takes that title) but still this is an excellent book. In this book he is very diplomatic in his comments of the current administration and he presents many well thought out ideas on how to deal with the Muslim countries, American demographics, how the world views the US etc. In some of the other books by say Chomsky or Soros some of the ideas are in fact quite similar to Brzezinski. Here he is also against unilateral action but he manages to calm down the rhetoric plus he suggests that some sort of world government or similar is not realistic and is many generations off. So instead of say going to the UN and supporting the UN or World Court in any absolute way he suggests shorter term goals that are a combination of working much more closely with the Europeans and then expanding that relationship later in stages (my comment baby steps). Also he seems to advocate more support for the Muslim countries to permit them to develop economically and socially. All in all a well thought out argument, it is well presented, and attempts to make the debate a little more rational.

ZB brilliantly analyzes the choices in front of USA, in its dealings with the rest of the World and the kind of role and status it can achieve and risks and feasibility of various possible policies. He is characteristically far reaching, almost mathematically precise and complete. Though he is objective and does not promote any particular ideology other than the balanced and realistic welfare of USA, he is after all a man of "Detante". Those "entangling alliences" and the beloved NATO template keeps coming to the forefront. He is no unilateralist. He makes us aware that unless the current emerging powers such as China and India feel secure, and their vital interests secured, there can not be peace and stability for anyone. I think he understands dynamics of "Great Powers" better than most, and that is the World we are moving back to after all. The great polarization of East and West blocs, and to some degree North and South, have dissolved and a new multi-polar World has been emerging. He seems to have dismissed altogether that infamous "clash of civilizations". It is a good read. There is a unique piece of insight and wisdom in almost every page. Well delivered and smooth. Stands out among many similar works. Highly recommended.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor and resident hawk of the Carter Administration, agrues in this excellent book that America is faced with a choice: either lead the world or try to dominate it. The correct answer or course is the former, and the Bush Administration has chosen the latter. Brzezinski is one of the brightest geostrategic thinkers in the firmament, and he offers a very clear and systematic policy statement on which direction this country should be going to achieve national security. In the era of globalization, especially after 9/11, the link between national sovereignty and national security has been broken. With the growing interdependence of nation-states, our national security is increasingly in the hands of others. It is true, as President Bush claimed in the election campaign 2004 that we do not need permission from others to protect our security; it is also true that we need the cooperation of others in order to have security. On a couple of points Brzezinski is in agreement with President Bush. The primary threat to international security comes from rogue or illiberal states - called the "Global Balkans" - that lie between the Suez Canal and the Khyber Pass, a part of the world that contains most of the world's oil and natural gas. The region also contains some of the most religiously inflamed, politically turbulent, and ethnically conflicted people on earth. And to make matters even worse, they are festering with terrorist and criminal groups searching for weapons of mass destruction. It is in the interest of the civilized and energy hungry world to maintain stability. America is the preponderant but not omnipotent power. America cannot stabilize the Global Balkans alone, nor with "coalitions of the willing." Brzezinski has a special place in his heart for Europe; he sees a healthy transatlantic alliance as the bedrock of global security. Europe and America are natural allies through shared history and culture. As a team our moral authority and political credibility would be greatly enhanced. Another point at which Brzezinski is in agreement with the Bush Administration is on the primacy of American military power. Europeans and other allies understand, though they don't openly acknowledge, that global security is underwritten by American power. Brzezinski differs with the administration on how this power should be used. America may have the capablity of overthrowing rogue regimes in a few days or weeks, nevertheless, it still needs to build consensus in order to win a war. If the excercise of military power is not done with legitimacy will fail and backfire. Operations in Iraq (a good outcome is still possible) were executed in such a way that they spawned more terrorist groups, and even emboldened Iran and North Korea to press ahead with nuclear weapons development. It was even more important to build consensus in the invasion of Iraq because, as we know now, it was a preventativ

For all the fact that it might be doubted for accuracy, this book by an experienced and clearly highly knowledgeable US foreign policy expert offers a stark and truthful picture of the present state of affairs as the civilised world struggles against the spread of radical Islam, which clearly is preying upon the extreme wealth of the West and its rampant secularism.Brzezinski's book is very well-written and stark, showing how the rapid growth of Islam and the decline of religion in the West and Far East in this post-state-capitalist era will be very difficult for everybody concerned. As Islam grows and Europe's population declines, we see the Middle East as likely due to its high fertility rates to develop into one or several major military powers that are likely to be a dangerous threat to the West.Brzezinski clearly points out that the problems faced by almost every country in the West and Far East (primarily demographic but not exclusively so) means that the US, if it wishes to fight radical Islam, has no useful ally with which to do so."The Choice" clearly shows how militant Islam has arisen from discontent with Western influence in the Islamic world, and illustrates very clearly the various forms it has taken and the critical differences between them. We seen that radical Islam can take many forms and that it has adapted to an already-modernising Islamic world, in the process offering the only viable alternative to rampant secularism.Art the same time, the author is not as despairing as he might be, shwoing that the US' being a target for radical Islamic groups means that it cannot sustain its role as a global dictator and can and must aim to change its foreign policy in order to counter these problems. he shows that at least in a few cases there is some room for accommodation between the West and the established cultures, and believes with very well-argued arguments that this is the only way to stop the world from succumbing to the very real threat of a takeover by extremist Saudi-style Islam.This book, though most students will be taught to be sceptical at best because of its author, should be a keystone of understanding the problems of Islamic terrorism in the wordl today.

After readng a one column interview with Brzezinski in Newsweek as part of the publicity for this book, I was taken by the overlap with in my thinking that ad come across in such a short space.The author makes a case for how the US fits into the world as the sole-superpower as well as how the country is percieved elsewhere and at home. He speaks extensively on the contradictions in the perceptions of the US (the rapid absorbtion of US culture throughout the world while at the same time a rising tide of anti-Americanism) as well as ways he sees to use those to our advantage.It's probably clear from the pharasing of the title that his belief is that the US should be striving for a position of global leadership rather than forced domination. He makes an excellent case for the reasons why this is both in the best interest of the US and the best interest of the rest of the world for the forseeable future.At the same time, Brzezinski devotes a lot of space to the alternatives along the way and why he things they're undesirable and ultimately will be detrimental to our interests.In my opinion, the book makes a good case for the importance of multilateralism in US policy. At the same time, the author doesn't attempt to let the reader believe that the motivations are primarily altruistic, but rather "it just makes sense" for the US to be remain a pivital force in the world.I wasn't terribly pleased by the use of end notes that elaborate at the end of the chapter. It makes follow up something of a pain and following up on sources is an important part of my reading these sorts of books.The end of the book lays out a number of conclusions that are obvious to someone paying attention but at the same time Brzezinski also pulls a few items in from nowhere that very well may be issues moving forwad in the world but seem out of place in the context of the book, perhaps even afterthoughts of things he thought he should mention but didn't have time to tie in to the rest or some such. I don't think this distracts from his central points, either, it's just a bit puzzling.While I consider the book to be a well-thought out read and an excellent choice for someone wanting to explore this line of thinking, it's also a very academic book. Other books of this genre that I have encountered are a breeze to read and go by quickly, this one was a bit more slow going than most. This may be explained by brevity or just the compactness of a lot of idea in a few words. This is not a reflection on how comprehensive the book is, but rather an attempt to set expectations for the potential reader.