|
America and the World: Conversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy | 
 enlarge | Authors: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Brent Scowcroft, David Ignatius
Publisher: Basic Books
List Price: $27.50
Buy New: $18.15
You Save: $9.35 (34%)
New (47) Used (10) Collectible (2) from $15.97
Rating:  16 reviews
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 304
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6.2 x 1.1
ISBN: 0465015018
Dewey Decimal Number: 327.73
EAN: 9780465015016
Publication Date: September 8, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The status of the United States as a world power, and the nature of power itself, are at a historic turning point. It is essential that we understand and adapt to the new security environment in which we find ourselves. Two of the most respected figures in American foreign policy are Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft—both former National Security Advisors under markedly different administrations. In America and the World they dissect, in spontaneous and unscripted conversations moderated by David Ignatius, the most significant foreign policy challenges facing the U.S.: the Middle East, Russia, China, Europe, the Developing World, the changing nature of power in a globalized world, and what Brzezinski has called the “global political awakening.” While one author is a Republican and the other a Democrat, they broadly agree on the need to adapt to a new international environment. Where they disagree, their exchanges are always both deeply informed and provocative. America and the World will define the center of responsible opinion on American foreign policy at a time when the nation’s decisions could determine how long it remains a superpower.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 11 more reviews...
 Foreign Policy Realists? December 15, 2008
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
Bitter, partisan rancor has characterized most discussion of foreign policy in America in recent years. This is a long tradition that has waxed and waned in intensity, depending on the perceived success or lack thereof of the country's involvement in international affairs, since the founding of the Republic. When this rancor runs high, it encourages our enemies, confuses our friends, and makes difficult the formulation and execution of any coherent U.S. foreign policy.
But there is another tradition as well, involving agreement on broad principles - the Monroe Doctrine, the containment policy of the Cold War - as well as restraint in name-calling and judging motivations - dissent is not termed un-American and intelligence mistakes are not called lies - combined with a vigorous bipartisanship that actively seeks consensus.
When this tradition is ascendant, as it was, for example, in the 1940s, American foreign policy tends to be more successful than when it is not, for example, in the Vietnam era and since 2003.
This book, as defined in its introduction, is "an experiment to see if a prominent Democrat and a prominent Republican - speaking only for themselves and not for or against either party - could find common ground for a new start in foreign policy." The experiment succeeded, and it produced what its dust jacket blurb correctly calls "a deeply informed and provocative book that defines the center of responsible opinion on American foreign policy."
The book consists of a series of discussions during the spring of 2008 between Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, and Brent Scowcroft, who held the same position under Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush, moderated by David Ignatius, a Washington Post columnist and former Executive Editor of the International Herald Tribune.
Brzezinski and Scowcroft might be considered foreign policy realists, in that they tend to begin with consideration of the national interest. But they both resist categorization as realists or idealists, agreeing that U.S. policy must strike a balance between the extremes of either school, combining power with principle, acknowledging limitations, and recognizing that everything can't be done at once.
They agree that the next president should stress bipartisanship in his foreign policy.
Here are some other important points of agreement:
A Cold War mindset that obscures new global realities, including the reduced role of the nation state, persists among U.S. policymakers.
The United States has become "too frightened in this age of terrorism, too hunkered down behind physical and intellectual walls."
While the "global center of gravity" is shifting toward Asia, a strong Atlantic community is vital for the United States as well as Europe, and the West will remain pre-eminent for some time.
Chances are good that China can be peacefully assimilated into the international system, and there is no need for the United States to choose between China and Japan as its principal "anchor point" in Asia.
A vigorous U.S. effort to solve the Israeli-Palestinian problem should be a high priority for the next president.
In spite of its limitations and current problems, the United States remains the country most able to "exercise enlightened leadership" for the global community.
There are also some significant points of disagreement:
While both publicly opposed the invasion of Iraq before it was launched, Scowcroft believes it has "created new conditions" requiring that we stabilize the situation before leaving. As he put it, "I think simply withdrawing is an impediment to a solution. And Zbig thinks it helps."
Both believe that Russia is trying to re-assert pre-eminence in the territory of the former USSR, especially Georgia and Ukraine; both are skeptical of the utility of putting missile defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic; but Brzezinski favors the option of NATO membership for Ukraine while Scowcroft opposes it.
Scowcroft is more concerned than Brzezinski about a nuclear Iran, fearing that "we stand on the cusp of a great flowering of proliferation if Iran is not contained in its attempt to develop a capability for nuclear weapons;" but neither seems to have a good prescription for thwarting this development other that continuing the thus-far-futile effort to mobilize greater international pressure.
These wise men agree that U.S. policy has not adapted well to a world that is changing in fundamental ways. They want to "restore a confident, forward-looking America," and they are optimistic about the country's future - but only if it "can rise to the challenge of dealing with the world as it now is, not as we wish it to be."
Ignatius December 3, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
This book presents an interesting dialogue between Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski as moderated by David Ignatius. The book is written in such a way that you feel like you are a fly on the wall while they discuss the vexing foreign policy issues of the day. They cover a wide range of topics, from Palestine and Hamas, Iraq (leading with the title a "crisis in of our own making"), Russia, and China. As you read through the book, you get the sense that you are being given a sneak peak inside the minds of two men of both incredible intellect and diplomatic astuteness.
 Holds your attention November 10, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
This book drew me in with it's insightful, easy to understand dialogue. It gave me the opportunity to view the world in a whole new way. Dr. Brzezinski and General Scowcroft offered me a new perspective and I felt included in the global community for the first time. I can recommend this book to anyone hoping to better grasp our role in foreign policy, past and future.
 America and the World: Cnversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy November 9, 2008
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
Insightful conversations. Too bad we don't listen and act on the recommendations of such thoughtful and experienced individuals.
Obaba and McCain must read this book! October 30, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I checked this book out from the Library over this last weekend. The conversation is between Bret Scowcroft and Zibignew Brzenski on how they viewed and presently view foreign policy. Bret served under a Republican administration and Zbig under a Democrat.
What's delightful is that these conversation gave the other a chance to disagree or dispute opinions. There was very little of that. I feel that the dialog between these two Foreign Security advisors was throughly open and honest.
In reading this book I gained a fuller understanding of American foreign policy in the past, it's successes and failures. Historically this is a very important book. Much of what is said at this 'conversation' was never reported nor analyzed at the time events took place.
Their conversations about past and future policies in China, Russia and the Middle East give clarity to both tenses.
The disappointing part of this book is that no attention is paid to Latin America and little to Africa. (Egypt is mentioned but only in the case of Israel.)
|
|
|
|
Powered by CBN AssociateStore
| |
