Product Description

From the most highly respected analyst of foreign policy writing today, a story of wasted opportunity and squandered prestige: a critique of the last three U.S. presidents' foreign policy.

America's most distinguished commentator on foreign policy, former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, offers a reasoned but unsparing assessment of the last three presidential administrations' foreign policy. Though spanning less than two decades, these administrations cover a vitally important turning point in world history: the period in which the United States, having emerged from the Cold War with unprecedented power and prestige, managed to squander both in a remarkably short time. This is a tale of decline: from the competent but conventional thinking of the first Bush administration, to the well-intentioned self-indulgence of the Clinton administration, to the mortgaging of America's future by the "suicidal statecraft" of the second Bush administration. Brzezinski concludes with a chapter on how America can regain its lost prestige. This scholarly yet highly opinionated book is sure to be both controversial and influential.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #249638 in Books
• Published on: 2007-03-05
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 240 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9780465002528
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

From The Washington Post
Reviewed by James M. Lindsay

The Iraq war has America's foreign policy mavens waxing nostalgic. Partisans of the elder George Bush long for the days when realism and caution reigned in the White House. Bill Clinton's fans fondly recall an era when presidential trips overseas drew admiring crowds rather than angry protesters. U.S. foreign policy, it would seem, should go forward by going backward.

Zbigniew Brzezinski will have none of that. In his engaging and briskly argued new book, Jimmy Carter's national security adviser sees little worth emulating in the past 15 years of U.S. foreign policy. He asks how Washington has led since becoming the world's first truly global leader after the collapse of the Soviet Union. His answer? "In a word, badly."

To make that case, Brzezinski grades the performance of presidents Bush, Clinton and Bush -- or, to use the ungainly terms he prefers, Global Leaders I, II and III. Second Chance even comes complete with a full-blown report card. (You can guess which president gets an F.) Brzezinski's unsparing assessments will warm the heart of anyone worried about grade inflation.

George H.W. Bush, Brzezinski argues, was a superb crisis manager who missed the opportunity to leave a lasting imprint on U.S. foreign policy because he was not a strategic visionary. He earns a solid B. On the other hand, Bill Clinton had the intellect to craft just such a post-Cold War strategy but lacked the discipline and the passion, leading to eight years that produced more drift than direction. He gets an uneven C. Finally, the younger Bush offered "catastrophic leadership" after 9/11 that has already stamped his "presidency as a historical failure."

These portraits will strike many readers as conventional -- and others as unfair, particularly to the first Bush. Yes, Bush 41 famously foundered with the "vision thing." But then again, less than a year passed between the Soviet Union's demise and his reelection defeat -- not much time to devise, let alone institutionalize, a new world order. And it goes beyond unfair to argue, as Brzezinski does, that had the elder Bush deposed Saddam Hussein when he had the chance in 1991, "a subsequent U.S. president might not have gone to war in Iraq." The younger Bush chose to wage war on Iraq; he was not forced into it by the choices his father made.

So much for the grades. So what does looking backward tell us about going forward? Brzezinski believes that George W. Bush's choices have been calamitous but not fatal. There's still no other country that can play the role of global leader. So America will get a second chance -- but not a third -- to reclaim the mantle of global leadership.

As much as Second Chance criticizes Global Leaders I, II and III for failing to devise a sensible geopolitical strategy, it does not offer one of its own. The few specific policy recommendations it does offer are unconvincing. Brzezinski wants to establish an executive-legislative planning mechanism to inject greater coherence into foreign policy. But this proposal fails to realize that consensus can produce bad policies as well as good ones. After all, we plunged into Iraq in 2003 because Congress followed rather than resisted the White House's lead.

Brzezinski also wants "stricter lobbying laws" because ethnic lobbies have too tight a hold on Uncle Sam's ear. But this exaggerates their importance. Yes, lobbying groups favoring countries such as Israel, Armenia, Greece and Taiwan complicate the lives of policymakers, but they seldom prove decisive on major issues. When they do -- as in the case of the Israel lobby, which Brzezinski believes distorts U.S. policy in the Middle East -- it is not because they mobilize narrow interests but because they can mobilize a broad swath of public opinion. That, for better or worse, is what democracy is all about.

What Second Chance does offer is a wise insight that should guide any effort to fashion a strategy to restore American leadership. We are in the midst of what Brzezinski rightly calls a "global political awakening." Technology has made global "have-nots" painfully conscious of their relative deprivation. It has also given them the tools to punish those they see as blocking their aspirations. If the United States is to avoid becoming the target of their resentment, its foreign policy must be seen as serving their interests as well as its own. That means exercising self-restraint rather than pressing every advantage that comes to a superpower; it means listening to others and not just working to preserve our own peace and prosperity but helping others to build their own. The Global Leader IV who can find a way to translate these precepts into practical policies should be able to impress even the redoubtable Prof. Brzezinski.

Copyright 2007, The Washington Post. All Rights Reserved.

Review
"Brzezinski has described the challenge of future American leadership with unusual clarity." -- Washington Post. 3/14/07

"[C]ompelling... Brzezinski's verdict on the current president's record -- "catastrophic," he calls it -- is nothing short of devastating." -- New York Times, 3/6/07

About the Author
Zbigniew Brzezinski, formerly the National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, is a counselor and trustee at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a professor of American foreign policy at the School of Advanced International Studies, the Johns Hopkins University,Washington, D.C. His many books include The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership (2004) and The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997). He lives in Washington, D.C.

Customer Reviews

perceptive, articulate, succinct!
A great book by the finest foreign policy thinker of the past 100 years.
Brzezinski analyzes the foreign policy of the last three presidents
(Bush I, Clinton, Bush II) and provides wonderful insights and coherent
criticism--good and bad--of each. The most relevant material is about
the current situation, but understanding the foreign policy of Bush I
and Clinton is essential if one wants to understand what is happening now.
The book's title "Second Chance" refers to what is needed after 2008 to
try to reestablish the global leadership of the United States.

You are not going to get simplistic answers here--"Us versus Them", "Good
versus Evil", "Our enemies hate freedom". Brzezinski shows that many
of the current views--"Arabs respect force above all else", "Democracy
can be imposed from outside", and the like have no basis in reality.
He also warns of the growing closeness between Russia and China, and
he is concerned that China will become the dominant player in the Middle
East, with a growing market for oil, a willingness to provide weapons,
and the absence of a patronizing attitude. The world is a very complex
place, and there are no easy answers. This is definitely not a feel-good
book. As Brzezinski says, we have created a disaster which with very
careful work can eventually be remedied--but there will be no third
chance.

Sets the Stage for our Second Chance in '08!
Brzezinski is incomparably qualified to explain and comment on foreign affairs in the last two decades, given his high-level academic and experiential backgrounds, and numerous current contacts. "Second Chance" begins by pointing out that the U.S., having emerged from the Cold War as the unquestioned victor, enjoyed an unprecedented degree of international dominance. Unfortunately, the subsequent three presidents squandered a great deal of its power and prestige - especially Bush II. Brzezinski's intent is to lay out all the problems in the hope that America does better when it gets a second chance after the '08 elections.

Before getting into the details, however, Brzezinski also points out that the collapse of the Soviet was NOT the work of a single person (Ronald Reagan), but the consequence of a 40-year bipartisan effort, beginning with Harry Truman, and also aided by Lech Walesa (defied communism for a decade and compelled compromises that ended communist monopoly on power and precipitated uprisings in Czechoslovakia and Hungary), Pope John Paul II (revived spiritual viability), and Mikhail Gorbachev.

Bush I, according to Brzezinski, did a good (B) job overall - his main achievements were dealing positively with Gorbachev and the U.S.S.R.'s collapse, and then building an impressive coalition to handle Hussein. His two criticisms are that Bush could have done more to resolve the Israeli-Palestine rift (though he did forcefully confront Israel's push to expand settlements), and that Bush I left the Iraq problem unresolved.

Clinton, according to "Second Chance" worked well to move former USSR warheads back into the new Russia, preventing proliferation. However, he did not effectively confront North Korea's efforts to build a bomb, and ultimately failed with Pakistan as well (ignored the fact that India's possession put enormous political pressure on Pakistan). As for the Israeli-Palestine conflict, Clinton's bringing the two parties together was a good step, though Rabin failed to renounce continued settlements; the second effort (Barak and Arafat) also failed, with even Barak's foreign minister noting that he would have rejected the offer as "too vague." Perhaps success would have been attained with more time - part of the problem was that Gore did not want pressure put on the Israeli's near his election campaign.) Another Clinton strength, per Brzezinski, was his bringing the U.S. government to surpluses, generating an even greater impression of world power. Overall, Clinton is rated as a "C" in foreign policy.

Bush II, however, is spared no scorn in "Second Chance," and rates an "F." Until '03 the world was accustomed to believing the word of the U.S. president. Our moral standing also suffered via Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo (without high level accountability), and the brutality of counterinsurgency efforts in the midst of hostile civilians. Our failure to decisively prevail further lowered America's esteem, and further helped unite our enemies and creates more terrorists. Resources diverted from the terrorist threat have led to a resurgence in Afghanistan, Somalia, and Pakistan. Taking Iraq out of the picture has also strengthened Iran; our bias towards Israel has increased - further acerbating a major issue within the Muslim world. Meanwhile, Russia and China, with their new economic strength (oil and manufactured goods, respectively), and lacking the constant mentoring and admonishments of the U.S., are becoming stronger and more involved throughout the world. Disrespectful treatment of China's President Hu during his D.C. visit (no state dinner, allowing hecklers outside the Blair House to continue late into the night, playing the Taiwanese anthem by mistake), as well as supporting more nuclear weapons for its neighgor India were also cited as mistakes by the author. Finally, Brzezinski believes our summary rejection of the International Court (even pressing to exempt U.S. personnel from local courts) and the Kyoto proposal also lowered our esteem.

The world is no longer automatically America's to lead, and by 2050 only 15% of the total population will be in North America and Europe. Hopefully, after the 2008 election we begin to regain our influence.

An excellent overview!

Aside: Brzezinski likes to use the word "Manichean." I had to look it up - means presenting or viewing things in "black and white" fashion.

An analysis that opened my eyes
Zbigniew Brzezinski's analysis of the post cold war responsibilities and actions of the Unites States was an eye opener. While both praising and critisizing past and current presidents since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the book makes a point that the current position of the USA in the world is one of not stepping up to meet the daunting challenges posed to the one superpower and that the world is ready and wanting a new tack by the USA because it is necessary for future peace. A good read.