Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

In a challenging book, Andrew Bacevich reconsiders the assumptions and purposes governing the exercise of American global power. Examining the presidencies of George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton - as well as George W. Bush's first year in office - he demolishes the view that the United States has failed to devise a replacement for containment as a basis for foreign policy. He finds instead that successive post-Cold War administrations have adhered to a well-defined strategy of openness. Motivated by the imperative of economic expansionism, that strategy aims to foster an open and integrated international order, thereby perpetuating the undisputed primacy of the world's sole remaining superpower. Moreover, openness is not a new strategy, but has been an abiding preoccupation of policymakers as far back as Woodrow Wilson.

Tabla de contenidos provista por Syndetics

• Preface(p. vii)
• Introduction(p. 1)
• 1 The Myth of the Reluctant Superpower(p. 7)
• 2 Globalization and Its Conceits(p. 32)
• 3 Policy by Default(p. 55)
• 4 Strategy of Openness(p. 79)
• 5 Full Spectrum Dominance(p. 117)
• 6 Gunboats and Gurkhas(p. 141)
• 7 Rise of the Proconsuls(p. 167)
• 8 Different Drummers, Same Drum(p. 198)
• 9 War for the Imperium(p. 225)
• Notes(p. 247)
• Acknowledgments(p. 297)
• Index(p. 299)

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

Publishers Weekly Review

This small book's analysis of America's foreign policy in the post-Cold War era is unfortunately being eclipsed by current events. Bacevich, professor of international relations at Boston University, interprets America as the new Rome: committed to maintaining and expanding an empire acquired by design, not accident. He argues persuasively that the foreign policies of Clinton and Bush 41 reflected an essential continuity because all three administrations had essentially the same view of America's vital interests and how best to secure them. They accepted an American mission as the guardian of history, responsible for changing the world by making it more open and more integrated. They accepted an American global leadership, manifested by maintaining preeminence in the world's strategically significant regions. They accepted the necessity of permanent global military supremacy. While Bacevich finds no purpose is served by denying the empire, the important thing is that America behave wisely. Doing so, he argues, demands foresight, consistency and self-awareness. Bacevich derives his view from two long-neglected intellectual figures: Charles Beard and William Appleman Williams. Between them they developed the insight that American well-being depends on the effective functioning of a global economy, and simultaneous global adherence to certain behavior. Harmony of conviction and consistency of purpose has characterized overt American strategy from the days of Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman, and Bacevich asserts that the Bush 41 and Clinton administrations maintained an empire built less on coercion than on persuasion. When something more is necessary, "gunboats and Gurkhas" suffice-e.g., cruise missiles and similar long-range precision weapons systems, used in cooperation with local forces enhanced by American expertise and material. That does not seem to describe the war the U.S. is preparing for now. (Nov. 15) Forecast: The trope of American empire is a familiar one by now, and the fact that this book was completed before Bush 43's shift in foreign policy toward preemptive action and possible full-scale occupation should limit its usefulness to its historical analyses. (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved

CHOICE Review

Bacevich challenges the assumption that US foreign policy has lacked coherence since the end of the Cold War by arguing that the country has a well-defined strategy, which is a variation of its long quest for empire. During the Cold War, the US grafted its resolve to dominate an integrated and open international order based on the principles of democratic capitalism onto an anticommunist imperative. When that conflict ended, the US pursued the same global empire but in the name of universal prosperity, freedom, and peace, with the military supremacy necessary to protect it. Since the terrorist attacks of September 2001, the strategy has adapted itself again to combine the war on terror with the defense of the American imperial system, defined as one of universal freedom. But, Bacevich claims, it was this American commitment to a "strategy of openness" that provoked the terrorists and that will generate resistance to the war against them. The analysis of the continuity between the Bush and Clinton presidencies and their militarization of American diplomacy is interesting but relies on secondary sources and speeches. ^BSumming Up: Recommended. General readers and undergraduates. L. M. Lees Old Dominion University

Notas de autor provistas por Syndetics

Andrew Bacevich was born in Normal Illinois. He was a graduate of West Point in 1969 and served in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War. He later held posts in Germany and the Persian Gulf up until his retirement from service in the early 1990's. He has a PhD in American Diplomatic History from Princeton University and has taught at West Point and Johns Hopkins University before joining the faculty at Boston University in 1998 and becoming Professor of International Relations. He has been a critic of the U.S. occupation of Iraq calling the conflict a catastrophic failure. He wrote several books including American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy and Washington Rules.

(Bowker Author Biography)