Rating: 
Summary: A lifelong conversative argues against unilateralism
Review: "Rogue Nation" examines a host of issues on which the U.S. has found itself at odds with the world: free trade agreements, global warming, the Israel-Palestine conflict, the treaty to eliminate land mines, the creation of an International Criminal Court, the war on Iraq, and more. The book is valuable regardless of whether or not the reader agrees with Prestowitz's politics (he's a longtime conservative and a former Reagan administration official) or his opinions on environmental, economic, and foreign policy concerns. Indeed, it's often hard to pinpoint the author's place on the ideological spectrum. For example, many conservatives will disagree with his support of several international agreements discarded by the Bush administration. Both conservatives and liberals will be dissatisfied about his ambivalence on the need for the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Many liberals will be turned off by his statement that, as of March 2003, "there is little choice for the United States and whatever partners it can gather to overthrow Saddam and occupy Iraq."What troubles Prestowitz, however, is not America's international policies per se but the manner in which we pursue those policies--a manner that may not always meant to be arrogant but certainly seems to be to the rest of the world. What especially distresses him are certain unilateralist principles proposed and implemented by "neoconservatives" like Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz. In a way, it's too bad that Prestowitz chose such a deliberately provocative title, since the book itself, while undeniably opinionated, makes considerable effort to present both sides of every issue. Yet he correctly acknowledges that much of the international community regards the United States as a "rogue nation"--whether we are in fact or not. Likewise, the author contends that, although we are not technically an empire, we often behave like one--or, just as important, appear to others to have imperial pretensions. In a world where perception is reality, Prestowitz argues, it is foolish not to be concerned about international opinion, since we depend on other nations as much as they depend on us for both economic well-being and domestic security. Above all, Prestowitz proposes that America's people and its leaders become better listeners--and Prestowitz himself is an astute listener. He has interviewed an impressive number of foreign diplomats, ambassadors, and government officials, and he faithfully presents their views even when he seems not to concur. What matters less to the author is how accurate international opinion is about American intentions or plans. Instead, he strives to understand how they arrive at contrary judgments: he provides historical context for various controversies and describes events, blunders, and misunderstandings that tend to support such mistrust. He also contends that Americans often seem to treat other nations as inherently inferior or, even more insultingly, that we seem to feel that other cultures would be better off if they became just like us. As Prestowitz notes, "Nations are very much like individuals. More than desire for material gain or fear or love, they are driven by a craving for dignity and respect, by the need to be recognized as valid and just a valuable as the next person or country." Rather than forcibly imposing our lifestyle on reluctant populations, we would be far more productive in providing a model worthy of admiration, "a city on a hill"--especially since most of the world's peoples greatly admire Americans themselves while they regard our government's policies with increasing suspicion. Prestowitz's treatise is enhanced by a riveting journalistic style, an impressive array of evidence, and a lucid synthesis of a variety of foreign policy issues. I don't always agree with his views or his conclusions. For example, while I support his argument that we should greatly lessen our military presence in the Persian Gulf, I don't buy his assertion that shrinking our dependence on Arab oil would cut off funding for terrorism. (Although a reduction in oil imports would offer many other benefits, the implication that boycott or impoverishment would reduce terrorism seems questionable.) Yet, even when one disagrees, the book is still informative and challenging, and I found his overarching thesis to be irrefutable: America cannot survive this century on its own, and we cannot continue to act as if we can.
Rating:
Summary: Coservative Republican Christian Patriot Skewers Bush Team
Review:
This book should shake the very foundations of the White House, because it is the first really well-documented discussion of--as the title defines--why America under the neo-conservatives has become a rogue nation. However, it is important to emphasize that at the institutional and cultural level, the author's critique carries backward to the Clinton Administration and forward to all but one Democratic candidate (Bush Lites).
I consider it extremely important that the author is a conservative Republican, Christian, and patriot with a proven track-record as head of the Economic Strategy Institute--a man who understands what moderate Republicans have been trying to tell the incumbent all along: fiscal prudence, no deficit, multilateral treaty adherence, these all provide for stability. If Bush is worried about 12% of the Republicans voting for Dean, after this book is read and absorbed by the educated and moderately-well off Republican base, he should start thinking in terms of losing 25%. This book is political and economic DYNAMITE. In ten thoughtful chapters, all well-sourced and well-indexed, and complemented by a *superb* five page list of additional recommended reading, the author lays out, with objective precision and a clear love of country extant throughout, why American unilateralism and all we have done since 2000 has been "stupidity, arrogance and ignorance in the exercise of power." His early use of Webster's definition of "Rogue" as "deviant, having an abnormally savage or unpredictable disposition" not only suits the unilateralist Bush team perfectly, but makes it clear that in objective terms, as perceived by the rest of the world--not just the Middle East, but the responsible Asian powers as well as what Rumsfeld revealingly denigrates as "old Europe"--the USA is indeed a "rogue nation." A few small quotes capture the value of this work, which I have heavily marked-up and which I recommend be read carefully, every word, by anyone contemplating their vote for November 2004 and beyond: According to former EU Ambassador to the US, Hugo Paemen: "...while your intentions are usually good, your actions are frequently informed by ignorance, ideology, or special interests and can have very damaging consequences for the rest of us." One Latin American Ambassador is quoted as saying, "The United States mistrusts the whole world. It relies only on military force and has no vision of itself working with others." Other authorities quoted by the author characterize US national security and foreign policy as "ambivalent", defined by "inconsistency and neglect." The author is especially strong on documenting the inconsistencies and incoherence of the over-all US national security strategy, and brings his special competency in international economic strategy to bear. He says, "An important aspect of the American empire is that because Americans don't see it as such, few look at the totality or thinking about where it is going and what it needs, and certainly no one is in charge. This inattention creates neglect and incoherent, often contradictory policy initiatives." Taking Africa in particular, a continent that Henry Kissinger says will be the ultimate test for US policy (see my review of "Does America Need a Foreign Policy"), the author is brutally candid: "In West Africa, the face of American-style globalization and free trade is not the hope-inspiring one of Colin Powell, but a harsh, hypocritical one that inspires a drift to radicalism and perhaps to terrorism. The cost of dealing with that would, of course, far exceed anything spent on subsidies or aid."
Skipping over the many other excellent and honestly presented thoughts the author presents in this book, which is a "must read, right now" book, I will end with three quotes that capture the urgency and relevancy of this book to the future of the Republic. At the top of page 277: "The imperial project of the so-called neoconservatives is not conservatism at all but radicalism, egotism, and adverturism articulated in the stirring rhetoric of traditional patriotism. Real conservatives have never been messianic or doctrinaire. The very essence of conservatism, which the neoconservatives constantly preach, is limited government. Yet the imperial project they are proposing will greatly increase the role of government both at home and abroad. ... This is not conservatism. It is Big Government." At the bottom of page 281, "The procedure of American foreign policy badly needs to be reviewed. It is terribly damaging when one or two powerful congressional chairpersons can dictate U.S. policy, despite a lack of significant public support. Even more importantly, the question of who decides when America goes to war desperately needs to be clarified. Congress seems to be less and less involved. But America was not meant to be run by a Caesar." [The author goes on to discuss how a more democratic and openly derived holistic national security strategy would not only resolve the instability associated with mis-directed globalization, but also address the fundamental: water scarcity, disease, deforestation, soil depletion, and overpopulation.] On page 284, the last page, "Particularly, I would like to remind my fellow Christians of the words of Oliver Cromwell, who enjoined in a letter to the Church of Scotland, 'In the bowels of Christ, please believe that you may be wrong.' As an elder of the Presbyterian Church, I [the author] want to emphasize that Christ was no about nations and power, and did not spread his gospel by force. ... Politicians who use God as prop for their campaigns should remember that 'God is not mocked.' An America that stressed its tolerance rather than its might, its tradition of open inquiry rather than its way of life, and that asked for God's blessing on all the world's people and not just its own, would be the America the world desperately wants." This book brought tears to my eyes. This is a great book, a worthy book, and the author merits our most earnest and respective attention and appreciation.
Rating:
Summary: Sets ideology aside
Review: As other reviewers have indicated, this is refreshing because it analyzes current international affairs and some of the pressing questions the U.S. confronts without trumpeting a particular ideological viewpoint. Although the author is a conservative, he spares no criticism of the current administration in their imperialist behaviors. Perhaps most striking is an anecdote early in the book. While Bush was at an international meeting in Mexico, he waltzed out, heading for his early bedtime. His entire demeanor inspired the subsequent comment from a foreign leader and defines the tone of the book: " Who does he ( Bush) think he is? An emperor?" As Prestowitz clearly explains, he may not think he is an emperor, but he acts like one, and that is the perception that is transmitted internationally.
The U.S. rightly or wrongly is perceived as arrogant, heavy handed and bullying, instead of acting as a force for good in the world, it is often counterproductive. Prestowitz skillfully demonstrates why, and addresses the central question: " Why do they hate us?" And furthermore, why we are the "Rogue Nation."
Skip alot of the Johhny come lately critiques in current foreign policy and dive into this, you wont be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: A True Conservative
Review: Clyde Prestowitz bears conservative credentials, as evidenced by his position as a trade representative in the Reagan Administration and his self-acknowledged life long status as a Republican. This reflective work demonstrates that he knows far more about what conservatism traditionally encompasses than the frantic neoconservatives of the Ann Coulter and Mona Charen stripe. Prestowitz persuasively argues that the bedrock of conservatism is evolutionary growth. Traditional conservatism differs from traditional liberalism basically on emphasis and government experimentation, with the liberal being more willing to resort to government action and the conservative adopting more of a "prove it to me that it works posture." As Prestowitz notes, traditional conservatism adheres to upholding and building upon international law and the framework of existing traditions. It is a philosophy that also adheres to a civil libertarian posture on civil liberties, totally apart from the philosophy of Bush-Ashcroft of incarcerating first and asking questions later. Conservative leaders of the past such as Dewey, Eisenhower, Willkie, Nixon and Ford favored strengthening American ties through international institutions such as the United Nations and alliances in which America is a willing partner rather than a ruling master. Eisenhower was so staunchly opposed to the idea of preventive war that the former supreme allied commander of World War Two stated bluntly as president that he did not even care to talk to anyone who espoused the dangerous idea. In order to contrast Prestowitz alongside the neocons of the Bush Administration, who abhor international cooperation and flaunt unilateralism in an aggressive form, it is interesting to examine the roots of some of the most ardent Bushies, which extend to Trotskyism. A conservative is careful about uprooting tested tradition while the neoconservatives call for abrogating treaties and keeping their gun powder ready, indicating a readiness to attack unilaterally. Prestowitz is a true conservative while the neocons are dangerous radicals operating under the bogus agenda of liberation and freedom.
Rating:
Summary: Written by someone on the "Right."
Review: Clyde Prestowitz is someone who has experience in negotiating foreign policy. A former Regan representative, he writes with an insiders (one could almost say "prophetic")knowledge of the global effects of America's military and economic policies.
Rating:
Summary: Written by someone on the "Right."
Review: Clyde Prestowitz is someone who has experience in negotiating foreign policy. A former Regan representative, he writes with an insiders (one could almost say "prophetic")knowledge of the global effects of America's military and economic policies.
Rating: 
Summary: Abysmal
Review: Clyde Prestowitz must be one of those Americans when he goes abroad he sits at his host's dinner table and nods approvingly when his fellow countrymen are described as backwards, provincial and not sophisticated enough to understand the world outside of the U.S. Why do I say this? Because Rogue Nation reads exactly like what you would expect from a sneering critic of the U.S., except this time the criticism comes from someone who could be considered part of the establishment. Rogue Nation has less to do with America's alleged policy blunders than it is a chance for Prestowitz to grind his axe and repeat line by line the same silliness the anti-war movement spewed for much of this year. Why is the world against the U.S.? Why because it failed to ratify the Kyoto Accord and Americans support Israel blindly, among other infractions. There are so many strawmen, dead-ends and pointless digressions in Rogue Nation that I'm appalled this book was actually published.
Rating:
Summary: Rogue Nation - How a Conservative American Can See Ahead
Review: Clyde Prestowitz's credentials make him an unsuspected analyst of America's unilateralist policies. As a genuine fan of the USA, its core values and the determination of its people to create a real Nation, it is sad to observe the binary assumption of President Bush "You're either with me or against me". Mr. Prestowitz gets straight to the points that may have allowed America to become the world's superpower, but, to some extent, have created the roots of anti-Americanism and terrorism. As I went through this magnificent book, I though to myself: "Maybe the American people will be the ones to use their ultimate weapon, and that's bound to happen in November '04, when Bush's term will be judged. With a slow economy, Iraq an unresolved nightmare, and the fear of terrorism, maybe voters will do the job, to the benefit of the world".
Rating:
Summary: Adds perspective and depth to a potentially emotional issue
Review: Despite the provocative title that might lead the reader expect a book that describes how awful the US is, this book actually provides a discourse that demonstrates how silly the description really is and provides a fair and balanced view of the topic. Rather than run with the assumptions that the increasing number of people around the world that are unhappy with the United States have become so because of jealousy and fantasies of former glory the author instead looks at the way the US has handled itself in the world and compares it to the virtues the US tends to espouse showing the frequent contradictions that have been raising eyebrows around the world. Much of Prestowitz's strong analysis is coupled with anecdotal comments from people abroad who are generally friends of the US but find that position increasingly difficult to justify. The author's vast experience in international circles has led to the perspectives of an interesting range of people. This book is not so much about laying blame although there's a little bit of that but it does collect a broad range of major events from throughout recent history and pulls them together giving the reader a sense of what shapes opinion abroad. The reader may not agree with the conclusions that Prestowitz draws, but that's not what this book is really about -- it's an excellent read (and a relatively easy one) for those folks who want to understand how America is viewed and will inevitably help the reader come to his or her own conclusions that may or may not agree with his about what should be done.
Rating:
Summary: A breath of fresh air!
Review: Extremely enlightening. The author describes how the world views America by putting us in the shoes of people living in other countries, something for which he is well qualified by having worked for the US government for many years stationed in many different countries around the world. An excellent, very well-researched book about the history of America's place in the world during the last 50 years and what we could be doing better to continue the greatness of our country. A good education in modern political history. I have purchased additional books as gifts for members of my family and close friend. Highly recommended.
| 
