Rating: 
Summary: A Spine Chilling prediction of present circumstances.
Review: Like others offering their reviews, I rate this book very highly not because it is a real "page turner" or is particularly well written, but because of its cold Machiavellian analysis of the need to protect and expand the American Empire and what that means to the ordinary Joe and Jane Citizen.
Three things in this book made my blood run ice cold. The first is the complete absense of any sense of morality in the whole discussion. I do not mean that this is an *im*moral book, it is not a moral book, it is *a*moral in that there is literally no discussion whatsoever whether what is being proposed is RIGHT or should be done. That the recomendations to grow the American Empire are valid is simply assumed, not proven or even argued. The second thing was the whole discussion on how the political center of mass was Central Eurasia (i.e. the region between Turkey and Pakistan and between Iran and Turkmenistan) and how unlikely it was that we were going to be able to have a substantial presence in the region (in the near term) unless we have SOME PERL HARBOR CLASS EVENT to accelerate the populations willingness to accept the costs. Also, This Was Bad because it would delay our needed expansion. Then, just on cue, we have the 9/11 attacks, and dang if we don't end up with a Whole Bunch of military presence all throughout the heart of Eurasia... Coincidence? Makes one wonder. As if that is not enough, the book closes with a clear and unambiguous reference to the steps needed to get us to the One World Government of the New World Order.
Read it and weep because, as another reviewer stated, he is not predicting the future, he is *planning* the future. Coldly. Methodically.
Rating: 
Summary: Brezinski misses the point
Review: On one major point I disagree with Brezinski - Russia. The old Soviet state did just what we were supposed to do- wither away. They did not have their revolution; there was no blood in the streets; the same old gang runs things now - only now these criminals call themselves capitalists. Forget the Russian economy. Without republican ideology and practice, capitalism still means wealth for a few, and thuggery and oppression for the masses. Brezinski, as a learned and seasoned diplomat is just too polite to speak clearly of the reality .
Rating:
Summary: Crash Course in Eurasian Politics
Review: The data in this book is incredibly valuable, and I recommend it as a study that skims the top of geopolitics in the NE hemisphere -- especially "resource rich" Central Asia which, according to the author, is the veritable crux of all policy and activity regarding the entire Eurasian supercontinent and thus, the world.Would make a very good textbook, but tends to be a bit esoteric, so get out your dictionaries!
Rating:
Summary: Brzezinsky is a brilliant Soothsayer !
Review: The grand chess board as suggested by the title discusses the US geopolitical global strategies to maintain world domination.
Mr. Brzezinsky is a globalist and carries out effectively in his book the policies of his globalist organizations (the Council On Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commission). His book has deservingly received grave and impressive reviews by his fellow trilateralists and CFR members.
What's bothersome is that Mr. Brzezinsky's predictions are not simply a prognostication, but are technically implied policies in the making. It's frightening to become aware of the many vulnerabilities in the world, and the potential for violence in many "hot" areas, which can be easily inflamed by covert operations. Brzezinsky is an expert in conflict creation. He was once very proud of his Afghani freedom fighters that defeated the Soviet Union.
This book provides important and stimulating information for the average person. It will help you think and even predict future conflicts in the world. The forecasts in this book should be taken seriously by the reader, after all Mr. Brzezinsky represents the elite and the policy makers.
Rating:
Summary: insightful
Review: The thesis that Dr. Brzezinski lays out in this book recreates Europe for the 21st century. Western Europeans will have to assert themselves much more economically. Dreams of the reconstitution of the USSR (by Belarus) are fantasies that are dispelled. Dr. Brzezinski's messages to Russia is pay attention to your economy and forget about your past, move on. The only troubling issue in this book is the necessity to draw zones of influence or zones of traditional influence. Today's financial climate and market instability lumps everyone in the region together. The premise of the book that oil and local politics will reshape Central and Eastern Europe rather than the traditional US/ Russia competition,
Rating:
Summary: Eerily Prescient
Review: The title reveals so much. It is eerie to think of the world being carved up by select global geopolitical thinkers, political leaders and corporate giants. Here is a book with basic premises which one can strongly disagree, but still regard it as indispensable, hence the 5-star review I have provided while finding so much of the message conveyed as abhorrent to democratic principles. The author, it will be remembered, was the architect of President Carter's policy of aiding rebels opposing the Soviet friendly regime in Afghanistan in 1979. As National Security Adviser, the Polish expatriate believed that the ingredients were present to help establish a Russian Vietnam. With the aid of Stinger missiles and subsequent strong support from the Reagan Administration in the eighties the Russians were defeated. One can see in retrospect, however, why the Soviet leadership opposed the creation of a dangerously extremist Islamic fundamentalist regime on its border. None other than Osama Bin Laden was used as a CIA operative assting this profound change, which resulted ultimately in the Taliban, oppression, and continuing conflict. In retrospect, this American move was anything but a brilliant initiative. The most shocking part of this book is the author's blunt statement that what the U.S. truly needs to awaken public opinion and lead to the kind of initiative to seize control of oil rich territory he deems necessary is a calamitous attack on the order of a Pearl Harbor. This came about with 9-11, which occurred after this book was published. For many years spokespersons of the left and right were derided for a panic mentality and in some instances paranoia for daring to impart the conspiracy element into world politics. The author is a definitive insider connected to the Council on Foreign Relations. The statements made in this book corroborate conspiracy fears as the world is approached and analyzed with scant disregard for the citizenry with a strong emphasis on the planners, the global activists who are prepared to move on the scene and determine the future. These individuals do not appear to be concerned about listening to public opinion, but are concerned about shaping it to fit their pre-conceived images of global necessity.
Rating:
Summary: A chilling account of Roman-style imperialism
Review: This is how Brzezinski views the (supposedly sovereign) nations of Central Asia: "The last decade of the twentieth century has witnessed a tectonic shift in world affairs. For the first time ever, a non-Eurasian power has emerged not only as a key arbiter of Eurasian power relations but also as the world's paramount power. The defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as the sole and, indeed, the first truly global power..." "Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;... second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above..." (p. 40) - "...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40) - "Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power." (p.55) - "America is now the only global superpower, and Eurasia is the globe's central arena. Hence, what happens to the distribution of power on the Eurasian continent will be of decisive importance to America's global primacy and to America's historical legacy." (p.194) - "That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacy..." (p. 198) - "The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role." (p. 198) - "For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain Geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan - and to deny to Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and Tajikistan - and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea." (p.139) And ponder the meaning of these statements in a post-9-11 world: - "Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." (p. 211) - "The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. (pp 24-5) To most Americans the people of the world are just that- people, just like us, with a right to self-determination. To Brzezinski, they are merely pawns on a chessboard. Such an imperialist strategy does not make me feel any safer- how did Napoleon's strategy fare for the French in the long run? Or the Roman emperors for their citizens? Rome fell, Hitler fell, all imperialist powers ultimately fail, because they follow the over-extended geopolitical strategy advocated by Brzezinski. While our military is busy fighting for oil interests all around the world, who's watching the front door?
Rating:
Summary: Those who don't know history, are doomed to experience it.
Review: To put the events of 9/11 in proper context as it relates to this book, one should view the video documentary entitled "Unanswered Questions" ... "Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty in the name of freedom, deserve neither."
Rating: 
Summary: The Grand Chessboard - Revisited
Review: When the power elite write, you better pay special attention to the wording because for better or worse, most are damn brilliant and some possibly dangerous. All through the book I found myself being lulled into the author's vision of "utopia" where American dominance rules on a global scale, tenfold over what it is now, mainly through a system of homogenized regional powers which would extend its hold into the resource rich area of Eurasia and the Middle East. However, Brzezinski's grasp on the mindsets of nations is so staggering that one cannot help but be respectful of his writing per se, even if the book has all the trademarks as the blueprint for the New World Order. The author is not shy about making his objective known but his wording is such that the reader's apprehensions are assuaged with new mottos skillfully interwoven into his keen insight. Convinced that without American global dominance, the world would decay into international anarchy, the former national security advisor and Trilateral member envisions an assimilation that combines the age old imperial doctrine of "divide, conquer, and rule" veiled with what he terms consolidation of "geopolitical pluralism" and tempered to produce what he envisions as "hegemony of a new type". Brzezinski's rational, however charming as it may be presented, is flawed as he fails to take into consideration one vitally important and likely scenario. Namely, that future generations of government will always use that power wisely and for the global good. If one ignores the old adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely" then one miscalculates on a global scale In the end however, no matter whether you agree or disagree with his ideas, the final result is a double-edged sword capable of producing polar results by however the wielding power sees fit. Nothing demonstrates this more dramatically than America's achievements with it's foothold in Japan and Europe after WWII, versus the completely counter productive blowback in Afghanistan where it was Brzezinski himself who convinced the Carter administration to secretly fund the Mujihadeen via the CIA. That intervention who as now everyone knows produced both Osama and the mutated Taliban, betrayed the strategy behind the book's most quoted paragraph when he wrote:
"To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating and important however tediously written
Review: Written in 1998, "The Grand Chessboard" is political science professor and former Secretary of State, Zbigniew Brzezinski's interpretation of both the challenges facing the United States following the demise of the Soviet Union, and the most viable response to those challenges. Although written with an exceptionally dull version of the already dry language and style that typically constitutes political theory, this book is worth reading for several reasons. I became interested in this book, at first because of the critical role it played in Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's analysis of the Bush regime's role the attacks of September 11th, 2001 in his book "The War on Freedom" and then because of how closely Brzezinski's thinking seemed to mirror that of the Neo Conservative theorists at the Project for a New American Century Institute, many of whom currently serve in high levels of the executive branch of government and the military bureaucracy. Finally, like many of my fellow reviewers, I have always been fascinated by global geo-politics. If you are approaching "The Grand Chessboard" from any of these perspectives, it will be a fascinating experience despite itself. Brzezinski's argument is a simple one. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States found itself in the unique historical position of being the world's only remaining super power. In this sense, traditional balance of power considerations were no longer relevant. Instead, Brzezinski argues, the United States was the power and consequently had an obligation to either guide the world to a new security framework-by force if necessary-or to watch it descend into anarchy. Much to his credit, Brzezinski argues that the United States must undertake this role with benign intentions and acknowledges that without international cooperation, primarily with the European Union, but no less importantly with Russian and China, its efforts are doomed to failure. At odds with this assertion, however, is his frightening statement that the American public would be unwilling to support the military requirements of America's new global role unless it felt under attack as the result of an event of similar or greater magnitude to Pearl Harbor. Here Brzezinski contradicts himself. On the one hand he imbues the United States with a critical historic responsibility. On the other hand he feels that America can only undertake this responsibility if the public is shocked-or perhaps even fooled-into accepting it. The contradiction between these two assertions is troubling and indicates that the foundation of Brzezinski's argument may rest more on his ideological principles than on a rational examination of global security. Timing is another contraction in Brzezinski's thinking. On the one hand, Brzezinski states that as the only super power the United States must fill the vacuum that has replaced traditional balance of power politics. On the other hand, he urges the United States to do this quickly before the emergence of a new rival such as a more militarily and economically robust China. Why? What does the United States have to accomplish so urgently before this vacuum is replaced by a new balance of power dynamic involving the United States and any of its future rivals? The implication, of course, is that before the emergence of a new rival takes place the United States must advance from a position of mere lone super power status to one of global domination. It is the indication of this nasty little policy shift that captures the attention of analysts such as Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed. The United States is in a position to take over the world but the American public hardly supports the type of military aggression associated with the great empires of history and the totalitarian states of the recent past. September 11th, according to Mosaddeq, may well have been the type of Pearl Harbor that the United States requires, according to Brzezinski, if it is going to undertake its new geo-strategic responsibility. While I found Ahmed's conspiracy study extremely compelling, after reading "The Grand Chessboard" it seemed to me that he vastly overstated the contribution Brzezinski's thinking may have contributed to such a plan. Throughout the book, and in at least one recent article he wrote for the Washington Post, Brzezinski repeatedly affirmed his view that America cannot pursue its geo-strategic responsibilities without strengthening and building on international partnerships with traditional European allies and with rival/partners such as China and Russia. If the Neo Conservatives have seized upon Brzezinski's ideas to justify their long stated quest for global military domination, they have only done so with a minute portion of them, and have largely ignored the rest. I have only two complaints about this otherwise excellent book. In first place, no matter how important the context, I quickly became bored with the detailed descriptions of countless "geo-strategic pivots" from Poland to Uzbekistan. Yes, they are relevant and important, but they just aren't as fun to read about as the role of "geo-strategic players" such as France, German, Russia, and China, not to mention "retired" geo-strategic players such as Britain. My second complaint is of the maps, which were relevant and useful but which also seemed to lack authority when scribbled over with childishly rendered circles. A small pet peeve. I highly recommend this book, but only if the subject matter falls within your domain of interest. If you're not into global strategies, it will bore you to death, but otherwise-let the games begin!
| 
