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: A brilliant book from a gifted communicator
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: All Americans Should Read This Book
Review: I was immediately engaged in this book. Mr. Prestowitz has the domestic and international experience to concisely explore America's international policies. He begins by explaining that world opinion of the United States is turning more negative as we barge into other country's affairs and invade them for interests of our own. We neglect problems around the world such as environmental pollution and waste, hunger and disease. This is not aimed necessarily at the present administration, but he details in a nutshell the decisions made by previous ones that affect decisions today. It's a great primer for anyone who wants to get a grip on America's stance around the world. It was a shock to find out so many leaders from other countries consider us unreliable and are suspicious of our motives. He delves into the myth we Americans believe of ourselves as a people trying to do good around the world. What we believe of ourselves is not what outsiders see. To be thought of as a "Rogue Nation" by other countries should be discomforting and frightening.
This is an excellent book. The author gives a balanced synopsis of our involvement in the Middle East, Korea, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan, China, Japan, etc.; all the areas that are going to plague us in the years to come.
Rating:
Summary: A brilliant book from a gifted communicator
Review: I will not discuss the content of the book very much, as that is well explained in the synopsis provided by Amazon and many of the other excellent reviews. Instead I will discuss why this book left me shaking my head in admiration and appreciation. This book is a masterpiece. It is vast in scope, integrated and coherent in it's arguments, and supported by a profound depth of the author's experience, scholarship, and writing ability. It is also a very enjoyable read. The best analogy I have to the effectiveness of Mr. Prestowitz's writing is that of the best teacher you ever had at school--how that teacher made the subject matter seem so easy, and such a pleasure to learn. Mr. Prestowitz has that ability. Part of his abililty is due his profound insight of the United States and the world, their history and interaction, and how we arrived where we are. His understanding is the result I am sure of a lifetime of experience and study. The rest of his ability is due to a remarkable clarity of thought, the logical progression of his arguments, and his writing ability. He cuts the heart of what is going on with U.S., and why our indifference to world opinion or cooperation is turning the United States into the equivalent of a corporate CEO gone amok (my analogy). Better yet, he provides realistic and relatively simply solutions.
Rating:
Summary: We reap what we sow.
Review: It's so easy to forget the things we do as a country and each decision we make builds on the last. Bad decisions lead to more bad decisions. This book describes that pathway and takes the subject matter by headings so that you need not read the whole book to get to the meat of things. Conservative or liberal, you will like this book because it is so factual. Time and again I was telling my self, "Wow, I forgot about that, why did we do that?" Generally the answer had to do with power, special intersts, the pro Israel lobby in Congress, and oil. But now with our deficits the US may fall behind the EU in economic stability, and we are hated by just about everyone. It is easy to see why if you read through the whole book. I am more than just a little ashamed at our past and present behavior toward the rest of the world. History combines with reality in this excellent book. We reap what we sow.
Rating:
Summary: Rogue Nation: American Unilateralism and the Failure of Good
Review: Prestowitz, president of the Economic Strategy Institute of Washington, D.C., explores the historical roots of American unilateralism and shows how it influences important areas of American foreign policy, including trade and economic policy, arms control, energy, environment, and agriculture. He argues that in every area a multilateral approach consistent with humane and liberal core values is in our country's long-term best interest.
Rating:
Summary: Refocusing America
Review: Quite simply put, this is the best book I've read on the status of the world in general, of its various hot spots in particular, of America's current role in them, and of alternative roles that it should rather play. Prestowitz is a conservative Republican, a former member of the Reagan administration, and an elder of the Presbyterian church--scarcely the type one would expect to call America a rogue nation. But as a conservative he has very critical things to say about the neo-conservatives that currently control our foreign policy, whose agenda he says "is not conservativism at all but radicalism, egotism, and adventurism articulated in the stirring rhetoric of traditional patriotism." The book is a compelling answer to Kagan's popular "Of Paradise and Order," which tends to characterize America, through neo-conservative glasses, as the only agent that can save the world from itself, an agent that "by advancing [its] own interests ... advance[s] the interests of humanity." Two very different views of America's role. Every thinking American should understand the difference between them.
Rating: 
Summary: U.S. Needs P.R.
Review: Robbie Burns prayed: "Oh wad some power the giftie gie us to see oursel's as others see us!" For Americans with an interest in their place in the world at the start of the second American Century, this book is a good starting point. The book is subtitled 'American Unilateralism and the Failure of Good Intentions', which is a good description of his thesis and conclusion as he enumerates the policies that are causing frustration among America's allies, and exacerbating mistrust and hatred among the rest. No bleeding heart liberal, Prestowitz is a former member of the Reagan administration who has traveled extensively and come back with a message from the rest of the world - you can't go it alone.
Rating: 
Summary: Completely unconvincing
Review: The author argues that we Americans have been throwing our weight around. And that we ought to embrace multilateralism and international law. Well, that sounds really good. Just what could be wrong with that?
The main problem is that even if we Americans have been unfair and unjust, there is little reason to believe that we'll be better off if we give more power to an international group. Such a group could be united against us, and it could make things worse for everyone (and really bad for us Americans). Probably, we'd be assured at the start of the group's good intentions. But after we conceded enough power, we'd get double-crossed.
Well, there isn't too much chance of that! The United Nations, the International Criminal Court, and others have made their intentions pretty clear. And so does the author. We're talking about a wolf in wolf's clothing.
I think one important issue the author deals with is the Arab-Israeli conflict. As he says, "On no issue is the gulf between America and the rest of the world greater than on" this.
Well, given that the issue is so important, what does Prestowitz say?
Well, he refuses to blame the Arab side for the failure of the Camp David negotiations. And he says that Sharon's walk on the Temple Mount was about as bad an idea as one could have. Okay, I have a few questions:
1) If the Arab case has any merit, why is it promoted almost exclusively by terror and lies? Does he think that such terror and lies ought to be opposed?
2) Why does the author think it proper to ethnically cleanse Jews (but not Arabs) from the West Bank? Isn't that a little arbitrary? And why does the author think this injustice is essential to bring peace closer?
3) Given that plenty of members of the Knesset had been visiting the Temple Mount, why does the author think that a pre-approved visit by Sharon was so obviously a bad idea? Has it occurred to him that refusing to let Sharon do something so ordinary might have severe ramifications in itself? And just why is it that the author feels that a Jew visiting the holiest Jewish site, in the capital of Israel ought to be a casus belli? Does this mean that the author thinks that Jews ought to be special in not having any rights in their own capital or at their own holy sites?
Oh yes, some folks have boasted that the author is a conservative. But I'm judging his book on its merits, not on the author's purported politics. In any case, I'm a liberal.
Had the author been more honest with us, I think I'd have been more willing to look at his advice. As it stands, I think the one star I'm giving this book is generous.
Rating:
Summary: A Real Eye Opener
Review: This book does a good job of explaining how other countries view the United States, and what their views are. That is the entire basis of this book. It is very heavily footnoted, with thousands of primary sources. One example of this is how world views the United States in terms of military strength. [quote]
"[Colin] Powell hinted at the new strategy during the testimony to the House Armed Services Committee in early 1992. The United States, he said, required "sufficient power" to "deter any challenger from ever dreaming of challenging us on the world stage." "I want to be the bully on the block," he added, so that there is no future in trying to challenge the armed forces of the United States."
Source-"Rogue Nation"-Clyde Prestowitz-copyright-2003-page-23-4
Source [primary]- David Armstrong. "Dick Cheney's Song of America; Drafting a Plan for Global Dominance." Harper's. October 1, 2002. Vol. 305, No. 1825, page. 76-82 Another example on the same theme- [quote] "Some Americans, believing that our troops in Korea are primarily there to defend the South against the North, called for a U.S. withdrawal. They should be aware of Secretary of defense William Cohen's statement in April 1997 that the United States intends to keep its forces in Korea even if the two Koreas unite." Source-{secondary}-"Rogue Nation"-Clyde Prestowitz-copyright-2003-page-180
Source-{primary}-"No reduction in US forces in Asia even if Korea reunites: Cohen"-Jim Mannion-April 6, 1997; Agence France Press. This book further dwells into the huge amount of resources America uses, with so little consideration to conserve energy, (as we drive our SUV's); how Americans have abandoned the Kyoto treaty. (Environmentalism) Many other countries view America as wasteful, greedy and that this planet belong the them. Clyde (the author again uses sources from people of several countries) Clyde also tries to explain why some countries don't understand why the United States allows Israel to violate UN resolutions, have Nuclear weapons, but not other countries. (there is a short overview of the Israel/Palestine relationship) The same examples of how the world views the United States refusal to sign UN treaties banning torturing Prisoners of War. (P.O.W.) How the United States, subsidizes the American Farmers, which makes it so that other countries can not compete on the Global Market in this respect, to how NAFTA is hurting the American Economy. There is a lot of information in this book, and I believe it's one of the books, a well read American should read.
|
