World Order

World Order is an impressive work that focuses on the geopolitical distribution of power. This is an enourmous topic and the author approaches methodically and continuously highlights insights with anecdotal personal experience. There are several key regional focuses that have both historical and modern day importance. The author focuses on Europe, the Middle East, Asia and the US. The chapters contain regional history and a perspective on cultural differences that create fracturing in understanding and negotiation. The author is always optimistic but makes sure to keep optimism in check with the realism learned through his experience in foreign policy. The author starts by discussing the distribution of power in Europe and how the Peace of Westphalia gave the model for stability. The author details the way in which after the devastation of the 30 years war, the peace that formed afterwards based on a focus of national sovereignty and balance of power led to a stable relationship among nation-states until the Napoleonic Wars. The discussion of Russian history is well weaved into the European narrative and its role in balancing or creating instability within the European sphere is discussed. The author discusses the rise of Germany and its ability to push Europe out of balance with its unification and the author discusses the first and second world wars and how the balance of power between France, Germany, Russia and the UK shaped events. The author moves on to Islam and Middle East. The author gives some background history to the spread Islam and the nature of the religion with respect to ideas like national sovereignty and balance of power. The author contends that they dont fit into the religion easily as Sharia law is given as the ultimate scale of justice. The author discusses the Ottoman Empire and how its alliances were often based on strategic advantage not perception of universal truth as evidence that the Westphalian concept of geopolitical stability included Islamic powers. The author discusses the relevence of current events like the Arab Spring and the emotions about Israel. The author also gives an overview of the richest Sunni nation- Saudi Arabia. The author then moves on to the ideological counterweight to the Westphalian system- Iran. The Iranianan religious rhetoric leaves no room for US values and sees no cooperative endgame. The narrative from the Ayatolla's is clearly demonizing. The author is hopeful that this is posturing and part of a strategy to keep a mandate rather than the unbending beliefs of the leaders and a representation of the populations views but the author warns of assuming that American values are naturally felt by all if just given the chance to be absorbed. The author discusses Asia and its different concepts of balance of power. The Chinese Empire throughout history saw itself as the center of the universe and their perspective on geopolitical order was that all states are culturally inferior and should be delivering tribute to the emperor (up until the opium wars). This perspective is fundamentally different from other regions in which warring parties constantly jostled for advantage. The repurcussion of this history is that China perhaps sees itself less bound by the international order constructed through the First and Second World Wars that it had no rule in constructing. China is looking to be the regional power but there are other nations who feel very differently, namely Japan and India. The US remains an important player balancing different interests in Asia with its naval presence. This will be a source of tension in the future as regional interests grow and relative power distribution moves towards China away from the US. The author spends time on the cultures of India, China and to a certain extent Japan. He discusses how their views of history and ethics can be fundamentally different to the enlightenment philosophy guided rhetoric that the US often argues is universal. The author finally moves on to the US. He discusses its often uniqueness in its perspective of foreign policy as an extension of its political philosophy rather than its national interest. The author discusses how the US is the only country to often believe it is acting for the betterment of society as well as for the propogation of liberty. This idealism often leads to overstretching and underappreciation of the requirement of the institutional architecture that allows for sustaining Americal values. The author does a quick history of US national policy from the Spanish American War up until the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His discusses the two mindedness of the public in that they yearn for supporting the freedom and of democracy of others. But they tire of the difficulty of achieving it. The author spends a lot of time on the great stateseman in the US that he believes helped guide the nation to being a world power. World Order is well written and insightful. It is realistic in its analysis of the difference in perceptions of the role of foreign policy and balancing of world power. The author discusses the challenges we face in a nuclear age with rising probabilities of cyber warfare. The penetration of the internet has changed the nature of information/knowledge/wisdom and the author is concerned we have too much information at our fingertips at the expence of knowledge or wisdom and the perspective to appreciate the relevance of data. The concluding remarks are interesting but perhaps a little bit overly concerned. There are plenty of interested thinkers in the world today trying to be statesman (though not being able to think of many perhaps i should get on the same page as the author). World Order is a must read, as is On China for those who are considering that as well.

SUMMARY OF THE THESIS: The peace of Westphalia was an imperfect but still uniquely effective development in international relations, depending on recognition of the legitimacy and sovereignty of states while keeping a flexible structure committed to protecting the balance of power. Sectarian absolutists, among others, pose an alternative world order that depends on the triumph of their sectarian or political visions; this threatens the interests of all those dedicated to the Westphalian system. The book is also an anthropology of statecraft, examining the histories of many nations and regions. It's a handbook in this regard, and while specialists in cultures will have grist for the argument mill, it's a good text from which to begin those arguments. In the end, the book is less about what U.S. foreign policy should look like. For Kissinger, that's an art and a creative enterprise. Rather, it's about the way Kissinger thinks an intelligent mind should think about foreign policy. Because Kissinger is such a polarizing figure, I'll say here that he does deal also with the question of humanitarian motivations in interferences in sovereign states. These bits are worth reading to better understand his conception of the relationship between realpolitik and morality: I could have wished they were more fully worked out, but where Kissinger touches on it, it's thought-provoking stuff. Kissinger's knowledge of history and statecraft is so extensive, commanding, and even sensitive that you can't easily evade it. His understanding of the motivations of, for instance, Iran's leadership or Egypt's Arab Spring would sit well on a postmodern multiculturalist; but he indicates from history the ways in which the postmodernist multiculturalist should have serious reservations about that. Kissinger does not make Islam a target, however, but fits the religion into a remarkably coherent picture of the world and its troubles. The book is a wakeup call to an under-educated Western public (and leadership) that too often misunderstands the aims of diplomacy (including military action), and so wins the battles but loses the wars. Highly recommended for anybody who values world order, peace, and justice. My biggest critiques are that he under-develops many trends in modern foreign policy, such as the Obama Administration's goal of rebalancing toward Asia and minimizing U.S. roles in the Middle East. (Obviously that has huge implications for Israel, among many others.) There are many such lacunae. But it's a book full of concepts that one should have at one's mental fingertips in any discussion of U.S intervention, or of what world order ought to look like.

Kissinger viveu a História que conta; ajudou a moldá-la ou a viu acontecer de dentro. Seus comentários são endossados por um nível de propriedade que poucos podem se pretender ter em Relações Internacionais. A qualidade da edição é notável, com capa dura, impressão, lombada, tudo. Além de ser um dos mais interessantes da minha estante, é também um dos mais bonitos!

Garbage print, the font chosen is hurting everyone else eyes.

本格的な英文であり、暗唱もしたい名文でもある。また、これ以上ないという詳細な内容で、世界の歴史がわかってきた。

Preziosa guida per comprendere gli equilibri mondiali. Illuminante nel disegnare le relazioni tra gli Stati europei e le dinamiche che li hanno portato nel corso dei secoli alla guerra. Cina e Stati Uniti, protagonisti dei prossimi equilibri, li ho trovati meno interessanti, probabilmente perché ampiamente attesi e dalle dinamiche passate semplici. Nel complesso libro affascinante.

Se notan dos cosas del autor: 1 Su formación y conocimientos iniciales como académico destacado. Desde siempre habla con propiedad y conocimiento 2 Su experiencia en las relaciones internacionales de EEUU en períodos críticos. todo esto más la sabiduría y aplomo que dan los años hace que a uno le venga a la mente, la palabra Excelencia. No aburre ni se queda en detalles menos importantes, pero advertencia a los lectores, sobre todo jóvenes: Supone un razonable mínimo conocimiento de historia y geografía en el lector.