Rating: 
Summary: Lighter than Air
Review: Says here that Kaplan's work is widely admired in the military, which kind of worries me, since Warrior Politics is very much a reporter's work, meaning facile, lightweight, and superficial. (This is quite apart from the fact that this is one of those annoying books that fails to live up to its title. Nowhere does Kaplan connect the dots and prove that leaders must adapt a pagan ethos. At most he demonstrates that they ought to be familiar with Machiavelli, which is something different.)Kaplan is first to admit (pp. xx - xxi) that his reading has been scattershot. This is a major weakness. All too often, Kaplan comes across as a slightly more erudite version of the college kid who has discovered The Book (Rand, Chomsky, etc.) and wants to tell you all about it. Kaplan has discovered Thucydides, Livy, Machiavelli, and Hobbes. He did not go on to discover Locke, Burke, or Tocqueville, to name a few, and so has missed much of the flavor of the modern political debate. Reading Locke, for instance, would have prevented him from making the common error that political consensus requires endless debate on every last issue (imagine the condition we'd be in if this had occurred after 9/11). So this book must stand as a beginner's primer at best. I'm sure that Kaplan's eyewitness reportage is far superior, and I'd happily read it if it happened to drift my way. But as for this--you're better off reading Ralph Peters, Victor Davis Hanson, Bernard Lewis, or for that matter, going back to the originals.
Rating: 
Summary: Machiavelli's Busboy
Review: Spin Doctor Robert D Kaplan in his book 'Warrior Politics' reminds us (once again) that the world is a very dangerous place.
He suggests dining on the works of political thinkers of the past as the 'roadmap' for today's 'western murderers'.
While insightful in some ways, his 'unsophisticated and general assumptions' of the marvels of past 'leaders'
and those who write about them, qualify state murder against 'enemies' as wonderful, necessary and MORAL.
Survival of the fittest is basically his tome. In Kaplan's world, there' s no compassion, love, respect or humility.
If he hadn't peppered 'Warrior Politics' with his 'personal ideas', that amount to spewing a 'narrow and hidden right-wing
agenda', this book would have been more interesting. Here's a couple of quotes: "Because the elite media is dominated by cosmopolitians who inhabit the wider world beyond the nation-state,
it has the tendency to emphasize moral principles over national self-interest." "The power of the media is wilful and dangerous because it dramatically affects Western policy,
while bearing no responsibility for the outcome. Indeed, the media's moral perfectionism is
possible because it is politically unaccountable." Is he talking about 'embedded journalists' who 'write what they're told'?
or is he referring to cnn or fox? or others?
Where would Mr. Kaplan advise us to seek objective news? Robert D Kaplan is another 'know-it-all pundit' who wants you to think like him. Let's face it, when you read quotes by mass murderers like Henry Kissinger, William J Perry, William S Cohn,
and disgraced criminal politicians like Newt Ginrich,
quoted on the back cover, take a big gulp before you read.
Rating: 
Summary: An excellent study in political pragmatism.
Review: This is an excellent book that teaches the basics of RealPolitik whereby wise pragmatism supersedes unrealistic and immature moral principals to ensure much better foreign policies. In this short book, Kagan covers a huge amount of ground. He presents the writings and lessons derived from the best Chinese, Greek, Roman, Renaissance, and Enlightenment philosophers focused on military strategic thinking, warfare, and foreign policy. Kagan explains how public virtue which characterizes the necessary pragmatism to be effective in foreign policy is much different from private virtue. He mentions the example of Franklin Roosevelt who coerced, manipulated, and lied to Congress in an effort to engage the U.S. in fighting the Germans in WWII. Roosevelt knew this was a war he had to take on, yet he also knew Congress would never approve it outright. So, Roosevelt did what he had to do to make it happen. Kagan mentions the famous quote by Miller: "Mankind is in debt to his lies" describing Roosevelt during this specific period. Kagan own writing is just as quotable as the ones from all the historic luminaries he refers to. Here is a good example: "With their incessant harping on values, today's Republicans and Democrats alike often sound less like Renaissance pragmatists [reference to the brilliant Machiavelli] than like medieval churchmen, dividing the world sanctimoniously between good and evil." In other words, our own two party system political values have much in common with the obsessive religious fundamentalists of all stripe we so despise. Kagan also supports a revival of Malthusian theories. Kagan mentions that the English Revolution of 1640, the French Revolution of 1789, the European revolts of 1848, and numerous rebellions in the Chinese and Ottoman empires all occurred against a background of high population growth and food shortages. Kagan states that many present and future conflicts will be Malthusian in nature. In this context, he is referring about all the tribal warfare plaguing Africa currently and into the future. Other areas subject to Malthusian laws include the Middle East (population growth is outpacing fixed limited water resources) and Central Asia. Kagan foresees how the implementation of our Constitutional laws will change to adapt to modern warfare. In this regard, he mentions that the majority of future conflicts will consist in small wars, rescue operations, preemptive strikes that will go unsanctioned by Congress and the citizenry. Going to war will be less and less a democratic decision, he states. He adds that our own laws forbidding the assassination of foreign leaders is both totally obsolete and cruel to citizens worldwide. "Would it have been more humane to assassinate Milosevic and his inner circle rather than bomb Serbia for ten weeks". Kagan's question is also the obvious answer.
Rating: 
Summary: A pragmatic reflection of our times
Review: This is the second time I have undertaken reading this book and like before I am impressed with the potent observations Kaplan has placed in 'Pagan Ethos'. We live in very uncertain turmoil times and it is imperative that prudent decisions be made to retain the sensitive balance of stability. America's expedition into Iraq and the tacit support for democracy in the Middle East has noble bearance; but the question remains will it really prevail stability or transgress the region in un-chartered chaos. Western policy makers believe that dictators can be defeated by merely replacing them. Jacob Burchardt said "Like bad physicians, they thought to cure the disease by removing the symptoms; and fancied that if the tyrant were put to death, freedom would follow of itself". In 1990s, Western government demanded elections throughout the developing world; often in places with low literacy rates; weak government institutions and raging ethnic disputes. Dictators were replaced by elected prime ministers. But because the dictators themselves were manifestations of bad social and economic development; their removal permitted the same uncivil practices to continue in democratic clothing, as for an example Pakistan and Cote d' Ivory where elected leaders stole vast amounts of money and played one ethnic group against the other. By the end of 1990s the military in both the countries staged coups. which the local population greeted with demonstrable relief. The democratic structures placed in these countries created weak government and open press, both of which have limited benefits for overall good will. With the weak government from democracy, peace making will become increasingly difficult, as they would lack the structures of centralization of power. Only strong rulers can justify the historic about-face necessary for peace; often with a compliant media and minimal opposition. Without centralized powers, Anwar Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan could not make peace with Israel. Today President General Pervaiz Musharraf has given peace overtures to India and has on occasion provided tacit support for recognition of Israel. Neither of which would be possible under a weak unstable democratic regime. The democratic and liberalization in places like Middle East will provide a mandate to the extremist forces that in near term will destabilize the region. There is nothing more volatile and more in need of disciplined enlightened direction than the vast populations of underpaid, under employed and badly educated workers divided by ethnicity and belief. Virtue is more complex than it seems. Because human rights are self-evident good, we believe by promoting them we are being virtuous. But that is not always the case. If the United States pressed for human rights in Jordan, King Hussein might have been weakened during his struggles for survival in 1970s and 1980s. The same is true in Egypt; where a United States policy dominated completely by human rights concern would weaken President Hosni Mubarak; whose successor would likely have even less regard for human rights. A point in example, Balochistan and North West Frontier province in Pakistan; where free and unhindered elections got the extremist right wing into the provincial government and overtime they dismantled the few prevailing human rights and freedom of expression. For Machiavelli; virtue is the opposite of righteousness. With the innocent harping on values; today's western leaders sound less like the Renaissance pragmatists and more like medieval clergymen; dividing the world between good and evil.
Rating:
Summary: A pragmatic reflection of our times
Review: This is the second time I have undertaken reading this book and like before I am impressed with the potent observations Kaplan has placed in `Pagan Ethos'. We live in very uncertain turmoil times and it is imperative that prudent decisions be made to retain the sensitive balance of stability. America's expedition into Iraq and the tacit support for democracy in the Middle East has noble bearance; but the question remains will it really prevail stability or transgress the region in un-chartered chaos. Western policy makers believe that dictators can be defeated by merely replacing them. Jacob Burchardt said "Like bad physicians, they thought to cure the disease by removing the symptoms; and fancied that if the tyrant were put to death, freedom would follow of itself". In 1990s, Western government demanded elections throughout the developing world; often in places with low literacy rates; weak government institutions and raging ethnic disputes. Dictators were replaced by elected prime ministers. But because the dictators themselves were manifestations of bad social and economic development; their removal permitted the same uncivil practices to continue in democratic clothing, as for an example Pakistan and Cote d' Ivory where elected leaders stole vast amounts of money and played one ethnic group against the other. By the end of 1990s the military in both the countries staged coups. which the local population greeted with demonstrable relief. The democratic structures placed in these countries created weak government and open press, both of which have limited benefits for overall good will. With the weak government from democracy, peace making will become increasingly difficult, as they would lack the structures of centralization of power. Only strong rulers can justify the historic about-face necessary for peace; often with a compliant media and minimal opposition. Without centralized powers, Anwar Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan could not make peace with Israel. Today President General Pervaiz Musharraf has given peace overtures to India and has on occasion provided tacit support for recognition of Israel. Neither of which would be possible under a weak unstable democratic regime. The democratic and liberalization in places like Middle East will provide a mandate to the extremist forces that in near term will destabilize the region. There is nothing more volatile and more in need of disciplined enlightened direction than the vast populations of underpaid, under employed and badly educated workers divided by ethnicity and belief. Virtue is more complex than it seems. Because human rights are self-evident good, we believe by promoting them we are being virtuous. But that is not always the case. If the United States pressed for human rights in Jordan, King Hussein might have been weakened during his struggles for survival in 1970s and 1980s. The same is true in Egypt; where a United States policy dominated completely by human rights concern would weaken President Hosni Mubarak; whose successor would likely have even less regard for human rights. A point in example, Balochistan and North West Frontier province in Pakistan; where free and unhindered elections got the extremist right wing into the provincial government and overtime they dismantled the few prevailing human rights and freedom of expression. For Machiavelli; virtue is the opposite of righteousness. With the innocent harping on values; today's western leaders sound less like the Renaissance pragmatists and more like medieval clergymen; dividing the world between good and evil.
| 
