Rating: 
Summary: All Americans Should Read This!1
Review: "Americans like to pretend that they have no imperial past. Yet they have shown expansionist tendencies since colonial days." (Zimmermann, 17) So begins chapter 1 of First Great Triumph, Warren Zimmermann's book chronicling the rise of America to world power status and the five men that he credits with that accomplishment. Zimmermann's book states emphatically that contrary to popular belief, America has been an imperialist state since the beginning. Zimmermann seeks to show that not only did the United States seek to create an overseas empire; we did so enthusiastically, rather than reluctantly.
In his book, Zimmermann acknowledges that in many ways the tide of history was pulling America toward the role of imperial power. The American frontier had closed, the Indian wars were over and now the American expansionist impulse needed a new direction the once powerful Spanish empire entered the final period of its inevitable decline. Many influential Americans argued that the expansionist impulse was by definition, a violation of the basic American principles of freedom, and self-determination. Such was not the case with the five heroes men detailed in Zimmermann's book.
Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Cabot Lodge, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Elihu Root and John Hay, were all imperialists. In part one of his book, Zimmermann provides biographical sketches that, while brief, give full accounting of each of these men and how each became a driving force in the growth of American foreign policy at that most critical point in history.
Zimmermann draws from over 190 sources, many the works of prominent American historians. He also draws heavily from the words, both written and spoken, of his five central figures. Zimmermann's own experience as a diplomat give him a keen understanding of the relevant geopolitical questions and his qualities as a writer provide the reader with a very engaging account of these men and their times.
Zimmerman's narrative provides a clear path for the reader to follow to understanding his central theme. The biographies contained in the first part of the book, use the words and actions of the central characters to prove his point. From their early lives, each of the five seems destined to play some role in the growth of the American nation. The way that Zimmerman weaves their stories together, illustrates the fact that in reality, very little of the American rise to global power was accidental.
Rating: 
Summary: Timely reminder of our imperial past ... and present
Review: A century after the events Warren Zimmerman describes, questions of "American empire" are once again being debated. That makes this book a particularly timely and instructive one.The book's structure has been described in many of these reviews: five biographies, about 40 pages each, and then a longer section weaving together the issues and events of these men's lives into the large drama of the growth of American imperialism. Though the book's length is certainly not unmanageable -- in fact, it would be hard to do this topic justice in a much smaller book -- one drawback of frontloading the biographies is that some of the details of the men's lives tend to be forgotten by the time they reappear later on in the narrative. Mahan, in particular, appears only sporadically in the second half of the book, although his influence on the other men can still be felt. Zimmerman focuses his narrative, obviously, on these five men and their influence on their nation and the world. The author perhaps agrees with Henry Cabot Lodge, whom he quotes on page 184 as writing, "The personal qualities and individual abilities of public men ... make the history and determine the fate of nations" (ellipses in original). This "methodological individualist" tack is a refreshing approach in a discipline that these days is so mired in "social movements" and "impersonal forces" that the critical -- even indispensable -- roles of individual men and women is often forgotten. While America may yet have become an imperial power without these five men, Zimmerman makes a strong case that Roosevelt, Mahan, Lodge, Root, and Hay, by their own will, channeled America's might and power in the direction of their choosing. It's a direction we're still, by and large, moving today. While the five biographies in the first half of the book are all useful, insightful, and well written, they're really mostly prologue. It's the second half where most of the action, drama, and even excitement can be found. Zimmerman does a fine job of charting the drive for empire, the various obstacles that our five subjects had to overcome, and the long-term consequences of it all. Zimmerman doesn't play favorites. Although his approach to the rise of empire is generally positive, it is balanced and nonjudgmental: his discussion of the annexation of Hawai`i, for example, makes it clear that the coup against the native monarchy was little more than theft. At the same time, though, he does not idealize the pre-colonial era or downplay that monarchy's undeniable corruption. He is clear-eyed about the costs of empire-building, doesn't shy from naming certain American actions in Cuba and the Philippines the "atrocities" they were, charts successes and failures honestly, and makes painfully clear the disconnect between America's high-minded rhetoric and our often base conduct. In what may be the nearest our author comes to outright denunciation, he is very hard on Theodore Roosevelt's "spurious euphoria" about the glories of war and TR's general bloodthirstiness (pp. 416-7). I would have liked to see a little more discussion of the opposition to war mounted by the "goo-goos," though Zimmerman's discussion, as far as it goes, is sound. This ground has also been covered well by Robert Beisner's "Twelve Against Empire" (1968), a work I recommend and which is listed in Zimmerman's bibliography. Even today, there seems to be reluctance in some quarters to see the United States as an imperial power. But we became one a century ago, and remain one today. While our intentions, and certainly our rhetoric, may have been (and be) more idealistic than those of other empires, the real-world consequences have been largely the same. As an introduction to how and why the American empire was born, a primer to how we got to where we are today, and a reminder of the power individuals have to shape the world, Zimmerman's "First Great Triumph" is not to be missed.
Rating:
Summary: First Great Triumph
Review: In First Great Triumph, author Warren Zimmermann demonstrates a masterful knowledge of the beginnings of American imperialism. He first develops biographical sketches into the background of the five men he feels made the most significant contributions to imperialist doctrines then uses the second part of the book to develop his theory. The result is a readable, engaging work that represents an important contribution to American diplomatic history. But Zimmermann also uses his book as a partial mirror to the present day. In 1898, America badgered Spain into a war the Spanish could not win. The reader cannot help but notice strong parallels to the approach America is using towards Iraq in 2003. Zimmermann?s quote about how American?s see themselves as liberators but are seen as oppressors by those they conquer echoes of America?s relationship with Pakistan today. His final twenty or so pages carry the work in sketch form to the present and helps portray his interpretation of the situation of America as an imperialist power. Zimmermann?s work is well crafted, but there are questions about who he includes and who he only give limited space. After their biographical chapters, John Hay and Elihu Root, and to a lesser extent Alfred Mahan, receive only limited attention. The main players are Henry Cabot Lodge and Theodore Roosevelt. William McKinley and Woodrow Wilson receive mention in the latter part, but are omitted in the first. More detailed chapters on them may have helped the transition that occurred in 1920 where overt imperialism was set aside in Harding's "Return to Normalcy" (whatever that means) campaign. Also there is no mention of Roosevelt as a progressive Republican that reached across class lines to achieve great popularity. All things being equal, this is a very good book and Zimmermann has established himself as a powerful force in this time period. His title seems a bit unusual, as one may confuse it with something on the American Revolution or the Constitution, but it is a quote borrowed from Roosevelt on his way to Cuba with the Rough Riders.
Rating:
Summary: America's First Empire
Review: This book by a former U.S. Ambassador is an elegantly-written history of the Spanish-American War of 1898, when the United States acquired colonies in the Caribbean and the Pacific and emerged as a major world power. The nuanced, balanced narrative deals with "big picture" geopolitics and historical trends but never loses sight of the human factor or the role that ego and personal ambition played in America's rise to power. Zimmerman doesn't flinch from concluding that American troops committed atrocities in the Philippines or that our acquisition of Hawaii and the Panama canal zone was little more than theft. At the same time, he avoids ahistorical condemnations of turn-of-the-century imperialism. His book will leave leftwing revisionists and flag-waving rightists equally disappointed -- surely a sign of scholarly achievement. "First Great Tiumph" brims with insights into diplomacy and politics, based on Zimmerman's many years in the U.S. foreign service. Indeed, many parts of the book are eerily topical, such as the discussion of how war-lover Theodore Roosevelt seized on the sinking of the battleship Maine as a pretext for a war in Cuba. The book was published prior to the non-discovery of the much-hyped WMDs in Iraq but the parallels to current events are there for any intelligent reader to see. I gave the book four stars instead of five only because the "multi-biographical" approach is a bit contrived and results in the inclusion of much unnecessary biographical material in the first section of the book.
Rating:
Summary: History at Its Best!
Review: This is history at its best -- well written, thoroughly researched, and interesting to read. The principle characters come alive. It's an ambitious undertaking, too, to describe this chapter in our history. Zimmermann not only discusses the emergence of the United States onto the world scene as a major player, but also interweaves five amazing men: John Hay, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Elihu Root, Henry Cabot Lodge, and Theodore Roosevelt. I was familiar with them, but he makes them real. You get into their point of view, their successes and foibles, and their backgrounds and their struggles. I had wanted to read about World War I and the formation of the Arab states as we know them today. Paris 1919 would be a good start. I decided to read this first, though, as a run-in to Paris 1919. What I discovered is that not only did this period posture the US as a world player, but also the striking similarity between the Spanish-American War and the War in Iraq. More about that later. Zimmermann begins by describing the lives, philosophies, and contributions of these five men whose contributions were pivotal. These are not definitive biographies, to be sure, but rather a series of monographs that are delightful in their brevity and depth. The rest of the book provides an excellent history of the war with Spain -- going into detail about Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines -- along with our seizure of Guam and Hawaii. Along the way he touches on a wide variety of other persons, US and foreign. The only downside is the lack of maps. They would help substantially, but their absence does not unduly detract from the strengths of the book. For example, there is fascinating detail regarding treaty negotiations with Spain and the debate within the US Senate for ratification. Zimmermann even gives insight into personalities in the Spanish ruling circles and how they affected Spanish actions. There were a variety of reasons for the US to expand its thinking past its ocean boundaries. Quoting Mahan, "[our] growing production, public sentiment, a geographic position between two old worlds and two oceans, the growth of European colonies in the Pacific, the rise of Japan, and the peopling of the American West with men favoring a strong foreign policy" (115). I always thought imperialism was driven more by economic motives (markets) and diplomatic and military motives (national power). Imperialism is not necessarily aimed just at less developed societies, but also between Western and regional powers. Still, I can see Zimmermann's point when he says, "Such a cultural atmosphere was extremely conducive to imperialist initiatives, because imperialism -- like Anglo-Saxonism, social Darwinism, and manifest destiny -- was also based on the principle of racial inequality" (37). Maybe "also" is the key word. Having said that, he also makes the point, "Three of America's earlier wars had been fought for specific principles: political liberty in 1776, freedom of the seas in 1812, and preservation of the Union in 1861. The Spanish-American War was the first in which Americans were activated in large part by the way a foreign government treated its subjects" (251). This is where Zimmermann's analysis gets quite interesting for today's environment. Much has been made recently comparing the War in Iraq and where it may lead us to Vietnam and the Persian Gulf War. In reading this book you come to find out that the true comparison is the Spanish-American War. The parallels are numerous. Here are a few examples: "...left unresolved [was] the crucial issue of who would inherit Cuba from Spain. Would it be the United States or the Cuban people? That fatal ambiguity has scarred American relations with Cuba ever since" (264). "The Spanish had courage, but not the kind of courage that leads to victory" (283). "If we turn this war, which was heralded to the world as a war of humanity, in any sense into a war of conquest, we shall forever forfeit the confidence of mankind" (337). "The first years of American occupation of the Philippines were marked by full-scale war...`The people whom we liberated down there have turned against us.' From the outbreak of violence...it took the US more than three years to subdue what was to the Americans an insurrection and to the Filipinos a war for independence. At its height the American troop presence constituted three-quarters of the entire US Army. Casualties on both sides far exceeded the killed and wounded in the three weeks of fighting in Cuba." (386) "'To leave the islands at this time would mean that they would fall into a welter of murderous anarchy. Such dereliction of duty on our part would be a crime against humanity.'" (404) Zimmermann's insights go on and on. There is much that is different between then and now, but it's clear that the Spanish-American War has much for us to learn in our current foreign paths. Zimmermann sums up his message of his book the best. "In retrospect, the twentieth century, for all the brilliance of its intellectual and technological accomplishments, was a time of violence and horror unprecedented in world history...The threat posed by Hitler's Germany became the major international preoccupation from 1933 until the German defeat in 1945. The threat of Stalin's Russia succeeded it as the main concern. Neither challenge could have been dealt with successfully without the full engagement of the US. The imperial initiation at the end of the nineteenth century had prepared Americans for the great power role that, in the twentieth century, only they could play." (482) This is one of the best accounts of US history that I've read. I'd give it six stars if I could.
Rating:
Summary: History at Its Best!
Review: This is history at its best -- well written, thoroughly researched, and interesting to read. The principle characters come alive. It's an ambitious undertaking, too, to describe this chapter in our history. Zimmermann not only discusses the emergence of the United States onto the world scene as a major player, but also interweaves five amazing men: John Hay, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Elihu Root, Henry Cabot Lodge, and Theodore Roosevelt. I was familiar with them, but he makes them real. You get into their point of view, their successes and foibles, and their backgrounds and their struggles. I had wanted to read about World War I and the formation of the Arab states as we know them today. Paris 1919 would be a good start. I decided to read this first, though, as a run-in to Paris 1919. What I discovered is that not only did this period posture the US as a world player, but also the striking similarity between the Spanish-American War and the War in Iraq. More about that later. Zimmermann begins by describing the lives, philosophies, and contributions of these five men whose contributions were pivotal. These are not definitive biographies, to be sure, but rather a series of monographs that are delightful in their brevity and depth. The rest of the book provides an excellent history of the war with Spain -- going into detail about Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines -- along with our seizure of Guam and Hawaii. Along the way he touches on a wide variety of other persons, US and foreign. The only downside is the lack of maps. They would help substantially, but their absence does not unduly detract from the strengths of the book. For example, there is fascinating detail regarding treaty negotiations with Spain and the debate within the US Senate for ratification. Zimmermann even gives insight into personalities in the Spanish ruling circles and how they affected Spanish actions. There were a variety of reasons for the US to expand its thinking past its ocean boundaries. Quoting Mahan, "[our] growing production, public sentiment, a geographic position between two old worlds and two oceans, the growth of European colonies in the Pacific, the rise of Japan, and the peopling of the American West with men favoring a strong foreign policy" (115). I always thought imperialism was driven more by economic motives (markets) and diplomatic and military motives (national power). Imperialism is not necessarily aimed just at less developed societies, but also between Western and regional powers. Still, I can see Zimmermann's point when he says, "Such a cultural atmosphere was extremely conducive to imperialist initiatives, because imperialism -- like Anglo-Saxonism, social Darwinism, and manifest destiny -- was also based on the principle of racial inequality" (37). Maybe "also" is the key word. Having said that, he also makes the point, "Three of America's earlier wars had been fought for specific principles: political liberty in 1776, freedom of the seas in 1812, and preservation of the Union in 1861. The Spanish-American War was the first in which Americans were activated in large part by the way a foreign government treated its subjects" (251). This is where Zimmermann's analysis gets quite interesting for today's environment. Much has been made recently comparing the War in Iraq and where it may lead us to Vietnam and the Persian Gulf War. In reading this book you come to find out that the true comparison is the Spanish-American War. The parallels are numerous. Here are a few examples: "...left unresolved [was] the crucial issue of who would inherit Cuba from Spain. Would it be the United States or the Cuban people? That fatal ambiguity has scarred American relations with Cuba ever since" (264). "The Spanish had courage, but not the kind of courage that leads to victory" (283). "If we turn this war, which was heralded to the world as a war of humanity, in any sense into a war of conquest, we shall forever forfeit the confidence of mankind" (337). "The first years of American occupation of the Philippines were marked by full-scale war...'The people whom we liberated down there have turned against us.' From the outbreak of violence...it took the US more than three years to subdue what was to the Americans an insurrection and to the Filipinos a war for independence. At its height the American troop presence constituted three-quarters of the entire US Army. Casualties on both sides far exceeded the killed and wounded in the three weeks of fighting in Cuba." (386) "'To leave the islands at this time would mean that they would fall into a welter of murderous anarchy. Such dereliction of duty on our part would be a crime against humanity.'" (404) Zimmermann's insights go on and on. There is much that is different between then and now, but it's clear that the Spanish-American War has much for us to learn in our current foreign paths. Zimmermann sums up his message of his book the best. "In retrospect, the twentieth century, for all the brilliance of its intellectual and technological accomplishments, was a time of violence and horror unprecedented in world history...The threat posed by Hitler's Germany became the major international preoccupation from 1933 until the German defeat in 1945. The threat of Stalin's Russia succeeded it as the main concern. Neither challenge could have been dealt with successfully without the full engagement of the US. The imperial initiation at the end of the nineteenth century had prepared Americans for the great power role that, in the twentieth century, only they could play." (482) This is one of the best accounts of US history that I've read. I'd give it six stars if I could.
Rating:
Summary: Bully Beginnings
Review: This is the best history book I've read in a long time. Here's why:
It's really about the beginnings of modern, international America. Politicians before this period seem antique, but those of the Spanish-American War era are the antecedents of current politicos. This is an important but little examined period.
Because the public knows so little about the major players, Zimmermann begins with mini-biographies of John Hay, Alfred Mahan, Elihu Root and Henry Cabot Lodge. They're of just the right length- around 50 pages. There is also a sketch of the better known Teddy Roosevelt. Zimmermann gives balanced portrayals of these men. T.R. was one of the best qualified Presidents ever, but a dangerous jingoist who would be unelectable in the nuclear age.
The circumstances leading to the Spanish-American War are not as simple as taught in high school. (It was not just a Hearst inspired land grab.) Having finished the book, I don't know which side I would have taken. Can one ask any more of a good history?
Zimmermann has a great feel for memorable anecdotes and pithy quotes. There are about a dozen snorters in this book that make you want to jump up and read aloud to whomever's in the room. Hay and Root seem to have been masters of the mot jus.
I thought alot about the impending war as I read this. There were several reasons for invading Cuba, but the reasons seemed distinct and unrelated. No single reason quite met the vital requirements of going to war. (Yup, sounds like Iraq.) The story of the subsequent occupation and war in the Philippines should be of interest to post-war nation builders. Of course, no matter how the war and occupation of Iraq turns out, you will be able to cite caveats from First Great Triumph.
Rating:
Summary: History taught through biography
Review: Warren Zimmerman uses short but trenchant bios of five important American decision makers and opinion leaders to tell a story about the beginnings of the American empire. John Hay, Navy Capt. Alfred T. Mahan, Elihu Root, Henry Cabot Lodge and Theodore Roosevelt are the principal actors. These men provided the intellectual atmosphere and the institutional framework that enabled the United States to step away from her traditional isolationism, recognize her place in the world as a power of the first rank, and take up that role. In order for that to happen the American people first had to understand the dangers that expansionist European powers presented to their nation. Zimmerman weaves the various strands that these five men bring to this story as well as the reluctantance of President McKinley and the objections of actors like Mark Twain and former senator and newspaper editor Carl Shurz, into an exciting and thoughtful work. The book is worth the price for the bios of the principals alone but it is the story of this interaction, as skillfully told by Zimmerman, that makes this book so interesting and such a quick read. For those who believe that America is not an imperial power (though not quite cut in the mold of European imperialism) this book will provide much to think about. For those interested in knowing how we became a world power in such a short time, this book is invaluable. The author is a former foreign-service officer who obviously has experienced the mixed blessings of the nation's global responsibilities.
Rating:
Summary: Americanism. Imperalism. Manifest Destiny - 5 Americans
Review: What do the above have in common? The answer is provided quite nicely in Warren Zimmerman's book "First Great Triumph". In it, he explains what 5 great Americans - John Hay, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Theodore Roosevelt, Hencry Cabot Lodge, and Elihu Root had to do with the forming of the American century (the 20th Century).
Each of these men played his own role in creating Imperialistic America, starting in the late 19th century, and their contributions to American foreign policy continue through to this day.
This is an important book for anyone that wants to understand the personalities of these five men and the actions that each took to make America the dominant player in world affairs that it has been during the last 100+ years.
The book is divided into two sections; biographical sketches of each of these five men, and then a section on how America became an Imperalistic power, similar to Great Britain or any of a number of the European countries in earlier centuries. Starting with the Spanish American war, the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands, and pushing through to American intervention in World War I, this book does a fantastic job of explaining the events that occured and the personalities involved.
I now understand why Zimmerman chose these five men to study in this book - when I first started to read it, I thought that perhaps others, such as William McKinley or William H. Seward should have been included in the biography section, but Seward's contributions were too early to be included in this study, and McKinley was too reserved to be included in a group of men that firmly believed in American expansion, much as earlier Americans had proclaimed "Mainfest Destiny".
I enjoyed the book greatly, and would highly recommend it to anyone that is looking for a study of early American foreign policy, or an understanding of why America played such a big role in world events during the 20th century.
Rating:
Summary: An Entertaining, Informative Analysis of the Pax Americana
Review: Zimmerman's First Great Triumph is a welcome dissertation for many reasons. It is both an analysis of the history and aims of American foreign policy and a collection of biographical sketches. It also is a timely commentary on the current state of American foreign policy. Zimmerman's contention, that the United States has entered another phase of world leadership, which requires careful analysis of the true origins of pax Americana, is the most important argument in the book. Zimmerman argues, that American foreign policy starts with five men, for each of whom in the first third of the text he provides a political biography. However, he does not omit other pertinent details. Compared with Morris's two-volume biography of Theodore Roosevelt, Zimmerman's sketches of Roosevelt, Elihu Root, John Hay, Alfred Mahan, and Henry Cabot Lodge are as well written and more focused. Zimmerman also provides shorter accounts of other figures in nineteenth century American history, such as President McKinley and Mark Twain. If nothing else, he makes this period of American history fascinating and central to the rest of American history. Considering the legacies of the five men, through other major figures such as George Kennan, this period should be considered more. Zimmerman also counters the thumbnail argument that American history is divided between realism and idealism. He argues, that from the beginning there were tensions in the conduct of American foreign policy between human rights and stability, depending on which of the five men's policies predominated. Zimmerman also identifies the central importance of the executive branch for the conduct of foreign policy in this period, further highlighted by the working and personal relationships between Senator Lodge and President Roosevelt. Zimmerman is quite frank about the errors these five men committed, especially in Cuba and the Philippines. His insistence, that American foreign policy was more enlightened and consistent with American ideals, will be controversial for many, but hardly unsupported. Zimmerman provides plenty of information for any student of American history and foreign policy to enter this debate.
|
