BOOK REVIEW: America and the World: Conversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft

From The New York Times

Reviewed by Michiko Kakutani

In the months before the American invasion of Iraq, among the few members of the foreign policy establishment to speak out forcefully about the dangers of going to war unilaterally against Saddam Hussein were Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to the first President Bush, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter.

In August 2002 Mr. Scowcroft warned that a “virtual go-it-alone strategy against Iraq” would degrade “international cooperation with us against terrorism,” and he presciently predicted that such a war “would not be a cakewalk,” as some members of the George W. Bush administration contended, but could involve “a large-scale, long-term military occupation” and “would be very expensive — with serious consequences for the U.S. and global economy.”

That same month Mr. Brzezinski cautioned that “war is too serious a business and too unpredictable in its dynamic consequences — especially in a highly flammable region — to be undertaken because of a personal peeve, demagogically articulated fears or vague factual assertions.” In February 2003, he added that “an America that decides to act essentially on its own regarding Iraq” could “find itself quite alone in having to cope with the costs and burdens of the war’s aftermath, not to mention widespread and rising hostility abroad.”

In a trenchant new book, “America and the World: Conversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy,” Mr. Brzezinski and Mr. Scowcroft (along with the Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, acting as moderator) incisively discuss the fallout of the Bush administration’s war in Iraq, including the empowerment of Iran, the recruitment of more terrorists and the inflaming of hatreds within the region. They also survey the foreign policy landscape as a whole: the consequences of globalization, the rise of China as a new economic behemoth, the ambitions of a new Russia under the leadership of Vladimir V. Putin and Dmitri A. Medvedev.

Their wide-ranging dialogue gives the reader an acute sense of the daunting challenges (including nuclear proliferation, global warming and terrorism) confronted by America in a rapidly changing international environment, even as it emphasizes the importance of the coming presidential election in picking a leader to grapple with those issues at what could well be a hinge moment in modern history.

In addition to the continuing problems in Iraq, Mr. Scowcroft says, there exists now the overarching “possibility of a general Middle East conflict in which the costs of Iraq would look minuscule.” Both he and Mr. Brzezinski underscore the importance of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process — which they suggest could change the psychology of the region and act as a catalyst for dealing with Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran — and both stress the importance of the next president’s engaging in that process immediately.

“We have an unusual moment now,” says Mr. Scowcroft, noting: “We have an Israeli government that is weak. We have a Palestinian entity that is weak. And, really for the first time, we have Arab countries ready to support a solution.” He adds that “the region is incredibly fragile right now” and worries about the time it will take for the new president to get up to speed.

Although they come from opposite sides of the political aisle (Mr. Scowcroft is a Republican, Mr. Brzezinski a Democrat), both are foreign policy realists who believe that the United States must constructively engage with a rapidly changing world, not react defensively to it. And while they disagree on aspects of the expansion of NATO and the timing of an American withdrawal from Iraq (Mr. Scowcroft says that “simply withdrawing is an impediment to a solution,” while Mr. Brzezinski contends that America’s continuing presence there is “part of the problem”), they agree on a remarkable number of basic strategic and diplomatic principles.

Unlike neoconservative ideologues in the current administration, the two former national security advisers say that talks with hostile parties can be a useful tool, and they argue that in the wake of 9/11, the Manichean language employed by President Bush has alienated allies and aggravated resentments in many parts of the world.

They point to the importance of alliances in an increasingly complicated and interconnected world. And they object to what Mr. Scowcroft refers to as the propagation of “an environment of fear” at home, which Mr. Brzezinski says has made Americans “more susceptible to demagogy” and to “a fearful paranoia that the outside world is conspiring through its massive terrorist forces to destroy us.”

What makes these discussions between Mr. Brzezinski and Mr. Scowcroft so bracing is their combination of common sense and an ability to place America’s relationship with a particular country in both a historical perspective and a regional context of competing interests and threats. Their book should be required reading not only for the next president-elect but also for any voters concerned with the foreign policy issues that will be on the next administration’s plate.

Two of America’s leading foreign policy specialists discuss the issues that face the United States today and the future

Review by Stefan Fergus

In a similar style to one of Brzezinski’s most frequently quoted articles (“The Clash of Titans” with John J. Mearsheimer, Foreign Policy 2005), America And The World is our chance to sit in on a spontaneous, unscripted discussion between the two authors and David Ignatius, who acted as moderator, as they discuss some of the most significant foreign policy challenges facing America today. Brzezinski and Scowcroft, both former National Security Advisors, have a history of working together – in both articles and letters that offer suggestions to administrations if they believe a policy shift is required.

Following the welcoming introduction by Ignatius (which does a brilliant job of dissipating any fears that this might be a stuffy, plodding book), the discussion sets out to give us a “sense of the problem of the world today”, before it moves on to offer solutions for the various realities confronting the United States, which some will no doubt be familiar with: the war in Iraq; a bellicose and near-nuclear Iran; a resurgent Russia; globalisation and its inherent problems; and growing competition with China and East Asia. As Ignatius says, “Both men believe the United States is in some difficulty abroad because it hasn’t yet adapted to these new realities.”

It is rare to find these topics discussed so openly outside of a lecture or debate. The authors don’t always agree (Brzezinski is a Democrat, Scowcroft is a Republican), but they do manage to find a certain amount of common ground, drawing on their own experiences in government and since to provide advice and anecdotes when warranted. Theoretically, they’re both foreign policy realists, believing that the national interest should form the basis of America’s foreign policy.

An unusual format for such a long work, it works surprisingly well and offers something new in a field that has a tendency to become rather formulaic. That the book describes their differing opinions also makes this book valuable, as it doesn’t just present one ideological argument, rather offering both sides, leaving it to the reader to decide which he/she prefers.

Insightful learned, and well-argued, both Brzezinski and Scowcroft present some compelling arguments and suggestions for America’s conduct in the near future. The conversational style also allows for some different perspectives on their already published works (either in articles or books) that should also be welcome to people who are looking for more explanation of their opinions, and how they stand up to direct questioning.