Neither really sells the title, but it doesn't matter with Zakaria's book, which is utterly without hyperbole and sensibly balances political arguments with enough economics resulting in a lot of calm, reasoned analysis.
Kagan, meanwhile, can write such short books (really an essay) because he only covers one side of the equation. His book is all pol-mil and power and states run everything. Basically ignored are globalization and financial interdependence and the rise of network trade, etc. Instead, defense budgets signal far more, and even though there are no great power wars in the offing, Kagan reminds us that they're "not unthinktable"! If the last book is subtly repudiated here (turns out we and Europe are alike in our non-autocratic governments), a mere few years after it was written, I don't think we'll need to wait so long on this one. For example, India, supposed logical member of the "axis of democracies," wants its oil and gas from Iran and tells the U.S. to bug off with its advice ("India Pursues Energy From Iran," by Peter Wonacott, WSJ, 30 April 2008, p. A8). Meanwhile, Hu is set to visit Japan in the first visit by a Chinese head of state in a decade, resulting in what the WSJ calls the "clearest sign yet that Asia's two largest economies are moving beyond political disputes that have overshadowed mushrooming trade and investment" ("Chinese President to Visit Japan," WSJ wire, 30 April 2008, p. A8.). And then there's Ma's election in Taiwan. Damn! Don't these great powers know they're supposed to be struggling against each other and us for global domination! How come they keep making deals instead?
I will probably compare and contrast the two books in a future column. They really do oppose each other in world views: Zakaria sees a world based on economics and Kagan sees one based on politics and ideology. But at the end of the day both will say that we're simply heading into a more competitive landscape. In that sense, Zakaria's prescriptions come off—as mild as they are—as far more sensible than Kagan's us-v-them stuff which strikes me as super-imposing conflict where none exists.
Ah, but that doesn't make it "unthinkable"!!!!!!
| Permalink |
Comments (2)
I've still got "Post American World" on the the back burner. I'll read it next when I'm done with Jan-Werner Muller's "Constitutional Patriotism" (after the fashion of Jurgen Habermas' ideas). I look forward to "Great Powers" coming out Feb. next. I've read Zakaria's "From Wealth to Power" and "The Future of Freedom". I find both Barnett's and Zakaria's Reasoned and Positive writings to be a breath of fresh air in the very shrill and negative atmosphere generated by the extremes of the left and the right here in the USA. =)
Posted by Tom Mull | May 16, 2008 8:30 AM
Khanna's book is the third leg of the tripod. Khanna and Kagan were both on Charlie Rose the other night. I found Khanna preferable to Kagan, but they both miss the boat in their lack of appreciation of economics. I was a bit distressed to hear Khanna describe himself as an unofficial adviser to the Obama campaign. An Obama vs. McCain campaign has the danger of degenerating into something like Nixon and Kennedy debating about non-existent missile gaps or nonsense like Qemoy and Matsu. We could very well hear debates about which one is going to be tougher on China. Barnett: can't you speed up the publication date of your book? We need you.
Posted by stuart abrams | May 17, 2008 1:48 PM