Customer Reviews

America Between the Wars: From 11/9 to 9/11

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was in Jr. High and High School during the 90s and so wasn't very familiar with this period before reading this, and while interested and somewhat familiar with policy, am certainly no expert. After years of thinking I knew who neoconservatives were and what both parties "stood for", this book really put things into perspective and contextualized things for me. And though it's a "history", it draws extensively on interviews with leading policymakers & insiders during the period, so the text ends up reading more like a narrative (great for a novel-reader like myself).

In sum, this was really informative, interesting, and a quick read - perfect for anyone looking for a genuinely nonpartisan, nuanced look at how we got to where we are - both domestically and abroad. Definitely a must for your summer reading list.

This is a tremendously important book that explains what happened when the Berlin wall fell and America's foreign policy establishment was forced to confront a world that was no longer organized by the US/Soviet rivalry. As it becomes increasingly clear that the "war on terrorism" is only a part of the broader foreign policy needed to protect our nation in a complex and multi-polar world, this is the book to read if you want to understand how the next generation of policymakers will draw on the lessons of the recent past to set a new course. Chollet and Goldgeier know what they are talking about. They have done exhaustive research, and each of them has hands on experience in the foreign policy business. It's a bonus that the writing is lively and engaging. Don't miss this book.

America Between the Wars tells the story of 11/9 to 9/11 through informative, behind-the-scenes stories that illustrate the dynamic and contentious foreign policy debates from the fall of the Berlin wall to the fall of the twin towers. If you like the stories behind the history, you'll love America Between the Wars. And if you usually prefer novels, you may find Chollet and Goldgeier's narrative voice appealing. Rather than writing a wonky, boring foreign policy book as so many unfortunately do, the authors present a relevant and relatable book. Especially for those who lived through this period, America Between the Wars reveals critical elements of our past and our future.

An excellent read for someone who wants a non-partisan approach to history's impact on international relations and foreign policy. Additionally, Chollet and Goldgeier postulate how our current state of affairs will shape tomorrow's. This is a perfect book for someone who wants to understand where we were and where we are going.

Having never read anything like this before, I was prepared for a brain-deadener. In very short order, however, things turned into a brain-enlivener. Simply and evenly written this book turned a potentially boring or polemical study of what seemed to have been a lost decade into a fascinating look backwards at a not-at-all distant past.
I thought I understood the decade but it is clear I did not. At least now I have a chance at understanding it better. These guys (incredibly well-informed and widely-researched) have done us a great service.
Reading this book does leave me with a nagging dread. The Campaign of 2008 did an excellent job of disregarding the great foreign policy dilemmas of the moment and of the 90s.
But, as Between the Wars so amply illustrates, foreign policy is driven by domestic politics, and in that arena it appears we are doomed to repeat, and repeat, the errors of our ways.

This book is the first account of US foreign policy in the 1990s that treats the decade as genuine history. I mean that it does not simply offer a chronicle of the period, or a set of newspaper clippings and individual events - it offers a guiding historical interpretation that sets those years in relation to the Cold War before and 9/11 and beyond. It is very convincing that there is far more continuity today with the foreign policies of those years than many people, left or right, give credit for. It is a highly persuasive interpretation of the period and I believe will remain the standard account of its foreign policy for a long time to come.

This is the first and so far only book that has taken a critical look at what happened from 1989 to 2001. The substance of the book is a perfect starting point for the ongoing foreign policy debates between the left and the right.

This is a must read for any who are concerned or interested in the foreign policy of this country. Past is prologue.

In "America Between the Wars," Derek Chollet and James Goldgeier suggest that 11/9--the day when the Berlin wall fell--was the more defining moment than 9/11--the day the twin towers fell.

On the surface, the two events seem unconnected. Indeed, the argument runs counter to widely held notion that 9/11 was the day "everything" changed. However, the authors submit that, in depriving the United States of its chief adversary, the collapse of the Soviet Union left the U.S. without a clear vision about how to proceed in international affairs. This confusion defined the interwar years.

This incoherence is reflected in the difficulty that ensuing U.S. presidents and intellectuals had in articulating a "bumper sticker" foreign policy agenda on par with the previous "containment" maxim that held sway for over 40 years. From H.W. Bush's "new world order" to Clinton's "democratic enlargement" to the "contract" Republicans who seemed to quietly support "isolationism," to Francis Fukuyama's "the end of history" to Samuel Huntington's "clash of civilizations," everyone seemed to have a theory as to what the demise of the Soviet Union meant and how U.S. foreign policy should proceed.

Should the U.S. interpret unipolarity as a validation of liberal capitalism and spread democracy around the world, even if it meant eschwing multi-lateralism (neo-con perspective)? Should the U.S. harness its position as the world's superpower to establish a consensus to address the world's manifold problems (H.W.'s realist perspective)? Should the U.S. focus more on domestic policies? What about our role in preventing genocide and using our military for humanitarian purposes (Somalia, Rwanda, Balkans)?

The absence of a defining strategy frustrated attempts to properly deal with terrorism. Clinton, who seemed to understand the challenges posed by terrorism and appreciated the Bin Laden threat, also had to contend with a domestic constituency that had grown weary of the U.S. being too "interventionist," and battle criticisms arising from his prurient transgressions with Monica Lewinsky. Furthermore, Clinton had to resolve the crisis in Kosovo--while losing as few American soldiers as possible--and rely on a grossly underfunded CIA to bring down bin Laden.

Clinton also had to manage Saddam's mounting defiance of international laws which culminated in "Operation Desert Fox" and inspired rhetoric from the President that, in retrospect, could have been used as talking points for W. Bush on the eve of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The Bush administration, on the other hand, entered office with little apparent appreciation for the threat posed by non-state actors. Despite being briefed by Clinton's outgoing administration about the al-queda threat, the Bush administration appeared more commited to mitigating percieved threats from nation states like China and Russia. Additionally, the administration appeared more focused on missile defense, which had become a platform for Republicans during the 90's.

In the end, the authors are not especially critical of any one president or administration. Instead, the tragedy of 9/11 can be evaluated in the context of a world that had been dramatically changed 12 years before.

This book is a quick-paced chronological summary of US foreign policy from the fall of the Berlin Wall to the 9/11 attacks. The book examines multiple themes. First, it looks at how different international events were responded to, or driven by, the occupants of the White House. Second, the book examines how US domestic events, such as presidential elections, the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and the 1994 Republican congressional takeover, affected the conduct of US foreign policy. The book also dedicates a lot of text to explain how various US scholars, such as William Kristol and Robert Kagan, affected US foreign policy through their writings and lectures.

The book gives equal mention to wars, trade deals, terrorist events, and other international events involving the US. The book also provides a good geographical balance by including discussion on N. Korea, Iraq, Haitia, the Balkans, Somalia, and other trouble spots during the 1990s. However, the book is seriously lacking in several key areas. First, there is no mention of the drug wars during this time, and the growth of the narco-states in Latin America. In fact, Latin America is barely covered in this book.

Second, the book totally ignores the growing power of corporations during this period. For example, the authors cite the efforts of Dick Cheney to influence Republican politics during the 1990s. They, however, fail to mention the role of Cheney's Halliburton and other US companies in sidestepping the trade sanctions on Iraq. Corporatons also drove the trade deals with China. The entire reason why Clinton turned against his own party was because of major campaign contributions from US corporations that wanted access to China's labor force and consumer markets.

Another major international issue missed by the book is the growing discord between the US and other countries on the safety of genetically modified food; which of course finds corporations predominantly on the side of supporting the safety of GM food. The list goes on and on. Frankly, after reading this book it seems as if the authors forwarded their initial draft to a committee of corporate PR agents, who then proceeded to edit out any and all text that could shed negative light on any corporation. The result is a book that (incorrectly) approaches its subject from the model of politics drives economics; when it is really the other way around. Business see opportunities, and lobby governments to get laws changed so they can take advantage of those opportunities. Overall, a flawed book. Its good reading for the various references, recollections of conversations between important people, and the extensive timeline in the back. But the meat of the book is missing key topics.

The caption does little justice to the main tenet of the book since no war worth the name occurred either on 11/9 or on 9/11. Readers might be confused although the book is studded with solid facts. The period under consideration, i.e., the decade of the 1990s was one of uncertainties and nations of the world were searching for a stable international order that has not yet emerged thanks to US follies.

Gautam Maitra
Author of 'Tracing the Eagle's Orbit: Illuminating Insights into Major US Foreign Policies Since Independence.'