Customer Reviews

The J Curve: A New Way to Understand Why Nations Rise and Fall

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

This is a timely and thought-provoking book for anyone who wants to better understand our rapidly changing world but is required reading for anyone leading an institution - public sector or private - at the forefront of globalization. Ian Bremmer argues that none of us can afford to ignore the risks created by failing and failed nations in a world where disease, terrorism, refugees and weapons of mass destruction can cross borders more easily than ever before. The complex dynamics of openness and stability brought by globalization are challenging all societies, markets and governments in new ways. This book provides an excellent framework for understanding the journey.

The J-Curve is an innovative approach to mapping these complex dynamics to the behavior of governments around the world. Much of what has been written to date has focused solely on the economic and social impacts of globalization. This book synthesizes those impacts and explains how they can undermine or strengthen a nation depending on where it is on the J-Curve. Understanding the political decision-making and the forces within their societies that are motivating these governments is the crucial missing piece of the puzzle laid out in the J-Curve.

His insightful analysis distills the history and the current political, social and economic forces in the countries most relevant to the world economy and global stability - North Korea, Iran, Russia, Saudia Arabia, Turkey, China and more. Ian not only explains where they are but provides a framework to interpret current events and understand in which direction they are headed on the J-Curve.

I find myself interpreting news in a new way after reading this book. Three environmental disasters in China this week and the government response is to tighten controls on journalism, a clear move up the left side. Opium production at record highs in Afghanistan - we are still aren't through the bottom of the curve. While he does provide some foreign policy prescriptions, you are ultimately left with an understanding of the limits of foreign policy in our increasingly complex world and the dangers in not providing enough of the right assistance to the nations most at risk.

The central argument of The J Curve is quite persuasive: the path from authoritarian "closed" societies to democratic "open" ones leads through a "dip in the curve"--that is, a prolonged moment of dangerous instability. In this way, authoritarian societies that begin to democraticize become paradoxically more unstable in the early stages of "opening." The J Curve is an explanatory model. But the book is normative as well: If "closed" states are ultimately to emerge on the other, "open" side of the curve, they require sustained international support, in particular from Western democracies.

The J Curve is the work of a once precocious Sovietologist whose political education came inside a disintegrating Soviet Union-turned-dazzlingly successful president of a political risk consulting firm whose now experience extends far beyond former Soviet borders. Ian Bremmer's prose is lively, sharp and eminently accessible--free of both academic and policy jargon. His voice is a human one, and strikes a rare balance: devoid of sentimentality, but marked by an authentic concern about the human condition.

This book is recommended, but with a caveat. Like most books about international relations written by social scientists who tend to simplify things for the sake of providing an over-arching structure, this one is to be read with a measure of skepticism. For a detailed review (or two), check out the recent debate in Slate.com between the journalists Bill Emmott and Fareed Zakaria, who are, respectively, an editor of The Economist and a columnist for Newsweek. (You can search within Slate by typing out their names and the title of the exchange: "Debating the J-Curve".) Here's two quotes from their exchanges.

Emmott: "I found this a useful representation of what happens as institutions and regimes change and, certainly, a salutary warning against the view that democracy will grow as naturally as flowers in the spring. The book's main interest for me, however, lay not so much in the chart that gives it its title but in the fine and revealing case studies that Bremmer lays out to establish how complicated the political form of states really is. He outlines the situations in North Korea, Cuba, Iran, and China adeptly and looks also at countries, such as South Africa, that have made a successful transition to democracy; at others, such as India, where democracy has survived seemingly against the odds; and at Russia, where democracy has lately been foundering. The conclusion? That there is no clear rule that can guide us in judging which countries will move up the J curve and which will not. It all depends. Societies are fragile and complex organisms."

Zakaria: "he biggest real-world test of Bremmer's thesis is taking place right now in Asia. If he's right, India is a better long- and even medium-term bet than China. Is he correct? I look at China, which is doing so much economic and even social reform. Its strange free-market dictatorship is building world-class infrastructure--new schools, colleges, and universities; special economic zones; nuclear power plants--and is opening the economy and society to international trade. India, meanwhile, moves its reform process forward at a snail's pace, remaining in many ways well behind China, largely because it is a democracy and the government is busy subsidizing interest groups and voters. They're both doing fine, but China's economy is now three times the size of India's and grows about 2 percentage points faster. Will that change? I puzzle about this and am genuinely curious as to your response."

Political scientists may come up with elegant and even persuasive models such as this J-Curve. But in the long run, it's historians and their research that give the last words.

Any business leader contemplating investing abroad should read "The J-Curve. Bremmer's model puts a whole new complexion on risk management that encompasses far more than the traditional emphasis on economic vulnerabilities. The book argues persuasively for greater focus on the role of openness in a country's stability and presents an unusually deep and detailed explanation of what true openness entails. It is also a useful prism for policy makers and just plain concerned citizens overwhelmed by rapidly escalating, apparently unpredictable events. The J-Curve is, to some extent, a tool for making sense of chaos.

The contrasting studies of South Africa and Yugoslavia, in particular, are fascinating in light of the current efforts to build amity among hostile factions in Iraq. This is history for those who are truly committed to not repeating it.

Bremmer contends that political stability can be achieved through a closed society (eg. North Korea), and even more so through an open society (eg. U.S., Japan, Sweden). In between, lies political instability - hence, stability plotted on the Y-axis (vs. openness on the x-axis) would resemble a "J curve."

Maintaining stability in a closed society requires limiting access to outside ideas (eg. purge "liberals" and intellectuals, ban/limit satellite dishes, Internet access, foreign trade, foreign films, outside books and magazines, cell phones, etc.), internal police (eg. KGB in the old U.S.S.R., Hussein's spies). Stability exists in open societies because their citizens know that political and social problems will be resolved by legitimate institutions. The "bad news" is that authoritarian elites cannot be quickly replaced by widely accepted institutions - it takes time for those new institutions to demonstrate credibility and gain strength over individuals that seek to make themselves dominant; it is easier to reestablish order by declaring martial law than increasing freedom.

Bremmer then uses these concepts to propose alternative directions for U.S. foreign policy. Instead of pushing regime change in North Korea via imposing punitive sanctions and cutting off opportunity to interact with outsiders (actually helps Kim by providing someone to blame for his problems and making isolation easier), we should encourage the Chinese and South Korea to create openings into North Korea. Further, we should also allow North Korea to keep its nuclear weapons while China and South Korea enforce inspections of N.K.'s exports to prevent nuclear smuggling.

A similar less confrontational approach should be/have been taken vs. Iran, Iraq, and Cuba. Additional reasons for doing so in Iran: Russia, China, and possibly some European nations will not allow sanctions against Iran, Iran was supportive of our efforts in Afghanistan, and the biggest threat against Iran's mullahs is its unemployed youth - not the U.S. (A 2002 survey found 94% of Iranians wanting either "change" or "major change.") As for Iraq - we simply should have let the U.N. inspectors continue, and forty years of isolating Cuba has accomplished nothing except to almost bring nuclear havoc during the Kennedy years.

Bremmer makes some good points - clearly we have not succeeded in Iran, Iraq, North Korea, or Cuba, and new thinking is appropriate. (I am, however, leery of simply relying on export inspections to contain N.K.) However, he could have done it in far less than 320 pages - eg. a magazine article.

Reading "The J Curve" also prompts one to think about how long American political stability can withstand the assaults continually perpetrated upon it. Examples include attempts to squash opposition (intellectuals, newspapers and other media), control voting (gerrymandering, large campaign contributions, impairing opponents access to voting), and misrepresenting actions being taken (tax cuts mostly benefiting the middle class; Saddam had WMD). Simultaneously globalization is creating social stresses through increased unemployment, lower wages and living standards, and decimating aspirations. How long before we descend into political instability?

Whether you're an avid reader or professional investor, Ian Bremmer's book is worth your time. Ian's writing is organized, clear and concise. The book is written for the average reader; you do not need to be a policy wonk to understand his points. Whether you agree with his conclusions or not, Ian Bremmer's book provides an excellent basis for continuing debate regarding U.S. foreign policy.

Ian discusses eleven countries and their position along the J Curve. With each country, he discusses its history, current leadership style, the positives and negatives of U.S. policy towards that country and some suggestions of other approaches that could further openess and stability in that country. As an investor, I came away with a better idea of how to qualitatively measure short term and long term political risk.

The one question I had after reading this book was whether our current global economic and governing organizations were structured or could evolve to address these instabilities. Ian Bremmer did address this issue at a professional investor meeting I attended. He was quite dynamic and covered material beyond his book. I'd recommend attending a book signing if there happens to be one in your city.

Bremmer's paradigm for understanding political stability or instability is a refinement of Hegal's dialectic and an elegant appropriation of same. He is lucid and convincing (and a compelling writer). Unlike the narrow focus of a strict ideological lens (either left or right), the J Curve has a wide range of vision and offers a viable--- even healthful--- alternative method of assessment to the rigid ideological positioning that is now going out of vogue.

Catch him in person on his promotional tour if you can. He's scary smart and a real fireball. His presentation segues perfectly into engagement with the book.

I hesitate to use the phrase "I enjoyed this book"
even though I genuinely and truly enjoyed "The J
Curve". More than enjoying it, I honestly read page
after page and LEARNED from it, in a manner I cannot
from blowhard blogs and television pundits, to even
the most insightful but thin op-ed pieces and the
always interesting and reasonably objective BBC
broadcasts.

Bremmer really takes the complexity and obfuscation
out of some very thorny and scary scenarios and writes
with the genuine, human passion of a concerned,
enlightened, insightful and just-a-little-bit worried
globalist.

This is highly recommended reading for the timeliness
of the subject, the clarity of its argument,
the accessability of the writing and overall,
the clearheaded explanation of a very serious
topic and its the range of possible, real-life outcomes.

This book puts forth the hypothesis that the stability of a society as a function of its openness can be represented by the capital letter J, where the x-axis is openness, and the y-axis is stability. The bottom of the J is the most unstable point, and a point where nations can collapse if they cross it coming from either direction. The author puts forth this hypothesis in the opening chapter, and then proceeds to place various countries on it, such as modern-day Russia, Israel, China, India, the US and South Africa. All his examples support his hypothesis. I would have liked to see him apply the same hypothesis to less current examples, like Weimar Germany, the US pre-Civil War, Tsarist Russia, and even Mexico. The last would have been a great test case of the author's thesis, as this country has undergone multiple revolutions and coups over the past 200 years.

This book describes how countries govern now and if they have an opportunity to move towards a methodology that will bring them to a 'better' state that provides freedoms and wealth(financial and spirtual) to their constituents. The chapters on Iran and China were, in my opinion, the best laid out.