Hard Power: The New Politics of National Security [Hardcover]

Kurt Campbell (Author), Michael O'Hanlon (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: October 3, 2006

Our ideas about national security have changed radically over the last five years. It has become a political tool, a "wedge issue," a symbol of pride and fear. It is also the one issue above all others that can make or break an election. And this is why the Democratic Party has been steadily losing power since 2001. In Hard Power, Michael O'Hanlon, an expert on foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, and Kurt Campbell, an authority on international security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, explain how the Democrats lost credibility on issues of security and foreign policy, how they can get it back--and why they must. They recall the successful Democratic military legacy of past decades, as well as recent Democratic innovations--like the Homeland Security Office and the idea of nation-building--that have been successfully co-opted by the Republican administration. And, most importantly, they develop a broad national security vision for America, including specific defense policies and a strategy to win the war on terror.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Kurt Campbell is Senior Vice President and Director of the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He is a contributing writer to the New York Times and frequent on-air contributor to NPR's "All Things Considered," and a consultant to ABC News. He lives in Washington, D.C. Michael O'Hanlon is a Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he has written books on defense strategy, arms control, and homeland security. He has contributed to numerous television programs and newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. He lives in Washington, D.C.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 336 pages
• Publisher: Basic Books; annotated edition edition (October 3, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0465051669
• ISBN-13: 978-0465051663
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.2 x 1.3 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #537,525 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Great Minds, Good Intentions, *Very* Incomplete, November 9, 2006

By 

Robert D. Steele (Oakton, VA United States) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Hard Power: The New Politics of National Security (Hardcover)

I know Michael O'Hanlon, whom I consider to be one of the most insightful and honest policy analysts in America--his one line in "A Half Penny on the Federal Dollar" pointing out that the single best investment in foreign assistance is in the education of women, is a benchmark for all that ails US foreign policy--we simply do not know how to wage peace. He's the best. I do not know Kurt Campbell, but I respect the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). I give this book five stars instead of four because of the caliber of the authors and the terribly difficult task they took on. The book is, however, *very* incomplete.

The authors are strongest on the politics of national security--there is nothing wrong with the substance where they address it, but I will end with my observation on how incomplete the book it.

The book can be summed up--and questioned--on the basis of its eight chapter headings--the book's focus is in capital letters, my alternative focus in lower case:

NATIONAL SECURITY AS PRIMARY ELECTORAL ISSUE--not so, electoral reform and the integrity and legitimacy of government is the primary issue

MYTH OF REPUBLICAN SUPERIORITY--quite so, but what about Peter Peterson's view in "Running on Empty," to wit, BOTH political parties are inept and two sides of the same coin--they represent corporations, not the people.

MANAGING THE MILITARY--is not enough. Must manage ways and means, must manage the inter-agency matrix (Cheney ignores the policy bureaucracy, and the only agency actually fighting in Iraq is the military--everyone else is going through the motions).

HOMELAND SECURITY--TAKING IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL--physical security is not enough, even if private sector is willing to cooperate. The next level is about immigration control, tracking non-citizens, revoking citizenship as appropriate for those who do not adopt our values, tracking sermons by hostile imans, and rejecting visitors who are not bonded by their home government.

WINNING THE LONG WAR--strong on understanding next generation, weak on how to actually stabilize and reconstruct the world. The authors are too focused on terrorism, which is a tactic, not an enemy, and while they boldly propose approaches to stabilizing the Islamic nations, with a positive emphasis on education, they do not address the fundamentals of virtual colonialism, unilateral militarism, and predatory immoral "bandit" capitalism--our greatest enemy is within, not without.

THE REAL TRIPLE THREAT; ENERGY & SECURITY, GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE, AND TERRORIST FINANCING. Simplistic, conventional wisdom. Sure, we have to have energy independence, start doing real-time science and climate stabilization (changes that used to take 10,000 years now take three), and focus on terrorism financing, but these are a *fraction* of the national security challenge, and out of context, they are not realistically achievable.

COPING WITH CHINA--all well and good, but what about Brazil, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and Wild Cards such as Turkey and South Africa?

PROLIFERATION--fine on the bio-chem and nuclear weapons, what about small arms, the real weapons of mass destruction that make the 17 genocides real (I am sick and tired of hearing about Darfur in isolation--it is ONE of 17 genocides now on-going).

Most useful to me was the authors' knowledgeable identification of four competing Democratic constituencies focused on national security: the "hard power" elite; the "soft power" globalists; the "modest power" Democrats seeking a partial pull back; and the labor-environmental Democrats profoundly troubled by global capitalism (which I and William Greider and Clyde Prestowitz among others have found to be pathologically predatory and our own worst enemy in terms of long-term global stability).

In short, this is a book that is excellent in its narrow focus--getting the Democrats some traction in the national security arena, growing beyond Iraq, and setting the stage for an expanded dialog.

Now here is what is NOT in this book:

1) The ten high-level threats identified by the United Nations High-Level Threat Panel, Dr. LtGen Brent Scowcroft participating, and taken *together*: poverty, infectious disease, environmental degradation, inter-state conflict, civil war, genocide, other atrocities (kidnapping starlets for Saudi debauchery, kidnapping others for body parts), proliferation, terrorism, and transnational crime.

2) The twelve policies that must be balanced in a transpartisan fashion: Agriculture, Diplomacy, Economy, Education, Energy, Family, Health,Immigration, Justice, Security, Social Security, and Water--using scarce water to produce subsidized agriculture or to flush heavy tar oil is nuts--but no one is managing the country across the board; and finally

3) The eight challengers or challenges that *must* be enlightened and assisted in avoiding our mistakes while we also learn from them: Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and Wild Cards.

One final note: Jock Gill, who served President Clinton as a communications specialist, taught me this: we have to abandon the war metaphor--war on drugs, war on poverty, war on terrorism. IT DOES NOT WORK! I would add that we have to abandon the secrecy practice as well. In my view, the next government must be a Coalition Government because neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can govern competently without the common sense of the Libertarians, Greens, Reforms, Independents, and others; and the next government must redirect half the secret intelligence budget toward national and global education free in all languages, and half the heavy-metal military budget toward waging peace in all possible forms, to include using residual capabilities in abandoned DoD communications satellites to provide free Internet connectivity to Africa and Latin America.

O'Hanlon and Campbell are as good as it gets inside the beltway. I praise them as being the first step in a long march back to sanity, but only the first step. We cannot proceed nor succeed without them, but they need a dirty dozen iconoclastic outsiders to actually get us to an AFFORDABLE implementable Grand Srategy for a sustainable prosperous peaceful future going out seven generations.

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Useful intro, but too often buys the myths it seeks to disspell, March 13, 2007

By 

MountainRunner "Matt Armstrong" (Los Angeles, CA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Hard Power: The New Politics of National Security (Hardcover)

Kurt M. Campbell and Michael E. O'Hanlon's book is written as a handbook for Democrats, as well as other soft power proponents, to discuss the importance and elements of national security. As the authors argue, Democrats need to stop fearing participation in national security debates and step up to form a dialogue and become a viable political party. National security is a wedge issue that is "often dominated by extremist ideology on one side and muted protest on the other" and Democrats and soft power advocates are ill-equipped to participate in the discussion is how Campbell and O'Hanlon frame it.

Examples of furthering the myth and not encouraging "original" thinking includes blind acceptance of L. Paul Bremer's version of events in Iraq (p116) and Tom Ridge's rosy image of port security, vaccines, etc (p125). A bare discussion of casualty sensitivity (p89), or did they really mean insensitivity, while assuming a role for it (without establishing if the "in-" belongs or not). A fanciful discussion on global projection requirements and suggesting the US Navy simply wait for UAVs instead of new fighters (p100). Ignorance of wear and tear on the Army's vehicle fleet (p102), conflicting views on counterinsurgency (p104).

Perhaps more importantly, the authors completely ignore institutional differences between DoS and DoD, which is odd considering the nature of the handbook and its efforts to instruct on the issues of national security. While arguing for Department of State Response Force / SysAdmin / Department of Peace / CRC / or whatever it is, they accept and promote 12 year old arguments that "combat units are best at [peace operations] as they inspire respect and fear in those who would challenge them" (p110).

As an introduction to the importance of hard power in national debates, this book is useful. The book creates an awareness of the complexity of some of the issues, but unfortunately they adopt the same language and lack "fact-based reality" in some of their arguments and citations. It should, however, help create the debate where it is absent in the coalitions of Democrats who fear issues of national security, Republicans who see things as black or white, and Independents and moderates who don't know any of the issues.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars HARD POWER outlines all the major issues facing us in the future., December 11, 2006

By 

Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Hard Power: The New Politics of National Security (Hardcover)

Democrats have been losing elections for the past five years and if you want to understand just why, HARD POWER is the place to go. It shows how the Democrats have no viable strategy on the major issue of national security, and shows not only how foreign policy will decide elections of the future, but how Democrats have lost such credibility and how to get it back. With its chapters covering Middle East peace issues and processes, military management, and future problems with China's ascent, HARD POWER outlines all the major issues facing us in the future.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch