Another, belated review of "America and the World," by ...

…  Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft:

This political book, written with David Ignatius examines current affairs and gives a new detailed synopsis of the role of the U.S. in the world, primarily from the time of the Marshall Plan through the Cold War and related nuclear threats, up to the fall of the former soviet union and then through 9 / 11 and beyond.  The text presents the idea that modern life, especially that in western society is in a new form of complexity not even seen since the fully bureaucratic days of Byzantium, for example.  The book begins with its proposals about historical events and their significance to us at this point (now 2008,) and then moves on to examine various questions, such as the Israelis and Palestinians and their state of affairs vis – a – vis the prosecution of the Iraq war.  With respect to Israel, there are great influences calling for a resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians, even at great sacrifice to the Jews, and this is in part what here is interpreted more and more as a ‘status quo’ to begin resolving this and other Middle East issues.  In fact, to abandon the ideals of an Israeli homeland at this point in time would be to equally abandon important U.S. state policies and roles in associations like the G – 20, N.A.T.O., our positions on nuclear non – proliferation and Eastern Europe, in favour of the polity of states like Iran who essentially exploit anti – Israeli groups like Hezbollah and Hamas.  Some of the text is dedicated to illustrating the last part of the Bush Administration and efforts to resolve the conflicts of Hamas, Beirut, and the role of Syria against the Jews, though this effort was shown as, and in fact was not overridingly successful.

The Taliban are perceived in the theme of this examination of historical events through Brzezinski and Scowcroft as a significant threat to U.S. national security, and as the memorable opponents of the soviets in Afghanistan as well.  One is also reminded the Pakistanis and the Taliban were trained by western military people, again against the soviets and the situation as it is today with the Taliban is extremely rancorous with respect to western governments.  

With respect to economics, though mostly politics in the Far East, the authors illustrate principally the rising power, economic and political, financial and so on, of the P.R.C. in terms of the enlightened self – interest not only of its Asian neighbors, but of western officialdom as well.  The rivalry between the P.R.C. and its Asian contemporaries with the west is nonetheless portrayed as ruthless in economic terms.  The issues of Tibet and T’ai wan, and South Korea are easily interpreted as very tense situations with P.R.C., a communist – party based government still dealing with the legacy of T’ian An Men and Deng Xiao Ping; and the recognitions of the legitimacy of smaller Asian associations such as A.S.E.A.N.  Special mention is made of North Korea and the need for its own adherence to nuclear anti – proliferation rules and other regional security issues including the naval incidents of late.  

Special mention is also made in large part of Russia and its current leadership after the very significant Gorbachev and Yeltsin years:  Apart from the conundrum surrounding the mutual political and administrative status of Dmitri Medvedev and Vladimir Putin, there seem to be four major issues with Russia, and all are unsolvable:  Nuclear non – proliferation, N.A.T.O. and the former soviet and COMECON (and Warsaw Pact) states, the vagaries of the petrol business, and relations with P.R.C.  With respect to Eastern Europe, still, Western Europe is illustrated as at times a fitful ally and then again as a close political and administrative partner that is attempting on the state level to rise above issues of nationalism in its institutions.  It is here where the authors bring in their partitioned time – lines on American politics and the world, dating back to the age of John Quincy Adams, then forward to the Wilson presidency, and then post – 9 / 11 events.  Brzezinski notes at this point the older European community was much more cohesive on a regional level given the two devastating world wars and the Cold War during the 20^th century, and needs at present better political coordination.  With respect to World Wars I and II, N.A.T.O. is still an issue unto itself that affects the sovereignty of most Europeans, regardless of nationality or where they reside in the region.

To begin the conclusion of the text, the authors enter into a discussion about the importance of human dignity and human rights, and its influence on their ideas about doctrinaire enlightened or “guileful” realism in affairs.  There is also some discussion of a new world order in which cultural identities have primacy, hearkening to the world of 20^th century Wilsonian political ideas.  The new administration in Washington, D.C., while it promised a number of important things, especially about changes in government, is seen currently as bogged down in its own efforts, and with respect to foreign policy there has been progress and reform in the integration of departments and agencies as far as communications and functioning are concerned.  

... and yet, today in South Africa

F.W. de Klerk & Nelson Mandela  - May 1990 (courtesy U.K. Guardian)

Not only is the country of South Africa important in the scheme of the human rights issues in mind with everyone today, but turning the recent history of that country over and over brings to mind some certainly unresolved items of which the following:  a.  The South African transition to majority rule has gone quite smoothly compared, for example, to what is happening in Zimbabwe or even Mozambique; b.  In what ways does the new regime there continue to defeat the argument of the Afrikaans assuming for so long the "white man's burden," and then relinquishing it to the blacks.  Due to these two items and more, and their international political and cultural influences, is South Africa a safe place today where one might travel and even stay for a while or emigrate?  People like me have a hard time posing this question as the only ideas we have about Africa are from literary dogma and the press.

It is also interesting to note that the Afrikaans continue to have a role in South African society, even though many of the native peoples just wanted them out.  There are and have been things wrong with colonialism for a long time, and this is why it is not any longer practised by anyone.  Some western powers still have control of island nations and so forth, but the actual colonial period entered into its sunset when water transport became motorized and when some other things happened (like WWI.)  One might note here the Afrikaans, again, were not colonial really in that they believed in the eventuality of the blacks ruling their own territories without the kind of oriental chaos they had experienced when settling that land.  It becomes clear upon any study of Africa the blacks knew of other lands, not mystical to them, but as those of subjugators; and they only really had an interest in maintaining the status quo of a very organic society that dated back many years.  The institutional introduction of Occidental institutions and polity at the time of the colonial empires was a huge shock to the native South African population and they staged a long - standing revolt.  That westerners were the first to really settle in Africa engendered future contemptibility and when the communists began propagandizing the native peoples there during the period after WWII, the political climate was rife with vulnerabilities that were exacerbated and exist to this day.  Part of the credence of the ANC and its merits was the future promise to make the country productive and to preserve its institutions that were not overwhelmingly racist.  This led to the beginning of better prospects for African nations as far as foreign aid and international legitimacy were concerned among other things.  All this due to the relationships between personalities like F. W. de Klerk and Nelson Mandela; see your Cambridge history.