Rogue Nation: American Unilateralism and the Failure of Good Intentions

by Clyde Prestowitz and Clyde V. Prestowitz Jr.

Book Overview

During the six months prior to the World Trade Center attack, the United States walked away from a treaty to control the world traffic in small arms, the Kyoto accords, a treaty to combat... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0465062792
• ISBN13: 9780465062799
• Release Date: May 2003
• Publisher: Basic Books
• Length: 336 Pages
• Weight: 1.40 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.1" x 6.5" x 9.6"

Customer Reviews

Refocusing America

Quite simply put, this is the best book I've read on the status of the world in general, of its various hot spots in particular, of America's current role in them, and of alternative roles that it should rather play.Prestowitz is a conservative Republican, a former member of the Reagan administration, and an elder of the Presbyterian church--scarcely the type one would expect to call America a rogue nation. But as a conservative he has very critical things to say about the neo-conservatives that currently control our foreign policy, whose agenda he says "is not conservativism at all but radicalism, egotism, and adventurism articulated in the stirring rhetoric of traditional patriotism."The book is a compelling answer to Kagan's popular "Of Paradise and Order," which tends to characterize America, through neo-conservative glasses, as the only agent that can save the world from itself, an agent that "by advancing [its] own interests ... advance[s] the interests of humanity."Two very different views of America's role. Every thinking American should understand the difference between them.

Required Reading!

In a world increasingly defined in simple stark contrasts of black and white, for us or against us, and good and evil, noted conservative author and social analyst Clyde Prestowicz adds some much needed perspective that both explains why the rest of the civilized world increasingly views us with suspicion and alarm, on the one hand, and why we are reacting to this seemingly new state of world affairs with dismay and righteous indignation. While we Americans are rightly outraged by the events surrounding 911, our reaction as though we were the only nation, or even the first nation, to experience such outrageously murderous attacks by terrorists is not correct; nor is it a helpful tact to use in then attempting to justify international military action against a foe we have not so far demonstrated had any role in such terrorist attacks. Based on this set of dangerous actions as well as a number of other unilateral actions, which collectively seem to signal a profound political indifference on our part toward legitimate international interests and concerns. Thus, we thumb our noses at the United Nations and international law by unilaterally attacking Iraq, in defiance of agreements with the United Nations an NATO on the one hand, and in violation of the Geneva Convention and the Treaty Of Westphalia as well. After nearly ten yeas of painstaking efforts by politicians from 46 countries to define, negotiate, and finalize the so-called Kyoto Accords, a set of international agreements to slow down the degradation of the environment and help mitigate a multitude of problems associated with air, water, and ground pollution, the Bush administration suddenly reversed the course of the two previous administrations and refused to recommend ratification of the accords. Moreover, we also unilaterally abrogated from participating in the International Criminal Court system, and walked away from the mutually binding agreement with the former Soviet Union not to develop or deploy anti-ballistic missile defense systems. From stem to stern, the Bush administration seemed to be telling the world that it was our way or the highway. In so doing, Mr. Bush has done much to convince the world the USA cares only about ourselves. And it is this issue regarding the differences in our policies and our perceived consciousness of ourselves that the author mines such a provocative essay on what it means to be an American in today's complex and permanently interdependent world, and what we must understand about the rest of the world in order to act in a way that serves both our own interests and considers theirs as well. We must reconcile our self-image as the champion of freedom and liberty with our actions abroad, supporting democratic institutions instead of paying mere lip service to doing so while forging alliances with despots, dictators, and military juntas. More than anything, we must reassure our allies and friends abroad, from France to Japan, from Australia to Canada,

A True Conservative

Clyde Prestowitz bears conservative credentials, as evidenced by his position as a trade representative in the Reagan Administration and his self-acknowledged life long status as a Republican. This reflective work demonstrates that he knows far more about what conservatism traditionally encompasses than the frantic neoconservatives of the Ann Coulter and Mona Charen stripe. Prestowitz persuasively argues that the bedrock of conservatism is evolutionary growth. Traditional conservatism differs from traditional liberalism basically on emphasis and government experimentation, with the liberal being more willing to resort to government action and the conservative adopting more of a "prove it to me that it works posture." As Prestowitz notes, traditional conservatism adheres to upholding and building upon international law and the framework of existing traditions. It is a philosophy that also adheres to a civil libertarian posture on civil liberties, totally apart from the philosophy of Bush-Ashcroft of incarcerating first and asking questions later. Conservative leaders of the past such as Dewey, Eisenhower, Willkie, Nixon and Ford favored strengthening American ties through international institutions such as the United Nations and alliances in which America is a willing partner rather than a ruling master. Eisenhower was so staunchly opposed to the idea of preventive war that the former supreme allied commander of World War Two stated bluntly as president that he did not even care to talk to anyone who espoused the dangerous idea.In order to contrast Prestowitz alongside the neocons of the Bush Administration, who abhor international cooperation and flaunt unilateralism in an aggressive form, it is interesting to examine the roots of some of the most ardent Bushies, which extend to Trotskyism. A conservative is careful about uprooting tested tradition while the neoconservatives call for abrogating treaties and keeping their gun powder ready, indicating a readiness to attack unilaterally. Prestowitz is a true conservative while the neocons are dangerous radicals operating under the bogus agenda of liberation and freedom.

Every American needs to read this book

In response to 9/11, Bernard Lewis bloviated in "What Went Wrong" (with respect to the Islamic world), that when things go wrong for you, you can either say: "who did this to me" and point the finger at someone else, or; you can ask "what did we do to ourselves and how do we fix it". There is a third question, however, that Lewis doesn't ask- "what have we done to them (that they feel the way they do)". Clyde Prestowitz does exactly that. Many readers may think this book the rantings of a left-wing ideologue, but for the fact it comes from a conservative. Prestowitz was a US trade negotiator under the Reagan Administration and possesses conservative values on par with any Reaganite.Rogue Nations examines the inconsistency between what America preaches versus America's conduct, implemented through our policies. His ability to understand arises from his experience as a negotiator; i.e., one, who by profession, must listen and understand the other side in order obtain what he wants for America. This skill in listening serves him well because he presents to the readership the admiration and disappointments of others with America's behaviour.Prestowitz begins with a very interesting point about America itself. He believes America is a religion. The American idea, articulated so well in the Bill of Rights, inheres in every citizen an idealism and vision that every person in the world can grab onto and believe regardless of race, religion, and gender. More importantly, is the belief that if "America" is good for us, then it must be good for everyone else and should be exported. Prestowitz discovers through conversations with Prime Ministers, Ambassadors, trade negotiators and business people around the world is that while the rest of the world truly admires American the idea (and Americans), it simultaneously resents us. The problem, as perceived by world citizens, is that what America wants for itself, many times, it will not afford to others. America possesses a certain religiosity about its ideals conferring a sense of entitlement and exceptionalism in comparison to the rest of the world-and there is the rub. Americans think they deserve the richness, wealth and resources other nations possess (oil, for one) because we are exceptional. Our way is the best way, if not the only way. We believe we are a chosen people possessing a manifest destiny to shape the world in our image and that creates resentment around the world.The book is basically organized by policies and reveals how these policies affect other countries to their detriment and to our benefit. Chapters include international financial policy (and explains how IMF policy led by US policy makers and financiers exacerbated the Asian financial crisis); arms, military manufacture and military consultancy and how we weaponize the world (often selling weapons to both sides of a conflict); American subsidies (and how it destroys third world economies because they lack the financial asse

A lifelong conversative argues against unilateralism

"Rogue Nation" examines a host of issues on which the U.S. has found itself at odds with the world: free trade agreements, global warming, the Israel-Palestine conflict, the treaty to eliminate land mines, the creation of an International Criminal Court, the war on Iraq, and more. The book is valuable regardless of whether or not the reader agrees with Prestowitz's politics (he's a longtime conservative and a former Reagan administration official) or his opinions on environmental, economic, and foreign policy concerns. Indeed, it's often hard to pinpoint the author's place on the ideological spectrum. For example, many conservatives will disagree with his support of several international agreements discarded by the Bush administration. Both conservatives and liberals will be dissatisfied about his ambivalence on the need for the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Many liberals will be turned off by his statement that, as of March 2003, "there is little choice for the United States and whatever partners it can gather to overthrow Saddam and occupy Iraq."What troubles Prestowitz, however, is not America's international policies per se but the manner in which we pursue those policies--a manner that may not always meant to be arrogant but certainly seems to be to the rest of the world. What especially distresses him are certain unilateralist principles proposed and implemented by "neoconservatives" like Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz.In a way, it's too bad that Prestowitz chose such a deliberately provocative title, since the book itself, while undeniably opinionated, makes considerable effort to present both sides of every issue. Yet he correctly acknowledges that much of the international community regards the United States as a "rogue nation"--whether we are in fact or not. Likewise, the author contends that, although we are not technically an empire, we often behave like one--or, just as important, appear to others to have imperial pretensions. In a world where perception is reality, Prestowitz argues, it is foolish not to be concerned about international opinion, since we depend on other nations as much as they depend on us for both economic well-being and domestic security. Above all, Prestowitz proposes that America's people and its leaders become better listeners--and Prestowitz himself is an astute listener. He has interviewed an impressive number of foreign diplomats, ambassadors, and government officials, and he faithfully presents their views even when he seems not to concur. What matters less to the author is how accurate international opinion is about American intentions or plans. Instead, he strives to understand how they arrive at contrary judgments: he provides historical context for various controversies and describes events, blunders, and misunderstandings that tend to support such mistrust.He also contends that Americans often seem to treat other nations as inherently inferior or, even more insultingly, that we seem to feel that ot