My First Scholarly Book Review

I just finished this book review for my political science class, "The American Presidency." I really enjoyed reading it. Recommended.

_______________________________________

Daalder, Ivo H. and James M. Lindsay. 2003. America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy. Washington DC: Brookings Press. $22.95

In America Unbound, Daalder and Lindsay argue that George W. Bush's foreign policy is a consistent reflection of his hegemonic worldview, and that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 created an opportunity structure for that worldview to be realized and an agenda crafted. This book has no agenda other than to analyze Bush’s foreign policy objectively from multiple perspectives, including his worldview, how his policy compares with previous ones, and criticisms of the policy.

Daalder and Lindsay begin by arguing that George W. Bush has succeeded in becoming a powerful and successful president, and that he does not fit the label of an inexperienced puppet controlled by the neoconservatives in his administration. They cite significant political advances Bush made in his first term: changing the United States’ time-ensconced foreign policy methodology, gaining public and Congressional support for two wars in the Middle East, and passing the Patriot Act—a sweeping bill that greatly expanded the authority of law enforcement and intelligence agencies. “By rewriting the rules of America’s engagement in the world, the man who had been dismissed as a political lightweight left an indelible mark on politics at home and abroad.”

The authors point out that Bush’s foreign policy plans were nothing new; rather, his means to those ends were unorthodox. They detail the methodology of foreign policy historically: traditionally it operated under the view that America works best with a “blend of power and cooperation.” Multilateralism was the best way to deal with international conflicts. Bush took the opposite position: America will not hesitate to use its unrivaled power to serve its interests, and throwing off the constraints of international alliances is more conducive to that end.

A key discussion in the book focuses on Bush’s hegemonic worldview. Those interested in understanding Bush by studying his most basic and fundamental beliefs about the world will find America Unbound highly relevant. Bush’s worldview is what drives every decision he makes—and all his decisions, the authors argue, fit consistently into that grid. From such a hegemonic worldview comes his natural skepticism of multilateralism, the Texas-style willingness to use force to achieve a goal, and the black-and-white “either you are for us or for the terrorists” ultimatum to other nations.

The authors note that Bush campaigned not on a foreign policy platform, but on a domestic one: tax cuts and social security reform. His foreign policy plans were mostly limited to defense spending and increasing the military. Everything changed with 9/11. Suddenly the international climate changed and Bush became the fearless leader of the free world, pursuing the evil that dared attack the greatest nation in history. The attack could have changed Bush’s view of the world, but instead he “interpret[ed] the facts to fit his worldview.” Thus, 9/11 provided an opportunity structure for Bush’s hegemonic worldview to represent itself in a foreign policy agenda.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush began to make tough decisions as his new foreign policy developed, and his course of action could be called the antithesis of the Neustadt president.

Neustadt's chief executive uses bargaining and coalitions to consolidate power and get things done; he would have taken the multilateral road and bargained for the support of our allies. Bush took an entirely different method to achieve the same goal--he exercised the raw power of the American military, alone and without the limitations of other nations' interests. In this case, Bush considered bargaining an impediment to his authority to act and a threat to his acquisition and preservation of power--as opposed to Neustadt's president, who uses bargaining as the means to acquire power.

Daalder and Lindsay ultimately conclude that Bush’s unilateralism, although acceptable in some cases, was taken too far, that he assumed too much could be done alone. Cooperation and collaboration in such an interconnected world is too important to reject. Bush was too harsh with any nation that didn’t fully and without reservation back the new mission of the U.S.; he failed to consider that other countries need to act in their own best interest, or that the “either/or” policy of support described above is too simplistic. On the other hand, there is growing evidence that certain countries would never have supported the U.S., due to illegal and unethical involvement in the UN’s Oil for Food Program. Unfortunately, this development is too recent to have been considered by Daalder and Lindsay.