CIAO DATE: 10/2013
Volume: 128, Issue: 2
Summer 2013
The Role of Villain: Iran and U.S. Foreign Policy (PDF)
Paul R. Pillar
THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN HAS BECOME, in two senses, an extraordinary preoccupation of the United States. One sense is that Iran is the subject of a strikingly large proportion of discourse about U.S. foreign policy. American pundits and politicians repeatedly mention Iran, usually with specific reference to its nuclear program, as among the biggest threats the United States faces. Republican nominee Mitt Romney, when asked in the last presidential debate of the 2012 campaign what was the single greatest future threat to U.S. national security, replied “a nuclear Iran.”1 For politicians of both major U.S. political parties, expressions of concern about Iran and of the need to confront it have become a required catechism. The U.S. Congress has spent much time on such expressions and on imposing with lopsided votes ever broader economic sanctions on Iran. Frequent and evidently serious references are made to launching a military attack against Iran, even though such an attack— an act of aggression—would probably mean a war with heavy costs and damage to U.S. interests and probably would stimulate the very development of an Iranian nuclear weapon that it ostensibly would be designed to preclude.2
Becoming a Candidate: Political Ambition and the Decision to Run for Office, Jennifer L. Lawless (PDF)
Samuel H. Fisher III
Elections in a democratic system depend upon the willingness of citizens to put themselves forward for political office with no assurance of success. If the pool of possible candidates becomes too self‐limiting, then the quality of representation is imperiled. Political ambition or progressive ambition, the driving force that differentiates office seekers from everyone else, has been the focus of extensive study by political scientists. Jennifer Lawless takes the tack that the decision to even consider running for office, nascent ambition, is a subject in need of greater understanding.
Warlords: Strong-Arm Brokers in Weak States, Kimberly Marten (PDF)
Jesse Driscoll
Some countries do not have effective domestic sovereignty. In these “weak states,” the central government lacks the will or capacity to enforce contracts, punish criminals, or deter terrorists in all parts of the internationally recognized territory. Kimberly Marten’s new book, Warlords: Strong‐Arm Brokers in Weak States, chronicles how order is subcontracted. Marten defines warlords as “individuals who control small pieces of territory using a combination of force and patronage” and who “rule in defiance of genuine state sovereignty but through the complicity of state leaders” (p. 3). What exactly is meant by “complicity of state leaders” varies substantially by context, but at base, Marten employs an extended delegation metaphor: “the principal actor (the state) relies on an agent (the warlord) to fulfill assigned tasks” (p. 30). The empirical chapters then take the reader on a sweeping tour of the peripheries of Iraq, Russia, Georgia, and Pakistan. Warlords demonstrates that in all of these places, state officials can be either hoodwinked or coerced into letting charismatic local authorities build their own invisible patronage networks. Though the theoretical insights are neither new nor controversial to students of comparative politics, the particulars of why resources are funneled to local violence entrepreneurs at the periphery of empire make for a compelling read.
Obama and China's Rise: An Insider's Account of America's Asia Strategy, Jeffrey A. Bader (PDF)
Peter Trubowitz
In this crisply written account of U.S. foreign policy toward Asia, Jeffrey Bader gives the reader an insider’s view of policymaking in the administration of Barack Obama. Bader served as the senior director for East Asian Affairs on the National Security Council from January 2009 to April 2011. He is well placed to discuss policy deliberations on Asia‐Pacific matters, and he ably chronicles many of the challenges that Obama faced during the period from the diplomatic crisis sparked by the North Korean sinking of the South Korean ship Cheonan in March 2010, to the tensions between China and its Asian neighbors over maritime rights and territory in the South China Seas, to the Fukushima nuclear meltdown triggered by the massive earthquake and tsunami that walloped Japan in March 2011.
California Crucible: The Forging of Modern American Liberalism, Jonathan Bell (PDF)
Adam Carrington
Jonathan Bell’s book tells the story of how the Golden State became the heart of the modern Democratic Party’s liberal wing. Bell’s narrative stretches from the end of World War II until 1980, tracing out the grassroots and party movements that constructed a distinctly leftist coalition of labor, gays, racial minorities, and middle‐to‐upper‐class liberals. Bell contrasts his history with the tale of conservative ascendency during the same period. Far from a bastion of leftist politics, as other studies claim, California in the 1940s was the home of progressive Republicans such as Governor (and later Chief Justice) Earl Warren. The GOP during this time was consistently buoyed to electoral victory despite a 2‐1 registration disadvantage through moderate policies and an apolitical election system. Partly because of these factors, the New Deal democratic coalition never truly coalesced in California. Bell argues that this circumstance allowed a new coalition to form, one linking civil and economic rights for ever‐broadening sectors of the population. Working through groups such as the California Democratic Council and politicians such as the Burton brothers and Pat Brown, liberals turned crushing defeats in 1952 into decisive victories in 1958. They were aided in this effort by a Republican Party moving increasingly toward anti‐ government, pro‐business positions that alienated labor and racial minorities.