Scan barcode
teeandtigrareads's review against another edition
5.0
As a political science major, I loved reading about the art of compromise, diplomacy, and respectful discourse of US officials and their counterparts all over the world. Loved the writing! Well done!
One of my favorite lines: “The result was an Escheresque tessellation of faction and violence.”
One of my favorite lines: “The result was an Escheresque tessellation of faction and violence.”
cook_memorial_public_library's review against another edition
4.0
Recommended by Rob. Check our catalog: https://encore.cooklib.org/iii/encore/search/C__Swar%20on%20peace%20farrow__Orightresult__U?lang=eng&suite=gold
rclyburn's review against another edition
3.0
Farrow is an excellent journalist, but that does not make him an excellent book writer. The vignettes he presents are vivid, the the weave connecting these vignettes is weak.
I found the following to be pretty ironic considering America's history with slavery and indigenous genocide: "And Beijing brings to the table a very different kind of leadership: still ruthless, still burdened by its refusal to confront its own human rights abuses."
I found the following to be pretty ironic considering America's history with slavery and indigenous genocide: "And Beijing brings to the table a very different kind of leadership: still ruthless, still burdened by its refusal to confront its own human rights abuses."
kentons's review against another edition
3.0
I was a little disappointed in this book. It was well written and researched, unsurprisingly. I think I would have liked to see more historical examples of how diplomacy worked in the past. This book seemed to stick with the examples where Ronan Farrow has first-hand experience but that is a very specific set of examples. Yes, it did a good job of showing how diplomacy is failing and is on the decline, but doesn't give much more than that.
misterfix's review against another edition
4.0
For an insider critique this book was exceptional in it's willingness to hold all parties and individuals accountable to the decline and failures of US diplomacy. Sure the author does not ask all of the hard hitting questions of subjects but he does a fair job and illustrates his point with specific case studies from key players. I wish the book was longer and that he went into greater detail on each of the cases and of course I want him to dig deeper but my guess is he would not have gotten access if he had.
It's no great stretch to state that diplomacy is dead, what's more critical and generally only superficially dealt with, is that diplomacy has always been rigged and exploitive. The end result of any negotiation that the US is engaged in essentially is tied to favor the US at the cost of sovereign or world stability regarding those we are negotiating with. To truly appreciate the dynamics and dare I say, truth behind the various scenarios discussed in this book one should seek out books that focus exclusively on this topic and are written outside the beltway and free of funding; be it educational, grants, etc.
Therefore, if you are looking for a progressive, hard hitting analysis of US diplomacy this is not the book instead view this as a quality primer that provides a CENTRIST, insider perspective on the situation. Given how awful the US track record is on diplomacy there is no shortage of abysmal case studies and the author has only just skimmed the surface in presenting this broad overview.
It's no great stretch to state that diplomacy is dead, what's more critical and generally only superficially dealt with, is that diplomacy has always been rigged and exploitive. The end result of any negotiation that the US is engaged in essentially is tied to favor the US at the cost of sovereign or world stability regarding those we are negotiating with. To truly appreciate the dynamics and dare I say, truth behind the various scenarios discussed in this book one should seek out books that focus exclusively on this topic and are written outside the beltway and free of funding; be it educational, grants, etc.
Therefore, if you are looking for a progressive, hard hitting analysis of US diplomacy this is not the book instead view this as a quality primer that provides a CENTRIST, insider perspective on the situation. Given how awful the US track record is on diplomacy there is no shortage of abysmal case studies and the author has only just skimmed the surface in presenting this broad overview.
thefriendlyabyss's review against another edition
4.0
This books starts slow, but really picks up the pace and grabs your interest. Farrow’s wry humor, frank analyses, and poignant anecdotes weave a complicated story into simple ideas that are all connected.
US foreign policy is becoming increasingly militarized, and Farrow gives us the inside scoop as to why. This intelligent book is a must-read for foreign policy fans.
US foreign policy is becoming increasingly militarized, and Farrow gives us the inside scoop as to why. This intelligent book is a must-read for foreign policy fans.
nadsyons's review against another edition
5.0
took me an embarrassingly long time to read but i did it and loved it. ronan farrow 4ever <3
sarsaparillo's review against another edition
4.0
This book reads like a series of beautifully written long-form articles on a theme - exposés, character profiles, and field reporting - rather than a comprehensive history. The theme is the decline in power and prestige of the US's diplomatic institutions, and the loss of talent and soft power.
The time period covered is mostly the last few administrations, but opens with a chilling description of the mass firings that took place in the State Department during the Trump transition, which sets the stage well.
Much of the book is focused on Pakistan and Afghanistan, where Farrow's former (late) boss, Richard Holbrooke spent a lot of his time. A chapter on Afghan warlord Abdul Rashid Dostum is entertaining and evocative and he serves as prime example of recurring problem. That is: recruitment of convenient allies from the ranks of dubious military groups, which can at some other time become just the sort of anti-democratic human-rights abusers that the US is purportedly out to stop. After finally pulling the spotlight away from central Asia, a series of other examples are found from Egypt to Columbia.
The story told is one of rival departments pushing policies of "war" or "peace", at the mercy of White House favour, The trend away is from the State Department's diplomatic solutions to international problems and toward a higher proportion of military generals in advisory roles. The result is a litany of errors, many of which Farrow contends could have been avoided or softened had the deep expertise of the diplomatic leadership been heeded.
The picture he paints is bleak: as the State Department withers, it loses much of its senior talent, and aspiring diplomats are discouraged from signing up, or simply prevented from doing so by quotas. The resulting brain drain is a wound that could take decades to heal, assuming the political will to do so even returns.
The book is entirely focused on the US foreign service and doesn't make any attempt to investigate the goings-on within the corresponding institutions of other countries. A tour of such might make for another fascinating book, and I'd love any recommendations along those lines.
The time period covered is mostly the last few administrations, but opens with a chilling description of the mass firings that took place in the State Department during the Trump transition, which sets the stage well.
Much of the book is focused on Pakistan and Afghanistan, where Farrow's former (late) boss, Richard Holbrooke spent a lot of his time. A chapter on Afghan warlord Abdul Rashid Dostum is entertaining and evocative and he serves as prime example of recurring problem. That is: recruitment of convenient allies from the ranks of dubious military groups, which can at some other time become just the sort of anti-democratic human-rights abusers that the US is purportedly out to stop. After finally pulling the spotlight away from central Asia, a series of other examples are found from Egypt to Columbia.
The story told is one of rival departments pushing policies of "war" or "peace", at the mercy of White House favour, The trend away is from the State Department's diplomatic solutions to international problems and toward a higher proportion of military generals in advisory roles. The result is a litany of errors, many of which Farrow contends could have been avoided or softened had the deep expertise of the diplomatic leadership been heeded.
The picture he paints is bleak: as the State Department withers, it loses much of its senior talent, and aspiring diplomats are discouraged from signing up, or simply prevented from doing so by quotas. The resulting brain drain is a wound that could take decades to heal, assuming the political will to do so even returns.
The book is entirely focused on the US foreign service and doesn't make any attempt to investigate the goings-on within the corresponding institutions of other countries. A tour of such might make for another fascinating book, and I'd love any recommendations along those lines.