Scan barcode
bakudreamer's review against another edition
2.0
Maybe GitS got it right ( again ) with ' The Second Vietnam War '
sprague's review against another edition
3.0
I was not aware of the importance of the South China Sea, which to China's rise is as important as the Caribbean was to post-Civil War America's.
Nice summary of the key players: Vietnam (most threatened), Malaysia (least), Singapore, Philippines, and Taiwan.
Nice summary of the key players: Vietnam (most threatened), Malaysia (least), Singapore, Philippines, and Taiwan.
bookaneer's review against another edition
4.0
If only men lacked the instinct to fight over every scrap of ground.
This is a dense, complex, and thought-provoking account of South China Sea and its immediate surrounding countries. Unfortunately the writing also portrays the region as it becomes chaotic and repetitive at times.
Nevertheless, this book provides a very realistic overview - knowing Kaplan, no surprise there - and is not afraid to provide strong thesis that undoubtedly beckons for further inquiries and/or counter-arguments, especially in the midst of a rapidly growing, complicated and volatile neighborhood in which yours truly happen to live in.
This is a dense, complex, and thought-provoking account of South China Sea and its immediate surrounding countries. Unfortunately the writing also portrays the region as it becomes chaotic and repetitive at times.
Nevertheless, this book provides a very realistic overview - knowing Kaplan, no surprise there - and is not afraid to provide strong thesis that undoubtedly beckons for further inquiries and/or counter-arguments, especially in the midst of a rapidly growing, complicated and volatile neighborhood in which yours truly happen to live in.
remidez's review against another edition
3.0
Since this is nonfiction, I think I can give spoilers: the U.S. is slowly retreating from the South China Sea and China is taking over as a rising super power.
The book gives a good overview of the cultural and geopolitical history of all countries that are involved in this issue, including the U.S.
For a full review see Rising Tensions in Asia; China’s Economic Expansion Muddies Waters On The South China Sea Map.
The book gives a good overview of the cultural and geopolitical history of all countries that are involved in this issue, including the U.S.
For a full review see Rising Tensions in Asia; China’s Economic Expansion Muddies Waters On The South China Sea Map.
lcdthethird's review against another edition
4.0
Robert Kaplan provides a very interesting look at Southeast Asian politics and how they relate to China and China's ambitions in the 21st century. Now that I live in Southeast Asia I thought I should learn more about the area.
michelle_l_d's review against another edition
2.0
While Kaplan notes correctly in the epilogue that the book is a snapshot in time, his style is to not only discuss the contributing past and possible futures but to do so with heavy inflection of personal belief. The author’s biases were so apparent that separating out cold fact was laborious. Overall, it was interesting to read since I lived in Asia near the time the book was written but the writing itself requires the reader to question the author so often that I can’t recommend the book.
starduest's review against another edition
2.0
I was rather frustrated reading this book and was writing some comments as I went along, which I have left below, in case anyone feels the same way and is wondering if it's worth pressing on with the book.
Kaplan's opening and concluding chapters are probably the weakest of all, as he says a lot without actually saying very much at all, and throws in a lot of (to me) irrelevant historical facts from elsewhere to make a point.
His chapters on the various countries in Southeast Asia were more interesting, although being familiar with some of them, I noticed some factual inaccuracies that cast doubt on all the facts in his book - I would advice readers to proceed with caution and not assume that what Kaplan presents as fact is actually true.
Kaplan also has the nasty habit of concluding each chapter with a sweeping, grand statement that appears from nowhere with no justification to how he came to that conclusion - a style more akin to high school student trying to be clever with an essay than something I'd expect from a renowned journalist.
Overall, read this book if you want to but I wouldn't trust his conclusions or his facts.
=================================================================
These are my thoughts 5 chapters in.
Chapters 1 and 2:
Kaplan analyses events and issues in the south China sea from a very American lens. That's fine, except that the parallels drawn are lost unless you're familiar with historical events in the Americas (chapter 2 compared the south China sea to the Caribbean).
He also likes referencing irrelevant historical events and uses a lot of words to say very little. His prose is quite grandiose. Kaplan loves America and exaggerates its influence. His factual accuracies are also questionable - he claims that southeast Asia has little Chinese influence beyond north Vietnam, which is laughable to one with any knowledge of the ethnicities represented in Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.
I'm not sure why he's so critically acclaimed because I'm not finding this book that insightful so far (he's hasn't told me anything I don't already know, and I'm far from being an expert on the geopolitics of the south China sea) but I suspect his popularity stems from a fairly specific audience.
Chapters 3 - 5:
The prose flows a lot better and it's much easier to read - less disjointed. But Kaplan continues to make some rather sweeping statements or arrives at a conclusion without elaborating the reasoning behind it, and makes some terrible, politically incorrect statements tinged with a hint of racism.
Kaplan's opening and concluding chapters are probably the weakest of all, as he says a lot without actually saying very much at all, and throws in a lot of (to me) irrelevant historical facts from elsewhere to make a point.
His chapters on the various countries in Southeast Asia were more interesting, although being familiar with some of them, I noticed some factual inaccuracies that cast doubt on all the facts in his book - I would advice readers to proceed with caution and not assume that what Kaplan presents as fact is actually true.
Kaplan also has the nasty habit of concluding each chapter with a sweeping, grand statement that appears from nowhere with no justification to how he came to that conclusion - a style more akin to high school student trying to be clever with an essay than something I'd expect from a renowned journalist.
Overall, read this book if you want to but I wouldn't trust his conclusions or his facts.
=================================================================
These are my thoughts 5 chapters in.
Chapters 1 and 2:
Kaplan analyses events and issues in the south China sea from a very American lens. That's fine, except that the parallels drawn are lost unless you're familiar with historical events in the Americas (chapter 2 compared the south China sea to the Caribbean).
He also likes referencing irrelevant historical events and uses a lot of words to say very little. His prose is quite grandiose. Kaplan loves America and exaggerates its influence. His factual accuracies are also questionable - he claims that southeast Asia has little Chinese influence beyond north Vietnam, which is laughable to one with any knowledge of the ethnicities represented in Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.
I'm not sure why he's so critically acclaimed because I'm not finding this book that insightful so far (he's hasn't told me anything I don't already know, and I'm far from being an expert on the geopolitics of the south China sea) but I suspect his popularity stems from a fairly specific audience.
Chapters 3 - 5:
The prose flows a lot better and it's much easier to read - less disjointed. But Kaplan continues to make some rather sweeping statements or arrives at a conclusion without elaborating the reasoning behind it, and makes some terrible, politically incorrect statements tinged with a hint of racism.
omnibozo22's review against another edition
4.0
A brief geopolitical look at the implications of living close to a body of water that touches on a wide range of nations with interests in controlling that waterway. Nothing really new here, except Kaplan seems a little stuck on the idea that sea power is the key to future relative power balance in the world. He correctly points out that neither the US nor China should be trusted in the area. Kaplan also correctly points out that the Philippines teeters on the edge of being a failed state. Given the crony capitalism and the deep-seated corruption of the every level of government, the nation is unable to hinder China in any matter, especially China's occupation of the Spratleys. He didn't directly mention the Chinese control of the gambling and drug culture here. The book was written before the current version of criminal governments in both the US and Philippines came into office, so Kaplan didn't comment on the seesaw actions of the DU30 government concerning the presence of US troops and Navy in the country. Looks like the US is on the way back in, at the moment.
perilevin's review against another edition
3.0
The author didn’t say who he was or what his stake/ involvement with the South China Sea/ Pacific was but he still included himself as an actor/ observer and it was like what are you doing in this narrative that you’re crafting? On a practical level I actually appreciated Kaplan tying any given event or geographic feature to a Caribbean or middle eastern/west asian conflict. Im much less familiar with dynamics of southeast asia so this was helpful. I thought this was an interesting overview of the geopolitical status quo but I wish it was less judgmental. I’d prefer more just talking about the facts rather than placing moral value on countries based on GDP. It’s on me for reading something that was most likely going to be vaguely paternalistic and more critical of poor countries than of colonialism itself. I should try to find works on this topic by AAPI or non American scholars.