Steve Forbes and John Prevas Power Ambition Glory - Book Report/Review Example

POLITICS AND LEADERSHIP Robert Kagans Of Paradise and Power Steve Forbes and John Prevas Power Ambition Glory The two books have a lot in common. Both tell fascinating stories about how politics takes place and how people countries can lead that development. Both are written by authors with a vast amount of experience with the subject. After reading these two accounts of both the ancient and modern global systems one is left much the richer. Robert Kagan’s book Of Paradise and Power suggests the reason Americans and Europeans sometimes act different is that Americans are big and strong (both economically and militarily) whereas Europeans are relatively weak (especially militarily). The author is troubled by fact, mostly because it means that America has to fight alone to preserve stability and peace around the world. In the end, Kagan claims America is much more technologically advanced and that it can attack safely other countries because it has the means to do so with technological warfare. However, as has been seen over the last few years in Iraq, American military power can get very tied up and may not always be very effective; it can sometimes limited in its ability to reshape a society or political system. That said, I really do believe that Kagan’s argument more or less makes sense and that the Europeans need to take a more proactive, robust role in the world today in order to help solve all the problems. It’s important to ask the question, What is power? Kagan suggests it is purely military force. The US is the lone power in the world with the ability to conduct expeditionary warfare on multiple fronts across the globe whenever it wants to. As was demonstrated in the Balkans in the 1990s, Europeans aren’t able to project a credible military force even within Europe. Therefore the Europeans resort to the only thing they have for managing international conflicts, international institutions such as the UN. The success of European integration and solving the "German problem" has a lot of Europeans, Kagan says, to believe that they live in a Kantian paradise where international institutions can banish war forever. Americans have a different historical reality, and think of the world as a Hobbesian jungle where hard power rules. All of this I agree with. However, I do have a few hesitations when it comes to this erudite and enlightening book. Yes, Europeans don’t have a right to tell us that the use of military force in some situations is morally wrong and no you can’t do that, because they really do depend on us, but they are also somewhat correct in being apprehensive about our decisions because they are so significantly affected by them. I think Kagan would argue that it is better for them to have an iron in the fire to sit outside of the campfire and complain about the lack of heat reaching them. They should take more responsibility. But now, looking back from several years after the publication of this book there is one defect in Kagan’s argument about power. Kagan believes the world and in particular, Europe, is left with two options: that either they follow the US or be a silent partner. "Rather than viewing the US as a Gulliver tied down by Lilliputian threads", says Kagan, "American leaders should realize that they are hardly constrained at all, that Europe is not really capable of constraining the US" (100). The main reason he reaches this conclusion is because he thinks of power only in a military sense. But power is also economic power, something he doesn’t spend very much time talking about. Europe is economically strong enough to trouble the US as and when it wants to, especially when it comes to important trade issues that can seriously affect American technologies and industries. Also, nowadays with the American Economy in so much trouble, it is important to look at the ways military power and economic power are interwoven—especially since Kagan thinks "...the US can sustain its current military spending levels and its current global dominance far into the future" (97). With America’s massive debt and deficit it is hard to imagine how it can also continue to police the globe without some serious economic restructuring. If you can’t pay for your military equipment you can’t fight with it. Europe, of course, is in a similar situation. This is especially important when you look at President Obamas spending priorities. Any return to socialism will have massively negative consequences for a globalizing world economy. We can already see the negative effects in the United States under President Obama who is rapidly increasing the American national debt and indebting future generations to come. It is very hard to balance social opportunity with the reduction of hierarchical structures. The truth is that some people rise to the top, and some people fail. That is the nature of the world, as unfair as it may sound. A few minor steps can be made to alleviate this unfairness—especially in cases where accidents or acts of a predatory nature have taken place—but wholescale efforts to redistribute wealth or reengineer society are bound to fail. The lessons of communism in eastern Europe and Russian as well as in China should be a great warning to us all. In Cambodia, for example, under the Khymer Rouge, they shot people who wore glasses because they believed they were intellectuals and supposedly of a higher class. In their zeal for radical egalitarianism they would do anything, including cutting off their noses to spite their faces. We must be very cautious of any shift in this general direction. If we focus too much on redistribution, we lose our leadership edge and our ability to fight wars. As stated above, there are currently efforts underway in the United States to create a more equal system. By bailing out banks and people who took bad mortgages, ordinary taxpayers are having to foot the bill for the mistakes of other people. As seen by recent protest this is making many people very angry. The truth is that this is not the way the Western world operates. Thanks to the reforms made my Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher among others, we can operate in a free market place where people can choose whether they want to succeed or to fail. This in turn led to globalization which is spreading wealth and opportunity around the world. While other countries were slow to see the positive ramifications of globalization, Britain and the United States, for example, were not. They saw what they wanted and it struck. Largely thanks to Milton Friedman’s ideas. Ideas which are now sadly being forgotten in both Great Britain and in the United States. People need to remember, now more than ever, that the foundations of Western prosperity lie in personal responsibility, following self-interest, and keeping markets open. Many of President Obama’s policies do not follow these principles and he has often flirted with protectionism, even stating a desire to open up the North America Free Trade Agreement which has proved so beneficial to the United States, Canada, and Mexico, as well as musing about “Buy American” provisions in his new budget. These measures have to be fought if we want to get through this crisis in one piece. Domestic policies always influence foreign policies. In the end it doesnt really matter what your politics are: this is a very useful book about international politics. Kagan presents a very interesting thesis about the relationship between Europe and America. While he doesnt really present any information that is incredibly new—he does manage to tie together lots of useful ideas in a way that is very coherent and a good introduction for people who might not know so much about the subject. Kagan uses a lot of good analogies to help paint his picture of the differences in the ways that America and Europe view world-wide threats (A bear roaming in the woods is viewed differently by a man with a rifle as opposed to a man with a knife). And given these acknowledged differences, is it any wonder that America and Europe increasingly find conflict over the way we resolve these problems? America wants to quickly solve the problems with arms (we have lots of over-powering weapons and a strong distaste for any American deaths and boots on the ground); Europe would rather discuss the problems and use international institutions to come to a non-conflict resolution (they dont have the weapons and have come to appreciate the power of discussion). However, with President Obama now leading the United States it is much more likely for a consensus between these two positions to be reached in our lifetime. Power Ambition Glory, on the other hand, provides an excellent overview of the history of leadership and what lessons contemporary leaders, especially those in business, can learn from historical figures, especially those of the ancient world. This is fertile territory and authors are very good at exploring it. It really shows that there very little has changed over the last few thousand years. Moral leadership remains very much the same as it always has. In this book the authors describe the tactics and travails of a number of people such as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Xenophon. These mens lives have lessons for us today but also in a way parallel the lives of some of the most significant business leaders of the 20th and 21st centuries. Business leaders and generals and political leaders all lead high stress lives. Many people depend on them for everything and their decisions have enormous impact. It is therefore very useful to understand what works and what doesnt. One of the best things about this book is how it covers so much ground so quickly. It provides an excellent overview of a number of historical periods and places. This part was a very exciting read. I knew little about Xenophon for example and his style of leadership. That was a model which is not often written about. This general style is very important: so many historical figures were also students of history. What happened in the past is the best predictor of what will happen in the future. A limitation that seemed apparent was that while there are similarities between business and war they are not the exactly the same. Sam Walton is not Alexander the Great. If things go bad for Sam, he loses money. If things go bad for Alexander, he and his soldiers are killed and his country destroyed. There is an important difference. When Hank Greenberg was voted out of AIG by the board of directors because of some of the mistakes he made with management, his penalty wasnt exactly the same as Julius Caesars. Life and death are rarely at stake in the business world (although sometimes they are). Another limitation is that there is no real discussion of women. If organizations are better able to understand when women leaders are most effective, they may then be able to increase the number of women in the leadership ranks which would result in better organizational performance. Increasing the numbers of women in the workforce is important to organizations around the world. In particular, workforce diversity continues to be a focus of most large corporations. Having a chapter or two on famous historical women and what business leaders could learn from them might also have been useful. This however is not a fatal flaw as there probably is a lack of material. Another possible limitation is the focus on American businesses. Only a few foreign companies such as Vivendi are mentioned. In part this is probably because the book is focused on the American market, but we do live in a globalized business climate these days. For me personally leadership means a number of things that are somewhat different than the authors suggestions. Leaders dont need to be bigger than life. They dont need to be historical figures. They are sometimes just people in your local community. Something that has had a big influence on me is the idea of integrity and leadership. I believe integrity is the most pressing leadership issue of today. To me it means having sound moral principles and being honest and upright. In our contemporary world it is clear we have a serious lack of these important principles. But it is not enough to say that it is important to have integrity—we must take steps to instil it where it is lacking. To begin with step one: discerning what is right and what is wrong is not an innate behavior or characteristic; it is learned. Education is key to building up this moral faculty. This faculty is built up through experience and through principles. In a country as politically complicated and as diverse as the United States, this takes a lot of work. We can’t shirk from hard work; we must embrace it. Step two: Sometimes integrity means acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost. In our society, one would call a person who discerns and acts on what they have witnessed or experienced a “snitch”. Many times in the justice arena a person who has witnessed a crime or an altercation, definitely could inform at personal cost—whether jeopardizing their lives or the lives of loved ones. The choice is a hard one; turning to faith is the best way to find an answer. Step three involves saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong. Even if it costs you personally, it is important to be honest. This book is very useful for business but also can be expanded into the international political climate which is very important for business too. What kind of leaders we have and how they approach the world is vital for the Wests continued success. In todays world it seem that America has to fight alone to preserve stability and peace around the world. Its businesses are more profitable and its military guarantees the peace. This is leadership, but other countries and blocs are depending too much on the United States. Certainly Steve Forbes would agree with this statement. America is much more technologically advanced and that it can attack safely other countries because it has the means to do so with technological warfare. However, as has been seen over the last few years in Iraq, American military power can get very tied up and may not always be very effective; it can sometimes limited in its ability to reshape a society or political system. The Europeans need to take a page from this book and their leaders need to take advice from some of the great men of history to take a more proactive, robust role in the world today in order to help solve all the problems. These two books have a great deal to say about how we live now, both from a present-day and a historical perspective. They take different approaches but come to the same conclusion: America must remain a leader in the world. REFERENCES Forbes, Steve and John Prevas. Power Ambition Glory. New York: Crown Business, 2009. Burns, James MacGregor. Transforming Leadership: A New Pursuit of Happiness. Grove/Atlantic, 2003. Robert Kagan. Of Paradise and Power. New York: Vintage, 2004. Kouzes,James M. and Barry Z. Posner. The Leadership Challenge, Credibility, Encouraging the Heart. 3rd ed., Jossey-Bass, 2003. Wheatley, Margaret J. Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World Revised. Berrett-Koehler, 2001. Read More