The Jungle Grows Back: America and Our Imperiled World Paperback – August 6, 2019

I found this to be an excellent book. If you're not completely conversant on the subject of geopolitics in the period before the First World War up through the present moment, this will serve as a neat and succinct summary of the shifting geometry of world order. Kagan's underlying premise is that, in the time preceding World War Two, nations were largely lone mercantile players and there was an unending series of threats because everyone feared, to some extent at least, everyone else. And the strong ruled. Once the American nuclear umbrella began shielding Western Europe, Japan, Korea and others, the threat each felt was greatly diminished. That has helped in the avoidance of all-out conflict for these last seventy years. Until right now, where the "protected" are suddenly doubting that the U.S. would necessarily come to their rescue. All the while, the Republicans appear to have turned away from supporting democratic governance, formerly their calling card. The return of Trump has only heightened worry that a seemingly once reliable partner is no longer.The book is very clearly written, calm in its tone and fair in its judgments. A very worthwhile read.

The Jungle Grows Back – America and our Imperiled World by Robert Kagan is a call to protect the international system that has been slowly dismantled by both American political parties. Kagan describes how this post-World War II international order began and highlights how it has benefited the world. In its genesis, Kagan points out that this order is fundamentally unstable but the west has grown complacent as it appreciates the benefits but is increasingly unwilling to pay the costs. The end result is the slow decay of the order with external actors including China and Russia actively undermining it. U.S. conservatives are reverting back to the pre-World War I isolationism while U.S. liberals constantly portray the U.S. as a malignant world actor. The Jungle Grows Back asserts that the end result will threaten the prosperity and peace of the west. This book is a vital wake-up call to both sides of the political spectrum. The challenge is that it is likely that Kagan is preaching to the choir and those that need to read the Jungle Grows Back never will. Highly Recommended.The Good – Kagan presents a multifaceted account of the post-World War II western consensus. He highlights the tradeoffs the U.S. made to its allies and correctly portrays that the United States’ allies remained because they wanted to and unlike the USSR’s – weren’t forced to. The end of the Cold War is where you first saw the consensus’s weakening but Kagan also dispels the myth that NATO enlargement resulted in a belligerent Russia. Finally – the exhaustion of the U.S. following the War on Terror laid the groundwork for the U.S. public’s loss of confidence with Both President Obama and President Trump actively dismantling it. Kagan understands that the foreign policy elites have made mistakes – Vietnam and Iraq to name two but argues that it is impossible to only throw touchdowns and that the world the west has made benefits everyone and needs to be tended to make sure the jungle doesn’t consume us all.The Bad – This a brief book but fairly dense. The acknowledgements admit that The Jungle Grows Back originated out of an unpublished essay and the overall book reads like it. It would have been far more digestible to have broken the themes up into chapters. The irony is that this book would have been far more effective as the original magazine article so that the message could better get to those that need it.

I don't think I have ever read a book that consists entirely of generalizations and opinions before this one. Strangely, I found it compelling in spite of a contrarian desire to challenge the thesis: that without the military protection of the USA the "liberal world order" is doomed to succumb to authoritarian regimes. The author traces recent history for support of his point of view and cites an impressive bibliography. His thesis is clearly and persuasively presented. I am nearly convinced. His overall view that there is no imperative based on history or human nature for preservation of the "liberal word order" is certainly correct. History is not over and human nature has not changed since the end of WWII. His insistence on the phrase "liberal world order" is curious; most would say "the free world" or simply "the West." But I believe the author clearly makes his case, arguable though it may be, that the USA must stay involved in international affairs, even to the point of military involvement, to preserve the way of life we have enjoyed since the second world war.

Robert Kagan gives a clear explanation of what we're seeing in the world today and the choices we have between the post-war order we've enjoyed these past eighty years versus a struggle of all against all. This book was timely when it was first published, it's even more timely today as the choice has become more apparent than ever.

I am one of the complacent liberals Kagan writes about, a person who believed that the world order would prevent major upheaval in our lifetime. After all, we've got climate change and the transitioning economy to worry about, right?I've changed my mind, thanks to the history presented so lucidly here. It's obvious that I (and most people I know) have taken peace for granted, a peace only made possible by America's dominance in the world. Kagan does a superb job of explaining how this happened and why we should expect it to change.As an argument, it's compelling and convincing. What I would love to see is some sort of debate between Kagan and a representative of the opposing view, perhaps Andrew Bacevich, to get a better sense of the trade-offs involved with continuing to be the world's enforcer or relinquishing that role. Many citizens seem to have fallen into the latter position from tiredness and cynicism about America's motives; however, the issue of America's future role in the world merits a genuine discussion, one based on goals, strategies, and costs rather than the public mood.