Kaplan's War.

AuthorBlitz, Mark
PositionBooks

Robert D. Kaplan, Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos (New York: Random House, 2002), 198 pp., $22.95.

FROM WHAT standpoint should we conduct foreign affairs? We currently discuss this issue by deploying a stylized division between national interest and morality, or realism and idealism. Endless variations on this division, with degrees of neo- and paleo- as varied and subtle as the thousand shades of beige in a decorator's palette, try but necessarily fail to overcome the underlying split.

Many sensible people like to combine the contenders: national interest in the service of something noble, or limited by general rules; moralism that is neither self-immolating nor unaware that proper action requires a live actor. Nonetheless, it is difficult to put the two together convincingly. This should be no surprise, because the Kantianism in which the split originates must leave a principled gulf between the two halves. The free and ideal cannot be the determined and material; what is moral or legal ought to shape our actions even if these dutiful measures fail to satisfy. Some day, Kant believed it was moral to hope, what is right will always be what succeeds. That day is in the infinite future, though, and however close we come it can never be reached.

Our other reigning analytical division concerns how much to rely on others in our foreign policies and how much to go it alone. This split is deeper than a mere tactical squabble because idealism and internationalism are often conflated, as are realism and nationalism. Kant and Woodrow Wilson welcomed leagues and federations while America-firsters have preferred to seal our borders. These conflations are misleading, however. A case for world government can be made by realists on Hobbes' grounds of self-interest and fear alone. The democratic nation-builders of the UN-ridiculing Reagan era were motivated by a love of equal rights as much as if not more than by national interest. International institutions can govern for reasons as narrow, or under laws and regulations as palpably biased, as nations can be broad-minded and generous. The two major distinctions we have learned to use, problematic in themselves, do not overlap in any simple way.

We therefore need coherent intellectual ground from which to overcome--or, better, place ourselves ahead of--these ritualized divisions, especially the split between realism and morality. As it turns out, prior to the division of the world into interest and idealism by modem intellectuals, political choice in foreign affairs (often) appeared in a more unified manner. It is this unity that concerns Robert Kaplan--not only its history but also its future.

Kaplan's Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos is useful and interesting because it gropes toward such a coherent political perspective for the future, one based on interest without being immoral. That said, Kaplan clearly begins with what is harsh, not gentle, in this point of view. Indeed, reading him reminds one of the morbid...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT