Review: The Hell of Good Intentions

A weekend non-fiction fun read as a break from heavy theological reading: Because Pastors need a break also!

Stephen M. Walt. The Hell of Good Intentions: America’s Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of U.S. Primacy.  New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, October 16th 2018. 400 pp.

5 out of 5

Purchase: Amazon

Want to read a book on the concerns for American foreign policies the last few decades that gives an analysis of the institutions and dynamics of the foreign policy establishment?  This book might be for you!  The author is Stephen Martin Walt who is a Professor of International relations at the Kennedy School at Harvard.  In our age of partisan politics this book isn’t just a slam against “Neocons” that one would expect from a professor who teach at Harvard; it is also a critique of Democrats and Republicans.  As the book reveals often the Democrats and Republicans who are involved in foreign policies have a lot more in common in assumptions and views than the general public think.  And yet it is those assumptions and views where at times even if it is good intentions can become a detriment to US long term interests and also cause international upheaval.  Given how dangerous our foreign policy in America can be I think this book is worth reading by not only those interested in politics and international relations but also the general readers to understand what is going on.

The book has seven chapters.  The first chapter in on America’s dismissal record with the United States pursuit of foreign policies.  The next chapter questions the liberal hegemony view that is popular among those who are in the foreign policy establishment.  I thought this chapter itself was gold enough to buy this book.  Chapter three is on the people involved with foreign policies and how people enter this realm while chapter four is on the lobby and think tanks relations to those in government making policies.  Chapter five is on the problem of accountability in our government with foreign relations; this is not just limited to the State Department but also the intelligence and National Security community.  Chapter six looks at Trump which the author argued was rather ad hoc and inconsistent with trying to solve the problems with how America approach foreign policy.  Chapter seven finally presents the author’s suggestions towards a solution with his view that is called “off shore balancing.”

I learned a lot from this book.  Interestingly I read this book while I was traveling and go about internationally.  The author’s overall thesis is the concern for our policy makers’ inflated expectations and hubris during the Post-Cold War years that drive policies that hurt everybody in the long run.  In the world of foreign policy failure, good intentions is not enough to justify a policy; this is a realm where there’s blowback and unintended consequences with governmental policies that not only effect the US but a region and nowadays even transregional consequences.  It is interesting that the author and many others have noticed how the American public in general don’t favor oversea intervention with other countries’ affair and yet the foreign policy establishment in general are pro-interventionists than the average Americans.  The book’s exploration of why that is so and also of the problem of how there’s no official “guild” and pipeline for people entering into foreign policy can result in a group conformity where those in entrance level are expected to agree with older hands in foreign policies in order to enter this world.  But I don’t know if the author is right to suggest a more official process to enter into the world of foreign policy decisions would remove the groupthink and echo chambers within the foreign policy community; it will just reinforce and exclude outside thinkers through formal and structural manner rather than informally.  The author noted there’s greater conformity of opinions the higher one climb the foreign policy food chain and it seems to me a rather larger systemic problem of the Federal government overall and not just with foreign policies, look at the way the FBI and Department of Justice community can have group think in concerning ways the last few years.  I think statism is the root problem.  I also found the book’s discussion about the role of think tanks to be very fascinating, where some operate as a way for people to enter a foreign policy career and others operate more as lobbyists rather than actual objective researchers.

This is not a book that is joyful to read.  There’s discussions about the increase of immunity of those in the highest echelon of the military, intelligence agencies and States Department when there is a crisis or wrong doing with their respective agencies, from torturing prisoners to wrongful spying and killing of civilians, it is something that everyone who cares about ethics should be concern about.  What’s even more tragic some of these leaders can be rewarded in their career with promotions and moving on to adjacent lucrative careers.  There’s something larger here than a military industrial complex: There’s a foreign policy administrative “deep state” if you will, that has a revolving door with retirement to boards of big companies and lucrative teaching and think tank positions.

This is a very informative book, even when I’m not sure the author is right on certain things nevertheless he really knows this area of political science and I am deeply enriched with understanding this realm more.  In an age where partisan voices are the loudest the book struck me as balance, moderate and yet penetrating and critical in its analysis.  That’s a big plus for me and why I recommend it.