(Part 3) Top products from r/geopolitics

Two great books I just finished:

The first, The Wizards of Armageddon by Fred Kaplan, is a fantastic overview of the development of U.S. nuclear strategy during the Cold War. Kaplan is a great writer who knows how to clearly detail and express information, with some humor sprinkled in making it a fun read. (Just as an aside, if you want to fit this book and nuclear strategy in general into the historical context of U.S. Cold War grand strategy read Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy during the Cold War By John Lewis Gaddis.)

My second recommendation, this one for modern nuclear strategy in the 21st century, is Nuclear Strategy in the Modern Era: Regional Powers and International Conflict by Vipin Narang. It is a brilliant book and very important for understanding how states chose various nuclear strategies/postures and the deterrent power each nuclear posture holds. Amazing book.

> Are they not saying the current problems of manufacturing jobs going away, income inequality, underemployment, or the recession are related to NAFTA?

I can say with confidence that the trade agreement between the the USA, Canada, and Mexico is most definitely not the primary cause the issues you listed.

http://www.cfr.org/trade/naftas-economic-impact/p15790

>But most economists say it is a stretch to blame these shifts on NAFTA. Manufacturing in the United States was under stress decades before the treaty, and job losses in that sector are viewed as part of a structural shift in the U.S. economy toward light manufacturing and high-end services. Alden says that broader economic trends affecting U.S. employment, such as China's economic rise, wouldn't be substantially altered by U.S. policy shifts toward NAFTA.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w18508.pdf

>We find that not all countries gained from NAFTA. Mexico and the U.S. gained 1.31% and 0.08% respectively, while Canada suffered a welfare loss of 0.06%. Still, real wages increased for all NAFTA members
and Mexico had the largest gains. We decompose the welfare effects into terms of trade and volume of trade
e§ects and Önd that most of the gains from NAFTA are a result of an increase in the volume of trade. We
Önd that the trade created, mostly between NAFTA members, was larger than the trade diverted from other
economies. This was particularly so for Mexico and Canada. The welfare gains from trade creation with
NAFTA members are 1.80% and 0.08% while the welfare loss from trade diversion with the rest of the world
are 0.08%, and 0.04% for Mexico and Canada respectively. Only a handful of sectors were responsible for
the aggregate volume of trade effects. These were sectors highly protected before NAFTA, like Textiles in
Mexico, with a large trade elasticity, like Petroleum, and with a large share of material use and sectoral
interdependence, like Electrical Machinery and Autos.

And the recession was the result of opaque lending practices which under priced risk.

>With wages so low abroad, why pay union wages?

Because they want to operate in the USA. When locating manufacturing on a global scale, cost isn't the only factor managers consider. Operating in lead countries gives businesses access to the latest innovations. Conducting operations close to your consumers helps anticipate their needs and speeds up response times. It also doesn't hurt that the US is politically stable, spacious, gifted with natural resources, a well developed infrastructure, and has strong property rights. For these reasons, a lot of global companies still choose to do business in the US. It may surprise you, but the United States is still by far the second largest manufacturer of goods on the planet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector_composition#PPP_GDP_sector_composition

If you want to know more, I recommend reading chapter 5 of Total Global strategy.

‘The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations’ (Oxford University Press) is excellent. It covers international relations theory, plus the global issues and changes facing world politics, effectively setting the stage for any deeper reading on geopolitics and international relations.

I’d also recommend iTunes U for introductory courses, plus podcasts and lectures (app of choice or YouTube) from academics. Plenty of good stuff out there for free to supplement reading.

The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxfo04) https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198739850/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_4KysDb9BXX7A6

Unfortunately, the most efficient way to become knowledgable about the Middle East is to read. A lot. The Middle East is a far more complex place than most people imagine and understanding the region requires a great deal of knowledge. I have been studying the Middle East for nearly a decade and I still feel like there is so much that I do not know. I would start by reading reputable news sources every day. Places like The Economist, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, BBC, Financial Times, are the Los Angeles Times are good English language news sources that you should look at. Additionally, I have written up a suggested reading list for learning about the Middle East, though it is a bit more security-related since that's my area of expertise. I hope it helps. And feel free to ask any questions if you have them.

Books - General History of the Middle East

• Albert Hourani - A History of the Arab Peoples. This is widely considered to be the definitive book on history in the Arab World.
  
• Eugene Rogan - The Arabs: A History. Another essential and critically acclaimed book on Arab history.
  
• Roy Mottahedeh - The Mantle of the Prophet. Role of religion and religious figures in Iran before and during the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
  
• Mark Lynch - The Arab Uprising: The Unfinished Revolutions of the New Middle East. An outline of the causes, reactions, and consequences of the Arab Spring.
  
• Thomas Barfield - Afghanistan: A Cultural and Political History. Afghanistan is usually not considered a part of the Middle East in academic research, so I am including this one. It's probably one of the best overviews of Afghan History.
  
  

  Books - Middle East Military History
  

  
  

• Kenneth Pollack - Arabs at War: Military Effectiveness, 1948-1991. Probably the best book on Arab militaries culture and effectiveness and warfare in the Middle East between 1945-1991. Very extensive and informative.
  
• Steven Ward - Immortal: A Military History of Iran and Its Armed Forces. A well-written history of Iran's military, from the Safavid Empire to the 21st century.
  
• Ahron Bregman - Israel's Wars: A History since 1947. A terrific book outlining Israel's strategic decision making for its military operations since its founding as a country.
  
• Bruce Hoffman - Anonymous Soldiers: The Struggle for Israel, 1917-1947. A look at the establishment of Israel and the development of the current Arab-Israeli conflict.
  
  

  Books - Middle East Terrorism and Substate Violence
  

  
  

• Daniel Byman - Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and the Global Jihadist Movement: What Everyone Needs to Know. A terrific primer on al-Qaida, ISIL, and jihadism.
  
• Lawrence Wright - The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. Probably the best book for outlining the history of al-Qaida and why 9/11 happened.
  
• Michael Wiess and Hassan Hassan - ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror. One of several recent books on ISIL, this one provides an overview on the history and organization of ISIL.
  
• Barry Rubin - Revolution Until Victory?: The Politics and History of the PLO. Although a little old (published in 1996), this books does a great job chronicling the history of the PLO and its role in the Palestinian struggle.
  
• Ahmed Rashid - Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. One of the best books on the rise and fall of the Taliban.
  
  

  Books - U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East
  

  
  

• Bob Woodward - Obama's Wars. Outline of the U.S. foreign policy decision making towards Iraq and Afghanistan in the early years of the Obama administration.
  
• Kenneth Pollack - The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America. A good overview of tensions between the United States and Iran.
  
• Michael R. Gordon - The Endgame: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Iraq, from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. Follows U.S. strategic and political decision making process during the Iraq War and the U.S. occupation.
  
• Peter R. Mansoor - Surge: My Journey with General David Petraeus and the Remaking of the Iraq War. An extensive outline of the development and outcome of the Surge during the U.S. Occupation of Iraq.
  
• Steve Coll - Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. A widely popular and acclaimed book on U.S. covert operations from the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan until 2001.
  
• Mark Mazzetti - The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth. An overview of the CIA's targeted killing program against terrorist organizations.
  
• Michael Morrell - The Great War of Our Time: The CIA's Fight Against Terrorism--From al Qa'ida to ISIS. Written by the former acting director of the CIA, this book examines U.S. counterterrorism successes and failures of the past two decades.
  
  

  Think Tanks
  

  
  Below is a list of several different think tanks, which frequently publish everything from extension research and analysis to quick and succinct blog posts about the issues in the Middle East. Some of these think tanks specifically focus on the Middle East, while for others it is only one area of their research.
  
  

• Washington Institute for Near East Policy
  
• Center for Strategic and International Studies
  
• Middle East Institute
  
• Atlantic Council
  
• Council on Foreign Relations
  
• Brookings Institute
  
• Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
  
• Institute for the Study of War
  
• International Institute for Strategic Studies
  
  

  Journals, Blogs, Podcasts, and other Publications
  

  
  

• Foreign Affairs - The premier publication on international politics. Has a paywall, but I recommend it. Also has a podcast.
  
• Foreign Policy - Actually a magazine, its website operates more like a blog. A major publication in the field. Also has a podcast.
  
• War on the Rocks - Reviews international political and security issues, U.S. national security issues, and alcohol. Also has a podcast.
  
• FRONTLINE: Syria At War - Their coverage of the Syrian Civil War. Amazing reporting and film. I highly recommend watching all of it.
  
• Jihadology - A clearing house for primary sources from terrorist organizations. Good place to go if you want to know what the other side is saying. Arabic skills sometimes required. Also has a podcast.
  
• Middle East Week - Looks at issues and topics in the contemporary Middle East that are not frequently talked about.
  
• Syria Comment - Blog run by Joshua Landis, a Syria expert, with frequent quest contributors. Focuses on Syria since before the start of the civil war.
  
• Musings on Iraq - Blog on Iraqi politics and society.
  
• Syria Deeply - A clearing house for news on the Syrian Civil War.
  
• CFR's: The Shia-Sunni Divide - An amazingly detailed and succinct outline of the history and issues behind the Shia-Sunni conflict in the Middle East.
  
• bellingcat - A blog that focuses on open source and social media investigations and analysis on international security issues. A fantastic 21st century approach to international issues.

I would first off recommend checking out the /r/geopolitics Wiki for its page on books. From there, I recommend introductory books that really help explain the geopolitical situation of the world in a cursory fashion. Consider:

• Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Explain Everything About the World: https://www.amazon.com/Prisoners-Geography-Explain-Everything-Politics/dp/1501121472
  
• Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty: https://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp/0307719219/ref=pd_sim_14_19?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0307719219&pd_rd_r=e512acc0-f2a2-11e8-88d2-3b20857d970c&pd_rd_w=Y7q9P&pd_rd_wg=eZWHM&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=18bb0b78-4200-49b9-ac91-f141d61a1780&pf_rd_r=PXKB01F4DSQYB49Y9WVA&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=PXKB01F4DSQYB49Y9WVA
  
  For a larger list, I can recommend our 2019 Geopolitical Reading list found here:
  
  
• https://encyclopediageopolitica.com/2018/11/12/the-2019-geopolitical-reading-list/

An easy geopolitical read? Hmmm. I always go to history books that have a geopolitical element to them when recommending pop-geopolitics. Try Charles C. Mann's 1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created or David Abernathy's The Dynamics of Global Dominance: European Overseas Empires, 1415-1980.

A really good book to check out that helps explain some of why Saudi Arabia is acting so irrationally these days:

http://www.amazon.com/After-Sheikhs-Coming-Collapse-Monarchies/dp/0199330646

There's an interesting book on the EU becoming some kind of mega state. It's a bit farfetched, and as far as I'm concerned both calls for a Federal Europe and fears of same are pretty overblown. Only when we start seeing any sincere indication that European states, and France, the UK, and Germany in particular, are willing to start integrating their fundamental powers of state—their military, intelligence, and policing (but particularly the military)—will anything of the sort be worth worrying about or rooting for, depending on your view.

I think this is the best intro book on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-International-Political-Economy-Balaam/dp/0133402398

The hypocrisy is amazing. Britain, Germany, America certainly had no problems with stealing intellectual property [see below] or erecting huge barriers to trade [https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Samaritans-Secret-History-Capitalism/dp/1596915986/]. In fact, they even invaded and drugged a nation to steal wealth [https://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Opium-Wars-Jack-Beeching/dp/0156170949/].

 

IP theft is a century's long Western tradition

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-26/china-didn-t-invent-industrial-espionage

http://www.amazon.com/For-All-Tea-China-Favorite/dp/0143118749

http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/internet-privacy/snowden--the-nsa-planted-backdoors-in-cisco-products.html

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/26/a_nation_of_outlaws/?page=full

http://www.amazon.com/Operation-Paperclip-Intelligence-Program-Scientists/dp/0316221031/

http://japanfocus.org/-Christopher-Reed/2177/article.html

You're in luck, there's a whole book on this subject that recently came out and I see it getting stellar reviews.

https://www.amazon.com/How-Defend-Australia-Hugh-White-ebook/dp/B07M8956X1

> If OP has time, there are two books that I would recommend:
> The Great War for Civilization (Niall Ferguson)
> Truman (Stephen McCullough)

Did you mean The Great War for Civilization or Civilization: The West and the Rest? I didn't see a book by that name by Ferguson.

> So what you've stated there again sounds different to the "real" neoliberalism I've had explained to me by others who claim to be neoliberals. This probably because a lot of different things could be seen as "the new liberalism".

Indeed, but how did those you talked to differ from what I said? The views I espoused are pretty consistent with other self-identifiers; see the Adam Smith Institute and Charles Peters.

> Where is it written down what a "real neoliberal" is?

There is no "written" definition because it's not an academic term. As your observing, it means different things to different people, and as with an analysis on "Marxists" you're going have to decide who to listen to. But in none of your character portrayals did you study someone who identified as a Neoliberal or advocated for the ideology.

> As I understand it, the founding text is Road to Serfdom - which reads as pretty libertarian to me.

Neoliberalism goes back to the 1930s and predates Hayek, but he's not a bad place to start. Other good historical texts:

• Mirowski & Plehwe, The Road from Mont Pèlerin
  
  
• Foucault, The Birth of Biopolitics
  
  
• Friedman, Neo-Liberalism and its Prospects
  
  Unlike some other ideologies, Neoliberalism changes because we try to stay up to date with both social justice and economics, which means admitting some of our past beliefs were wrong. This is why conflating us with libertarians is unfair: we don't hold the same beliefs in market divinity as they do.
  
  >The label neoliberal itself, in its modern meaning at least, I understand appeared in the 80s as a means to criticise the policies of structural adjustment, but tracing the ideas back to Hayek and similar thinkers. Therefore isn't neoliberalism whatever those scholars were observing (market fundamentalism), as opposed to something else that later decided "hey no, we're neoliberalism!"
  
  The people who employed "neoliberal" had no qualifications to do so. For example, a book that's becoming more common in Critical Theory discourse is David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism, which is similar to your podcast but makes the same mistakes. Harvey is a marxist anthropologist writing a book about economics, political science, and history, none of which he has any formal training in. "Neoliberal" does not appear in economic or polisci literature because it's not an academic term.
  
  A good analogue for this is to consider "capitalism." The term is rarely if ever used in economics because of how bloated, charged, and imprecise it is. An anthropologist may write a book about European colonialism and all of its destructive, racist madness, and then ultimately conclude that "capitalism is bad", when really this had less to do with an economic system and more to with the age-old process of imperial extraction.
  
  > What you describe just sounds like economic liberalism.
  
  It is, but with social liberalism baked in.
  
  > If the term neoliberalism is broadly understood by most to mean market fundamentalism... Well isn't that it's definition then?
  
  > Again I sympathise that the "real neoliberalism" for one set of supposed neoliberals has been warped by another bunch of supposed neoliberals (see also - the various groups who claim to be the "real Marxists"). The debate could go on forever.
  
  > If almost all people understand neoliberalism to be market fundamentalism, and those who claim to be neoliberal all seem to disagree on what it is, well I'm inclined to go with the most popular definition.
  
  Who is this "other group" you speak of? I'd be very interested to know who you talked with that self-identified as neoliberal before embarking on your project.
  
  The reason why this is important is because of a fundamental query in your presentation: who is your target audience? People who lobby 'neoliberal' as a pejorative already agree with you. Academics won't take this seriously. Neoliberals of my stripe would be offended. Is your intent just to criticize bad economic policies and ascribe them to an ideology? Even this is bizarre because you posit economic liberalism as inherently bad too. I almost feel like it would be useful to go over your podcast line by line, but that would tax not only your patience but your trust in me.
  
  
  

Historian. If you want independent confirmation, try Robert Kaplan's [Balkan Ghosts] (https://www.amazon.com/Balkan-Ghosts-Journey-Through-History/dp/0312424930).

Anonymous Soldier is also a great book about the pre-State struggle for Israel and how the Jews defeated the British forces: https://www.amazon.com/Soldiers-Struggle-Israel-1917-1947/dp/0307741613

For a great discussion of this exact topic check out Cyber War Will Not Take Place by Thomas Rid. He takes the idea a bit farthur than i would, but as a scholar of war he has some interesting things to say about it.

Some really great choices, but I'd also suggest https://www.amazon.com/Art-Intelligence-Lessons-Clandestine-Service/dp/0143123378

Henry was state Dept ambassador in charge of countering terrorism which is a big deal geopolitically

In short: Regulatory capture in the US led to the US Government handing out large sums of money to US Companies for services that were never delivered.

See also: The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Kline

Yes, it would be disastrous. However, that being said, no one really considered the implications of invading Iraq would have on the Middle East in 2002 into 2003.

The war would entail a lot of asymmetric fighting. Think the way the Iraq jWar went (with less sectarian violence given the lack of divide between Sunnis/Shiites in Iran) just with more people, more nationalism, and a state that's been practicing unconventional warfare for 30+ years.

It's closer to reality than what people think. Look at the rhetoric with those involved with anti-Iran deal. Furthermore, a lot of the talk prior to the invasion of Iraq involved fighting Iran instead. It would be extremely damaging to US-EU relations given that the Iran Deal is basically upheld by the EU at this point.


Here's a good book on US-Iranian relations
www.amazon.com/Twilight-War-Americas-Thirty-Year-Conflict/dp/014312367X