Notes

INTRODUCTION: THE QUESTION OF WORLD ORDER

“You are 20 states”: Franz Babinger, Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978), as quoted in Antony Black, The History of Islamic Political Thought (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011), 207.

CHAPTER 1: EUROPE: THE PLURALISTIC INTERNATIONAL ORDER

The idea of Europe loomed: Kevin Wilson and Jan van der Dussen, The History of the Idea of Europe (London: Routledge, 1993).

In that worldview Christendom: Frederick B. Artz, The Mind of the Middle Ages (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953), 275–80.

Aspirations to unity were briefly realized: Heinrich Fichtenau, The Carolingian Empire: The Age of Charlemagne, trans. Peter Munz (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), 60.

Charles was hailed: Hugh Thomas, The Golden Age: The Spanish Empire of Charles V (London: Allen Lane, 2010), 23.

In the tradition of Charlemagne: James Reston Jr., Defenders of the Faith: Charles V, Suleyman the Magnificent, and the Battle for Europe, 1520–1536 (New York: Penguin Press, 2009), 40, 294–95.

The French King repudiated: See Chapter 3.

The universality of the Church Charles sought: See Edgar Sanderson, J. P. Lamberton, and John McGovern, Six Thousand Years of History, vol. 7, Famous Foreign Statesmen (Philadelphia: E. R. DuMont, 1900), 246–50; Reston, Defenders of the Faith, 384–89. To a later Europe fractious and skeptical of universalistic claims, Charles’s rule appeared less like a near deliverance into desired unity than an overbearing threat. As the Scottish philosopher David Hume, a product of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, would later write, “Mankind were anew alarmed by the danger of universal monarchy, from the union of so many kingdoms and principalities in the person of the Emperor Charles.” David Hume, “On the Balance of Power,” in Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary (1742), 2.7.13.

A map depicting the universe: See Jerry Brotton, A History of the World in Twelve Maps (London: Penguin Books, 2013), 82–113 (discussion of the Hereford Mappa Mundi, ca. 1300); 4 Ezra 6:42; Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy, trans. Allen Mandelbaum (London: Bantam, 1982), 342; and Osip Mandelstam, “Conversation About Dante,” in The Poet’s Dante, ed. Peter S. Hawkins and Rachel Jacoff (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001), 67.

“red eminence”: Richelieu himself had a “grey eminence,” his confidential advisor and agent François Leclerc du Tremblay, whose robes as Père Joseph of the Capuchin order led him to be called Richelieu’s éminence grise, a label ever thereafter applied to shadowy figures of influence in the history of diplomacy. Aldous Huxley, Grey Eminence: A Study in Religion and Politics (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1941).

Machiavelli’s treatises on statesmanship: See, for example, Niccolò Machiavelli, The Art of War (1521), Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy (1531), The Prince (1532).

To outraged complaints: Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke, and E. Harris Harbison, The Mainstream of Civilization Since 1500 (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971), 420.

The fragmentation of Central Europe: Richelieu, “Advis donné au roy sur le sujet de la bataille de Nordlingen,” in The Thirty Years War: A Documentary History, ed. and trans. Tryntje Helfferich (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2009), 151.

The 235 official envoys: Peter H. Wilson, The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2009), 673.

Most representatives had come with eminently practical instructions: Ibid., 676.

Both the main multilateral treaties: Instrumentum pacis Osnabrugensis (1648) and Instrumentum pacis Monsteriensis (1648), in Helfferich, Thirty Years War, 255, 271.

Paradoxically, this general exhaustion and cynicism: Wilson, Thirty Years War, 672.

novel clauses: These formal provisions of tolerance were extended only to the three recognized Christian confessions: Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism.

“We have no eternal allies”: Palmerston, Speech to the House of Commons, March 1, 1848. This spirit was also expressed by Prince William III of Orange, who fought against French hegemony for a generation (first as Dutch stadtholder and then as King of England, Ireland, and Scotland), when he confided to an aide that, had he lived in the 1550s, when the Habsburgs were on the verge of becoming dominant, he would have been “as much a Frenchman as he was now a Spaniard” (Habsburg)—and later by Winston Churchill, replying in the 1930s to the charge that he was anti-German: “If the circumstances were reversed, we could equally be pro-German and anti-French.”

“When people ask me”: Palmerston to Clarendon, July 20, 1856, quoted in Harold Temperley and Lillian M. Penson, Foundations of British Foreign Policy from Pitt (1792) to Salisbury (1902) (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1938), 88.

In his Leviathan: The experience that brought Hobbes to write Leviathan was principally that of the English Civil Wars, whose impact on England, though less physically devastating than that of the Thirty Years’ War on the Continent, was still very great.

“Concerning the offices of one sovereign to another”: Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1651) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994), 233.

There were in fact two balances of power: It is important to keep in mind that only one major power existed in Central Europe at the time: Austria and its dominions. Prussia was still a secondary state at the eastern fringes of Germany. Germany was a geographic concept, not a state. Dozens of small, some minuscule, states made up a mosaic of governance.

“He [Louis] was well aware”: Lucy Norton, ed., Saint-Simon at Versailles (London: Hamilton, 1958), 217–30.

Split into two: Until ruthless diplomacy led to three successive partitions of Poland, the eastern half of Frederick’s territory was surrounded by Poland on three sides and the Baltic Sea on the other.

When Frederick II ascended the throne in 1740: Gerhard Ritter, Frederick the Great: A Historical Profile, trans. Peter Paret (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 29–30.

“Rulers are”: Frederick II of Prussia, Oeuvres, 2, XXV (1775), as quoted in Friedrich Meinecke, Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’État and Its Place in Modern History, trans. Douglas Scott (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1957) (originally published in German, 1925), 304.

“Pas trop mal pour la veille d’une grande bataille”: “Not so bad for the eve of a great battle.” Frederick II, as quoted in Otto von Bismarck, Bismarck: The Man and the Statesman (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1899), 316; and Otto von Bismarck, The Kaiser vs. Bismarck: Suppressed Letters by the Kaiser and New Chapters from the Autobiography of the Iron Chancellor (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1921), 144–45.

Enlightment governance: As Alexander Pope remarked in 1734, “For forms of government let fools contest; / Whatever is best administered is best.” Alexander Pope, An Essay on Man (1734), epistle iii, lines 303–4.

“The superiority of our troops”: As quoted in G. P. Gooch, Frederick the Great (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1947), 4–5.

“lives and values were put on display”: David A. Bell, The First Total War: Napoleon’s Europe and the Birth of Warfare as We Know It (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2007), 5.

a single elite society: For lively accounts of this social aspect, see Susan Mary Alsop, The Congress Dances: Vienna, 1814–1815 (New York: Harper & Row, 1984); Adam Zamoyski, Rites of Peace: The Fall of Napoleon and the Congress of Vienna (London: HarperPress, 2007).

“In short, from the earth to Saturn”: Jean Le Rond d’Alembert, “Éléments de Philosophie” (1759), as quoted in Ernst Cassirer, The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, trans. Fritz C. A. Koelln and James P. Pettegrove, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1951), 3.

“zeal for the best interests of the human race”: Denis Diderot, “The Encyclopedia” (1755), in Rameau’s Nephew and Other Works, trans. Jacques Barzun and Ralph H. Bowen (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2001), 283.

“solid principles [to] serve as the foundation”: Ibid., 296.

“It is not fortune which rules the world”: Montesquieu, Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de leur décadence (1734), as quoted in Cassirer, Philosophy of the Enlightenment, 213.

“unsocial sociability”: Immanuel Kant, “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose” (1784), in Kant: Political Writings, ed. H. S. Reiss (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 44.

“the most difficult and the last”: Ibid., 46.

“devastations, upheavals and even”: Ibid., 47.

“the vast graveyard of the human race”: Immanuel Kant, “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch (1795),” in Reiss, Kant, 96.

The answer, Kant held, was a voluntary federation of republics: That is, states with participatory forms of government, ruled by a system of laws applied equally to all citizens. “Perpetual Peace” has since been enlisted on behalf of the contemporary era’s “democratic peace theory.” Yet in the essay Kant drew a distinction between republics, which he described as representative political structures in which “the executive power (the government) is separated from the legislative power,” and democracies. “Democracy, in the truest sense of the word,” he argued—that is, a direct democracy such as late ancient Athens in which all matters of state are submitted to a mass vote—“is necessarily a despotism.” Ibid., 101.

“calling down on themselves all the miseries of war”: Ibid., 100. Emphasis added. Operating on the plane of abstract reason, Kant sidestepped the example of republican France, which had gone to war against all of its neighbors to great popular acclaim.

“a system of united power”: Kant, “Idea for a Universal History,” 49.

The Revolution’s intellectual godfather: In Rousseau’s famous analysis, “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” The course of human development had gone wrong with “the first person who, having enclosed a plot of land, took it into his head to say this is mine.” Thus only when private property is abolished by being held communally and artificial gradations of social status are eliminated can justice be achieved. And because those with property or status will resist the reintroduction of absolute equality, this can only come about by violent revolution. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and The Social Contract, in The Basic Political Writings (1755; 1762) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987), 61, 141.

“rule of administration in the social order”: Legitimate governance, Rousseau had reasoned, would come only when “each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.” Dissent was to be eradicated: since in a world of rational and egalitarian social structures, divergences within the popular will would reflect illegitimate opposition to the principle of popular empowerment, “whoever refuses to obey the general will shall be compelled to do so by the whole body. This means nothing less than that he will be forced to be free; for this is the condition which, by giving each citizen to his country, secures him against all personal dependence.” Rousseau, Social Contract, in The Basic Political Writings, 150.

“will accord fraternity and assistance”: “Declaration for Assistance and Fraternity to Foreign Peoples” (November 19, 1792), in The Constitutions and Other Select Documents Illustrative of the History of France, 1789–1907 (London: H. W. Wilson, 1908), 130.

“The French nation declares”: “Decree for Proclaiming the Liberty and Sovereignty of All Peoples” (December 15, 1792), in ibid., 132–33.

“I saw the Emperor—this world-soul”: Hegel to Friedrich Niethammer, October 13, 1806, in Hegel: The Letters, trans. Clark Butler and Christine Seiler with commentary by Clark Butler (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985).

CHAPTER 2: THE EUROPEAN BALANCE-OF-POWER SYSTEM AND ITS END

“A monstrous compound of the petty refinements”: Marquis de Custine, Empire of the Czar: A Journey Through Eternal Russia (1843; New York: Anchor Books, 1990), 69.

“the sole Emperor of all the Christians”: Epistle of Filofei of Pskov, 1500 or 1501, as quoted in Geoffrey Hosking, Russia: People and Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997), 5–6. Ivan’s successors would give this philosophical conviction a geopolitical thrust. Catherine the Great conceived of a “Greek Project,” which was to culminate in the conquest of Constantinople and the crowning of Catherine’s fittingly named grandson Constantine as its ruler. Her courtier Potemkin even placed (in addition to fake villages) a sign along his patroness’s Crimean route that read, “This way to Byzantium.” For Russia, the reattachment of the lost capital of Orthodox Christendom became an objective of profound spiritual and (for an empire lacking warm-water ports) strategic significance. The nineteenth-century Pan-Slavist intellectual Nikolai Danilevskii summed up a long tradition of thought with his ringing assessment: “[Constantinople has been] the aim of the aspirations of the Russian people from the dawn of our statehood, the ideal of our enlightenment; the glory, splendor and greatness of our ancestors, the center of Orthodoxy, and the bone of contention between Europe and ourselves. What historical significance Constantinople would have for us if we could wrest her away from the Turks regardless of Europe! What delight would our hearts feel from the radiance of the cross that we would raise atop the dome of St. Sophia! Add to this all the other advantages of Constantinople …, her world significance, her commercial significance, her exquisite location, and all the charms of the south.” Nikolai Danilevskii, Russia and Europe: A View on Cultural and Political Relations Between the Slavic and German-Roman Worlds (St. Petersburg, 1871), as translated and excerpted in Imperial Russia: A Source Book, 1700–1917, ed. Basil Dmytryshyn (Gulf Breeze, Fla: Academic International Press, 1999), 373.

“expanding the state in every direction”: Vasili O. Kliuchevsky, A Course in Russian History: The Seventeenth Century (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1994), 366. See also Hosking, Russia, 4.

This process developed: John P. LeDonne, The Russian Empire and the World, 1700–1917: The Geopolitics of Expansion and Containment (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 348.

“His political philosophy, like that of all Russians”: Henry Adams, The Education of Henry Adams (1907; New York: Modern Library, 1931), 439.

It expanded each year: Orlando Figes, Natasha’s Dance: A Cultural History of Russia (New York: Picador, 2002), 376–77.

From that perspective: As Russian troops marched in 1864 into the territory now known as Uzbekistan, Chancellor Aleksandr Gorchakov defined Russia’s expansion in terms of a permanent obligation to pacify its periphery driven forward by sheer momentum:

The state [Russia] therefore must make a choice: either to give up this continuous effort and doom its borders to constant unrest which would make prosperity, safety, and cultural progress impossible here; or else to advance farther and farther into the heart of the savage lands, where the vast distances, with every step forward, increase the difficulties and hardships it incurs … not so much from ambition as from dire necessity, where the greatest difficulty lies in being able to stop.

George Verdansky, ed., A Source Book for Russian History: From Early Times to 1917 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1972), 3:610.

Yet early European visitors: Marquis de Custine, Empire of the Czar, 230. Modern scholars continued to wonder. See, for example, Charles J. Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1985); Paul Harrison Silfen, The Influence of the Mongols on Russia: A Dimensional History (Hicksville, N.Y.: Exposition Press, 1974).

Determined to explore the fruits of modernity: With a domineering hands-on approach that prompted amazement in Western European nations, Peter enrolled as a carpenter on the docks of Holland, deconstructed and repaired watches in London, and unsettled his retinue by trying his hand at new innovations in dentistry and anatomical dissection. See Virginia Cowles, The Romanovs (New York: Harper & Row, 1971), 33–37; Robert K. Massie, Peter the Great (New York: Ballantine Books, 1980), 188–89, 208.

“to sever the people from their former Asiatic customs”: B. H. Sumner, Peter the Great and the Emergence of Russia (New York: Collier Books, 1962), 45.

A series of ukases issued forth: Cowles, Romanovs, 26–28; Sumner, Peter the Great and the Emergence of Russia, 27; Figes, Natasha’s Dance, 4–6.

“Russia is a European State”: Catherine II, Nakaz (Instruction) to the Legislative Commission of 1767–68, in Dmytryshyn, Imperial Russia, 80.

Stalin too has acquired: Maria Lipman, Lev Gudkov, Lasha Bakradze, and Thomas de Waal, The Stalin Puzzle: Deciphering Post-Soviet Public Opinion (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2013) (reporting polls of contemporary Russians showing 47 percent agreement with the statement “Stalin was a wise leader who brought the Soviet Union to might and prosperity” and 30 percent agreement with the statement “Our people will always have need of a leader like Stalin, who will come and restore order”).

“The Extent of the Dominion requires”: Catherine II, Nakaz (Instruction) to the Legislative Commission of 1767–68, 80.

“In Russia, the sovereign is the living law”: Nikolai Karamzin on Czar Alexander I, as quoted in W. Bruce Lincoln, The Romanovs: Autocrats of All the Russias (New York: Anchor Books, 1981), 489.

“at the interface of two vast and irreconcilable worlds”: Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, 126.

“this ceaseless longing”: Fyodor Dostoevsky, A Writer’s Diary (1881), as quoted in Figes, Natasha’s Dance, 308.

“orphan cut off from the human family”: Pyotr Chaadaev, “Philosophical Letter” (1829, published 1836), as quoted in Figes, Natasha’s Dance, 132, and Dmytryshyn, Imperial Russia, 251. Chaadaev’s commentary struck a nerve and circulated widely, even though the publication was immediately suppressed and the author was declared insane and placed under police supervision.

“Third Rome”: Mikhail Nikiforovich Katkov, May 24, 1882, editorial in Moskovskie vedomosti (Moscow News), as excerpted in Verdansky, A Source Book for Russian History, 3:676.

“What a people! They are Scythians!”: Figes, Natasha’s Dance, 150.

“It is to the cause of hastening the true reign”: Lincoln, The Romanovs, 404–5.

“There no longer exists an English policy”: Ibid., 405.

“the course, formerly adopted by the powers”: Wilhelm Schwarz, Die Heilige Allianz (Stuttgart, 1935), 52.

The vanquished enemy would become: It was analogous to the decision in 1954 of (West) Germany to join the Atlantic Alliance, less than a decade after its unconditional surrender at the end of a murderous war against its newfound partners.

“too weak for true ambition”: Klemens von Metternich, Aus Metternich’s nachgelassenen Papieren, ed. Alfons v. Klinkowstroem (Vienna, 1881), 1:316.

“the contingency of an attack by France”: Palmerston’s dispatch no. 6 to the Marquess of Clanricarde (ambassador in St. Petersburg), January 11, 1841, in The Foreign Policy of Victorian England, ed. Kenneth Bourne (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970), 252–53.

The German philosopher Johann Gottfried von Herder: See Isaiah Berlin, Vico and Herder: Two Studies in the History of Ideas (New York: Viking, 1976), 158, 204.

“Underlying the theory was fact”: Jacques Barzun, From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life (New York: Perennial, 2000), 482.

Linguistic nationalisms made traditional empires: Sir Lewis Namier, Vanished Supremacies: Essays on European History, 1812–1918 (New York: Penguin Books, 1958), 203.

“powerful, decisive and wise regents”: Otto von Bismarck, Die gesammelten Werke, 3rd ed. (Berlin, 1924), 1: 375.

The war received its name: The battle was memorialized in classic literature on both sides, including Alfred Tennyson’s “Charge of the Light Brigade” and Leo Tolstoy’s Tales of Sevastopol. See Nicholas V. Riasanovsky, A History of Russia (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 336–39.

“We will astonish the world by the magnitude of our ingratitude”: Allgemeine deutsche Biographie 33 (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1891), 266. Metternich left office in 1848.

“Where everything is tottering”: Heinrich Sbrik, Metternich, der Staatsmann und der Mensch, 2 vols. (Munich, 1925), 1:354, as cited in Henry A. Kissinger, “The Conservative Dilemma: Reflections on the Political Thought of Metternich,” American Political Science Review 48, no. 4 (December 1954): 1027.

“invention is the enemy of history”: Metternich, Aus Metternich’s nachgelassenen Papieren, 1:33, 8:184.

For Metternich, the national interest of Austria: Algernon Cecil, Metternich, 1773–1859 (London: Eyre and Spottiswood, 1947), 52.

“The great axioms of political science”: Metternich, Aus Metternich’s nachgelassenen Papieren, 1:334.

“A sentimental policy knows no reciprocity”: Briefwechsel des Generals Leopold von Gerlach mit dem Bundestags-Gesandten Otto von Bismarck (Berlin, 1893), 334.

“For heaven’s sake no sentimental alliances”: Ibid. (February 20, 1854), 130.

“The only healthy basis of policy”: Horst Kohl, Die politischen Reden des Fursten Bismarck (Stuttgart, 1892), 264.

“Gratitude and confidence will not bring”: Bismarck, Die gesammelten Werke (November 14, 1833), vol. 14, nos. 1, 3.

“Policy is the art of the possible”: Ibid. (September 29, 1851), 1:62.

“a greater political event than the French Revolution”: Speech of February 9, 1871, in Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, ser. 3, vol. 204 (February–March 1871), 82.

German strategy: By contrast, Moltke, the architect of Prussian victories in the wars that led to unification, had in his day planned a defense on both fronts.

World War I broke out: For stimulating accounts of these developments, see Christopher Clark, The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 (New York: HarperCollins, 2013) and Margaret MacMillan, The War That Ended Peace: The Road to 1914 (New York: Random House, 2013).

In the 1920s, the Germany of the Weimar Republic: See John Maynard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace (New York: Macmillan, 1920), Chapter 5.

Their residue would continue: See Chapters 6 and 7.

CHAPTER 3: ISLAMISM AND THE MIDDLE EAST

“the first deliberate attempt”: Adda B. Bozeman, “Iran: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Tradition of Persian Statecraft,” Orbis 23, no. 2 (Summer 1979): 397.

That a small group of Arab confederates: See Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests: How the Spread of Islam Changed the World We Live In (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 2007), 34–40.

“If you embrace Islam”: Kennedy, Great Arab Conquests, 113.

Islam’s rapid advance: See generally Marshall G. S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization, vol. 1, The Classical Age of Islam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974).

“The dar al-Islam”: Majid Khadduri, The Islamic Law of Nations: Shaybani’s Siyar (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1966), 13.

“by his heart; his tongue”: Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1955), 56. See also Kennedy, Great Arab Conquests, 48–51; Bernard Lewis, The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years (New York: Touchstone, 1997), 233–38.

Other religions—especially Christianity: To the extent that democracy and human rights now serve to inspire actions in the service of global transformation, their content and applicability have proven far more flexible than the previous dictates of scripture proselytized in the wake of advancing armies. After all, the democratic will of different peoples can call forth vastly different outcomes.

“Islamic legal rulings stipulate”: Labeeb Ahmed Bsoul, International Treaties (Mu‘āhadāt) in Islam: Theory and Practice in the Light of Islamic International Law (Siyar) According to Orthodox Schools (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2008), 117.

“The communities of the dar al-harb”: Khadduri, Islamic Law of Nations, 12. See also Bsoul, International Treaties, 108–9.

In the idealized version of this worldview: See James Piscatori, “Islam in the International Order,” in The Expansion of International Society, ed. Hedley Bull and Adam Watson (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 318–19; Lewis, Middle East, 305; Olivier Roy, Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), 112 (on contemporary Islamist views); Efraim Karsh, Islamic Imperialism: A History (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2006), 230–31. But see Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, 156–57 (on the traditional conditions under which territory captured by non-Muslims might revert to being part of dar al-harb).

These factions eventually formed: An analysis of this schism and its modern implications may be found in Vali Nasr, The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006).

“the order of the world”: Brendan Simms, Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy from 1453 to the Present (New York: Basic Books, 2013), 9–10; Black, History of Islamic Political Thought, 206–7.

In this context, formal Ottoman documents: These were called, misleadingly in English, “capitulations”—not because the Ottoman Empire had “capitulated” on any point, but because they were divided into chapters or articles (capitula in Latin).

“I who am the Sultan of Sultans”: Answer from Suleiman I to Francis I of France, February 1526, as quoted in Roger Bigelow Merriman, Suleiman the Magnificent, 1520–1566 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1944), 130. See also Halil Inalcik, “The Turkish Impact on the Development of Modern Europe,” in The Ottoman State and Its Place in World History, ed. Kemal H. Karpat (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974), 51–53; Garrett Mattingly, Renaissance Diplomacy (New York: Penguin Books, 1955), 152. Roughly five hundred years later, during a period of strained bilateral relations, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan presented a ceremonial copy of the letter to French President Nicolas Sarkozy but complained, “I think he did not read it.” “Turkey’s Erdoǧan: French Vote Reveals Gravity of Hostility Towards Muslims,” Today’s Zaman, December 23, 2011.

“the Sick Man of Europe”: In 1853, Czar Nicholas I of Russia was reputed to have told the British ambassador, “We have a sick man on our hands, a man gravely ill, it will be a great misfortune if one of these days he slips through our hands, especially before the necessary arrangements are made.” Harold Temperley, England and the Near East (London: Longmans, Green, 1936), 272.

“attacks dealt against the Caliphate”: Sultan Mehmed-Rashad, “Proclamation,” and Sheik-ul-Islam, “Fetva,” in Source Records of the Great War, ed. Charles F. Horne and Walter F. Austin (Indianapolis: American Legion, 1930), 2:398–401. See also Hew Strachan, The First World War (New York: Viking, 2003), 100–101.

“the establishment in Palestine”: Arthur James Balfour to Walter Rothschild, November 2, 1917, in Malcolm Yapp, The Making of the Modern Near East, 1792–1923 (Harlow: Longmans, Green), 290.

Two opposing trends appeared: See Erez Manela, The Wilsonian Moment: Self-Determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism, 1917–1920 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).

From its early days as an informal gathering: See Roxanne L. Euben and Muhammad Qasim Zaman, eds., Princeton Readings in Islamist Thought: Texts and Contexts from al-Banna to Bin Laden (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2009), 49–53.

“which was brilliant”: Hassan al-Banna, “Toward the Light,” in ibid., 58–59.

“Then the fatherland of the Muslim expands”: Ibid., 61–62.

Where possible, this fight would be gradualist: Ibid., 68–70.

“low associations based on race”: Sayyid Qutb, Milestones, 2nd rev. English ed. (Damascus, Syria: Dar al-Ilm, n.d.), 49–51.

“the achievement of the freedom of man”: Ibid., 59–60, 72, 84, 137.

core of committed followers: For a discussion of the evolution from Qutb to bin Laden, see Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (New York: Random House, 2006).

“freedom”: Barack Obama, Remarks by the President in Joint Press Conference with Prime Minister Harper of Canada, February 4, 2011; interview with Fox News, February 6, 2011; Statement by President Barack Obama on Egypt; February 10, 2011; “Remarks by the President on Egypt” February 11, 2011.

“The future of Syria”: Statement by the President on the Situation in Syria, August 18, 2011, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/08/18/statement-president-obama-situation-syria.

The main parties thought themselves: Mariam Karouny, “Apocalyptic Prophecies Drive Both Sides to Syrian Battle for End of Time,” Reuters, April 1, 2014.

deploying military personnel to Saudi Arabia: On Riyadh’s request, to deter any attempt by Saddam Hussein to seize Saudi oil fields.

Osama bin Laden had preceded the attack: See “Message from Usama Bin-Muhammad Bin Ladin to His Muslim Brothers in the Whole World and Especially in the Arabian Peninsula: Declaration of Jihad Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Mosques; Expel the Heretics from the Arabian Peninsula,” in FBIS Report, “Compilation of Usama bin Ladin Statements, 1994–January 2004,” 13; Piscatori, “Order, Justice, and Global Islam,” 279–80.

When states are not governed: For an exposition of this phenomenon, see David Danelo, “Anarchy Is the New Normal: Unconventional Governance and 21st Century Statecraft” (Foreign Policy Research Institute, October 2013).

CHAPTER 4: THE UNITED STATES AND IRAN

“Today what lies in front of our eyes”: Ali Khamenei, “Leader’s Speech at Inauguration of Islamic Awakening and Ulama Conference” (April 29, 2013), Islamic Awakening 1, no. 7 (Spring 2013).

“This final goal cannot be anything”: Ibid.

“The developments in the U.S.”: Islamic Invitation Turkey, “The Leader of Islamic Ummah and Oppressed People Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei: Islamic Awakening Inspires Intl. Events,” November 27, 2011.

The Persian ideal of monarchy: Among the most famous instances of this tradition was the sixth-century B.C. liberation of captive peoples, including the Jews, from Babylon by the Persian Emperor Cyrus, founder of the Achaemenid Empire. After entering Babylon and displacing its ruler, the self-proclaimed “king of the four quarters of the world” decreed that all Babylonian captives would be free to return home and that all religions would be tolerated. With his pioneering embrace of religious pluralism, Cyrus is believed to have been an inspiration over two millennia later for Thomas Jefferson, who read an account in Xenophon’s Cyropedia and commented favorably. See “The Cyrus Cylinder: Diplomatic Whirl,” Economist, March 23, 2013.

“Most of all they hold in honor”: Herodotus, The History, trans. David Grene (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 1.131–135, pp. 95–97.

“The President of the United States”: Kenneth M. Pollack, The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America (New York: Random House, 2004), 18–19. See also John Garver, China and Iran: Ancient Partners in a Post-imperial World (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006).

“great interior spaces”: See Roy Mottahedeh, The Mantle of the Prophet: Religion and Politics in Iran (Oxford: Oneworld, 2002), 144; Reza Aslan, “The Epic of Iran,” New York Times, April 30, 2006. Abolqasem Ferdowsi’s epic Book of Kings, composed two centuries after the arrival of Islam in Persia, recounted the legendary glories of Persia’s pre-Muslim past. Ferdowsi, a Shia Muslim, captured the complex Persian attitude by penning a lament spoken by one of his characters at the end of an era: “Damn this world, damn this time, damn this fate, / That uncivilized Arabs have come to make me Muslim.”

“prudential dissimulation”: See Sandra Mackey, The Iranians: Persia, Islam, and the Soul of a Nation (New York: Plume, 1998), 109n1.

“imperialists”: Ruhollah Khomeini, “Islamic Government,” in Islam and Revolution: Writings and Declarations of Imam Khomeini (1941–1980), trans. Hamid Algar (North Haledon, N.J.: Mizan Press, 1981), 48–49.

“the relations between nations”: As quoted in David Armstrong, Revolution and World Order: The Revolutionary State in International Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 192.

“an Islamic government”: Khomeini, “Islamic Government,” “The First Day of God’s Government,” and “The Religious Scholars Led the Revolt,” in Islam and Revolution, 147, 265, 330–31.

“What was wanted”: R. W. Apple Jr., “Will Khomeini Turn Iran’s Clock Back 1,300 Years?,” New York Times, February 4, 1979.

Amidst these upheavals a new paradox: See Charles Hill, Trial of a Thousand Years: World Order and Islamism (Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Institution Press, 2011), 89–91.

Tehran’s imperative: Accounts of this phenomenon, carried out largely covertly, are necessarily incomplete. Some have suggested limited cooperation, or at least tacit accommodations, between Tehran and the Taliban and al-Qaeda. See, for example, Thomas Kean, Lee Hamilton, et al., The 9/11 Commission Report (New York: W. W. Norton, 2004), 61, 128, 240–41, 468, 529; Seth G. Jones, “Al Qaeda in Iran,” Foreign Affairs, January 29, 2012, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137061/seth-g-jones/al-qaeda-in-iran.

“This lofty and great author”: Akbar Ganji, “Who Is Ali Khamenei: The Worldview of Iran’s Supreme Leader,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2013. See also Thomas Joscelyn, “Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Revolution,” Longwarjournal.org, January 28, 2011.

“In accordance with the sacred verse”: Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran (October 24, 1979), as amended, Section I, Article 11.

“We must strive to export our Revolution”: Khomeini, “New Year’s Message” (March 21, 1980), in Islam and Revolution, 286.

temporarily exercises: This status is set out in Iran’s constitution: “During the occultation of the Wali al-’Asr [the Guardian of the Era, the Hidden Imam] (may God hasten his reappearance), the leadership of the Ummah [Muslim community] devolves upon the just and pious person, who is fully aware of the circumstances of his age, courageous, resourceful, and possessed of administrative ability, will assume the responsibilities of this office in accordance with Article 107.” Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran (October 24, 1979), as amended, Section I, Article 5. In the Iranian revolution’s climactic phases, Khomeini did not discourage suggestions that he was the Mahdi returned from occultation, or at least the forerunner of this phenomenon. See Milton Viorst, In the Shadow of the Prophet: The Struggle for the Soul of Islam (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 2001), 192.

“Without any doubt”: “Address by H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Before the Sixty-second Session of the United Nations General Assembly” (New York: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations, September 25, 2007), 10.

“Vasalam Ala Man Ataba’al hoda”: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to George W. Bush, May 7, 2006, Council on Foreign Relations online library; “Iran Declares War,” New York Sun, May 11, 2006.

“By dressing up America’s face”: As quoted in Arash Karami, “Ayatollah Khamenei: Nuclear Negotiations Won’t Resolve US-Iran Differences,” Al-Monitor.com Iran Pulse, February 17, 2014, http://iranpulse.al-monitor.com/index.php/2014/02/3917/ayatollah-khamenei-nuclear-negotiations-wont-resolve-us-iran-differences/.

“When a wrestler is wrestling”: As quoted in Akbar Ganji, “Frenemies Forever: The Real Meaning of Iran’s ‘Heroic Flexibility,’” Foreign Affairs, September 24, 2013, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139953/akbar-ganji/frenemies-forever.

Plutonium enrichment: Two types of material have been used to drive nuclear explosions—enriched uranium and plutonium. Because the control of a plutonium reaction is generally seen as a technically more complex task than the equivalent work required to produce an explosion using enriched uranium, most attempts to prevent a breakout capability have focused on closing the route to uranium enrichment. (Plutonium reactors are also fueled by uranium, requiring some access to uranium and familiarity with uranium-processing technology.) Iran has moved toward both a uranium-enrichment and a plutonium-production capability, both of which have been the subject of negotiations.

The process resulted in the November 2013: This account of the negotiating record makes reference to events and proposals described in a number of sources, including the Arms Control Association, “History of Official Proposals on the Iranian Nuclear Issue,” January 2013; Lyse Doucet, “Nuclear Talks: New Approach for Iran at Almaty,” BBC.co.uk, February 28, 2013; David Feith, “How Iran Went Nuclear,” Wall Street Journal, March 2, 2013; Lara Jakes and Peter Leonard, “World Powers Coax Iran into Saving Nuclear Talks,” Miami Herald, February 27, 2013; Semira N. Nikou, “Timeline of Iran’s Nuclear Activities” (United States Institute of Peace, 2014); “Timeline: Iranian Nuclear Dispute,” Reuters, June 17, 2012; Hassan Rohani, “Beyond the Challenges Facing Iran and the IAEA Concerning the Nuclear Dossier” (speech to the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council), Rahbord, September 30, 2005, 7–38, FBIS-IAP20060113336001; Steve Rosen, “Did Iran Offer a ‘Grand Bargain’ in 2003?,” American Thinker,November 16, 2008; and Joby Warrick and Jason Rezaian, “Iran Nuclear Talks End on Upbeat Note,” Washington Post, February 27, 2013.

“The reason for the emphasis”: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, remarks to members of the Iranian Majles (Parliament), Fars News Agency, as translated and excerpted in KGS NightWatch news report, May 26, 2014.

Administration spokesmen: David Remnick, “Going the Distance,” New Yorker, January 27, 2014.

“Today we are embarking”: Address by Yitzhak Rabin to a joint session of the U.S. Congress, July 26, 1994, online archive of the Yitzhak Rabin Center.

CHAPTER 5: THE MULTIPLICITY OF ASIA

Until the arrival: Philip Bowring, “What Is ‘Asia’?,” Far Eastern Economic Review, February 12, 1987.

“the basic principle of modern international relations”: Qi Jianguo, “An Unprecedented Great Changing Situation: Understanding and Thoughts on the Global Strategic Situation and Our Country’s National Security Environment,” Xuexi shibao [Study Times], January 21, 2013, trans. James A. Bellacqua and Daniel M. Hartnett (Washington, D.C.: CNA, April 2013).

In Asia’s historical diplomatic systems: See Immanuel C. Y. Hsu, The Rise of Modern China (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 315–17; Thant Myint-U, Where China Meets India (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011), 77–78; John W. Garver, Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Twentieth Century (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001), 138–40; Lucian W. Pye, Asian Power and Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985), 95–99; Brotton, History of the World in Twelve Maps, chap. 4.

Yet in a region: See, for example, David C. Kang, East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010), 77–81.

At the apex of Japan’s society: Kenneth B. Pyle, Japan Rising (New York: Public Affairs, 2007), 37.

“Japan is the divine country”: John W. Dower, War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War (New York: Pantheon, 1986), 222.

In 1590, the warrior Toyotomi Hideyoshi: See Samuel Hawley, The Imjin War: Japan’s Sixteenth-Century Invasion of Korea and Attempt to Conquer China (Seoul: Royal Asiatic Society, Korea Branch, 2005).

After five years of inconclusive negotiations: Kang, East Asia Before the West, 1–2, 93–97.

strict diplomatic equality: Hidemi Suganami, “Japan’s Entry into International Society,” in Bull and Watson, Expansion of International Society, 187.

Chinese traders were permitted to operate: Marius Jansen, The Making of Modern Japan (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2002), 87.

“edict to expel foreigners”: Suganami, “Japan’s Entry into International Society,” 186–89.

“If your imperial majesty”: President Millard Fillmore to the Emperor of Japan (presented by Commodore Perry on July 14, 1853), in Francis Hawks and Matthew Perry, Narrative of the Expedition of an American Squadron to the China Seas and Japan, Performed in the Years 1852, 1853, and 1854, Under the Command of Commodore M. C. Perry, United States Navy, by Order of the Government of the United States (Washington, D.C.: A. O. P. Nicholson, 1856), 256–57.

“most positively forbidden by the laws”: Translation of the Japanese reply to President Fillmore’s letter, in ibid., 349–50.

“1. By this oath”: Meiji Charter Oath, in Japanese Government Documents, ed. W. W. McLaren (Bethesda, Md.: University Publications of America, 1979), 8.

“New Order in Asia”: Japanese memorandum delivered to the American Secretary of State Cordell Hull, December 7, 1941, as quoted in Pyle, Japan Rising, 207.

Having established: See, for example, Yasuhiro Nakasone, “A Critical View of the Postwar Constitution” (1953), in Sources of Japanese Tradition, ed. Wm. Theodore de Bary, Carol Gluck, and Arthur E. Tiedemann (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), 2:1088–89. Nakasone delivered the speech while sojourning at Harvard as a member of the International Seminar, a program for young leaders seeking exposure to an American academic environment. He argued that in the interest of “accelerating permanent friendship between Japan and the United States,” Japan’s independent defense capability should be strengthened and its relations with its American partner put on a more equal footing. When Nakasone became Prime Minister three decades later, he pursued these policies to great effect with his counterpart Ronald Reagan.

“as Japan’s security environment”: National Security Strategy (Provisional Translation) (Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, December 17, 2013), 1–3. The document, adopted by Japan’s Cabinet, stated that its principles “will guide Japan’s national security policy over the next decade.”

“the long and diversified history”: S. Radhakrishnan, “Hinduism,” in A Cultural History of India, ed. A. L. Basham (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997), 60–82.

“in search of Christians and spices”: Such was the Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama’s explanation to the King of Calicut (the present-day Kozhikode, India, then a center of the global spice trade). Da Gama and his crew rejoiced at the opportunity to profit from the thriving Indian trade in spices and precious stones. They were also influenced by the legend of the lost realm of “Prester John,” a powerful Christian king believed by many medieval and early-modern Europeans to reside somewhere in Africa or Asia. See Daniel Boorstin, The Discoverers (New York: Vintage Books, 1985), 104–6, 176–77.

The Hindu classic: The Bhagavad Gita, trans. Eknath Easwaran (Tomales, Calif.: Nilgiri Press, 2007), 82–91; Amartya Sen, The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture, and Identity (New York: Picador, 2005), 3–6.

Against the background of the eternal: See Pye, Asian Power and Politics, 137–41.

“The conqueror shall [always]”: Kautilya, Arthashastra, trans. L. N. Rangarajan (New Delhi: Penguin Books India, 1992), 6.2.35–37, p. 525.

“If … the conqueror is superior”: Ibid., 9.1.1, p. 588. Prussia’s Frederick the Great, on the eve of his seizure of the wealthy Austrian province of Silesia roughly two thousand years later, made a similar assessment. See Chapter 1.

“The Conqueror shall think of the circle”: Ibid., 6.2.39–40, p. 526.

“undertake such works as would”: Ibid., 9.1.21, p. 589.

“make one neighboring king fight”: Ibid., 7.6.14, 15, p. 544.

“all states of the circle”: See Roger Boesche, The First Great Political Realist: Kautilya and His “Arthashastra” (Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2002), 46; Kautilya, Arthashastra, 7.13.43, 7.2.16, 9.1.1–16, pp. 526, 538, 588–89.

To be sure, Kautilya insisted: In Kautilya’s concept, the realm of a universal conqueror was “the area extending from the Himalayas in the north to the sea in the south and a thousand yojanas wide from east to west”—effectively modern-day Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. Kautilya, Arthashastra, 9.1.17, p. 589.

The Arthashastra advised: See Boesche, First Great Political Realist, 38–42, 51–54, 88–89.

“truly radical ‘Machiavellianism’”: Max Weber, “Politics as a Vocation,” as quoted in ibid., 7.

Whether following the Arthashastra’s prescriptions: Asoka is today revered for his preaching of Buddhism and nonviolence; he adopted these only after his conquests were complete, and they served to buttress his rule.

“grafted to the Greater Middle East”: Robert Kaplan, The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate (New York: Random House, 2012), 237.

“We seem, as it were, to have conquered”: John Robert Seeley, The Expansion of England: Two Courses of Lectures (London: Macmillan, 1891), 8.

“There is not, and never was an India”: Sir John Strachey, India (London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, 1888), as quoted in Ramachandra Guha, India After Gandhi: The History of the World’s Largest Democracy (New York: Ecco, 2007), 3.

“Whatever policy you may lay down”: Jawaharlal Nehru, “India’s Foreign Policy” (speech delivered at the Constituent Assembly, New Delhi, December 4, 1947), in Independence and After: A Collection of Speeches, 1946–1949 (New York: John Day, 1950), 204–5.

“We propose to avoid entanglement”: As quoted in Baldev Raj Nayar and T. V. Paul, India in the World Order: Searching for Major-Power Status (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 124–25.

“It would have been absurd”: As quoted in ibid., 125.

“Are we, the countries of Asia and Africa”: Jawaharlal Nehru, “Speech to the Bandung Conference Political Committee” (1955), as printed in G. M. Kahin, The Asian-African Conference (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1956), 70.

“(1) mutual respect”: “Agreement (with Exchange of Notes) on Trade and Intercourse Between Tibet Region of China and India, Signed at Peking, on 29 April 1954,” United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 299 (1958), 70.

Treated as provisional: As of this writing, Afghanistan does not officially recognize any territorial border with Pakistan; India and Pakistan dispute the Kashmir region; India and China dispute Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh and fought a war over these territories in 1962; India and Bangladesh have expressed a commitment to negotiate a resolution of the dozens of exclaves in each other’s territory but have not ratified an agreement resolving the issue and have clashed over the patrol of these territories.

the larger Muslim world: See Pew Research Center Forum on Religion and Public Life, The Global Religious Landscape: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Major Religious Groups as of 2010 (Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center, 2012), 22.

geographically an Asian power: “European Russia,” or Russia west of the Ural Mountains, constitutes roughly the westernmost quarter of Russia’s landmass.

CHAPTER 6: TOWARD AN ASIAN ORDER

“Sinocentric”: See Mark Mancall, “The Ch’ing Tribute System: An Interpretive Essay,” in The Chinese World Order, ed. John K. Fairbank (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968), 63.

A Chinese foreign ministry: See Mark Mancall, China at the Center: 300 Years of Foreign Policy (New York: Free Press, 1984), 16–20; Jonathan Spence, The Search for Modern China, 2nd ed. (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999), 197–202.

“To give them … elaborate clothes”: Ying-shih Yü, Trade and Expansion in Han China: A Study in the Structure of Sino-Barbarian Economic Relations (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), 37.

“Swaying the wide world”: Qianlong’s First Edict to King George III (September 1793), in The Search for Modern China: A Documentary Collection, ed. Pei-kai Cheng, Michael Lestz, and Jonathan Spence (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999), 105.

England’s Prince Regent: Governing in the place of King George III, whose mental faculties had deteriorated.

“henceforward no more envoys”: “The Emperor of China,” Chinese Recorder 29, no. 10 (1898): 471–73.

“Having, with reverence, received”: Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the First Session of the Thirty-eighth Congress (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1864), Document No. 33 (“Mr. Burlingame to Mr. Seward, Peking, January 29, 1863”), 2:846–48.

“During the past forty years”: James Legge, The Chinese Classics; with a Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes, vol. 5, pt. 1 (Hong Kong: Lane, Crawford, 1872), 52–53.

Though emerging as one of the victorious: See Rana Mitter, Forgotten Ally: China’s World War II, 1937–1945 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013).

“The cycle, which is endless”: “Sixty Points on Working Methods—a Draft Resolution from the Office of the Centre of the CPC: 19.2.1958,” in Mao Papers: Anthology and Bibliography, ed. Jerome Ch’en (London: Oxford University Press, 1970), 63–66.

Interestingly, a CIA analysis: “National Intelligence Estimate 13-7-70: Communist China’s International Posture” (November 12, 1970), in Tracking the Dragon: National Intelligence Estimates on China During the Era of Mao, 1948–1976, ed. John Allen, John Carver, and Tom Elmore (Pittsburgh: Government Printing Office, 2004), 593–94.

A Harvard study: See Graham Allison, “Obama and Xi Must Think Broadly to Avoid a Classic Trap,” New York Times, June 6, 2013; Richard Rosecrance, The Resurgence of the West: How a Transatlantic Union Can Prevent War and Restore the United States and Europe (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2013).

America’s so-called pivot policy: In a speech of February 13, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the Obama administration’s “Pivot to East Asia” regional strategy, the extent of which has yet to be fully elaborated.

“Actually, national sovereignty”: As quoted in Zhu Majie, “Deng Xiaoping’s Human Rights Theory,” in Cultural Impact on International Relations, ed. Yu Xintian, Chinese Philosophical Studies (Washington, D.C.: Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2002), 81.

number of players is small: Europe before World War I was reduced to five players by the unification of Germany; see Chapter 2.

CHAPTER 7: “ACTING FOR ALL MANKIND”

“liberty according to English ideas”: “Speech on Conciliation with America” (1775), in Edmund Burke, On Empire, Liberty, and Reform: Speeches and Letters, ed. David Bromwich (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2000), 81–83. Burke sympathized with the American Revolution because he considered it a natural evolution of English liberties. He opposed the French Revolution, which he believed wrecked what generations had wrought and, with it, the prospect of organic growth.

In New England: Alexis de Tocqueville, “Concerning Their Point of Departure,” in Democracy in America, trans. George Lawrence (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 46–47.

“We feel that we are acting”: Paul Leicester Ford, ed., The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1892–99), 8:158–59, quoted in Robert W. Tucker and David C. Hendrickson, Empire of Liberty: The Statecraft of Thomas Jefferson (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 11.

“candidly confess[ed]: Jefferson to Monroe, October 24, 1823, as excerpted in “Continental Policy of the United States: The Acquisition of Cuba,” United States Magazine and Democratic Review, April 1859, 23.

“We should then have only to include the North”: Jefferson to Madison, April 27, 1809, in ibid.

For the early settlers: This was largely true for settlers from England and Northern Europe. Those from Spain largely saw it as a territory to be exploited and inhabited by natives to be converted to Christianity.

“We shall find that the God of Israel”: John Winthrop, “A Model of Christian Charity” (1630). See Brendan Simms, Europe, 36.

“an empire in many respects”: Publius [Alexander Hamilton], The Federalist 1, in Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, The Federalist Papers (New York: Mentor, 1961), 1–2. The use of “empire” here denoted a totally sovereign independent entity.

“our manifest destiny”: John O’Sullivan, “Annexation,” United States Magazine and Democratic Review, July–August 1845, 5.

“America, in the assembly of nations”: John Quincy Adams, “An Address Delivered at the Request of the Committee of Citizens of Washington, 4 July 1821” (Washington, D.C.: Davis and Force, 1821), 28–29.

“[America] goes not abroad”: Ibid.

“Besides, it is well known”: Jedidiah Morse, The American Geography; or, A View of the Present Situation of the United States of America, 2nd ed. (London: John Stockdale, 1792), 468–69, as excerpted in Manifest Destiny and American Territorial Expansion: A Brief History with Documents, ed. Amy S. Greenberg (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2012), 53.

“travelling from east to west”: That is, the “translatio imperii mundi”—transfer of the rule of the world—that had theoretically seen the seat of paramount political power travel across time and space: from Babylon and Persia, to Greece, to Rome, to France or Germany, thence to Britain, and, Morse supposed, to America. Also the famous line of George Berkeley in his “Verses on the Prospect of Planting Arts and Learning in America”:

Westward the course of empire takes its way;

The four first Acts already past,

A fifth shall close the Drama with the day;

Time’s noblest offspring is the last.

“The American people having derived”: John O’Sullivan, “The Great Nation of Futurity,” United States Magazine and Democratic Review, November 1839, 426–27.

“Though they should cast into the opposite”: O’Sullivan, “Annexation,” 9–10.

As the United States experienced total war: See Amanda Foreman, A World on Fire: Britain’s Crucial Role in the American Civil War (New York: Random House, 2011); Howard Jones, Blue and Gray Diplomacy: A History of Union and Confederate Foreign Relations (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009).

all but disbanded it: Foreman, World on Fire, 784. The U.S. Army went from 1,034,064 men at arms at the close of the Civil War to 54,302 regular troops and 11,000 volunteers eighteen months later.

In 1890, the American army ranked: Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of America’s World Role (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1998), 47.

“any departure from that foreign policy”: Grover Cleveland, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1885, in The Public Papers of Grover Cleveland (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1889), 8.

“To-day the United States is practically”: Thomas G. Paterson, J. Garry Clifford, and Kenneth J. Hagan, American Foreign Policy: A History (Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath, 1977), 189.

“To us as a people”: Theodore Roosevelt, Inaugural Address, March 4, 1905, in United States Congressional Serial Set 484 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1905), 559.

“In new and wild communities”: Theodore Roosevelt, “International Peace,” Nobel lecture, May 5, 1910, in Peace: 1901–1925: Nobel Lectures (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co., 1999), 106.

“As yet there is no likelihood”: Roosevelt’s statement to Congress, 1902, quoted in John Morton Blum, The Republican Roosevelt (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967), 137.

“It is … a melancholy fact”: Roosevelt to Spring Rice, December 21, 1907, in The Selected Letters of Theodore Roosevelt, ed. H. W. Brands (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2001), 465.

“we need a large navy”: Theodore Roosevelt, review of The Influence of Sea Power upon History, by Alfred Thayer Mahan, Atlantic Monthly, October 1890.

“grasp the points of vantage”: Theodore Roosevelt, “The Strenuous Life,” in The Strenuous Life: Essays and Addresses (New York: Century, 1905), 9.

This was an astonishingly ambitious: When German and British warships cruised toward chronically indebted Venezuela in 1902 to enforce a long-overdue loan, Roosevelt demanded assurances that they would seek no territorial or political aggrandizement by way of repayment. When the German representative promised only to forgo “permanent” territorial acquisitions (leaving open the possibility of a ninety-nine-year concession, as Britain had achieved under similar circumstances in Egypt, and Britain and Germany had in China), Roosevelt threatened war. Thereupon he ordered an American fleet south and distributed maps of the Venezuelan harbor to the media. The gambit worked. While Roosevelt remained silent to allow Kaiser Wilhelm a face-saving way out of the crisis, imperial Germany’s ambitions in Venezuela were given a decisive rebuke. See Edmund Morris, Theodore Rex (New York: Random House, 2001), 176–82.

“wrongdoing or impotence”: Theodore Roosevelt’s Annual Message to Congress for 1904, HR 58A-K2, Records of the U.S. House of Representatives, RG 233, Center for Legislative Archives, National Archives.

“All that this country desires”: Ibid.

Backing up this ambitious concept: To demonstrate the strength of the American commitment, Roosevelt personally visited the Canal Zone construction project, the first time a sitting president had left the continental United States.

“pursued a policy of consistent opposition”: Morris, Theodore Rex, 389.

“make demands on [the] Hawaiian Islands”: Ibid., 397.

“should be left face to face with Japan”: Roosevelt’s statement to Congress, 1904, quoted in Blum, Republican Roosevelt, 134.

“practice cruise around the world”: Morris, Theodore Rex, 495.

“I do not believe there will be war with Japan”: Letter to Kermit Roosevelt, April 19, 1908, in Brands, Selected Letters, 482–83.

“I wish to impress upon you”: Roosevelt to Admiral Charles S. Sperry, March 21, 1908, in ibid., 479.

“Do you not believe that if Germany”: Roosevelt to Hugo Munsterberg, October 3, 1914, in ibid., 823.

civilization would spread: See James R. Holmes, Theodore Roosevelt and World Order: Police Power in International Relations (Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books, 2007), 10–13, 68–74.

“Our words must be judged by our deeds”: Roosevelt, “International Peace,” 103.

“We must always remember”: Roosevelt to Carnegie, August 6, 1906, in Brands, Selected Letters, 423.

“It was as if”: Woodrow Wilson, Commencement Address at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point (June 13, 1916), in Papers of Woodrow Wilson, ed. Arthur S. Link (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1982), 37:212.

“the culminating and final war”: Woodrow Wilson, Address to a Joint Session of Congress on the Conditions of Peace (January 8, 1918) (“Fourteen Points”), as quoted in A. Scott Berg, Wilson (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 2013), 471.

“cooling off”: In all, the United States entered such arbitration compacts with Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, France, Great Britain, Guatemala, Honduras, Italy, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Russia, and Spain. It began negotiations with Sweden, Uruguay, the Argentine Republic, the Dominican Republic, Greece, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Panama, Persia, Salvador, Switzerland, and Venezuela. Treaties for the Advancement of Peace Between the United States and Other Powers Negotiated by the Honorable William J. Bryan, Secretary of State of the United States, with an Introduction by James Brown Scott (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920).

“We have no selfish ends”: Woodrow Wilson, Message to Congress, April 2, 1917, in U.S. Presidents and Foreign Policy from 1789 to the Present, ed. Carl C. Hodge and Cathal J. Nolan (Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2007), 396.

“These are American principles”: “Peace Without Victory,” January 22, 1917, in supplement to American Journal of International Law 11 (1917): 323.

“Self-governed nations do not”: Wilson, Message to Congress, April 2, 1917, in President Wilson’s Great Speeches, and Other History Making Documents (Chicago: Stanton and Van Vliet, 1917), 17–18.

“The worst that can happen”: Woodrow Wilson, Fifth Annual Message, December 4, 1917, in United States Congressional Serial Set 7443 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1917), 41.

“the destruction of every arbitrary power”: Woodrow Wilson, “An Address at Mount Vernon,” July 4, 1918, in Link, Papers, 48:516.

“no autocratic government could be trusted”: Wilson, Message to Congress, April 2, 1917, President Wilson’s Great Speeches, 18.

“that autocracy must first be shown”: Wilson, Fifth Annual Message, December 4, 1917, in The Foreign Policy of President Woodrow Wilson: Messages, Addresses and Papers, ed. James Brown Scott (New York: Oxford University Press, 1918), 306.

“dare … attempting any such covenants”: Ibid. See also Berg, Wilson, 472–73.

“an age … which rejects”: Woodrow Wilson, Remarks at Suresnes Cemetery on Memorial Day, May 30, 1919, in Link, Papers, 59:608–9.

“a number of small states”: Lloyd George, Wilson memorandum, March 25, 1919, in Ray Stannard Baker, ed., Woodrow Wilson and World Settlement (New York: Doubleday, Page, 1922), 2:450. For a conference participant’s account of the sometimes less than idealistic process by which the new national borders were drawn, see Harold Nicolson, Peacemaking, 1919 (1933; London: Faber & Faber, 2009). For a contemporary analysis, see Margaret MacMillan, Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World (New York: Random House, 2002).

“not a balance of power, but a community of power”: Address, January 22, 1917, in Link, Papers, 40:536–37.

All states, in the League of Nations concept: Wilson, Message to Congress, April 2, 1917, President Wilson’s Great Speeches, 18.

“open covenants of peace”: Wilson, Address to a Joint Session of Congress on the Conditions of Peace (January 8, 1918) (“Fourteen Points”), in President Wilson’s Great Speeches, 18. See also Berg, Wilson, 469–72.

Rather than inspire: The United Nations has provided useful mechanisms for peacekeeping operations—generally when the major powers have already agreed on the need to monitor an agreement between them in regions where their own forces are not directly involved. The UN—much more than the League—has performed important functions: as a forum for otherwise difficult diplomatic encounters; several peacekeeping functions of consequence; and a host of humanitarian initiatives. What these international institutions have failed to do—and were incapable of accomplishing—was to sit in judgment of what specific acts constituted aggression or prescribe the means to resist when the major powers disagreed.

They submitted an analysis: “Differences Between the North Atlantic Treaty and Traditional Military Alliances,” appendix to the testimony of Ambassador Warren Austin, April 28, 1949, in U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, The North Atlantic Treaty, hearings, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1949), pt. I.

“I am for such a League provided”: Roosevelt to James Bryce, November 19, 1918, in The Letters of Theodore Roosevelt, ed. Elting E. Morrison (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1954), 8:1400.

what if an aggressor: Seeking to crush resistance to Italy’s colonial expansion, Mussolini ordered Italian troops to invade what is today’s Ethiopia in 1935. Despite international condemnation, the League of Nations took no collective security counteractions. Using indiscriminate bombing and poison gas, Italy took occupation of Abyssinia. The nascent international community’s failure to act, coming after a similar failure to confront imperial Japan’s invasion of China’s Manchuria, led to the collapse of the League of Nations.

“an instrument of national policy”: Treaty between the United States and other powers providing for the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy. Signed at Paris, August 27, 1928; ratification advised by the Senate, January 16, 1929; ratified by the President, January 17, 1929; instruments of ratification deposited at Washington by the United States of America, Australia, Dominion of Canada, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Great Britain, India, Irish Free State, Italy, New Zealand, and Union of South Africa, March 2, 1929; by Poland, March 26, 1929; by Belgium, March 27, 1929; by France, April 22, 1929; by Japan, July 24, 1929; proclaimed, July 24, 1929.

Not all of this—especially the point on decolonization: See Peter Clarke, The Last Thousand Days of the British Empire: Churchill, Roosevelt, and the Birth of the Pax Americana (New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2009).

“The kind of world order”: Radio Address at Dinner of Foreign Policy Association, New York, October 21, 1944, in Presidential Profiles: The FDR Years, ed. William D. Peterson (New York: Facts on File, 2006), 429.

“We have learned the simple truth”: Fourth Inaugural Address, January 20, 1945, in My Fellow Americans: Presidential Inaugural Addresses from George Washington to Barack Obama (St. Petersburg, Fla.: Red and Black Publishers, 2009).

“Bill, I don’t dispute your facts”: William C. Bullitt, “How We Won the War and Lost the Peace,” Life, August 30, 1948, as quoted in Arnold Beichman, “Roosevelt’s Failure at Yalta,” Humanitas 16, no. 1 (2003): 104.

During the first encounter of the two leaders: On Roosevelt’s arrival in Tehran, Stalin claimed that Soviet intelligence had identified a Nazi plot, Operation Long Jump, to assassinate Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin together at the summit. Members of the American delegation harbored serious doubts about the Soviet report. Keith Eubank, Summit at Teheran: The Untold Story (New York: William Morrow, 1985), 188–96.

“They talk about pacifism”: As quoted in T. A. Taracouzio, War and Peace in Soviet Diplomacy (New York: Macmillan, 1940), 139–40.

“He [Roosevelt] felt that Stalin”: Charles Bohlen, Witness to History, 1929–1969 (New York: W. W. Norton, 1973), 211. See also Beichman, “Roosevelt’s Failure at Yalta,” 210–11.

Another view holds that Roosevelt: Conrad Black, Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom (New York: PublicAffairs, 2003). Roosevelt was enough of a sphinx to prevent an unambiguous answer, though I lean toward the Black interpretation. Winston Churchill is easier to sum up. During the war, he mused that all would be well if he could have a weekly dinner at the Kremlin. As the end of the war was approaching, he ordered his chief of staff to prepare for war with the Soviet Union.

CHAPTER 8: THE UNITED STATES

All twelve postwar presidents: As Truman, the first postwar President, explained it, “The foreign policy of the United States is based firmly on fundamental principles of righteousness and justice” and “our efforts to bring the Golden Rule into the international affairs of this world.” Eisenhower, tough soldier that he was, as President described the objective in almost identical terms: “We seek peace … rooted in the lives of nations. There must be justice, sensed and shared by all peoples … There must be law, steadily invoked and respected by all nations.” Thus, as Gerald Ford stated in a 1974 joint session of Congress, “Successful foreign policy is an extension of the hopes of the whole American people for a world of peace and orderly reform and orderly freedom.” Harry S. Truman, Address on Foreign Policy at the Navy Day Celebration in New York City, October 27, 1945; Dwight D. Eisenhower, Second Inaugural Address (“The Price of Peace”), January 21, 1957, in Public Papers of the Presidents: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957–1961, 62–63. Gerald Ford, Address to a Joint Session of Congress, August 12, 1974, in Public Papers of the Presidents: Gerald R. Ford (1974–1977), 6.

“Any man and any nation”: Lyndon B. Johnson, Address to the United Nations General Assembly, December 17, 1963.

a new international order: For an eloquent exposition, see Robert Kagan, The World America Made (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2012).

“Whoever occupies a territory also imposes”: Milovan Djilas, Conversations with Stalin, trans. Michael B. Petrovich (New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1962), 114.

“A basic conflict is thus arising”: Kennan to Charles Bohlen, January 26, 1945, as quoted in John Lewis Gaddis, George Kennan: An American Life (New York: Penguin Books, 2011), 188.

“foreign policy of that kind”: Bohlen, Witness to History, 176.

without requiring ambassadorial approval: The American Embassy was then, briefly, without an ambassador: W. Averell Harriman had left the post while Walter Bedell Smith had yet to arrive.

“contained by the adroit and vigilant application”: “X” [George F. Kennan], “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” Foreign Affairs 25, no. 4 (July 1947).

“the unity and efficacy of the Party”: Ibid.

“The question is asked”: Robert Rhodes James, ed., Winston S. Churchill: His Complete Speeches, 1897–1963 (New York: Chelsea House, 1974), 7:7710.

“freedom under a government of laws”: A Report to the National Security Council by the Executive Secretary on United States Objectives and Programs for National Security, NSC-68 (April 14, 1950), 7.

“difficult for many to understand”: John Foster Dulles, “Foundations of Peace” (address to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, New York, August 18, 1958).

Should the victorious army cross: George H. W. Bush faced a similar issue after Saddam Hussein’s forces had been expelled from Kuwait in 1991.

“If the American imperialists are victorious”: Shen Zhihua, Mao, Stalin, and the Korean War: Trilateral Communist Relations in the 1950s, trans. Neil Silver (London: Routledge, 2012), 140.

“indeed the focus of the struggles in the world”: Chen Jian, China’s Road to the Korean War: The Making of the Sino-American Confrontation (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994), 149–50. On the Chinese leadership’s analysis of the war and its regional implications, see also Sergei N. Goncharov, John W. Lewis, and Xue Litai, Uncertain Partners: Stalin, Mao, and the Korean War (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1993); Henry Kissinger, On China (New York: Penguin Press, 2011), chap. 5; Shen, Mao, Stalin, and the Korean War; and Shu Guang Zhang, Mao’s Military Romanticism: China and the Korean War, 1950–1953 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1995).

Considerations such as these induced Mao: See Chapter 5.

“the wrong war, at the wrong place”: General Omar N. Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testimony before the Senate Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Relations, May 15, 1951, in Military Situation in the Far East, hearings, 82nd Cong., 1st sess., pt. 2, 732 (1951).

Charges of immorality: See Peter Braestrup, Big Story: How the American Press and Television Reported and Interpreted the Crisis of Tet 1968 in Vietnam and Washington (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1977); Robert Elegant, “How to Lose a War: The Press and Viet Nam,” Encounter (London), August 1981, 73–90; Guenter Lewy, America in Vietnam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), 272–79, 311–24.

“We must remember the only time”: “An Interview with the President: The Jury Is Out,” Time, January 3, 1972.

“prepared to establish a dialogue with Peking”: Richard Nixon, U.S. Foreign Policy for the 1970’s: Building for Peace: A Report to the Congress, by Richard Nixon, President of the United States, February 25, 1971, 107. To this point, American government documents had referred to “Communist China” or had spoken generally of authorities in Beijing or (the Nationalist name for the city) Beiping.

“any sense of satisfaction”: Richard Nixon, Remarks to Midwestern News Media Executives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Kansas City, Missouri, July 6, 1971, in Public Papers of the Presidents, 805–6.

These phrases, commonplace today: See Kissinger, On China, chap. 9.

“only if we act greatly”: Richard Nixon, Second Inaugural Address, January 20, 1973, in My Fellow Americans, 333.

“our instinct that we knew what was best for others”: Richard Nixon, U.S. Foreign Policy for the 1970’s: Building for Peace, 10.

“The second element of a durable peace”: Richard Nixon, U.S. Foreign Policy for the 1970’s: A New Strategy for Peace, February 18, 1970, 9.

“All nations, adversaries and friends”: Richard Nixon, U.S. Foreign Policy for the 1970’s: Shaping a Durable Peace, May 3, 1973, 232–33.

“I’ve spoken of the shining city”: Ronald Reagan, Farewell Address to the American People, January 11, 1989, in In the Words of Ronald Reagan: The Wit, Wisdom, and Eternal Optimism of America’s 40th President, ed. Michael Reagan (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004), 34.

“I have a gut feeling I’d like to talk”: Ronald Reagan, An American Life (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1990), 592.

“the helicopter would descend”: Lou Cannon, President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1990), 792.

“governments which rest upon the consent”: Ronald Reagan, Address Before a Joint Session of Congress on the State of the Union, January 25, 1984, in The Public Papers of President Ronald W. Reagan, Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

“commonwealth of freedom”: George H. W. Bush, Remarks to the Federal Assembly in Prague, Czechoslovakia, November 17, 1990, accessed online at Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, eds., The American Presidency Project.

“great and growing strength”: Ibid.

“beyond containment and to a policy”: George H. W. Bush, Remarks at Maxwell Air Force Base War College, Montgomery, Alabama, April 13, 1991, in Michael D. Gambone, Small Wars: Low-Intensity Threats and the American Response Since Vietnam (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2012), 121.

“enlargement”: “Confronting the Challenges of a Broader World,” President Clinton Address to the UN General Assembly, New York City, September 27, 1993, in Department of State Dispatch 4, no. 39 (September 27, 1993).

“a world of thriving democracies”: Ibid.

“Deliver to United States authorities”: George W. Bush, Presidential Address to a Joint Session of Congress, September 20, 2001, in We Will Prevail: President George W. Bush on War, Terrorism, and Freedom (New York: Continuum, 2003), 13.

“These carefully targeted actions”: George W. Bush, Presidential Address to the Nation, October 7, 2001, in ibid., 33.

“the establishment of a broad-based”: “Agreement on Provisional Arrangements in Afghanistan Pending the Re-establishment of Permanent Government Institutions,” December 5, 2001, UN Peacemaker online archive.

“to support the Afghan Transitional Authority”: UN Security Council Resolution 1510 (October 2003).

No institutions in the history: Surely it was telling that even while calling for gender sensitivity in the new regime, the drafters at Bonn felt obliged to praise the “Afghan mujahidin … heroes of jihad.”

“Except at harvest-time”: Winston Churchill, My Early Life (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1930), 134.

Belgian neutrality: See Chapter 2.

“on the same side—united by common dangers”: The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (2002).

“Iraqi democracy will succeed”: George W. Bush, Remarks by the President at the 20th Anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy, United States Chamber of Commerce, Washington, D.C. (November 6, 2003).

UN Security Council Resolution 687 of 1991: UN Security Council Resolution 687 of 1991 made the end of hostilities in the first Gulf War conditional on the immediate destruction by Iraq of its stock of weapons of mass destruction and a commitment never to develop such weapons again. Iraq did not comply with Resolution 687. As early as August 1991, the Security Council declared Iraq in “material breach” of its obligations. In the years following the Gulf War, ten more Security Council resolutions would attempt to bring Iraq into compliance with the cease-fire terms. The Security Council found in later resolutions that Saddam Hussein “ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM [the UN Special Commission charged with weapons inspections] and the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] in 1998,” expelling the UN inspectors the cease-fire had obliged him to accept.

   In November 2002, the Security Council passed Resolution 1441, “deploring” Iraq’s decade of noncompliance, deciding that “Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions.” Chief inspector Hans Blix, not an advocate for war, reported to the Security Council in January 2003 that Baghdad had failed to resolve outstanding questions and inconsistencies.

   The world will long debate the implications of this military action and the strategy pursued in the subsequent effort to bring about democratic governance in Iraq. Yet this debate, and its implications for future violations of international nonproliferation principles, will remain distorted so long as the multilateral background is omitted.

“The United States wants Iraq”: William J. Clinton, Statement on Signing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, October 31, 1998.

“a forward strategy of freedom”: Remarks by the President at the 20th Anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy, Washington, D.C., November 6, 2003.

“this war is lost and the surge”: Peter Baker, Days of Fire: Bush and Cheney in the White House (New York: Doubleday, 2013), 542.

“If we’re not there to win”: Ibid., 523.

“Americans, being a moral people”: George Shultz, “Power and Diplomacy in the 1980s,” Washington, D.C., April 3, 1984, Department of State Bulletin, vol. 84, no. 2086 (May 1984), 13.

CHAPTER 9: TECHNOLOGY, EQUILIBRIUM, AND HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS

Strategic stability was defined: For a review of these theoretical explorations, see Michael Gerson, “The Origins of Strategic Stability: The United States and the Threat of Surprise Attack,” in Strategic Stability: Contending Interpretations, ed. Elbridge Colby and Michael Gerson (Carlisle, Pa: Strategic Studies Institute and U.S. Army War College Press, 2013); Michael Quinlan, Thinking About Nuclear Weapons: Principles, Problems, Prospects (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).

When, in the 1950s, Mao spoke: See Chapter 6.

But neither side: Much has since been written about the U.S. “nuclear alert” during the 1973 Middle East crisis. In fact, its principal purpose was to alert conventional forces—the Sixth Fleet and an airborne division—to deter a Brezhnev threat in a letter to Nixon that he might send Soviet divisions to the Middle East. The increase in the readiness of strategic forces was marginal and probably not noticed in Moscow.

Reflecting in the 1960s: C. A. Mack, “Fifty Years of Moore’s Law,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing 24, no. 2 (May 2011): 202–7.

The revolution in computing: For mostly optimistic reviews of these developments, see Rick Smolan and Jennifer Erwitt, eds., The Human Face of Big Data (Sausalito, Calif.: Against All Odds, 2013); and Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen, The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2013). For more critical perspectives, see Jaron Lanier, Who Owns the Future? (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013); Evgeny Morozov, The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom (New York: PublicAffairs, 2011); and To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism (New York: PublicAffairs, 2013).

Cyberspace—a word coined: Norbert Wiener introduced the term “cyber” in his 1948 book, Cybernetics, though in reference to human beings rather than computers as nodes of communication. The word “cyberspace” in something approaching its current usage came about in the work of several science fiction authors in the 1980s.

As tasks that were primarily manual: Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Kenneth Cukier, Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013), 73–97.

“smart door locks, toothbrushes”: Don Clark, “ ‘Internet of Things’ in Reach,” Wall Street Journal, January 5, 2014.

(and currently an estimated one billion people do): Smolan and Erwitt, Human Face of Big Data, 135.

The complexity is compounded: See David C. Gompert and Phillip Saunders, The Paradox of Power: Sino-American Strategic Relations in an Age of Vulnerability (Washington, D.C.: National Defense University, 2011).

Stuxnet: Ralph Langer, “Stuxnet: Dissecting a Cyberwarfare Weapon,” IEEE Security and Privacy 9, no. 3 (2011): 49–52.

“the next war will begin”: Rex Hughes, quoting General Keith Alexander, in “A Treaty for Cyberspace,” International Affairs 86, no. 2 (2010): 523–41.

“sown in the nature of man”: Publius [James Madison], The Federalist 10, in Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, Federalist Papers, 46–47.

Recent studies suggest: See “Digital Set to Surpass TV in Time Spent with US Media: Mobile Helps Propel Digital Time Spent,” eMarketer.com, August 1, 2013 (reporting that the average American adult spends “5 hours per day online, on nonvoice mobile activities or with other digital media” and 4.5 hours per day watching television); Brian Stelter, “8 Hours a Day Spent on Screens, Study Finds,” New York Times, March 26, 2009 (reporting that “adults are exposed to screens … for about 8.5 hours on any given day”).

“Where is the Life”: T. S. Eliot, Collected Poems, 1909–1962 (Boston: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1991), 147.

“People forget items they think”: Betsy Sparrow, Jenny Liu, and Daniel M. Wegner, “Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips,” Science 333, no. 6043 (2011): 776–78.

Information at one’s fingertips: See Nicholas Carr, The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains (New York: W. W. Norton, 2010).

“to consume more content”: Erik Brynjolfsson and Michael D. Smith, “The Great Equalizer? Consumer Choice Behavior at Internet Shopbots” (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Sloan School of Management, 2001).

“which you would like”: Neal Leavitt, “Recommendation Technology: Will It Boost E-commerce?,” Computer 39, no. 5 (2006): 13–16.

They look forward: See Clive Thompson, Smarter Than You Think: How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better (New York: Penguin Press, 2013).

“people who try to perpetuate myths”: Schmidt and Cohen, New Digital Age, 35, 198–99.

Yet they also bring conflicting: See, for example, Ofeibea Quist-Arcton, “Text Messages Used to Incite Violence in Kenya,” National Public Radio, February 20, 2008, and “When SMS Messages Incite Violence in Kenya,” Harvard Law School Internet & Democracy Blog, February 21, 2008. For a discussion of this and other examples, see Morozov, Net Delusion, 256–61.

anticipating their thoughts: That is, the burgeoning field of “predictive analytics,” with uses expanding in both commercial and governmental spheres to anticipate thoughts and actions at both the societal and the individual level. See Eric Siegel, Predictive Analytics: The Power to Predict Who Will Click, Buy, Lie, or Die (Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, 2013).

In this respect, among the new technology’s: For an exploration of this concept, particularly as applied to the commercial realm, see Lanier, Who Owns the Future?

The West lauded the “Facebook”: See Chapter 3.

“The Internet has made tracking”: Mayer-Schönberger and Cukier, Big Data, 150.

“People will not look forward”: Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790; Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987), 29.

CONCLUSION: WORLD ORDER IN OUR TIME?

In the world of geopolitics: For a compelling exploration of this shift and its possible implications, see Charles Kupchan, No One’s World: The West, the Rising Rest, and the Coming Global Turn (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012).

More elemental forms of identity: The seminal work about prospects for a world ordered on such a basis is Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996).

particular domestic structures: On the evolution and appeal of different models, see John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, The Fourth Revolution: The Global Race to Reinvent the State (New York: Penguin Press, 2014).

“to acquiesce in some qualified plan”: Edmund Burke to Charles-Jean-François Depont, November 1789, in On Empire, Liberty, and Reform, 412–13.

Cryptic fragments from remote antiquity: G. S. Kirk and J. E. Raven, The Presocratic Philosophers: A Critical History with a Selection of Texts (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1957), 193, 195, 199 (on Heraclitus); Friedrich Nietzsche, The Pre-Platonic Philosophers, trans. with commentary by Greg Whitlock (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2001).

“The Meaning of History”: Henry A. Kissinger, “The Meaning of History: Reflections on Spengler, Toynbee and Kant” (undergraduate thesis, Department of Government, Harvard University, 1950).