The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives
- Downloads：3100
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-10-12 09:56:11
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Zbigniew Brzeziński
- ISBN：046509435X
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Bestselling author and eminent foreign policy scholar Zbigniew Brzezinski's classic book on American's strategic mission in the modern world
In The Grand Chessboard， renowned geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski delivers a brutally honest and provocative vision for American preeminence in the twenty-first century。 The task facing the United States， he argues， is to become the sole political arbiter in Eurasian lands and to prevent the emergence of any rival power threatening our material and diplomatic interests。 The Eurasian landmass， home to the greatest part of the globe's population， natural resources， and economic activity， is the "grand chessboard" on which America's supremacy will be ratified and challenged in the years to come。 In this landmark work of public policy and political science， Brzezinski outlines a groundbreaking and powerful blueprint for America's vital interests in the modern world。
In this revised edition， Brzezinski addresses recent global developments including the war in Ukraine， the re-emergence of Russia， and the rise of China。
In The Grand Chessboard， renowned geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski delivers a brutally honest and provocative vision for American preeminence in the twenty-first century。 The task facing the United States， he argues， is to become the sole political arbiter in Eurasian lands and to prevent the emergence of any rival power threatening our material and diplomatic interests。 The Eurasian landmass， home to the greatest part of the globe's population， natural resources， and economic activity， is the "grand chessboard" on which America's supremacy will be ratified and challenged in the years to come。 In this landmark work of public policy and political science， Brzezinski outlines a groundbreaking and powerful blueprint for America's vital interests in the modern world。
In this revised edition， Brzezinski addresses recent global developments including the war in Ukraine， the re-emergence of Russia， and the rise of China。
Reviews
Alin Andronic
，
Alături de Diplomația lui Kissinger și Ciocnirea civilizațiilor de Huntington， Marea tablă de șah de Zbigniew Brzezinski întregește mica "Sfântă Treime" a cărților de bază în ce privește relațiile internaționale。 Alături de Diplomația lui Kissinger și Ciocnirea civilizațiilor de Huntington， Marea tablă de șah de Zbigniew Brzezinski întregește mica "Sfântă Treime" a cărților de bază în ce privește relațiile internaționale。 。。。more
Lei
，
In an unbelievably dull， outdated book， former security advisor of President Carter makes a poor and flawed account on the so-called perseverance of American supremacy， a topic that seems extraordinarily futile and incomprehensible with the recent presidents of Trump and Biden。 There is an epilogue in 2016， but that does little other than meagre five-page writing almost seems like sensational news adapted into book format， with profoundly few insights。 In conclusion， this is a deplorable book。
Cindy
，
《大棋局》由美国外交官、政治学家布热津斯基所著。作者认为欧亚大陆是决定世界今后稳定和繁荣的中心舞台，他将整个欧亚大陆比作一个地缘政治大棋盘，而在这个棋局中存在着几个主要的棋手（德、法、俄、中、印），以及一些重要的棋子（战略支轴国家：乌克兰、阿塞拜疆、韩国、土耳其、伊朗），美国的战略目标就是通过在这些国家中纵横捭阖，尽可能长地维持美国世界霸主地位，并且尽可能遏制挑战其地位的新的霸主的出现。这本书对欧亚大陆冷战后各地区的情况都进行了高度的概括。欧洲与美国不存在意识形态分歧，是美国在欧亚大陆的桥头堡，美国希望进一步向东扩展其影响力，联合德法两国的力量建立一个一体化的欧洲，但又不希望它们联手起来挑战美国的权威。苏联的解体在东欧和中亚地区形成了一个权力真空地带，仿佛是一个巨大的黑洞。保证这些新政权的独立性对防止俄罗斯重新建立帝国至关重要。美国希望把俄罗斯纳入欧洲的体系，又不希望其在北约拥有太强大的话语权。在欧亚大陆的巴尔干，蕴藏着难以估量的自然资源，而这个地区由于内外双重的不稳定因素而非常脆弱。美国的首要利益是确保没有任何一个大国单独控制这一地缘政治空间，从而获取该地区资源的渠道不会受到限制。在 《大棋局》由美国外交官、政治学家布热津斯基所著。作者认为欧亚大陆是决定世界今后稳定和繁荣的中心舞台，他将整个欧亚大陆比作一个地缘政治大棋盘，而在这个棋局中存在着几个主要的棋手（德、法、俄、中、印），以及一些重要的棋子（战略支轴国家：乌克兰、阿塞拜疆、韩国、土耳其、伊朗），美国的战略目标就是通过在这些国家中纵横捭阖，尽可能长地维持美国世界霸主地位，并且尽可能遏制挑战其地位的新的霸主的出现。这本书对欧亚大陆冷战后各地区的情况都进行了高度的概括。欧洲与美国不存在意识形态分歧，是美国在欧亚大陆的桥头堡，美国希望进一步向东扩展其影响力，联合德法两国的力量建立一个一体化的欧洲，但又不希望它们联手起来挑战美国的权威。苏联的解体在东欧和中亚地区形成了一个权力真空地带，仿佛是一个巨大的黑洞。保证这些新政权的独立性对防止俄罗斯重新建立帝国至关重要。美国希望把俄罗斯纳入欧洲的体系，又不希望其在北约拥有太强大的话语权。在欧亚大陆的巴尔干，蕴藏着难以估量的自然资源，而这个地区由于内外双重的不稳定因素而非常脆弱。美国的首要利益是确保没有任何一个大国单独控制这一地缘政治空间，从而获取该地区资源的渠道不会受到限制。在远东，日本拥有强大的经济实力，但它在军事上完全依附于美国，使其处于一种十分尴尬的境地，同时日本由于过去对邻国的侵略，使其在东亚处于孤立状态。美国忌惮于日本的军国主义倾向，担忧日本摆脱对美国在军事上的依赖，从而失去它在远东的利益，因而希望引导日本多参与到国际事务中（放弃其地区性影响力）。中国的崛起是无法忽视的事实，中国的地区性势力范围正在形成之中，美国将别无选择与中国、日本在远东形成伙伴关系。这本书写于二十几年前，即使在现在读，也能很好地帮助我理解当今的国际局势。在本书的最后，布氏提到，美国将会是第一个也会是最后一个全球性超级大国，在长期内美国应当通过与欧亚主要伙伴的合作，逐渐建立新的地缘政治框架。我很敬佩他提出的这个愿景，但是这个世界似乎并没有向他所期望的方向发展，民族主义、民粹主义、贸易保护主义的盛行，已经与这个方向背道而驰，只是不知道这个趋势是不是只是暂时的；另外，似乎在美国看来这个长期的框架是建立在美国式的民主基础上的，关于这一点我也持一定的怀疑态度。最后，这本书内容很好，只是翻译有些生硬，而且微信读书版本略去了信息量非常丰富的图表和地图，这一点比较遗憾。 。。。more
Renate
，
Brzezinski glaubte， dass Amerika wenigstens zu seiner Zeit die einzige große Macht darstellte und der "american way of life" die beste Art des Zusammenlebens sei und überall zu verbreiten sei。 Vor allem aber in Eurasien， um ungehinderten Zugang zu den überaus reichlichen Bodenschätzen， vor allem im Energiebereich， zu bekommen。 Nach dem Zerfall der Sowjetunion schien ihm die Situation in dieser Region sehr instabil。 Um zu verhindern， dass eine dieser Staaten durch plötzlichen Aufstieg oder durch Brzezinski glaubte， dass Amerika wenigstens zu seiner Zeit die einzige große Macht darstellte und der "american way of life" die beste Art des Zusammenlebens sei und überall zu verbreiten sei。 Vor allem aber in Eurasien， um ungehinderten Zugang zu den überaus reichlichen Bodenschätzen， vor allem im Energiebereich， zu bekommen。 Nach dem Zerfall der Sowjetunion schien ihm die Situation in dieser Region sehr instabil。 Um zu verhindern， dass eine dieser Staaten durch plötzlichen Aufstieg oder durch eine antiamerikanische Allianz die Vormachtstellung der USA bedrohen könnte， dienten alle sein Analysen dem Ziel， einen stabilen geopolitischen Pluralismus zu erreichen。 Die Erweiterung der EU und der NATO （darunter auch Einbindung der Ukraine sehr wichtig） sollten als "Brückenkopf "und "Sprungbrett" für diese Ziele dienen。Am Ende stellt er ernüchternd fest， dass die von ihm angestrebten Ziele bisher nicht erreicht wurden: Die USA versäumten es， ihre zentrale Rolle in der Weltpolitik zu bewahren， die ungerechte Güterverteilung in der Welt zu beenden， eine "strategische Partnerschaft" zu Russland aufzubauen， Waffenexporte zu beenden， den Schutz de Umwelt zu verstärken oder lokale Kriege zu verhindern。Für mich das Ergebnis， wenn nur die Entwicklung des politischen Überbaus betrachtet wird ， aber die Wechselwirkung mit der zugrundeliegenden ökonomischen kapitalistischen Entwicklung vernachlässigt wird。Zuletzt flüchtet er nun in die Hoffnung， eines zu knüpfenden Netzes außerhalb des traditionellen Systems der Nationalstaaten， natürlich wieder unter Führung der USA， um eine "friedliche Weltherrschaft " zu entwickeln。 Das wäre aber das Ende nationaler Demokratien， （was ja durchaus schon zu beobachten ist）。 。。。more
Luke
，
Recommended by Kai
ΑΝΤΥ ΒΡΟΣΓΟΣ
，
Κολλημένος ελαφρώς στον Ψυχρό Πόλεμο αλλά με ενδιαφέρουσες επισημάνσεις。 3。5/5
Antonios
，
Definitely a good book to read if you're a history and geopolitical enthusiast。 Definitely a good book to read if you're a history and geopolitical enthusiast。 。。。more
Harun
，
This book > strategic deepth - el ehmed bin davut
Lloyd Fassett
，
2/28/21 Recommended by Tom Keefer
Farida
，
"Every man can become American， only a Chinese man can become Chinese。"Amazing how the chessboard hasn't changed nearly at all， the players are still the same， abiding by the same rules。 A quarter of a century has passed though。。。 😳 "Every man can become American， only a Chinese man can become Chinese。"Amazing how the chessboard hasn't changed nearly at all， the players are still the same， abiding by the same rules。 A quarter of a century has passed though。。。 😳 。。。more
Lumba Go
，
That's interesting how the Americans watching the other part of World， even more， some people who have a power to change or modify it。。。 That's interesting how the Americans watching the other part of World， even more， some people who have a power to change or modify it。。。 。。。more
Sarandis
，
Interested in Geopolitics？ Start from this book。 The world map is the chessboard。 And we're all part of it。 Interested in Geopolitics？ Start from this book。 The world map is the chessboard。 And we're all part of it。 。。。more
Frank 。
，
À l'aube d'un monde où la domination de l'échiquier géopolitique se joue maintenant à plusieurs grands joueurs （USA， Russie， CHINE）， l'auteur propose une incursion dans la stratégie d'une partie de l'intelligentsia américaine qui conseillait plusieurs présidents （Brzezinski était un conseiller de Carter et d'Obama）。 À tout prix， les États-Unis devront faire en sorte qu'une alliance euro-asiatique alliant Russie et Chine ne voit pas le jour。 Livre très intéressant pour savoir ce que devrait faire À l'aube d'un monde où la domination de l'échiquier géopolitique se joue maintenant à plusieurs grands joueurs （USA， Russie， CHINE）， l'auteur propose une incursion dans la stratégie d'une partie de l'intelligentsia américaine qui conseillait plusieurs présidents （Brzezinski était un conseiller de Carter et d'Obama）。 À tout prix， les États-Unis devront faire en sorte qu'une alliance euro-asiatique alliant Russie et Chine ne voit pas le jour。 Livre très intéressant pour savoir ce que devrait faire les américains pour conserver leur place dans le monde。 Point négatif : un peu lourd par moment。 。。。more
Natasha Onoshko
，
A classic book by Zbigniew Brzezinski about American geopolitical strategy towards the Eurasian continent – which he calls a ‘grand chessboard’。 The book was written in 1997， however it feels like it was written yesterday as it gives answers to many questions about current events: from Brexit and the future of the EU to the foreign policy of Russia and China。Of course， Brzezinski’s presupposition that America is a superior state and thus has to exercise a global hegemony across the globe is ques A classic book by Zbigniew Brzezinski about American geopolitical strategy towards the Eurasian continent – which he calls a ‘grand chessboard’。 The book was written in 1997， however it feels like it was written yesterday as it gives answers to many questions about current events: from Brexit and the future of the EU to the foreign policy of Russia and China。Of course， Brzezinski’s presupposition that America is a superior state and thus has to exercise a global hegemony across the globe is questionable， to say the least。 However， the geopolitical and historical analysis that he performs is of top quality， making the book relevant even in 20 years since the publication。Below are some interesting thoughts regarding the Eurasian geopolitics:– First， Brzezinski outlines an interesting and accurate classification of ‘geopolitical players’ and ‘geopolitical pivots’。 Geopolitical players are powerful countries， many of which used to be empires in the past and still hold imperial aspirations to some extent。 France， Russia and China are the examples。 What’s interesting to note is that not all countries that have a potential of becoming geopolitical players have an ambition to do so。 For instance， UK prefers a role of a ‘retired’ state that used to be strong in the past， but now only wishes to be left alone。 Same with Japan – which has a potential to be the most influential Asian state， however it doesn’t have such ambition， preferring to focus on its internal affairs and domestic market instead。– ‘Geopolitical pivots’， according to Brzezinski， are regions and territories that are crucial for other states to assert their geopolitical influence on。 Such regions in Eurasia include Turkey， Iran， Ukraine and Azerbaijan （which sheds some light on many recent events， such as the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 or the 2020 conflict in Nagorno Karabakh）。 Internal conflicts on the territories of these ‘geopolitical pivots’ – such as territorial disputes， ethnic or religious conflicts – can be misused by stronger political players to make a geopolitical shift in the entire region to their own benefit。European Union– The book was written when the EU was only starting to form。 Already then， Brzezinski was criticizing the overall ‘lack of a common idea’ that could unite European countries in the future。 In 2020 – when anti-EU sentiment is especially strong， this lack of a common idea is serious as never before。 What is for sure is that the EU cannot exist without its two founding states – France and Germany。 Brzezinski notes that these two countries have very different reasons to be in the EU。 France still has an imperial ambition， and wants to restore its past glory。 Germany， in turn， seeks for a ‘redemption’ – a forgiveness for the tragic events of the past century。 The only way for Germany to assert its influence is to act on behalf of the EU as a whole: obviously， Germany cannot say that its intention is to become a strong national state （that would just sound weird given the past circumstances）， however Germany can do the same by acting through the EU。– Apart from that， the book has a few interesting paragraphs about the UK: its initial hesitance to join the EU and its doubt that such a union can ever be successful。As Brzezinski writes， already in 1955， British councils at the European Commission meetings were expressing the following doubts regarding a potential formation of the European Union:‘The treaty which you’re discussing has no chance of being agreed; if it was agreed， it would have no chance of being applied。 And if it was applied， it would be totally unacceptable to Britain… au revoir et bonne chance。’I guess those people who took Brexit as a surprise in 2016 were simply not aware of this long history of UK skepticism towards the Union。Russia– The chapter about Russia and its options for a future geopolitical strategy is written very well。 Brzezinski calls Russia and its territory a ‘black hole’ on the map or a ‘great void’ （which sounds like a pretty accurate description to me – as a Russian citizen）。 According to Brzezinski， as of 1997 Russia had four options for a future geopolitical strategy， three of which were unrealistic and only one was a single viable alternative。 1） The first option for Russia is to become an equal strategic partner of the US， a power as strong as America itself that could be treated as an equal partner。 Unfortunately， this turned out to be unrealistic – after the fall of the Soviet Union Russia found itself in a deep crisis， both social and economic， which made it a weak partner that nobody really wished to have。2） The second option is to create a ‘Eurasian Union’ similar to the EU， that would unite Russia， Eastern Europe and the Central Asian states。 This option is faulty too – the EU model implies a union of equal states， however in Eurasian region this is almost impossible， as any union would inevitably be centred around the largest and most powerful economy of the region – Russia – and resemble a reincarnation of the Russian empire rather than the EU。3） The third option for Russia is to create an anti-US alliance with other countries that don’t accept the US hegemony: China and Iran; first – as the most populous and fast-developing Asian economy， second – as the most militarized and powerful Middle Eastern state。 Unfortunately， such alliance has also proven to be unrealistic: neither Iran nor China would treat Russia as a potential partner that could be more beneficial to them than the US， especially in terms of foreign investments and access to Western technologies。 4） Hence， the last and the only feasible alternative for Russia， according to Brzezinski， is to look towards the direction of the EU and strive to become more of a Western， modernized and democratic country – a similar process that Turkey has undergone after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire。 Unfortunately， a critical moment in the 90s when Russia was seriously considering such a possibility， and had a chance to become a part of NATO was missed due to a short-term hesitation on American side。 Soon after that， it was already too late， as the Russian sentiment towards the EU and the US has forever changed。 Now， the only option is to wait until a few generations of Russian political elite pass， in order for this possibility to become feasible again。 In the end， Brzezinski writes:‘It should become more evident to the Russian political elite that Russian first priority is to modernize itself rather than to engage in a futile effort to regain its former status as a global power。’Unfortunately， seems like this is exactly what has happened after 1997。 And instead of the fourth strategy， Russia has clearly chosen the second and third ones。– Again， a special importance in the book is given to Ukraine as a ‘geopolitical pivot’ that the Russian status depends on。 According to Brzezinski， with having Ukraine under control， Russia could strive to become a real Eurasian pan-Slavic power。 On the contrary， without Ukraine， Russia could only form an alliance with Asian countries of Central Asia and lose its influence over the European part of Eurasia。 Therefore， the status of Ukraine is particularly important and its control is pivotal （which was clearly proven in 2014）。As Brzezinski writes:‘If Moscow regains control over Ukraine， with its 52 million people and major resources as well as its access to the Black Sea， Russia automatically regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state， spanning Europe and Asia。’Central Asia– A chapter about Central Asia is very interesting too。 One important thing to consider when trying to understand current sentiments of many Central Asian countries is their imperial legacy。 People of modern Turkey， Iran or even Uzbekistan consider themselves successors if Ottoman， Persian and Tamerlane empires， respectively。 Therefore， it’s hard for them to accept a role of a ‘vassal’ of another stronger state。 As these countries are inherently unstable， Brzezinski gives them the status of ‘geopolitical pivots’ that could potentially change the state of political affairs in the whole region。 The case of Turkey in particular has a lot of similarities to Russia: another post-imperial state torn apart between a lure of becoming a member of the EU and a possibility of playing a leading role in restoring an empire that could potentially unite the Islamic world。 – As for the Central Asian states: Kazakhstan， Uzbekistan， Turkmenistan， Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan， Brzezinski gives a lot of interesting historical details that led to the current position of these countries in Eurasian politics。 After collapse of the Russian empire， Central Asian states fell under a strong control of the Soviet Union。 How？ First， Soviet Union preferred to split the region into 5 different republics rather than to establish one single republic of ‘Turkistan’ – to avoid formation of a large single entity that could become its future rival。 Second， there was a need to draw borders of the new Central Asian Soviet republics upon the Soviet Union formation， and Soviet cartographers drew these borders in a rather arbitrary way， making sure that the new republics would be comprised of multiple ethnic groups and hence – be inherently unstable。 Third， the Soviets undermined the national identity of the new republics: as an atheist state， Soviet Union suppressed their possible identification with the Islamic world。 Now， when the Soviet Union has collapsed and Central Asian republics got an independent status， Russia continues to exercise control over them through the CIS （remember second strategy for the Russian foreign policy proposed by Brzezinski？）。 The main pillar of control is the redirection of all decision-making to Russia。 As long as all transportation routes and oil pipelines from Central Asia are directed through Moscow， the true independence of the region is far from real。 But， even without Moscow’s influence， there’re other countries aspiring to exercise control over Central Asia: Turkey， Iran and China being top candidates on the list。 Hence， the role of the US， writes Brzezinski in a rather predictable way， is to spread its control even into this region。The obvious weakness of Brzezinski’s theories unsurprisingly comes from his failure to account for the fact that the world has changed， and that the post-modernist political philosophy has become the new mainstream。 There’s no philosophical basis to justify the fact that liberal democracy of American type is an ultimate political virtue that has to be spread to all other regions of the world。 Neither that it bears a universal set of values that would be universally true and equally relevant to all civilizations: either Russian， Chinese or Iranian。As the American philosopher Richard Rorty once said towards his fellow colleagues fighting for establishing a democracy in South America:‘Philosophy cannot find or justify the truth of your arguments against military dictators and for human rights。 There are no such arguments。 You can fight rhetorically， argue as you like for freedom and progress， but you cannot justify it philosophically’Similar way， there’s no justification for America’s self-proclaimed status of the global political and cultural leader， as its own truths lack a universal foundation – they’re inherently subjective and， from the philosophical standpoint， no better or worse than the values of other cultures – cultures which would rather choose to be left alone than to absorb the American way of life。 。。。more
Roman Kachaliy
，
Must read
Mibin Mammen
，
Best book for future diplomats from USA
Qasim
，
This is a must read for those who wish to understand the broad stokes global geopolitical landscape。 He identifies issues in 1997， when he authors the book， which are playing out today in 2020。The book contains very little waffle and packs a great deal of useful information and analysis in relatively few pages。
Zhijing Jin
，
1。 This book is in the category of "how to do things" but not "why to do things"。 In terms of "how to"， this book gives a strategically good way， but not the best way （through personal/cultural charisma）。 E。g。， it captures how to make America win over other countries， but not how to make the America's style of doing things the belief / blueprint / moral role model for all other countries。2。 Core idea: Eurasia continent is this "chessboard" -> "Eurasia is also the location of most of the world's 1。 This book is in the category of "how to do things" but not "why to do things"。 In terms of "how to"， this book gives a strategically good way， but not the best way （through personal/cultural charisma）。 E。g。， it captures how to make America win over other countries， but not how to make the America's style of doing things the belief / blueprint / moral role model for all other countries。2。 Core idea: Eurasia continent is this "chessboard" -> "Eurasia is also the location of most of the world's politically assertive and dynamic states。 After the United States， the next six largest economies and the next six biggest spenders on military weaponry are located in Eurasia。 All but one of the world's overt nuclear powers and all but one of the covert ones are located in Eurasia。 The world's two most populous aspirants to regional hegemony and global influence are Eurasian。 All of the potential political and/or economic challengers to American primacy are Eurasian。 Cumulatively， Eurasia's power vastly overshadows America's。"3。 Core idea: - 5 big competitors are Russia， China， Germany， France， and India; - 2 key point on the chess board （=allies of the US with strategic importance） are UK and Japan （which is more important right now because East Asia is not aggressive towards the US）; - 5 secondary key points are Ukraine， Azerbaijan， Korea， Turkey， and Iran。*It is interesting that the author， who was a former National Security Advisor for the US， did not list Israel， which is a key point to cast US's power over middle east （which has a similar size as Western Europe） and the whole Africa。4。 Applications: From this analysis， we can see that the US is happiest when North Korea is developing but not yet developed nuclear power。 Its benefit are as follows: （1） Japan and South Korea will be afraid and largely leaning towards the US， （2） South Korea will not be aggressive towards Japan because they were long-term enemies throughout the history， but will unite with Japan against their common rival， North Korea， and （3） America's current rival， China， has to feed its resources to support North Korea， but North Korea will not reward back （due to many many political and historical dilemma， hard to elaborate all）。 So all three benefits are good for the US。 But （！） as you can see from this example， the US can strategically make South Korea and Japan follow it， but not "from the bottom of their heart"， which means that the US conquer by techniques， but not by *culture*。 E。g。， Trump can force countries to do things， but he lacks charisma， -- more specifically， he lack foresights into what is the sustainable good-for-all world that all humans want to build， but he thinks from a merchant's way of maximizing short-term profits。 This attitude cannot make other countries conquered by the culture of the US， but only temporarily conform due to their balance of profits。5。 Application of this book: Use it to understand international news， and also your own country's relationship with the US （=where is it on the chessboard of the US？）6。 Zbigniew Brzeziński is a role model for scholars who want to contribute to political decision-making。 He is a professor， studying subjects key to policy-makers， and he， including his parents and offsprings， actively involve in politics。 。。。more
christopher moore
，
Amazing Read！The author described in detail geopolitical strategy on a global scale。 And he then closed with fire warning of possible out comes for multiple nations。 I highly recommend to individuals of the politically conscious sort。
Thắng Nguyễn tuấn
，
Chia sẻ cảm xúc sau khi đọc “Bàn Cờ Lớn Vị Thế Đứng Đầu Và Những Đòi Hỏi Địa Chiến Lược Đối Với Hoa Kỳ”Cuốn sách “Bàn Cờ Lớn Vị Thế Đứng Đầu Và Những Đòi Hỏi Địa Chiến Lược Đối Với Hoa Kỳ” thực sự là một cuốn sách thú vị cho những ai muốn tìm hiểu về địa chính trị nhất là trong bối cảnh thế giới có nhiều bất ổn đặc biệt xoay quanh sự tranh chấp giành địa vị là siêu cường lãnh đạo toàn cầu giữa một thế lực đang thống trị – Mỹ – và một thế lực đang trỗi dậy – Trung Quốc – và giữa hai người đàn ông Chia sẻ cảm xúc sau khi đọc “Bàn Cờ Lớn Vị Thế Đứng Đầu Và Những Đòi Hỏi Địa Chiến Lược Đối Với Hoa Kỳ”Cuốn sách “Bàn Cờ Lớn Vị Thế Đứng Đầu Và Những Đòi Hỏi Địa Chiến Lược Đối Với Hoa Kỳ” thực sự là một cuốn sách thú vị cho những ai muốn tìm hiểu về địa chính trị nhất là trong bối cảnh thế giới có nhiều bất ổn đặc biệt xoay quanh sự tranh chấp giành địa vị là siêu cường lãnh đạo toàn cầu giữa một thế lực đang thống trị – Mỹ – và một thế lực đang trỗi dậy – Trung Quốc – và giữa hai người đàn ông đều mang giấc mộng khôi phục sự vĩ đại cho quốc gia mình – tổng thống Donald Trump vs chủ tịch Tập Cận Bình。 Cuốn sách chủ yếu xoay quanh những vấn đề địa chính trị phức tạp， những giằng co của các tay chơi trên bàn cờ lục địa Á Âu， một khu vực mà bất kỳ quốc gia nào muốn vươn lên địa vị thống trị toàn cầu phải kiểm soát được cùng những toan tính của nước Mỹ， một tay chơi không đến từ lục địa Á Âu nhưng hiện tại đang là người làm chủ cuộc chơi ở đây。Tuy nhiên， điều mà mình muốn chia sẻ ở đây lại là góc nhìn của tác giả so sánh vị thế của Đức ở châu Âu và của Nhật ở châu Á để thấy được sự khác biệt của vị thế hai nước bén rễ từ những đặc điểm văn hóa và tính cách của mỗi dân tộc。 Đức và Nhật là hai quốc gia đã từng nuôi mộng bá chủ và gây ra Chiến Tranh Thế Giới lần thứ hai nhưng cách các quốc gia láng giếng nhìn nhận ở châu Âu hoàn toàn khác biệt với những gì Nhật nhận được ở châu Á。 Trong một bối cảnh rộng lớn thì Đức và các nước láng giếng châu Âu đều chia sẻ những nguyên tắc chung về dân chủ và cả di sản Kito giáo rộng lớn trong khi đó châu Á là nơi hội tụ lớn nhất của một khối chủ nghĩa dân tộc khổng lồ， đa dạng về hình thái chính trị và phức tạp về vấn đề tôn giáo。 Do đó， có thể thấy ở châu Âu có thể hình thành liên kết ở cấp độ châu lục như EU còn ở châu Á thì mới chỉ dừng lại các tổ chức ở cấp khu vực và vẫn còn nhiều nghi ky， bằng mặt mà không bằng lòng。Một điều nữa là thái độ của người dân Đức đối với những lỗi lầm gây ra trong quá khứ， họ sẵn sàng xin lỗi về những điều ông cha mình gây ra và chấp nhận xin lỗi。 Họ thúc đẩy lợi ích chung như một cơ hội thanh tẩy， lịch sử và khôi phục sự ủng hộ và tôn trọng của châu Âu。 Còn Nhật， một dân tộc có ý thức sâu sắc về tính độc đáo và vị thế đặc biệt của mình， những người tự xưng là con cháu của nữ thần mặt trời và vượt trội so với các dân tộc xung quanh và thật khó để một dân tộc như vậy chấp nhận xin lỗi và tiêu biểu cho vấn đề này việc các chuyến thăm của các chính trị gia Nhật đến đền thờ Yasukuni。 Một biểu tượng đối với người dân Nhật là nơi đề cao bản sắc dân tộc và là nền tảng tinh thần của Nhật còn đối với các quốc gia từng bị Nhật xâm chiếm thì đây lại là biểu tượng minh chứng cho tội ác chiến tranh của Nhật đã gây ra cho họ。 Chính vì những lý do trên， Đức với tư cách là thành viên tích cực trong liên minh châu Âu và NATO， không còn bị những người hàng trước đây từng bị nó xâm lược xem là mối đe dọa mà thay vào đó là một đối tác kinh tế và chính trị đáng mong muốn。 Còn Nhật Bản là một quốc gia châu Á nhưng lại không được các quốc gia châu Á coi là một nước châu Á và các nước phương Tây thì lại xem Nhật Tây hóa đến mức nào nên rất khó cho Nhật có thể giành được vị thế như với Đức ở châu Âu。 。。。more
Arda YIGIT
，
Brzezinski， Avrasya'nın doğusunu dünyanın büyük oyun arenası ve Büyük Satranç Tahtası olarak betimliyor ve Amerika gözünden kendi çıkarları ve dünya düzeni için yapılması gerekenleri bir nevi strateji önerileri biçiminde sunuyor。 Yazıldığı tarihin 1997 yılı olmasına rağmen pandemi gibi bu denli küresel krizler yaşadığımız büyük belirsizlik dönemleri ile bile ne denli uyuşan öngörülerde bulunduğunu görmek çok şaşırtıcıydı。Aslında kitabı çok eskilerde Banu Avar'ın söyleşilerinde sürekli yaptığı gö Brzezinski， Avrasya'nın doğusunu dünyanın büyük oyun arenası ve Büyük Satranç Tahtası olarak betimliyor ve Amerika gözünden kendi çıkarları ve dünya düzeni için yapılması gerekenleri bir nevi strateji önerileri biçiminde sunuyor。 Yazıldığı tarihin 1997 yılı olmasına rağmen pandemi gibi bu denli küresel krizler yaşadığımız büyük belirsizlik dönemleri ile bile ne denli uyuşan öngörülerde bulunduğunu görmek çok şaşırtıcıydı。Aslında kitabı çok eskilerde Banu Avar'ın söyleşilerinde sürekli yaptığı göndermelerden biliyordum ve bir gün okumak için kenarda bekletiyordum。 Ancak bu anlamda da beni çok şaşırtan bir kitap oldu。 Banu Avar'ın dünya olaylarına yaklaşım tarzı bildiğiniz üzere Amerika'nın her taşın altından çıkması ve asıl amacının dünya üzerinde sonsuz egemenlik sahibi olması üzerine kuruludur。 Bu kitaba yaptığı göndermelerden dolayı bu kitabın da bu temel etrafında kurulduğunu düşünmüştüm。 Oysa son söz olarak kitapta geçtiği üzere Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nin küresel büyük güç olma iddiası 1997 itibariyle son bulmaya yaklaşmıştır ve aslında kitap Amerika'nın bu egemenliğinin sonucunda dünyaya ne gibi bir miras bırakacağı ile ilgilidir。Sonuç olarak dünya tarihi hakkında belli bir bilgi sahibi olduktan sonra okunması gereken ve yazıldığı yıldan bağımsız şekilde geçerliliğini halen koruyan bir kitap olması açısından elbette önemli bir eserdir。 Ancak bir kısmı günümüzde geçerli olsa bile yine de fazlaca kişisel görüş içermesi sebebiyle spekülatif ve belki de manipülatif bir kitaptır ve okurken bunu göz önünde bulundurmak faydalı olacaktır。 。。。more
Nicolas
，
The grand Chessboard is the compiling of the recommendations regarding geo-strategy that Zbigniew Brzezinksi had to give to the US statesmen and generally for the US government at the end of the 90s in order to maintain its geopolitical place in the world， stating Eurasia as the most important region for global primacy。 Although many things have changed in the last 20 years regarding the positions and strategies of many states， the book feels still actual， with the author describing his differen The grand Chessboard is the compiling of the recommendations regarding geo-strategy that Zbigniew Brzezinksi had to give to the US statesmen and generally for the US government at the end of the 90s in order to maintain its geopolitical place in the world， stating Eurasia as the most important region for global primacy。 Although many things have changed in the last 20 years regarding the positions and strategies of many states， the book feels still actual， with the author describing his different views on different regions/states in what he sees as the most important regions in terms of geopolitics for the United States; their relationship with his country and the strategies that the US government should follow along the geo-strategies that these states could pursue（and in his mind， will pursue。The author begins the book with a historical review of the US， how it came about to gain global control and influence， and in the words of the author， the first， only and probably last "global superpower"。 According to Zbigniew the overall supremacy of the United States exist due to its dominion on 4 different fields: World's military， economical， technological and culturally; stating that no other state has ever come close to match US lead on each of these four perspectives。 Nonetheless the author sees the Eurasian continent as the source of real power and anybody who controls it， as the leader of the world， since the United States is not an Eurasian power， he beliefs that any arising power could undermine US influence and control over world affairs， even stating this arise as an event that would destabilise the globe and prompt global anarchy。 He does not hide his profound belief that US should lead the world， although not as a solely power（as it was after the USSR collapse in the 90s）， but with important allies in different regions， who could share the burden of security and decision making。 Nonetheless his strategies are sometimes mixed between wanting to share power and at the same time maintaining US primacy。 In his words: 。“To put in in terminology that hearkens back the moral brutal age of ancient empires， the three grand imperatives of imperial strategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals， to keep tributaries pliant and protected， and to keep the barbarians from coming together。 “。。， or better said， making every big new power a vassal or a tributaries， and maintain hostile potential powers at bay， as "barbarians"。 The next chapters of the book are focused on recounting the state in which Europe， Russia， China and Japan founded themselves and how the US had to behave with them in order to protect US interest worldwide， with a special content on the role that China would have played （and had） in the future， stating the relations between the United States and China as one of the most important strategies to be undertaken by the US。 Although falsely believing that China could not maintain its growth for many more years and positively expecting it to democratise。This last views on China being read in 2020 are of important insight， as it is clear that the strategies of the US differed much from what he believed important in order to maintain global stability and we see the consequences of these in the present。 Zbigniew believed that in order to discourage others from posing a challenge（to the US） it was in the interest of the United States as the middle term goal to foster genuine partnerships， predominant among them those with a more united and politically defined Europe; with a regionally preeminent China， as well a post imperial Europe-oriented Russia and finally with a regionally stabilising India。。。This of course we know its being torn apart by the actual strategies that the United States had taken， alienating many of these potential allies into economical wars and into proxy wars。 For a book written more than 20 years ago， it is a very insightful and interesting read though US biased view of the world， that could be useful for anyone looking for contemporary geopolitical thinking and of some of the thinkers commenting on the role of the US after the fall of the USSR。 It would have be interesting to see the author's views of US future geo-strategies after 9/11 and the global economical crisis of 2008 with a new edition of his book。 。。。more
Truls Ljungström
，
Förra gången jag läste denna var när jag precis slutat plugga/höll på att sluta plugga。 Då kändes den som en lärd beskrivning av världsläget， och den bästa möjliga vägen framåt。 Visst såg man redan då att Ryssland valt den "kejserliga vägen" snarare än den "europeiserande"， men i övrigt verkade boken rimlig: framförallt dess analys av PRC och av EU:s potentiella problem， som numera också har drabbat USA。 Idag känner jag mig snarare nostalgisk。 Brzezinski är förmodligen en av de vackrare tänkare Förra gången jag läste denna var när jag precis slutat plugga/höll på att sluta plugga。 Då kändes den som en lärd beskrivning av världsläget， och den bästa möjliga vägen framåt。 Visst såg man redan då att Ryssland valt den "kejserliga vägen" snarare än den "europeiserande"， men i övrigt verkade boken rimlig: framförallt dess analys av PRC och av EU:s potentiella problem， som numera också har drabbat USA。 Idag känner jag mig snarare nostalgisk。 Brzezinski är förmodligen en av de vackrare tänkare jag har läst， och hans förhoppning om ett Eurasiskt säkerhetsblock förankrat i faktiska mänskliga rättigheter och politisk realism om möjligheterna framåt är i mitt tycke en vision som är värd att kämpa för。 Problemet är bara att nästan allt har gått fel vad gäller detta - Indien har backat; Frankrike och Tyskland verkar inte ha nått politiskt rapprochement med varesig Polen eller varandras mål; NATO:s tandlöshet i frågan om expension bevisades två gånger i Georgien och Ukraina。 Nu revolterar folk på gatan i väst， och skjuts för demonstrationer i de framgångsrikare asiatiska länderna。 Detta betyder att Brzezinski såg en vision som var för beroende av kompetent ledarskap。 Jag funderar över vad som kunde gjorts annorlunda， eller vilka strävpelare som behövs för att en sådan "polarallians" skulle överleva。 Problemet i IR är att Napoleon， förtjänstfullt citerad av Brzezinski i början av denna bok， hade fel。 Geografi styr bara politik i kombination med tillgänglig teknologi， vilken i sin tur ger tillgänglig elit， vars intressen styr。 Jag känner att jag inkarnerar Pareto här。 Effekten av det är att teknologisk förändring， som är en konstant， behöver åsidosättas för en stabil rigid struktur。 Alternativet är överågången till ett slags nyfeodalism， men problemet med det， är att strävan efter makt på kort sikt är enkelt tillfredsställd genom ökad våldsanvändning。 Människor vill väl， tänker inte， och resultaten blir därefter。 Nu inser jag att detta var mer en dagbok än en beskrivning。 För att återgå till Brzezinskis bok: Den är en av de klassiska formuleringarna av den förhoppning som drev västvärlden under åren kring millennieskiftet。 Den är välgjord， fokuserar på rätt saker， och är djupt förankrad i sin tids realistiska analys。 Jag rekommenderar den för alla som är intresserade av politik。 。。。more
Paul Dabrowa
，
Predicted the future。
Zain Ul Hassan
，
The book provides an insight into the new world order， after the collapse of the Soviet Union， in which the US holds the title of being first， only， and the last true global power， according to the writer。He has explicitly explained the geographical importance of current major world powers in shaping further the world map with regard to their history， ethnicity， economy， population， and resources。The book is recommended to all those who want to understand the map with its past， present， and fore The book provides an insight into the new world order， after the collapse of the Soviet Union， in which the US holds the title of being first， only， and the last true global power， according to the writer。He has explicitly explained the geographical importance of current major world powers in shaping further the world map with regard to their history， ethnicity， economy， population， and resources。The book is recommended to all those who want to understand the map with its past， present， and foreseeable future to some extent。 。。。more
Adnan
，
Great overview of world affairsFor those who study international relations this book is a must-read。 It was written in 1997 but it still very important for understanding contemporary international relations and geopolitical strategies of World powers。
Marek
，
Aj keď ste nič nevedeli o geopolitike po prečítaní tejto knihy už viete。 Brzezinski je autor， ktorý bol pri niekoľký prezidentoch ako poradca a práve to mu dodava autenticitu。 Jeho obraz sveta je v mnohych ohľadoch veľmi presný a mrazivý。 Táto kniha je prakticky must read pre ľudí zaujímajúcich sa o geopolitiku a zahraničnú politiku。
Glenn
，
The late Zbigniew Brzezinski was one of the great thinkers about international relations of our time。 Like Henry Kissinger， Professor Brzezinski was both an accomplished academic and writer， and a statesman。 He served as National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter。 I met Dr。 Brzezinski when he visited Algiers， Algeria， in that capacity。The reason I marked this book "amazing" is that it was written in 1997， although an epilogue was added in 2016， before 9/11， before the George W。 Bush adm The late Zbigniew Brzezinski was one of the great thinkers about international relations of our time。 Like Henry Kissinger， Professor Brzezinski was both an accomplished academic and writer， and a statesman。 He served as National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter。 I met Dr。 Brzezinski when he visited Algiers， Algeria， in that capacity。The reason I marked this book "amazing" is that it was written in 1997， although an epilogue was added in 2016， before 9/11， before the George W。 Bush administration， before all the events which have supposedly made our international environment what it is today。 And， yet， Dr。 Brzezinski called the shots！This is where broad， deep thinkers， with a real grasp to history， have the advantage over， say， newspaper columnists and talking heads。 Brzezinski understands the world in geopolitical terms， and he sees the choices that are open to nations。 Thus， he doesn't predict that Russia will become an adversary of the United States。 He does predict that， if Russia does not give up its imperial ambitions， it will become an adversary of the United States。 He predicts that Ukraine will become a critical arena in the contest between East and West。 Before the expansion of NATO into the former Warsaw Pact countries， he predicts that such an expansion will cause serious contention with Russia， again， unless Russia gives up its imperial dreams。Mr。 Putin has not given up his dreams of empire， and， sure enough， he has seized Crimea， tried to dominate Ukraine， continued to assert Russia's dominant role in Central Asia， and tried to divide and weaken NATO。The other big arena， Asia， is working itself out。 Dr。 Brzezinski concludes that the United States must develop a workable relationship with China， or it will find itself struggling to maintain its position in Asia through its off-shore and peninsular allies。For good or ill， Zbigniew Brzezinski understood our geopolitical world， and understood the directions that were available to us。This is an excellent book， well worth reading。 。。。more
Louis Devine
，
Illuminates much of contemporary US foreign policy， especially the system of European and East Asian alliances。 Although the central argument of the book is that the US must prevent a single power from dominating Eurasia， the author does little to explain in detail why a united Eurasia would be such a threat。 The reader can infer the answer， but more explicit reasoning would have made it a stronger argument。
Fang Yiyang
，