Politics

Le Grand Échiquier

Le Grand Échiquier

  • Downloads：7924
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2022-03-17 03:53:13
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Zbigniew Brzeziński
  • ISBN：2818501423
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

Pourquoi et comment les États-Unis d’Amérique sont-ils devenus les garants de l’ordre mondial ？ Quel rôle peut jouer l’Europe face à cette arrogante suprématie ？
Zbigniew Brzezinski montre la situation paradoxale des États-Unis qui， pour maintenir leur leadership， doivent avant tout maîtriser le grand échiquier que représente l’Eurasie （Europe et Asie orientale）， où se joue l’avenir du monde。 L’ancien conseiller de la Maison-Blanche définit ainsi un cadre durable pour une coopération géopolitique mondiale autant qu’il donne à voir la façon dont l’Amérique envisage sa place dans « le reste du monde »。

Download

Reviews

Prabhu ，

A curious mix of a very academic take on the world （granted that it is a chessboard and hence requires the rigour to view it that way） and hard-nosed realism about the need to extend the superpower role of the U。S。 A good read to understand the American policy and reactions related to post cold-war interactions with the rest of the world。

Antonio ，

When the Ukrainian war broke I read an article about what is behind all of this and someone mentioned ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI and his book The Great Chessboard ‐ a geopolitical textbook of how to master the world。 According to the author， the continent of Eurasia is key to mastering the world and if you find the formula for how to master Eurasia you master the world。 Brzezinski is like Machiavelli of the 21th century。So， in this book Ukraine is mentioned 109 times and According to Brzezinski Ukraine When the Ukrainian war broke I read an article about what is behind all of this and someone mentioned ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI and his book The Great Chessboard ‐ a geopolitical textbook of how to master the world。 According to the author， the continent of Eurasia is key to mastering the world and if you find the formula for how to master Eurasia you master the world。 Brzezinski is like Machiavelli of the 21th century。So， in this book Ukraine is mentioned 109 times and According to Brzezinski Ukraine is the key point in Europe to hold Eurasia。 It looks to me like American politics toward Russia and Ukraine and Putin's response to it follows this book literally。。。 This is scary！ This is my assessment of this book The Great Chessboard by ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI according to my 8 criteria:1。 Related to practice - 5 stars 2。 It prevails important - 4 stars 3。 I agree with the read - 3 stars4。 not difficult to read （as for non-English native） - 4 stars 5。 Too long （more than 500 pages） - concise （150-200 pages） - 4 stars6。 Boring - every sentence is interesting - 5 stars7。 Learning opportunity - 4 stars8。 Dry and uninspired style of writing - Smooth style with humouristic and fun parts - 4 stars Total 4。125 stars─────────────── Here are some excerpts from the book:▪ Great Britain is not a geostrategic player▪ Its ambivalence regarding European unification 。and its attachment to a waning specialrelationship with America have made Great Britain increasingly irrelevant insofar as the major choicesconfronting Europe's future are concerned。 London has largely dealt itself out of the European game。▪ It is a retired geostrategic player， resting on its splendid laurels， largely disengaged from thegreat European adventure in which France and Germany are the principal actors▪ Without Ukraine， Russia ceases to be a Eurasianempire。 Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status， but it would then become a predominantlyAsian imperial state▪ However， if Moscow regains control overUkraine， with its 52 million people and major resources as well as its access to the Black Sea， Russiaautomatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state， spanning Europe and Asia。Ukraine's loss of independence would have immediate consequences for Central Europe， transforming Polandinto the geopolitical pivot on the eastern frontier of a united Europe。▪ An independent Azerbaijan， linked toWestern markets by pipelines that do not pass through Russian-controlled territory， also becomes a majoravenue of access from the advanced and energy-consuming economies to the energy rich Central Asianrepublics。 Almost as much as in the case of Ukraine， the future of Azerbaijan and Central Asia is also crucial indefining what Russia might or might not become。▪ Washingtonhas also shown a clear preference for German--rather than French-- leadership in Europe▪ Potentially， the most dangerous scenario would be a grand coalition of China， Russia， and perhaps Iran， an"antihegemonic" coalition united not by ideology but by complementary grievances▪ Also quite remote， but not to be entirely excluded， is the possibility of a grand European realignment，involving either a German-Russian collusion or a Franco-Russian entente▪ For Germany， redemption + security = Europe + America。 That formula defines Germany'sposture and policy， making Germany simultaneously Europe's truly good citizen and America's strongestEuropean supporter▪ The creation of a genuine Europe--in Charles De Gaulle's words， "from the Atlantic to the Urals"--was toremedy that deplorable state of affairs。 And such a Europe， since it would be led by Paris， wouldsimultaneously regain for France the grandeur that the French still feel remains their nation's special destiny▪ By the year 2010，Franco-German-Polish-Ukrainian politicalcollaboration， engaging some 230 millionpeople， could evolve into a partnershipenhancing Europe's geostrategic depth （seemap above）。▪ Whether the above scenario emerges in a benign fashion or in the context of intensifying tensions withRussia is of great importance▪ America's central geostrategic goal in Europe can be summed up quite simply: it is toconsolidate through a more genuine transatlantic partnership the U。S。 bridgehead on the Eurasian continent sothat an enlarging Europe can become a more viable springboard for projecting into Eurasia the internationaldemocratic and cooperative order。▪ Most troubling of all was the loss of Ukraine。 The appearance of an independent Ukrainian state not onlychallenged all Russians to rethink the nature of their own political and ethnic identity， but it represented a vitalgeopolitical setback for the Russian state。 The repudiation of more than three hundred years of Russian imperialhistory meant the loss of a potentially rich industrial and agricultural economy and of 52 million peopleethnically and religiously sufficiently close to the Russians to make Russia into a truly large and confidentimperial state。 Ukraine's independence also deprived Russia of its dominant position on the Black Sea， whereOdessa had served as Russia's vital gateway to trade with the Mediterranean and the world beyond。▪ Russia will find it incomparably harder toacquiesce in Ukraine's accession to NATO， for to do so would be to acknowledge that Ukraine's destiny is nolonger organically linked to Russia's。 Yet if Ukraine is to survive as an independent state， it will have to becomepart of Central Europe rather than Eurasia， and if it is to be part of Central Europe， then it will have to partakefully of Central Europe's links to NATO and the European Union。 Russia's acceptance of these links would thendefine Russia's own decision to be also truly a part of Europe。 Russia's refusal would be tantamount to therejection of Europe in favor of a solitary "Eurasian" identity and existence▪ No nation-state is likely to match America in thefour key dimensions of power （military， economic， technological， and cultural） that cumulatively producedecisive global political clout▪ As in chess， American global planners must think several moves ahead， anticipating possible countermoves。A sustainable geostrategy must therefore distinguish between the short-run perspective （the next five or soyears）， the middle term （up to twenty or so years）， and the long run （beyond twenty years）。 Moreover， thesephases must be viewed not as watertight compartments but as part of a continuum。 The first phase mustgradually and consistently lead into the second--indeed， be deliberately pointed toward it--and the secondmust then lead subsequently into the third。 。。。more

Ahmad Syamil Awang ，

Penulis menekankan kepentingan kepada Amerika supaya mencatur permainan politik di sekitar kawasan Rusia dan China supaya hegemoni Amerika tetap berkuasaDan dunia tidak jatuh kepada perang dunia apabila muncul kuasa besar lain yang boleh mengancam hegemoni Amerika。"As in chess， American global planners must think severalmoves ahead""A sustainablegeostrategy must therefore distinguish betweenthe short run perspective （the next five or so years）， the middle term （up to twentyor so years）， and the Penulis menekankan kepentingan kepada Amerika supaya mencatur permainan politik di sekitar kawasan Rusia dan China supaya hegemoni Amerika tetap berkuasaDan dunia tidak jatuh kepada perang dunia apabila muncul kuasa besar lain yang boleh mengancam hegemoni Amerika。"As in chess， American global planners must think severalmoves ahead""A sustainablegeostrategy must therefore distinguish betweenthe short run perspective （the next five or so years）， the middle term （up to twentyor so years）， and the long run （beyond twenty years）""The most immediate task is to make certain that no state orcombination of states gains the capacity to expel the United Statesfrom Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitrating role。""Geostrategic successin that cause would represent a fitting legacy of America's role asthe first， only， and last truly global superpower。" 。。。more

Volodymyr Melnyk ，

This book is an incredible tool in understanding current geopolitical processes， happening between the USA， the EU， China and russia。 It becomes clearer why certain countries are so eager in maintaining spheres of influences in regions， 1000 km away from their borders。

Katarína Kramaríková ，

"Európa je prirodzeným spojencom Ameriky。 Vyznáva rovnaké hodnoty， opiera sa o rovnaké náboženské dedičstvo， uplatňuje rovnakú demokratickú politiku a je pôvodnou vlasťou veľkej väčšiny Američanov。" To je veľká pravda Zbigniew。 Na ktorú som vo vlastnej proruskej minulosti zabudla。 Veľký konflikt na Ukrajine je， zdá sa， zažehnaný （aspoň pre tento moment）。 Vnútorný konflikt Ukrajincov je ale zjavný。 Časť by chcela byť súčasťou západu， pre druhú sme zradcami。Ukrajina rozdelíš sa？ Alebo budeš ohnisk "Európa je prirodzeným spojencom Ameriky。 Vyznáva rovnaké hodnoty， opiera sa o rovnaké náboženské dedičstvo， uplatňuje rovnakú demokratickú politiku a je pôvodnou vlasťou veľkej väčšiny Američanov。" To je veľká pravda Zbigniew。 Na ktorú som vo vlastnej proruskej minulosti zabudla。 Veľký konflikt na Ukrajine je， zdá sa， zažehnaný （aspoň pre tento moment）。 Vnútorný konflikt Ukrajincov je ale zjavný。 Časť by chcela byť súčasťou západu， pre druhú sme zradcami。Ukrajina rozdelíš sa？ Alebo budeš ohniskom veľkého konfliktu？ Na tieto otázky sa ťažko hľadajú odpovede， ale táto kniha poskytne ľahký náčrt geopolitickej problematiky。 。。。more

Andriy Savka ，

As it was written in the end of 20th century， most of the information feels irrelevant when you read it in 2022。 However， it’s a nice book to get into basics of geopolitical events that are still relevant after more than 20 yearsSome predictions are really on point， but some are extremely off。 For example， about Uzbekistan as a soul of “Eurasian Balkans” and possible major role of this country in the region （never happened）。 Overall， it’s a decent book that you should speed read if you decide to As it was written in the end of 20th century， most of the information feels irrelevant when you read it in 2022。 However， it’s a nice book to get into basics of geopolitical events that are still relevant after more than 20 yearsSome predictions are really on point， but some are extremely off。 For example， about Uzbekistan as a soul of “Eurasian Balkans” and possible major role of this country in the region （never happened）。 Overall， it’s a decent book that you should speed read if you decide to start it nowadays。 。。。more

Muyu ，

@2015-12-12 23:53:26

Lam Giang Huu ，

Một khối óc thật ấn tượng， tác giả đưa ra những phân tích và dự báo từ hơn hai mươi năm trước về một thế giới với các động cơ， chiến lược， mục tiêu theo đuổi， thế mạnh yếu khác nhau sẽ làm gì và nên làm gì。 Cả thế giới như một bàn cờ lớn và các nước đi ảnh hưởng lẫn nhau một cách mơ hồ， phức tạp như thế nào。 Những dự báo của ông vẫn đúng cho đến ngày nay， cho thấy một thế stalemate kéo dài， chậm thay đổi， nhưng chực chờ hàng trăm biến động vô định tiềm tàng。 Những kết luận của ông thể hiện cái n Một khối óc thật ấn tượng， tác giả đưa ra những phân tích và dự báo từ hơn hai mươi năm trước về một thế giới với các động cơ， chiến lược， mục tiêu theo đuổi， thế mạnh yếu khác nhau sẽ làm gì và nên làm gì。 Cả thế giới như một bàn cờ lớn và các nước đi ảnh hưởng lẫn nhau một cách mơ hồ， phức tạp như thế nào。 Những dự báo của ông vẫn đúng cho đến ngày nay， cho thấy một thế stalemate kéo dài， chậm thay đổi， nhưng chực chờ hàng trăm biến động vô định tiềm tàng。 Những kết luận của ông thể hiện cái nhìn sâu sắc và thật phù hợp lạ lùng với những diễn biến đã xảy ra sau năm 1997 （thời điểm xuất bản sách đầu tiên）。 2 chương cuối về quan hệ Mỹ Nhật Trung và về các kết luận của tác giả là hấp dẫn nhất。 。。。more

Paulo ，

When the Cold War ended， Zbigniew Brzezinski hoped for a perennial Pax Americana based on shared Western values， American-led multilateral institutions， and common prosperity。 Whether or not you agree with his policy prescriptions， Brzezinski’s deep analysis and cogent arguments are worthwhile reading， not only as a memoir of America’s post-Cold War mindset， but also as a guide to the balance of power in Eurasia。But today Zbig’s hopes for an “end of history” （or at least for a little less carnag When the Cold War ended， Zbigniew Brzezinski hoped for a perennial Pax Americana based on shared Western values， American-led multilateral institutions， and common prosperity。 Whether or not you agree with his policy prescriptions， Brzezinski’s deep analysis and cogent arguments are worthwhile reading， not only as a memoir of America’s post-Cold War mindset， but also as a guide to the balance of power in Eurasia。But today Zbig’s hopes for an “end of history” （or at least for a little less carnage） seem naive and overly optimistic。 Perhaps his proposed worldwide multilateral setup had too many moving parts to begin with。 Given the developments in New York and Baghdad only a few years later， the author must be spinning in his grave。 。。。more

Yauheni Shauchenka ，

Интересно， хоть уже и не совсем неактуально。 Понравилась мысль， что для того， что бы понять происходящие события нужно помнить， что страны исходят из своих национальных интересов и для объективной оценки нужно хоть чуть-чуть разбираться в предмете。

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

Arman Avetisyan ，

Գիրքը， որը գրվել է 1997 թվականին， ԱՄՆ աշխարհաքաղաքական հզորության և նրա ռազմավարական ուղղությունների մասին է:Այսպես ասած «դեպքերը» ծավալվում են Եվրասիա մայրցամաքում， որն էլ հենց իրենից ներկայացնում է «շախմատային տախտակը»:Գիրքը գրելու ժամանակահատվածում ԱՄՆ-ն աշխարհում միակ գերտերությունն էր， իսկ Եվրասիան` կենտրոնական ասպարեզը: Այդ տարածաշրջանում ուժերի փոփոխությունը ԱՄՆ-ի համար որոշիչ դեր կարող է խաղալ: Թե որ «քարերով կխաղա» ԱՄՆ-ը Եվրասիա շախմատի տախտակի վրա և թե ինչպես կկառավարի Եվրասիայի աշխարհ Գիրքը， որը գրվել է 1997 թվականին， ԱՄՆ աշխարհաքաղաքական հզորության և նրա ռազմավարական ուղղությունների մասին է:Այսպես ասած «դեպքերը» ծավալվում են Եվրասիա մայրցամաքում， որն էլ հենց իրենից ներկայացնում է «շախմատային տախտակը»:Գիրքը գրելու ժամանակահատվածում ԱՄՆ-ն աշխարհում միակ գերտերությունն էր， իսկ Եվրասիան` կենտրոնական ասպարեզը: Այդ տարածաշրջանում ուժերի փոփոխությունը ԱՄՆ-ի համար որոշիչ դեր կարող է խաղալ: Թե որ «քարերով կխաղա» ԱՄՆ-ը Եվրասիա շախմատի տախտակի վրա և թե ինչպես կկառավարի Եվրասիայի աշխարհաքաղաքան կենտրոնները` կորոշի աշխարհում եզակի գերտերություն լինելու վերջինիս կայունությունը:Ընդ որում Եվրոպայում այդ քաղաքարերը Ֆրանսիան և Գերմանիան են և， խնդիրը， Արևմուտքում դեմոկրատական պլացդարմի ամրապնդումն ու մեծացումն է:Ասիայում կենտրոնական դերը Չինաստանինն է， որի նշանակությունը շարունակելու է աճել ինչպես տարածաշրջանում， այնպես էլ ամբողջ աշխարհի մակարդակով: Այս առումով Չինաստանին պետք է վերաբերվել որպես աշխարհի ամենամեծ ու արագ զարգացող երկրի， որին պետք է հարգել այդ գործում արդեն իսկ գրանցած հաջողությունների համար: Այս ամենը պետք է շարունակվի այնքան ժամանակ， մինչև ԱՄՆ-ին կհաջողվի կոնսենսուսի գալ նրա հետ:Եվրասիայի կենտրոնում առաջացել է «սև խոռոչ» և Ռուսաստանը առաջին հերթին պետք է զսպի ներքին պայքարը և հասկանա ինչ պետություն է ցանկանում դառնալ հետխորհրդային իրավիճակում， եթե ցանկանում է «մտնել խաղի մեջ»:Ամենակարևորն， ըստ իս， այս ամենը հասկանալու և հետևություններ անելու համար， առաջին հերթին պետք է ընդունել， որ գրքի հեղինակը ընդգծված պրոամերիկյան քաղաքականություն է վարում և հայտնի է իր հակախորհրդային արմատական հայացքներով: 。。。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 Kouvousis ，

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

he chow ，

漢語只知“霸權”不知“秩序”【書評】大棋局：羅馬人的國際秩序建設美學（上）https://man-ju。org/2021/01/25/thegran。。。【書評】大棋局：羅馬人的國際秩序建設美學（下）https://man-ju。org/2021/01/25/thegran。。。——————玩《文明5》遊戲的時候，勉強可以懂“傳統”，但完全不懂“秩序”。即使是鐮刀和錘子創造的秩序，我也玩不上手。我不知道他是什麼意思。英文“order”只能聯想到命令與訂單。統治階級空口白話說的也只是維護社會穩定，而不是維護社會秩序。穩定是不是秩序，這個問題就很微妙。漢語在我看來，是幻肢痛的同義詞。比如說，“文明”是大而空的人造幻詞。文明落實到接地氣的政府宣傳，就是不要隨地亂吐痰、亂丟垃圾，這才是匹配文明的中國人類行為，這樣。“中華人民共和國”就是人造幻詞。“中華”大而空，一談到“華人”只能落實到漢人，你實在不會聯想到藏人、維吾爾族人、蒙古人，他們甚至默認絕對不可以成為漢族人民共和國的首腦與領袖；“人民”大而空，不落實到人民幣的層面就不會聯想到“權力”，而“人權”絕不會被默認是“人民權利”的縮寫，這樣；“ 漢語只知“霸權”不知“秩序”【書評】大棋局：羅馬人的國際秩序建設美學（上）https://man-ju。org/2021/01/25/thegran。。。【書評】大棋局：羅馬人的國際秩序建設美學（下）https://man-ju。org/2021/01/25/thegran。。。——————玩《文明5》遊戲的時候，勉強可以懂“傳統”，但完全不懂“秩序”。即使是鐮刀和錘子創造的秩序，我也玩不上手。我不知道他是什麼意思。英文“order”只能聯想到命令與訂單。統治階級空口白話說的也只是維護社會穩定，而不是維護社會秩序。穩定是不是秩序，這個問題就很微妙。漢語在我看來，是幻肢痛的同義詞。比如說，“文明”是大而空的人造幻詞。文明落實到接地氣的政府宣傳，就是不要隨地亂吐痰、亂丟垃圾，這才是匹配文明的中國人類行為，這樣。“中華人民共和國”就是人造幻詞。“中華”大而空，一談到“華人”只能落實到漢人，你實在不會聯想到藏人、維吾爾族人、蒙古人，他們甚至默認絕對不可以成為漢族人民共和國的首腦與領袖；“人民”大而空，不落實到人民幣的層面就不會聯想到“權力”，而“人權”絕不會被默認是“人民權利”的縮寫，這樣；“共和國”大而空，落實到地氣底層都沒有漢語能解釋什麼是“共和”，勿論會有中國人類發現“人民共和國”與“共和國”有什麼奇怪的差別，這樣。但我很清楚，漢語是懂霸權的。《大棋局》這本書，在中國人類自我投射的精神意識層面，就會是美利堅帝國主義在全球實現霸權支配的陽謀論。我讀的時候，一邊想著中國人類會這樣嚴肅的理解就心裡覺得好笑，是想到了《第十二夜》的大管家馬伏力奧？不過擁有自我心理投射大概也是利益集團代理人的身分表現吧，一種全息影像的公民複決幻景，這樣。我讀《大棋局》時，看的是“霸權”，滿腦子想的卻是文明遊戲的“秩序”。 。。。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

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Le Grand Échiquier

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Le Grand Échiquier&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Le Grand Échiquier&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0