Lade die kostenlose Kindle-App herunter und lese deine Kindle-Bücher sofort auf deinem Smartphone, Tablet oder Computer – kein Kindle-Gerät erforderlich.
Mit Kindle für Web kannst du sofort in deinem Browser lesen.
Scanne den folgenden Code mit deiner Mobiltelefonkamera und lade die Kindle-App herunter.
Bild nicht verfügbar
Farbe:
-
-
-
- Herunterladen, um dieses Videos wiederzugeben Flash Player
Dem Autor folgen
OK
The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives Taschenbuch – 18. September 1998
Dieses Buch gibt es in einer neuen Auflage:
- Seitenzahl der Print-Ausgabe240 Seiten
- SpracheEnglisch
- HerausgeberBasic Books
- Erscheinungstermin18. September 1998
- Abmessungen13.97 x 1.91 x 20.96 cm
- ISBN-100465027261
- ISBN-13978-0465027262
Kunden, die diesen Artikel angesehen haben, haben auch angesehen
Produktbeschreibungen
Über den Autor und weitere Mitwirkende
Produktinformation
- Herausgeber : Basic Books (18. September 1998)
- Sprache : Englisch
- Taschenbuch : 240 Seiten
- ISBN-10 : 0465027261
- ISBN-13 : 978-0465027262
- Abmessungen : 13.97 x 1.91 x 20.96 cm
- Amazon Bestseller-Rang: Nr. 1,033,765 in Bücher (Siehe Top 100 in Bücher)
- Nr. 1,172 in Globalisierung
- Nr. 2,983 in Internationale Politik (Bücher)
- Nr. 15,765 in Politik nach Ländern (Bücher)
- Kundenrezensionen:
Informationen zum Autor

Entdecke mehr Bücher des Autors, sieh dir ähnliche Autoren an, lies Autorenblogs und mehr
Verwandte Produkte zu diesem Artikel
Kundenrezensionen
Kundenbewertungen, einschließlich Produkt-Sternebewertungen, helfen Kunden, mehr über das Produkt zu erfahren und zu entscheiden, ob es das richtige Produkt für sie ist.
Um die Gesamtbewertung der Sterne und die prozentuale Aufschlüsselung nach Sternen zu berechnen, verwenden wir keinen einfachen Durchschnitt. Stattdessen berücksichtigt unser System beispielsweise, wie aktuell eine Bewertung ist und ob der Prüfer den Artikel bei Amazon gekauft hat. Es wurden auch Bewertungen analysiert, um die Vertrauenswürdigkeit zu überprüfen.
Erfahren Sie mehr darüber, wie Kundenbewertungen bei Amazon funktionieren.-
Spitzenrezensionen
Spitzenbewertungen aus Deutschland
Derzeit tritt ein Problem beim Filtern der Rezensionen auf. Bitte versuche es später erneut.
Ich frage mich allerdings, ob es jemals ein Deutscher wagen würde, ein vergleichbares Werk zu schaffen. Wir Deutschen haben keine geostrategischen, aber großräumige regionale Interessen, die zu analysieren und zu formulieren derzeit offenbar niemand bereit ist.
Gründen" das so nicht gemacht, wie "damals"alles in Latein geschrieben wurde.
Ob alles der Wahrheit entspricht werden die betroffenen Erdbewohner sehen. Denn die Hoffnung, das alles nicht so stimmt, stirbt bekanntlich zuletzt.
Leider lernen so manche "Menschen"nichts von der Vergangenheit, doch in Wahrheit sind diese "Kämmerlein Strategen"ganze Hosenscheißer.
Wenn diese Strategen längst nicht mehr Gäste auf dieser Welt sind, müssen andere deren"Suppe"auslöffeln, wie eh und jeh.
Als leichteren Einstieg empfehle ich The Fog Of War. Wer weiter hinter den Vorhang schauen will der kann dann noch forschen, wie es zur Watergate-Affäre kam, was die Pentagon-Papiere offenlegten,...
Ich kann es nur jedem empfehlen, dann sieht er heutige Geschehnisse verstehen will, man wird sehen, dass so mancher Experte im TV und Radio nur ein Plappermaul ist.
Das Buch ist so spannend wie ein Schachspiel!!!
Ausblick auf die Herausforderungen im 21. Jh. Pflichtfelder für jeden der globale, politische Entwicklungen und Konflikte verstehen will.
September 11 showed us that the world is not as "simple" and nicely structured as Brzezinski wants us make believe. Unless you are historian, there are better timeless analyses of world affairs around.
Spitzenrezensionen aus anderen Ländern
The general lines of the point of view of Brzezinsky are corrects, and we see every day with the news how the US army go in the path recomended by him. But there are some wrong points ( in my modest point of view ). First , Brezinsky was the creator of the muslim guerrilla in Afganistan that was one of the beginning of islamic terrorism. He created a monster only for their hate to Russia, and we , and the americans, are suffering the consequences. Before 9/11, when a journalist asked him about the danger of islamic terrorism for the world, he said " nonsenses". A big mistake.
Second. The word Africa don't appear one time in the book, obviously this continent is not importante for him, may be true but, why the american companies are taking off oil in Angola and Guinea ?
Third . He speaks about Ukrania and Kazastan and other former provincies of Russia like if they were real independients countries. Ukrania and Russia have been unitad for more of 350 years ( very far before US existed )and he's happy that they are separated now. In kazastan 60 % of the population are slavic, russian and ukranians, if you believed in democracy , don't believed that they had to have the mayority of every aspect of life ? But the minority of kazanstan aborigen people ocuped almost every place in the gobernment, companies, etc, with the help of US, that is democracy ? If you see Caspio Net the satelite TV of Kazastan only see oriental faces, that is a disrimination to the white people, but, of course , the white people, an more if they are russians don't have rights.
Of course after the "orange revolution" in Ukrania and others similars in former provincies of the URSS everybody knows who put the money back. And the objetive is clear, Brezinsky said, and everybody knows too. The oil of Central Asia.
Unfortunately for Brzezinsky, Unites States is far and Russia near. The people of Kazastan and the other former provincies, speak russian and have russian education, Russia civilizated that regions before US conquered , about 1848,to Mexico, California, Nevada , Utah, Arizona, New Mexico , Texas, etc. With time these people will be reunited again, and that will be good for all, because the absence of control of Moscow in that provinces, only produced civil wars and anarchy.
Unites States is doing like he did in Panama. Panamá was a province of Colombia and United States paid money to the local politics for make a artifical country separated of Colombia, and in that way buy the land for the Panama channel cheaper an easily, but Russia is not Colombia.
The vacuum of russian power in that countries of central Asia is bad, very bad for all the western civilitation, and not other country can fill it without danger for Europe. The hate to Russia of a man had created a great problem for all us.
Fourth. Brzezinsky is not happy still with make pieces of Russia, he wants make Russia littler, with three bigs republics inside ¡ What do you think if I said that United States have to be divided in three parts, East, Center and West because in that way they can don't suffer the power of Washington ? And If I give money to the aborigines of Haway and Alaska, and they make independent countries and few to few begins to expel to the white people of their countries ? And if from one century or two from now the people of Mexico that will be majority in West and South of Unied States wants to reunite with Mexico and come back the stolen lands ? All that is the things that United States does with Russia now, and don't forget that the white people in Unites States is , every day, fewer.
It's a pity that when a big country like Russia wants go out of comunism , Europe and United States don'help him, and try to cut it in pieces. But remember that Tayllerand said " Russia is never so strong or weaker how she seems ". And also don't forget that the democracy is a way not the meta, many south american countries are democracies almost two centuries ago, and they are OK ? And Hitler get the power in free elections.
One last point. Indonesia never will be a ally of Australia against China, like islamic country , will be a enemy of Australia for ever, because Australia is, still, a christian country. And the same happens with Pakistan and Turkey. United States forget the religion like motor of wars and hates.
Anyway a very interesting book.
When an author writes a book, especially one that is political and deals with foreign affairs, this book captures events as a snapshot in time. As authors write later books, sometimes their views change.
Chessboard has been on university Poli Sci and Foreign Affairs/ Diplomatic Studies book lists for academic use since it was published, meaning that people who needed to know about and shape our foreign policy for the last 20 years have been familiar with it and have used it.
Dr. Brzezinski ‘s very interesting book is loaded with maps and other graphics to illustrate the changes that would be made in the future (from the time that he wrote it) to many countries world-wide, some of which would benefit from these changes, while others would not.
One of the most prescient, cogent, and almost incredible aspects about this book is that most of what it says would occur in world events at the time that it was written has, in fact, eventually happened!
In many ways, this book seems to have been ‘the script’ for many US foreign policy advisers to have been following, and it is understandable that it was followed, given that Brzezinski was a member of the CFR, a founding member of the Trilateral Commission, a Bilderberger, and an adviser to Presidents and other people that shape global policy. He did this both professionally and as a university professor.
The average person has no idea that a book like this exists. Because of this, I have bought multiple copies and given them out to others to help them understand why our current events are happening - by means of both major political parties, in a seemingly long-term weaving back and forth, throughout different political administrations.
As such, this would be one of the main Poli Sci/ diplomatic studies books to buy, read, re-read, and discuss with friends who also have inquiring minds.
I recommend that readers also buy Brzezinski’s last book: Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power (2012), because it is the bookend to Chessboard. In fact, I often buy both and give them to friends to read, so that we can use our higher-order thinking and communication skills to have a discussion about what the author felt/ knew about the imperatives of the ‘American Primacy’ at the time that he wrote Chessboard in 1997. This should then allow us to compare his changed vision to what he says in Strategic Vision, only 15 years later.
This book (along with Strategic Vision) should be required reading to increase the Politics/ Foreign Affairs knowledge base for every inquiring mind, especially regarding the concept of ‘global order’ and how the US currently fits inside of this.
(Please see my other Brzezinski Amazon ‘bookend’review on Strategic Vision.)
"It is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus also of challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book."
The roots of Brzezinski's Eurasian-centric worldview can be traced to his own personal background as an exile from Nazi/Soviet occupied Poland and also from the well known geopolitical discussions that were held in the early years of the previous century when Halford Mackinder and Karl Haushofer each weighed in on the underpinnings of geopolitics. The pedigree of Brzezinski's book therefore appears to be largely based on realist power politics. However, I would argue that Brzezinski's prescriptions for continued American global hegemony are aligned more in the vein of multilateralist liberal internationalism than the hardcore realist and unilateralist approaches of Mackinder and Haushofer.
A recurring theme runs through the entire book - what seems to be Brzezinski's pervasive and poorly substantiated imperative for America to rescue the world from itself. Furthermore, Brzezinski's call for American empire is based on a very weak discussion of vital, versus desirable, American national interests. Brzezinski also discloses a complete disregard for the populous and resource-rich continents of South America and Africa in his geopolitical musings about the need to oppose a future Eurasian competitor.
Brzezinski frequently acknowledges the American public's reticence for empire, but nonetheless relentlessly presses for the continuation and even expansion of American global hegemony. He also hints about, but does not explore, the visceral and militant Islamic opposition to American hegemony spanning a wide swath of the planet. Like most critiques of Mackinder's and Haushofer's ideas, Brzezinski shows no inclination to analyze events from a non-Western perspective. What China, Russia or Japan think about the writings of Mackinder and Haushofer is explored in few, if any, Western-oriented readings on geopolitics - just as Brzezinski fails to explore his exhortations of American empire in any alternate light of non-Western attitudes and reactions. He explores his ideas from a consistently Western viewpoint, seemingly nonchalant about how his aggressive grand plans may be interpreted from Beijing, Moscow or Tokyo. He extols America's democratic, economic, military and cultural virtues and ignores any vices whatsoever. Maybe we don't have any.
First things first, Brzezinski is not some kind of devious Dr. Evil, and he has been highly critical of American actions under the current administration, so to say that he is some sort of pre-cursor to the Bush doctrine is unfair and inaccurate. Obviously, any book that refers to the potential fate of whole countries as a grand game of chess is certain to ruffle feathers, but this is basically what international relations experts do. This is a practical, unsentimental, and insightful argument for American global primacy and how we should use our power and influence for good. This is not to say that I agree with this worldview, I don't, but there's no need to get hysterical about it.
Brzezinski mostly concentrates on Eurasia, which according to him is the central battleground for competing global powers. Not only does it have plentiful natural resources, but its geographic location-the meeting point between Europe and Asia-essentially make it the center of the advanced world. Brzezinski fluently describes the potential problem spots in this area as well as potential rivals, allies and global aspirants. France, Germany, Russia, China, and to a lesser extent Turkey and Iran are all important world players in this chess game and for what it's worth, Brzezinski favors friendly relations with all of these countries. Unlike our current leaders, he opposes the demonization of any country and insists that all the aforementioned powers can be brought into a mutually beneficial relationship.
To be fair, Brzezinski argues that a sudden end to American supremacy would likely be disastrous to the region, causing massive instability and anarchy. He also claims that if we abandon our imperial role, this will only leave the door open for another, perhaps less benevolent power to take our place. He also claims that America's hegemony is best understood as a temporary substitute for a more equal global partnership. Of course this is all debatable, and it is fair to argue that imperialism is the cause of this region's problems, but Brzezinski sees the world as it is, not as it should be.
So whether you see Brzezinski as a benevolent visionary, or a maniacal plotter of world domination, this book is an excellent glimpse into the mind of a brilliant globalist and international strategist. Highly recommended to anyone with the slightest interest in international affairs.
The author is not shy about making his objective known but his wording is such that the reader's apprehensions are assuaged with new mottos skillfully interwoven into his keen insight. Convinced that without American global dominance, the world would decay into international anarchy, the former national security advisor and Trilateral member envisions an assimilation that combines the age old imperial doctrine of "divide, conquer, and rule" veiled with what he terms consolidation of "geopolitical pluralism" and tempered to produce what he envisions as "hegemony of a new type".
Brzezinski's rational, however charming as it may be presented, is flawed as he fails to take into consideration one vitally important and likely scenario. Namely, that future generations of government will always use that power wisely and for the global good. If one ignores the old adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely" then one miscalculates on a global scale
In the end however, no matter whether you agree or disagree with his ideas, the final result is a double-edged sword capable of producing polar results by however the wielding power sees fit. Nothing demonstrates this more dramatically than America's achievements with it's foothold in Japan and Europe after WWII, versus the completely counter productive blowback in Afghanistan where it was Brzezinski himself who convinced the Carter administration to secretly fund the Mujihadeen via the CIA.
That intervention who as now everyone knows produced both Osama and the mutated Taliban, betrayed the strategy behind the book's most quoted paragraph when he wrote:
"To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy 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."
