China never had good intentions. Since the late 1980s, its stated aim has been world domination, technologically and militarily.
– Steve Hilton, British political commentator
“Maintaining a hold on political power and enhancing US control of the world’s primary energy sources are major steps towards the twin goals that have been declared with considerable clarity: to institutionalise a radical restructuring of domestic society that will roll back the progressive reforms of a century, and to establish an imperial grand strategy of permanent world domination.”
(Chomsky 2003, p. 125)
The above is a quote from the book ‘Hegemony or Survival – America’s Quest For Global Dominance’ and an eye opening assertion by Noam Chomsky. I got my copy of the book exactly on the February 18 2004 – a mere three months after the book was first published in November 2003. Thanks to Alimah Joned.
Alimah was a brilliant first class student amongst her batch, a few years my senior, and upon graduating became a tutor at her alma mater, the Law School at the University Of Malaya. When she passed me a copy of the book at the lobby of The Petronas Twin Towers, in Kuala Lumpur she was then on a balik kampung trip to her home country from Washington DC, where she was, and is still, practising law. Probably, one of the few Malaysians doing so in DC.
Over the years we have kept in touch and even done some work together, helping us on aspects of US law and international law practice. That was back then when I was heavily involved in the globalisation of Petronas’ business.
As I was doing some spring cleaning in my study recently, I came across the copy of the book – now a bit jaded but still clear and readable. A simile or metaphor for some of us at this day and age, and more importantly, which got me interested to look at it again, and write this account.
When I first read the book, I didn’t read it in the conventional way – from front cover to the back cover, because it’s not a novel but a series of independent chapters – numbering 9 in total – covering discreet and separate topics in their own right but obviously related and relevant to the other chapters.
The chapter that first caught my attention was Chapter 2 – Imperial Grand Strategy. This chapter elaborated on the declared intention of the most powerful state in history to maintain its hegemony, hence the title of the book. Only after reading that Chapter did I revert to Chapter 1 – Priorities and Prospects.
Chomsky makes a brilliant case to support his arguments and logic as espoused in the book. If you have not read it, you should do so and get a better idea of the dynamics behind the major events that have happened in the past and the events that are happening in the world today.
As explained in the words of – The New Statesman, ‘12 Great Thinkers of Our Time’, – “For anyone wanting to find out more about the world we live in … there is one simple answer: read Noam Chomsky.”
Whether or not you agree with the narrative, analysis of events, and the arguments that he laid out in his book – ‘Hegemony Or Survival’ you would agree that Chomsky’s questions and brilliant logic, and arguments, are not only fascinating – covering the nature, basis, limits, legality, etc and sustainability of unilateral US interventions in the affairs of other nations – but are also striking, raising some valid and important questions. And not just to the rest of the world but to the American people themselves, it may be added.
I found the book enlightening and it helped me understand the dynamics behind world events and the undercurrents that influence geopolitical events, even to this day.
By the way, the meaning of HEGEMONY is “preponderant influence or authority over others. In other words: domination.”
On the book, The New York Times, in a kind of praise of his book, and the man himself, had this to say – “Judged in terms of the power, range, novelty, and influence of his thought, Noam Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive.” It’s not meant to be a definitive statement as the word ‘arguably’ is used in the sentence. It’s an opinion.
The Business Week has this to say: “Reading Chomsky is like standing in a wind tunnel. With relentless logic, he bids us to listen closely to what the leaders tell us – and to discern what they are leaving out … Agree with him or not, we lose out by not listening.”
That last sentence from Business Week is a good one, it invites you to read it and make your own judgment. At the minimum, what you read gives you additional information to retain in your mental databank.
I also saw the following words of one commentator, where he agreed that Chomsky “asks cogent questions about the nature, limits and sustainability of interventionism” and “makes a reasonable (e.g., arguable but legitimate) indictment of the West for its moral inconsistency…”
The Publishers Weekly had this review of the book:
“In this highly readable, heavily footnoted critique of American foreign policy from the late 1950s to the present, Chomsky (whose 9-11 was a bestseller last year) argues that current US policies in Afghanistan and Iraq are not a specific response to September 11, but simply the continuation of a consistent half-century of foreign policy – an “imperial grand strategy” – in which the United States has attempted to “maintain its hegemony through the threat or use of military force.”
Such an analysis is bound to be met with scepticism or antagonism in post – September 11 America, but Chomsky builds his arguments carefully, substantiates claims with appropriate documentation and answers expected counterclaims. Chomsky is also deeply critical of inconsistency in making the charge of ‘terrorism’.
Using the official US legal code definition of terrorism, he argues that it is an exact description of US foreign policy (especially regarding Cuba, Central America, Vietnam and much of the Middle East), although the term is rarely used in this way in the US media, he notes, even when the World Court in 1986 condemned Washington for “unlawful use of force” (“international terrorism, in lay terms” Chomsky argues) in Nicaragua.
Claiming that the US is a rogue nation in its foreign policies and its “contempt for international law,” Chomsky brings together many themes he has mined in the past, making this cogent and provocative book an important addition to an ongoing public discussion about US policy.
For the readers’ information, a Publishers Weekly Review is the most highly regarded review in the publishing industry. It is a ‘capsule book review’ containing about 200 words. PW reviews are primarily geared toward helping booksellers and librarians decide which books to purchase.
The book reviews are written by experts in the book’s genre or field and are published anonymously in Publishers Weekly magazine and on publishersweekly.com. Superlative books may receive the coveted PW star, an unbiased indication of truly outstanding quality. Therefore, a good review is really a strong endorsement and, of course, would help sell the book.
Further insight into the angle taken or the premise chosen by Chomsky in the book are given in the Wikipedia, thus:
“Chomsky’s main argument in ‘Hegemony or Survival’ is that the socio-economic elite who controls the United States have pursued an “Imperial Grand Strategy” since the end of World War II to maintain global hegemony through military, political, and economic means. He argues that in doing so they have repeatedly shown a total disregard for democracy and human rights, in stark contrast to the US government’s professed support for those values. He further argues that this continual pursuit of global hegemony threatens the existence of humanity itself because of the increasing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
“Drawing historical examples from 1945 through to 2003, Chomsky looks at the US government’s support for regimes responsible for mass human rights abuses, including ethnic cleansing and genocide – namely El Salvador, Colombia, Turkey, Israel, Egypt, South Africa, and Indonesia. He also discusses US support for militant dissident groups widely considered ‘terrorist’, particularly in Nicaragua and Cuba, as well as direct military interventions, such as the Vietnam War, NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, Afghan War, and Iraq War to further its power and grasp of resources. He highlights that the US foreign policy at – whether controlled by Republican or Democratic administrations – pursues the same agenda of gaining access to lucrative resources and maintaining US world dominance.”
Wikipedia further elaborated that “mainstream press reviews of the book in the US were mixed and were largely negative in the UK, although a review in Asia was more positive. In a speech before the UN General Assembly in September 2006, Venezuelan President Hugo Cha’vez openly praised the work. Sales of the book surged after the recommendation, its rank on Amazon.com rising to #1 in paperback and #6 in hardcover in only a few days.”
Apparently, Chávez had opened his speech recommending the 2003 book by Noam Chomsky – which saw the sales of the book surging. As a result of the speech, in the next days, the book flew off shelves around the country. Chomsky’s publisher, Metropolitan Books, was reported to have printed an extra 25,000 copies of the book. Prior to Chávez’s speech, some 110,000 copies of a run of 250,000 had been sold, in one account read. My copy would have me one of those numbers because it was bought in the US.
Finally, the book is described by the publishers as one which is “provocative and critical book
that will focus on the increasingly imperial cast of America’s government and policy.”
So that is my review of the book which I hope will pique the curiosity and interest of readers on a book which continues to be relevant to the understanding of the arguments and premise contained in the book first published in November 2003, a copy of which is kept in my collection and was first received on February 18 2004, not long after it was published and achieving record sales. A best seller. A keepsake for your library at home. Thanks to Hugo Chavez for promoting the book. And to Alimah Joned, former tutor at UM and a good friend, thanks for giving me that copy in 2004.
Having said the above, it needs to said as well that reading the literature about the book, there are also criticisms of the book and Chomsky’s approach, analysis and over simplification of the subject of international relations. To get a balanced view, it’s important to read such other views and criticisms as well, and to make your own judgement.
