Every once in a while a book comes along that makes you think.  You may agree or disagree, but the thinking process that the book stimulates in its readers is what counts.  The Pentagon’s New Map is one such book.  The author, Thomas P. M. Barnett, is a scholar of some note in Defense Department circles.  He is presently serving as a Professor in the Warfare Analysis & Research Department of the U.S. Naval War College; however, his background and experience qualify him perhaps as much a “futurist” as a strategic analyst.  He is an optimist, and to a certain extent, an idealist, and it shows in his writing.  Nonetheless, he is worth paying attention to. 

The story really begins as Barnett, for all intents and purposes a specialist on the Soviet Union, enters the world of the Defense Department, just as the USSR was being dismantled.  Obviously, he had to find another focus, and it came when he began researching the future of national defense.  As his work progressed he became convinced that the Pentagon top brass had become overly focused on “great power confrontations,” leading them to expect that America’s next challenge would come from China.  Barnett’s work led him to believe quite differently; that the next confrontation would be between the technologically advanced, democratically governed, economically powerful “Core” nations and the “Gap” which can be roughly defined as “the Third World” where the wolfish characteristics explored by Thomas Hobbes still hold sway.  Barnett relies heavily on his conclusion that new rules governing international relations have taken hold, making great power wars essentially impossible.  He proposes that the mission of the Core, that next challenge, is to “shrink the Gap,” leading to a Kantian era of world peace, and that the United States should take the lead, largely because we possess the most powerful military on earth, and because other nations generally can and will trust us to lead the way. 

Much of Barnett’s theory rests on a reasonable belief that people who have a substantial economic stake in a system will not go to war against other members of that system.  From this, one can see the logic in suggesting that China would not want to precipitate a war with its best customer, and this is what drives Barnett’s interest in shrinking the Gap.  Integrating Gap nation economies into the overall Core system is the key to eliminating international instability and terrorism.  “Disconnectedness equals danger,” he says, and makes an excellent case in favor of this view.  He then moves into explaining the how and why of this problem, followed by his prescription for a new American military and a map to a “future worth creating.” 

Conservatives should be forewarned.  Barnett is not a Republican and he admits to voting for Al Gore in the last presidential election.  One gets the impression that he will vote Democratic in 2004, despite Kerry’s statements that going into Iraq was a mistake.  Barnett states that it was necessary, and that the United States should get involved in toppling more corrupt dictators.  Obviously, Barnett is also not your typical liberal either.  What he appears to be, in many respects, is an internationalist and/or a globalist.  One word he uses frequently is “globalization,” sometimes capitalized to indicate stages that have occurred during the 20th Century.  He almost seems to see America as having a messianic role in the 21st Century, leading a sometimes-unwilling world to its own best destiny. 

Barnett admits that his work is controversial.  His analysis does appear to contain some glaring problems, and he may have lost track of some little details that might derail his train to the “future worth having."  For one, Barnett tends to ignore the role of corruption within the Core.  He makes no mention of the Franco-German role in the Iraq “food for oil” program that has recently come under investigation, and was already on the radar screen before his work was published.  This same investigation may lead to the unveiling of similar problems within the United Nations, despite Barnett’s belief that the UN has a continuing major role to play in nation building after the American Leviathan removes undesirable elements. 

In an interesting contradiction he also mentions how we need to be more sensitive to Muslims, and how the military is moving out of the Arabian Peninsula, to avoid religious problems.  Meanwhile much of his work points to the need for more outsiders in Arabia to integrate the region into the Core, and eliminate the factors that prevent modernization. The fact remains that as of now the fascistic elements of Islam have rendered that region extremely xenophobic, which promotes the jihadist ideal.   Thus, there is the strong possibility that sensitivity is the last thing the Core should demonstrate, if they want to move Iraq and the rest of the region out of the Gap. 

As for the rest of the World, Barnett seems to believe that the Core may be persuaded to go along with his plan if the United States can make the right case in public.  He does not deal sufficiently with the possibility that many foreigners will see his program as a blueprint for an American Empire.  Considering the anti-American attitudes that are so pervasive in many societies today, including Core members, one must expect that it will be an uphill struggle.  Then there are also some nations (such as Spain) whose people cut and run instead of accepting the challenge.  To be fair to Barnett, his work was published before the recent Madrid bombings. 

He concludes his book with a series of predictions, some startling, and virtually all guaranteed to make any paleoconservative cringe.  It is certain that if a significant number of his predictions come to fruition, it means the end of the United States, as we know it.  Of course, Barnett is looking toward the end of the World, as we know it, which in some respects may not be a bad thing.  

The Pentagon's New Map is available on Amazon.com.

Steven Laib is a practicing attorney.

Email Steven Laib

Send this Article to a Friend