Arc of Empire: America's Wars in Asia from the Philippines to Vietnam

by Michael H. Hunt, Steve Levine

Although conventionally treated as separate, America's four wars in Asia were actually phases in a sustained U.S. bid for regional dominance, according to Michael H. Hunt and Steven I. Levine. This effort unfolded as an imperial project in which military power and the imposition of America's political will were crucial. Devoting equal attention to Asian and American perspectives, the authors follow the long arc of conflict across seventy-five years from the Philippines through Japan and Korea to Vietnam, tracing along the way American ambition, ascendance, and ultimate defeat. They show how these wars are etched deeply in eastern Asia's politics and culture.The authors encourage readers to confront the imperial pattern in U.S. history with implications for today's Middle Eastern conflicts. They also offer a deeper understanding of China's rise and Asia's place in today's world.

Genres: History, War, Nonfiction, American History, Asia

352 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 2012

Reviews

[James Murphy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I thought that Hunt and Levine might address America's 20th century wars in Asia from the idea of manifest destiny. They don't. Their argument is that America's Pacific reach was in search of empire in the European model. And their argument is superficial. Admittedly our taking the Philippines from Spain and then suppressing the resulting insurgency was an act of empire building, and this is treated correctly by Hunt and Levine. But in considering the wars to follow, in my opinion they become wrongfooted. They seem to forget that the U. S. at the beginning of the 1940s was Europe-focused and didn't want to go to war with Japan at all. They seem to forget that rather than trying to hammer out empire in Korea after the war we'd removed our occupying forces from the country before the Communist invasion of the south. They fail to see the mid-century U. S. policy advocating the containment of Communism as motivating our military responses in Korea and Vietnam. They write a sensationalist history too often filled with the negative details which support their view of America's drive for empire. Aside from an insightful analysis of why our failure in Vietnam was inevitable, an analysis that impressed this old revisionist, much of their work is too polemical and self-serving to their central idea. It is the duty of history to interpret and analyze, and in that regard Hunt and Levine have gotten to the right church. But they're in the wrong pew.

[Derrick Rowe · Rating 2 out of 5]

“Arc of Empire” studies the US’ interactions in East Asia from the Philippine War to the present. Although this work does present a decent overview of US actions in East Asia, this work suffers as their views are rooted in the Vietnam Era. For those who would like an introduction on and a brief military overview of American actions in East Asia, this would be a fine book to read, if one wishes to understand the US empire I would suggest “Patterns of Empire.”

[Gelly · Rating 2 out of 5]

I felt like the argument was compelling, but the only parts that were relevant to the actual argument was the introduction and conclusion. Everything else was superficial.

[Robert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. The chapter on Vietnam reminded me too much of the current war in Afghanistan. (In 1965 an American field officer remarked to a journalist: “If there is a God, and he is very kind to us, and given a million men and five years and a miracle in making the South Vietnamese people like us, we stand an outside chance of a stalemate.”) See my forthcoming review in The History Teacher.

[Jessica]

Can't wait to read this!! I took classes with both of the authors as an undergrad at UNC!

[Hopeton Hay · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent view of America's Asian strategy over four wars and why we did what we did. While written by academics, very accessible to the layman.

[D. Ennis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid overview of the 4 wars; however, they didn't prove their theory as best as I could tell.

[Jaki]

Did not finish.

Owned this from a history course and remembered liking the one chapter we read from it. Made it through the Philippines before deciding to put it down. Well researched and an interesting perspective, but unless you’re reading with a goal in mind (essay you need to write etc.) can get bogged down in the details, some of which may feel dry.