Autocrats vs. Democrats: China, Russia, America, and the New Global Disorder – The Former Ambassador's Bold Vision for Confronting Authoritarian Threats

by Michael McFaul

"A history, an analysis, and a set of prescriptions for the greatest geopolitical challenge of our the threat to the democratic world posed by China and Russia." —Anne Applebaum, author of Autocracy, Inc.

"A monumental account of contemporary geopolitics"—Francis Fukuyama, author of Liberalism and Its Discontents
From New York Times bestselling author and former ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul comes a bold, clear-eyed look at how the autocracies of China and Russia are challenging the current global order, and how America’s future depends on successfully confronting this threat.

The rise of China, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the reelection of President Donald Trump have reinforced a gloomy yet growing the old global order has ended, and a new Cold War has begun. And yet, many of the perils we face today are distinctly different from those we encountered from the Soviet Union. The alliance between the autocracies of China and Russia, China’s economic might, the rise of the far right in the United States and Europe, and the disturbing isolationist foreign policy shifts of the Trump administration—taken together represent new challenges for the democratic world. They are threats with no precedent in the past century.
In this sweeping account of great power competition between the United States, China, and Russia over the past three centuries, Michael McFaul—former ambassador to Russia and international affairs analyst for NBC News—argues persuasively that today’s challenges require fresh thinking, not constrained by distant memories of the Cold War or the nationalist dreams of MAGA. One of the preeminent thinkers on American foreign policy for decades, McFaul combines in-depth historical analysis with a forward-looking perspective, crafting a new grand strategy for America in this age of global disorder. Acknowledging how Xi’s China, Putin’s Russia, and Trump’s America are upending the current international system, Autocrats vs. Democrats makes the case against America’s retreat from the world, detailing



Russia’s disruptive ambitions should not be underestimated.China’s capabilities should not be overestimated.Trump’s shift toward isolationism and autocracy will weaken America’s place in the world.
At once a clarion call for American diplomacy and a forceful rebuttal of the Trump administration’s policies, Autocrats vs. Democrats provides a nuanced assessment of the China and Russia threats, as well as a bold vision for renewing America’s leadership on the world stage.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, China, Audiobook, Russia, American

544 pages, Kindle Edition

Published October 28, 2025

Reviews

[Steven Z. · Rating 4 out of 5]

The other day President Trump gave Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinsky an ultimatum, accept his proposed peace plan by Thanksgiving or else. The next day Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the United States was still in negotiations with Kyiv to find a solution for its ongoing war with Russia, and the deadline was cancelled. Another day went by when we learned that Special Enjoy Steve Wycoff had spoken with a top Russian negotiator and provided him with information as to how to maneuver Trump to obtain his approval for Kremlin demands. It appears that the original twenty-eight step proposal ultimatum from Trump was a recasting of Putin’s maximalist position which has not changed despite the recent Alaska Summit.

It seems to me the only way to get Putin to seriously negotiate is to provide Ukraine with long range missiles, ammunition, and other military equipment to place the war on a more even footing. Further the Trump administration should introduce more secondary sanctions on Moscow and others whose purchase of Russian fossil fuels fund Putin’s war, which would create a more level playing field for Ukraine, however the president will not do so no matter how often he hints that he will. Another important aspect is that Trump refused to provide any direct American aid to Ukraine. He will allow the European allies to purchase American equipment and ship it for use by the Ukrainian army. The problem is that it is not quick resupply and the allies have had difficulty agreeing amongst themselves.

As the war progresses Putin has tried to showcase his burgeoning friendship with President Xi Jinping of China. China has purchased millions of gallons of Russian oil, as has India which states it will now find alternative sources, which has bankrolled Moscow in paying for its war against Ukraine. These two autocratic countries are solidifying their relationship after decades of disagreements. It would be important for American national security not to drive a wedge in Chinese-American relations, however, Trump’s obsession with reworking the world economy through his tariff policy seems to be his only concern. Increasing tariffs, threatening trading partners, disrupting trade just angers China and does not allow American businesses to plan based on a supply line that is at the whim of Trump’s next TACO or change of mind!

In this diplomatic environment Michael McFaul, a professor of Political Science at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, in addition to being a former U.S. ambassador to the Russian Federation (2012-2014) latest book, DEMOCRATS VS. AUTOCRATS: CHINA, RUSSIA, AMERICA AND THE NEW GLOBAL ORDER is rather timely. In his monograph McFaul concludes, the old world order has ended, and we have entered a new Cold War era which is quite different from the one we experienced with the Soviet Union. The new era has witnessed many disconcerting changes; a new alliance emerging between China and Russia, Chinese economic growth has been substantial, and it has allowed them to fund their overwhelming military growth, the far right has grown exponentially in the United States and Europe, and the disturbing shift of the Trump administration toward isolationism, except in the case of Venezuela and the Southern Hemisphere. As a result, we are facing a new world which offers new threats without precedent in the 20th century, and we seem incapable of dealing with them.

McFaul meticulously takes the reader on a journey encompassing the last 300 years as he argues that today’s new power alignments and problems require a fresh approach, unencumbered by our Cold War past or MAGA’s insular nationalist dreams. McFaul’s incisive and analytical approach provides a manifesto that argues against America’s retreat from the world. The author develops three important themes throughout the book. First, Russia’s disruptive ambitions should not be underestimated. Second, China’s capabilities should not be overestimated. Lastly, Trump’s move toward isolationism and autocracy will only weaken America’s place in the world balance of power. These themes are cogent, well researched, and supported by numerous historical examples that McFaul weaves throughout this lengthy work which should be read by all policymakers, members of congress, and the general public.

There is so much to unpack in McFaul’s monograph. He does an excellent job of synthesis in tracing the causes of great power competition today reviewing the history of US-Russia and US-China relations over the last 300 years and explains how we arrived at the tensions that define the global order today. He correctly argues that power, regime types, and individuals have interacted to produce changing cycles of cooperation and conflict between the United States, China, and Russia over the last three centuries. It is clear that over the past few decades these factors have created more conflict after the hopes of democratization that existed in the 1990s.

McFaul argues that there are some parallels between the Cold War with the Soviet Union and the present competition with China and Russia, but we should not go overboard because it distorts what is really happening. Similarities with the Cold War include a bipolar power structure this time between the US and China; there is an ideological component resting on the competition between democracy and autocracy; and all three nations have different conceptions of what the global order should look like. However, we must be careful as we have overestimated Chinese power and exaggerated her threat to our existence for too long. Containing China must be our prime goal but China is not an existential threat to the United States and the free world. China does not threaten the very existence of the United States and our democratic allies. President Xi of China has witnessed the decline of American power particularly after it caused the 2008 financial crash and no longer believes he has to defer to the United States and has taken advantage of American errors over the last twenty years to pose a competitive threat to Washington. Xi is not trying to export Marxist-Leninism, he is employing China’s financial and technological strengths to support autocracies around the world and expand Chinese power in the South China Sea, the developing world, especially in Africa - once again taking advantage of American errors.

Along these same lines we have underestimated Russian power in recent years as under Putin it has the capacity to threaten US security interests, including those of our European allies. Though Russia is not an economic threat she is a formidable adversary because Putin is a risk taker and is more willing to deploy Russian power aggressively than previous Russian leaders. Secondly, its invasion of Ukraine provides military experience and lessons that can only improve their performance on the battlefield. Thirdly, unlike during the Cold War, Russia is closely aligned with China. Putin’s aggressive foreign policy has an ideological component and has sought to propagate his illiberal orthodox values for decades. Unlike his predecessors Putin is willing to intervene in the domestic affairs of other countries, i.e., kept Bashir Assad in power in Syria for a decade, interfered in American presidential elections and elections throughout Europe, invaded Georgia, Chechnya, Ukraine, etc. Putin sees the collapse of the Soviet Union as the greatest disaster for Russia of the 20th century and wants to restore the territorial parameters of the Soviet Empire in his vision of Russian autocracy. As he exports this ideology we can see successes in a number of European countries and certain right wing elements in the United States.

One of his most important chapters recounts the decline of American hegemony since the end of the Cold War. It has been a slow downturn and has resulted in the end of the unipolar world where the US dominated. The Gulf War of 1991 witnessed the United States at its peak power. Following the war the United States decided to reduce its military since the Soviet Union was collapsing. However, after 9/11 US military spending expanded. Under Donald Trump the US spends 1% of GDP on the Pentagon allowing Russia and China to close the gap. Today we correctly condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but from 1991-2020 the use of hard power in Kuwait to remove Iraq, the overthrow of Manuel Noriega in Panama, the bombing of Serbia in 1998, interfering in the Somali Civil War in 1992, the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the overthrow of Gaddafi in 2011 created power vacuums for terrorist rebels to fill including ISIS in Iraq and Syria. In addition, it cost the United States trillions of dollars to finance. According to economist Joseph Stiglitz the war in Iraq alone cost three trillion dollars, and the trillions lost in Afghanistan money that could have been put to better use domestically and globally to enhance Washington’s reputation worldwide, along with thousands of American casualties resulting in death and life-long injuries. In this environment it is no wonder that the Chinese have expanded their power externally and strengthened their autocracy internally, and Putin feels American opposition is rather hypocritical.

If this use of hard power was not enough along comes Donald Trump to accelerate the decline in US power by turning to disengagement and isolationism as he withdrew from the Transpacific Partnership, the Paris Climate Accords, the Iran nuclear deal, the INF (Intermediate range nuclear forces) treaty, the World Health Organization and severely criticizes the World Trade Organization, NATO, the European Union, and imposed new and higher tariffs on China, and our allies. The Trump administration has done little to promote democracy and weakened the United States’ ability to compete ideologically with China whose reputation and inroads in the developing world have made a difference in their global image at the same time the Trump administration has severely cut foreign aid. His actions have led to little in the area of supporting democracy as an ideological cause as he has curtailed or stopped funding for USAID, NED, Voice of America, Radio Free Europe among many programs, in addition to picking fights with allies, and threatening to withdraw from NATO. If this is not enough, the COVID 19 virus showed how dependent the United States was on Chinese firms for drug production and critical medical supplies.

Domestically, Trump’s immigration policy is becoming a disaster for the American economy as there is a shortfall in certain areas of the labor market, particularly food production and distribution. The policy could be a disaster in the long run as university enrollment of foreign students has declined markedly and if one examines the contributions of immigrants historically in the fields of medical and other types of scientific research this is a loss that eventually we may not be able to sustain. As Trump attacks the independent media and truth, politicizes the American justice system, and uses the presidency for personal gain he appears more and more like an autocratic wannabe, and it is corrosive to American democracy and our image in the world. These are all unforced errors, and China and Russia have taken advantage dramatically, altering the global balance of power and America’s role in it.

McFaul provides an impressive analysis of the relative economic power vis a vie the United States and Russia, and the United States and China. The entanglement of the US and Chinese economies must be considered when their relationship has difficulties. China is both a competitor and a trading partner for the United States. American companies and investors engage profitably with Beijing, i.e., Boeing, Apple, Nvidia, and American farmers have earned enormous profits and supported thousands of jobs. American consumers have benefited from lower-priced products imported from China. Chinese companies trade with and invest in American companies, Chinese scholars conduct collaborative research at American universities, and Chinese financial institutions buy American bonds and go a long way to finance American debt. Their entanglement presents both challenges and opportunities, but the fundamental challenge for the American foreign policy toward China is figuring out the delicate balance between economic engagement and containment.

In turning to difficulties with Russia, the United States does not have the meaningful economic relationship it has with China. In fact, as McFaul correctly points out our issues rest outside the economic realm to the ideological – Putinisim. The Russian autocrat “champions a virulent variant of illiberal, orthodox, and nationalistic ideas emphasizing identity, culture, and tradition.” Putin wants to export his conservative values and attack western values, by supporting a strong state, enhancing autocracy by promoting Russian sovereignty, basically by creating a false image of Russia. China spreads its ideology to the developing world. Russia tries to spread Putinism to the developed world, especially Europe as he tries to foment social polarization in democracies to weaken them. The rhetoric out of Moscow does not bode well for the future and any change in their approach will have to wait until Putin leaves the scene.

Another very important issue for the American consumer and politicians is Chinese-American trade. Those who are against an interdependent economy increasingly call for a decoupling of the economic relationship with China because of the damage it does to Americans. McFaul drills down to show that this is not the case and more importantly how difficult it would be to decouple. The argument that the US does not benefit from this relationship is a red herring as China holds $784 billion in American debt, and Chinese manufacturing production is imperative for the global supply chain. Companies like Apple, pharmaceutical companies, and the robotics industry are entities deeply intertwined between the US and China creating economic growth in both countries. It also must be kept in mind that Chinese growth had a positive effect on the American economy as goods made in China make them cheaper for the US consumer, in fact during the period of increasing US-China trade and investment, the American economy grew more rapidly than any other developed economy. McFaul warns that the US has to learn how to further benefit from the US-Chinese relationship or at least manage economic entanglement better because it is not going away for decades.

If there is a flaw in McFaul’s monograph it is one of repetition. The structure of the book makes it difficult to avoid this shortcoming. Whether the author is discussing Chinese and Russian approaches to confronting the liberal economic world, interfering in other countries, or the philosophies and actions of Putin, Xi or Trump at times the narrative becomes tedious. The constant reminder that the Chinese threat is much more dire than the Soviet threat was during the Cold War is made over and over as is the constant reminder that our fears of the Chinese are overblown, our attitude toward Russia is not taken seriously enough, and the threat represented by Trump’s devotion to isolationism. To McFaul’s credit he seems aware of the problem as he constantly reminds us he is repeating the same argument or that he will elaborate on the same points later in the book. My question is, if you are aware of a problem why keep repeating it?
McFaul spends the last third of the book warning that the United States cannot repeat their Cold War errors as there are fewer resources today to prevent mistakes. He calls for containing Russia and China, and avoiding what Richard Haass calls “wars of choice,” as took place in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. After critiquing errors like overestimating Soviet military and economic power, in addition to exaggerating the appeal of communism, along with underestimating China’s economic and military rise and the faulty belief that the Chinese communist party would democratize, he offers solutions.

All through the narrative McFaul sprinkles suggestions of what the United States should do to compete and contain China and Russia. Be it encouraging parameters for Ukrainian security, rejoining the Trans-Pacific Partnership, negotiating comprehensive trade agreements with the European Union, the restoration of USAID and other forms of soft power, maintaining and increasing funding for our research institutions, and most importantly lessen the polarization in American politics so China and Russia cannot take advantage. In considering these policy decisions and many others which would restore America’s reputation and position in the world – the major roadblock is the Trump administration who will never act upon them. According to McFaul we must ride out the next three years and hope that the damage that has been caused and will continue can be overcome in the next decade. McFaul is hopeful, but I am less sanguine.

[Brandi · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is incredibly well researched and I’m grateful I had a change to read it. I’m not well-versed in politics and I thought this was a thorough explanation of what happened in the past (Cold War) to now (Trump, Putin, China). A little dense at times, but it does give that depth.

Thank you, Mariner Books and Net Galley for an advanced copy of this ebook.

[Casual Ecocentrism · Rating 2 out of 5]

I will preface this review by stating that I previously was a longtime fan of McFaul, having read his previous book Cold War Hot Peace, and having let up with his other work over the years.

This book was deeply disappointing. It is lazy, cowardly, prejudiced to the point of intellectual dishonesty, lacks depth of analysis, hopelessly naive, and, particularly in the sections that discuss comparative military strength, belied a lack of serious research and/or an overestimation of the McFauls understanding of areas beyond his nominal expertise.

It is farcical to make the case that Russia and China are the only significant threats to liberal internationalism after the last 75 year, and particularly last 25 and 3 year stretches of American international action.

This is not an exhaustive review, but here are a few examples of this book’s failures.

1. If a Russian apparatchik wrote this book from the Russian perspective with the same level of bias as McFaul, it would read as “Russia historically has been foundational to the construction and enhancement of multilateral institutions, and overall is committed to upholding the international order. Just look at BRICS, the CSTO, and the EEU! While their invasion of Ukraine has strained internationalism, they are responding to the legitimate security concerns of Russian Citizens of the Donbas! They have the right to defend themselves against Ukrainian Terrorism!”

2. McFaul quotes Elbridge Colby, seemingly believing that he is serious nat sec voice.

While not non-existent, McFaul offers the flimsiest condemnations of American actions that damage or degrade liberal internationalism. I don’t think he mentions US non-compliance with WTO rulings, or offers any analysis of the ramifications of US obstruction of global climate policy. You can predict his view of US support of Israel, and the actions of the US toward allies or international institutions that seek to interfere with Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians. This reader believe that warrants more than a footnote to McFauls grand theory that the US is the bulwark of liberal internationalism and the principal guarantor of universal human rights.

[Kelly Stover · Rating 4 out of 5]

A policy heavy read with more economic jargon and detail than I’d normally consume, but I respect Michael McFaul and appreciate his informed views and first hand experience in his area of expertise, including having served as former U.S. Ambassador to Russia under Obama.

There’s nothing to dispute in my view, and I agree with most of his recommendations on how to compete in the global economy and power structure in a world where China is catching up. I learned a lot about the differences between the ideologies of Russia and China and how over the decades they’ve tried to advance their sphere of influence and militaries for their own purposes. Some of that was reassuring to a point.

However, though no fault of his own, the book is already out of date from its publishing just a few months ago. McFaul recognizes the Trump administration’s lack of willingness to protect democracy and maintain our ties with other democratic countries as well as continuing to promote our values and the virtues they espouse in the world. It’s a mistake, especially at this critical time when we’re facing growing competition from China. He explains how the irrational use of tariffs is also damaging.

The last two months have felt like 10 years with the boat strikes in the Caribbean, the ICE raids and killings, Maduro’s capture in Venezuela with installment of the preferred leader (instead of the duly elected one) and most of all, the war in Iran. All of which put us further out of reach to implementing any of the policies that this book recommends for our continued success and prosperity. McFaul recognizes that challenge and perhaps as a cop out, states that perhaps future presidents can do that. However, the damage done, in my view, will take years if not decades to undo. Until then, we resemble (or have become) an autocratic country with dwindling allies.

I was excited to read this book when it came out and had been waiting for it from my library. However, perhaps it’s best to hold off on these policy books until we get through whatever this is. It’s too depressing.

[Andrey · Rating 2 out of 5]

к сожалению, все это утратило актуальность еще до того, как было написано

[Sandy · Rating 3 out of 5]

A dense book dealing with the difference between autocrats vs. democrats. The majority of the books focuses on the difference between the US vs. Russia and China. I did find the book.informative but at times felt as though I was reading a text book.

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

So the autocrats are Russia and China.
1. Russia is still a military super power. It wants to destroy Western alliances and international norms. It is willing to spend money and weapons to spread its beliefs. It invaded Ukraine. It interferes with American elections.
2. China is an economic super power. It wants to preserve the international norms but tilt them to its advantage. It has little desire to invade other countries other than reclaiming Taiwan.

So Russia is the more dangerous foe. But China is more difficult to defeat because it offers other countries an alternative concurrent with American ones.

America must works with its allies, stop threatening to invade them. Use USAID to extend its soft power. It should welcome immigrants from China and Russia but chase away the spies. It should invest in basic research.

Ok… basically what NOT Trump is doing.

[Leanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Here is my book review of Michael McFaul's AUTOCRATS VS. DEMOCRATS.

**Democracy, Autocracy, and the Species Question:
A Review of Michael McFaul’s “Autocrats v. Democrats” for a Planet in Search of Itself

By Leanne Edwards

If you want to know the shape of the human heart, don’t look to ideology. Look to the way we organize ourselves when no one is watching. Look to the stories we tell about freedom, about order, about what it means to be alive and together on this strange, blue planet.

Michael McFaul’s “Autocrats v. Democrats” is, on the surface, a book about political systems—about the drift of nations toward or away from democracy, about the stubborn persistence of autocratic regimes, about why some revolutions spark and others sputter. But if you read carefully, and read wide, you’ll find a more unsettling question lurking beneath the policy analyses and the case studies: what kind of species are we, really? What do our politics reveal about our place in the world?

To read McFaul only in the language of “isms”—liberalism, authoritarianism, nationalism—is to miss the deeper stakes. The real drama playing out isn’t between parties, or even between nations. It’s between two visions of what it means to be human, and what kind of world we want to build from the raw materials of our bodies, our brains, our needs, and our dreams.

The Seven Continents: Humanity’s Mosaic

What if, instead of narrowing our lens to the West, the East, or a single “system,” we looked to the whole planet for wisdom? Each continent, after all, is a living, breathing testament to a particular way of being human. Each one brings something irreplaceable to the global table.

Africa – The Cradle of Beginnings
The story of our species begins here, where the earliest humans learned to read the land, to track water through drought, and to live in concert with a world full of teeth and thorns. Africa’s wisdom is ancient: survival through adaptation, community as the root of strength, and music as a language older than words. From the Nile’s kingdoms to the marketplaces of Lagos, Africa reminds us that to be human is to belong to a lineage that stretches farther back than memory.

Asia – The Laboratory of Civilization
Asia is where empires rose and philosophies collided, where silk and stories traveled the length of the earth. Its lived experience is one of vastness—of dynasties measured in millennia, of faiths that imagine time in cycles, not lines. Here, the tension between tradition and reinvention is a daily negotiation: from the meditative patience of Japanese gardens to the churning innovation of Indian cities. Asia’s gift is the art of holding opposites—discipline and spontaneity, hierarchy and humility, the sacred and the everyday.

Europe – The Workshop of Ideas
Europe has been a cauldron of contradiction: birthplace of democracy and fascism, of reason and religious war, of Mozart and mechanized slaughter. Its cities are palimpsests of hope and regret, its landscapes marked by borders that have shifted with the winds of empire. Europe’s lived wisdom is skeptical, restless, and hungry for meaning. It brings to the table the hard-won knowledge that progress is fragile, that rights must be defended, and that beauty can exist even in ruin.

North America – The Frontier of Reinvention
North America is a land of arrivals and departures, of promises both kept and broken. Its story is one of reinvention—from the Indigenous nations who shaped the land for millennia, to waves of settlers and dreamers seeking a new start. The continent’s myth is the open road, the blank slate. Its lived experience is about possibility, but also about reckoning—with the violence and displacement that made that possibility real. North America brings an audacious optimism, a faith in new beginnings, and a cautionary tale about forgetting the past.

South America – The Land of Survival and Synthesis
South America’s wisdom is written in mountains and rivers, in languages layered like sediment. This is a continent forged by collision—of peoples, cultures, and ecosystems. From the resilience of the Andean highlands to the memory held in Amazonian soil, South America knows that to survive is to adapt, to blend, to endure. Its music, its food, its revolutions remind us that joy and pain often share a single root.

Australia (and Oceania) – The Songlines of Interconnection
Australia and the islands of Oceania carry the knowledge of distance and kinship, of surviving in places where the land itself resists easy living. The Aboriginal Dreamtime and the navigational genius of Polynesian voyagers teach that identity is inseparable from place, and that stories are maps through both land and time. Oceania’s contribution is the sense that we are all wayfarers, that belonging is an act of caretaking, and that the smallest islands can hold the greatest wisdom.

Antarctica – The Mirror of Extremes
Antarctica is the exception that proves the rule: a continent with no native people, where only the most determined survive, and where human presence is always provisional. Its lesson is humility, the realization that much of our planet is indifferent to our plans. Antarctica is a place of science and silence, reminding us that the earth’s story is bigger than ours, and that stewardship sometimes means knowing when to step lightly—or not at all.

Each continent brings its own flavors, scars, and songs to the human table. Together, they form a mosaic—sometimes harmonious, sometimes jagged, always incomplete. To be human is to inherit all of it: the ingenuity, the trauma, the joy, and the stubborn hope that tomorrow might be just a little better than today.

The Universal Wellspring: Power, Vulnerability, and Ancient Wisdom

Throughout history, thinkers and seekers have tried to map the inner landscapes of humanity, giving us signposts for the journey. Robert Greene, with his unflinching analysis of power and human nature, reminds us that ambition, rivalry, and strategy are woven into every society—yet so is the potential for transformation. Brené Brown, in contrast, turns our gaze inward, urging us to embrace vulnerability as the birthplace of courage, and to build true belonging through empathy and honest connection. The Enneagram, a synthesis of ancient wisdom and modern psychology, offers a lens for understanding the diverse ways we seek safety, love, and meaning—reminding us that difference is not a flaw, but the basis of community. And across all continents and centuries, the voices of ancient sages—the Confucian scholars, Sufi poets, West African griots, Indigenous elders, Christian mystics, and Buddhist monks—have asked the same essential questions: What does it mean to be good? How do we find peace? How do we become whole? Religion, at its best, has carried these questions forward, inviting us to see our lives as stories in a much larger tapestry. All of this wisdom, drawn from every corner of the earth, enriches our understanding of what it takes to be fully human—and what it takes to build a society worthy of that name.

The Brain, the Body, and the Banality of Evil

Humans are built for complexity. Our brains are not just vessels for reason or instruments of instinct—they are the seat of our deepest contradictions. We crave order and novelty, discipline and joy, safety and adventure. We are driven by stories, drawn to belonging, and capable of both unthinkable cruelty and breathtaking kindness.

In whole-brain living, as some neuroscientists now call it, we recognize that our intelligence is bound up with our instincts; our bodies are not just meat, but spirit made manifest. Autocracies, McFaul argues, thrive on fear and control—on the stifling of curiosity, the policing of joy, the crushing of those delicate, unseen threads that bind us to one another. Democracies, at their best, are experiments in trust: trust in our own messiness, our ability to solve problems together, our need for deep abiding love and connection.

Yet even democracy can fail to recognize the full humanity of its citizens. It can become procedural, technocratic, cold. It can, in Hannah Arendt’s phrase, slip into the banality of evil—not out of monstrous intent, but through the slow erosion of empathy, the dulling of our sense of wonder and responsibility.

Shared Needs, Shared Fate—and the American Experiment

If the twentieth century was the age of ideology, the twenty-first must be the age of shared needs. The Global Peace Index, a tool that charts the relative calm or chaos of nations, suggests that what we want—peace, security, opportunity—is not the property of any one culture or creed. These are the substrate of a life worth living, the baseline from which curiosity, joy, and meaning can grow.

And here, the United States stands at a crossroads. The founding promise—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—is powerful, but it’s not a finished recipe. If America is to live up to its ideals, it must look beyond slogans and systems, and instead draw on the best practices of the world’s lived experiences. What the United States can offer—if it’s wise—is not just its own myth of reinvention, but a willingness to integrate the ancient resilience of Africa, the philosophical depth of Asia, the hard-earned rights of Europe, the joy-in-sorrow of South America, the caretaking spirit of Oceania, and even the humility of Antarctica.

Best practice, born from lived experience, is more valuable than any “ism” or “ology.” It is the wisdom that comes not from theory, but from the daily act of being human—of adapting, listening, repairing, and daring to hope. If America can learn from the world, it might yet become a nation that not only pursues happiness, but helps create the conditions for it—at home and everywhere.

The Cosmos and the Human Project

We are, as Carl Sagan liked to say, star stuff contemplating the stars. Our politics, for all their ugliness and pettiness, are also acts of cosmic significance—they are how we decide what kind of life is possible on this planet, and what kind of future we leave for those who come after us.

To review “Autocrats v. Democrats” only as a treatise on political science is to miss its deeper urgency. We are not just fighting over systems; we are fighting for the soul of the species. We are, as ever, perched between fear and possibility, shadow and light.

The wisdom of the continents—the lived experience of billions—tells us that peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of justice. That democracy is not just a system of voting, but a way of honoring the full spectrum of our humanity. That love, curiosity, and joy are not luxuries, but the very things that make all this striving worthwhile.

A Call Beyond the “Isms”

Perhaps the most radical thing we can do, in this moment of danger and division, is to refuse the comfort of narrow categories. To see, with clear eyes, the human needs beneath the political theater. To insist that our systems serve our bodies, our brains, our spirits—not just our ideologies.

McFaul gives us a map. But the journey is ours. The next chapter is unwritten, and the question it poses is both old and new: How will we live together, on this planet, with all our flaws and all our gifts, all our terrors and all our hopes? The answer, as always, will be a measure of our wisdom—and our willingness to be, fully, human.

End Notes

Michael McFaul, Autocrats v. Democrats: Lessons from the Battle for Freedom (Harvard University Press, 2024).
Global Peace Index, Institute for Economics and Peace, 2025 edition.
Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (Viking Press, 1963).
Carl Sagan, Cosmos (Random House, 1980).
On “whole brain living,” see Jill Bolte Taylor, Whole Brain Living: The Anatomy of Choice and the Four Characters That Drive Our Life (Hay House, 2021).
Robert Greene, The 48 Laws of Power (Viking, 1998); Brené Brown, Daring Greatly (Avery, 2012); Don Richard Riso & Russ Hudson, The Wisdom of the Enneagram (Bantam, 1999).

[Barb Cherem · Rating 4 out of 5]

Too tough and detailed for me, just took too much discipline despite it containing wonderful content.

I was part of a discussion group over 5 sessions so that saved me and I really did understand the history of relations with China and Russia and a bit about the growth of autocracy worldwide. This is a book that is either for an academic course in foreign policy or a book study as I experienced it.

I will summarize a few of the more important improvements that he gave as well as my "take-aways" from this outstanding expert's perspective.
What stands out from course and McPhail book are the following:
1. How one expert’s sophisticated knowledge can imagine so many improvements and just how complex international relations can be with adversaries --- where it’s not enough to just have the largest military. It makes one wonder:--- what a President without any gov’t experience and not a reader of daily briefings, and not having an experienced Cabinet with expert experience to advise him, can operate in this complex environment with any chance of success.

Large foreign involvements with complex situations such as Ukraine, Gaza/Israel and Iran are examples; they are being negotiated with only a duo of people with no diplomatic experience or experts in negotiation, that is, by the Sec. of State, Marco Rubio and businessman Steve Witcoff negotiating in all three settings. Twice while negotiating with Iran, this duo allowed bombing of Iran to start-up! They also were negotiating with Iran on nuclear issues--- that Trump canceled earlier from Obama's era,--- and without any nuclear experts at the table. Obama's team always had nuclear experts and diplomats negotiating earlier over the multi-year negotiations. The Trump admin. attacked Iran during these short attempts; this is a basic “no-no” in such negotiations, because of course this deters later negotiations, as the adversary doesn’t trust you’re negotiating in good faith.

2. How complicated international relations are and how many factors are involved including the history of these distinctive relations.

3. The book study went back to relations from post-WWII from 1949-2025 with Russia and China and America with many added involvements as part of the current major relations today. The shift in autocratic regimes having attraction in about 2005 worldwide and about 2010 in America was provided as there is now only about a 5 nation difference, when in the 90s it looked like Democracy had won the world's adoration. Over the past 15-20 years this has shifted and autocracies rose.

3. You wonder if America is capable of a “long game” when we have these 4 yr terms that can be interrupted by a new leader, such as happened with the Paris Agreement and the Iranian JCSPCU with on nuclear that was verified but canceled by Trump.
As much as good ideas, is the institutionalization of some changes in our governance that don’t allow for this sort of short-termism. Climate and peace agreements are needed to hold steady, or no one will sign any treaties with America due to their potential brevity. Once established, these should be more difficult to cancel than one man’s impulse/opinion. Presidents should not have this sort of power.

4. It would seem that our own internal divisions are as erosive as those efforts from without. Agreement on who that is though is divided. Trump accuses all protesters, as being domestic terrorists and unpatriotic, so he'd see these folks as the "dividers from within". Whereas, those in MN and at the All Kings protests think Trump and his cadre of loyalists are disobeying the Constitution and lawless, undercutting the rule of law and our Constitutions as non-patriots. They see he and his Cabinet as the "threat from within", when he uses this phrase.
The two areas that need take special attention to reduce divisiveness are the media and campaign financing that have greatly changed and owned and influenced by the far right elites, esp. in tech thru folks like Musk, Thiel, Andreeson.

5. The 2008 financial recession was a part of this disenchantment with democracy, and emerging distrust of government, and an important start of the shift away and joining the worldwide turn towards autocracies. But so too was the mishandling of the Cold War which we over-assessed Russia and under-assessed China; expending resources on things we don’t need to, taking from the areas where we needed to expend effort and resources.

6. There were many instances of hypocrisy of the US which undercut its credibility around the world and the constancy of wars was one point of poorly expended resources. We supported regimes as long as they were not Communist which was one such mis-step, as thought they may've not been sympathetic to Communism, they were also not particularly liberal democracies.

7. We didn’t give Russia financial support when they had a decade in the '99s when they were moving towards Democracy when they hit a hard time, and financially supporting their emerging democracy could have been conditional on such things as eliminating the KGB and this wasn’t done, and so, they continued to move in a more hostile direction instead.
Need today to remember 1949 treatment of Japan and Germany after WWII rather than what we did in the 1998 which embolded the aggression away from democracy by Putin.

8. My takeaway is that leaders make a difference and yet, it’s equally important to have effective experts and calm decision-makers around the leaders, as the complexity of the world is so interdependent and consequences so grave, that these many calm and informed heads are best poised to help make good decisions in these complex contexts and histories. One leader is not so poised or informed adequately, s/he can't be as the world has complexified.
The backing away from a bad leader such as Trump isn’t straightforward and backing away from Trump’s many mis-steps will be decades in the un-doing.

9. The idea of having a new Dept. that includes parts of 6 others: Agriculture, Defense, Justice, State, Treasury & Commerce (for Development Aid pp. 348-349) is an important one.

10. Stengthening alliances esp in Asia

11. Best assurance of peace is to invite Ukraine to join NATO

12.Intelligence Community has “5 eyes”, need to add Japan and S. Korea (5= Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US, UK)
Several other alliances noted in Asia to promote
“Quad” --Biden began with 4 (Australia, Japan, India, US), but S. Korea could be added

13. Military Alliance as well
Pacific Alliance Treaty: US. Japan, S. Korea, Australia, New Zealand exclusively defensive. Small countries without alliances are vulnerable.
Strikes me that the author believes the future is saved through alliances for protection and defense. We need friends, not to alienate the world.

14. Pro-actively to prepare Taiwan now (institute a military draft, training by US would take 2 yrs., they need increase % of their GDP for this military prep….) so that they either deter China from attack or are ready if it occurs. ready. And be proactive by doing a lot of small things to prepare Taiwan for the later Chinese attempts, to deter them through training of military

14. How brilliant the post-WWII institutions were, such as Breton Woods and the Marshall plan post-WWII in preventing world wars and increasing economic interdependence and globalization bringing millions out of poverty in China and India.

15. What strikes me are all the allied arrangements that McFaul suggests in a time when all our regular allies have been alienated.
It makes sense that Economic statecraft would have an assemblage from 5 depts: Commerce, Intelligence, Defense, Treasury and State & NSC.
He stresses this in other areas too: Development Aid with an assemblage from Defense, State, Treasury, Justice, Agriculture and Commerce engaged in rule of law into one dept. And stresses development AND democratic objectives that are assessed and conditions for continuing aid. And more than 1% need be devoted to this aid.

16. The “quad” becoming the “Qunit” by adding S. Korea.
And the 5 eyes in the intelligence area expanded to 7 by adding S. Korea and Japan
These integrated entities, he stresses in allied arrangements, and esp. recommends in Asia
Military alliances thru PATO with members of Australia, New Zealand, Japan, S. Korea and later add others. Defensive like NATO

17. Stationing troops in all countries bordering Russia.

18. Selective de-coupling in key areas only, surveillance, telecommunications, selective investment in export controls of tech. transfer.
Stop tech transfers, investment, collaboration that help Russia or China to modernize their militaries e.g. quantum computing, AI

I guess that's just a small smattering McFaul's ideas, but of course thedevil is in the details of implementation; ideas are one thing, doing them is quit another, but he'd have us do quite a bit more than what we are doing. And he is critical that Trump seems to be doing just the opposite of what's needed. We don't need to become both isolationist by pulling away from alliances, and yet starting troubles in other nations such as Venezuela and Iran.

[Ryan Boyce · Rating 2 out of 5]

Boring and ultimately not that insightful into relations between America and Russia and America and China. It might be fine for someone who does not know a lot, but its shallow in its analysis and everything I read was something I already knew.

I thought the policy prescriptions would be nice, but they were intuitive and unoriginal. Maybe thats what is best, but there’s nothing new in this book.

I did appreciate McFaul’s humor throughout the book.

It would probably be better just to listen to one of his book tour podcasts than actually reading.

[Penny A · Rating 4 out of 5]

You probably will not find this book on a shelf at the White House. If you are a fan of president Trump, you will not like this book. But whether or not you are a fan, you ought to read it.

McFaul was Ambassador to Russia under President Obama. He breaks his book into three parts: the past, the present and the future relationships between Russia, China and the United States. When the Cold War ended in 1991, The United States was the world power, a democracy to be envied and copied by many other countries. Thirty years later, our place in the world is being challenged by Russia, China and other countries.

Chapters on our past relationship with Russia include details on time with the tsars, when that regime benefitted from our newly formed government. Catherine the Great, for example, believed that good relations with the Colonies would provide benefits in trade and keep Europe at bay. The Bolshevik Revolution changed that. Not until FDR did diplomatic relations between the two countries resume. Hopes were high with Gorbachev but dashed again with Putin. Russia and the US have been on, and continue to be on, a seesaw.

China also had periods of cooperation with the US. Beginning in the late 18th century, China was a regional powerhouse and the US a weak startup. But the “Century of Humiliation” reduced China’s power through populations explosions, crooked bureaucrats and financial disasters. The Communist regime of Mao in 1949 “mobilized peasants, not workers…the opposite of the Moscow model.” As their economy grew, tensions often appeared between China and the US due to incidents like Tiananmen Square and questions about the origin of the COVID virus.

While the chapters on history are enlightening, it is in looking at where we are now, and making suggestions for the future, that McFaul shines. He studies power, regimes and leaders and lays much of the blame for our current situation at the feet of Trump. Fawning over Putin, challenging NATO and longtime allies, and undermining the basic foundations of our democracy and heritage weaken, not strengthen, our place in the new world order. He argues that we need to continue working together in many areas (education, science, innovation like AI) and decouple in areas that threaten our democracy (surveillance, election interference). .

This was a well-researched book, and a long one. It took me a few weeks to get through it because it is so dense with ideas and information. But in the end, here is the most important message I took from this book: “The threat from within the United States could very well metastasize into a greater threat to American security than either China or Russia.” Between the government shutdown, the firing of federal workers, the expunging of our history and the NO KINGS marches, we may be heading down that path already.

[Robert H. · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title Autocrats vs Democrats has the sound of an epic battle, the makings of a thrilling cliffhanger. And the title is unsettling because I thought the debate was settled long ago. The question I have, and one that Michael McFaul poses, is whose side is the United States on these days? The answer to that question isn’t definitive, but that the current administration is leaning toward “team” Autocrat.

To be clear, the book is not so much about this alarming trend where the U.S. seems to be going it alone with a clear disdain for democracy friendly multilateral alliances, but rather about the historical relationships between the U.S., Russia, and China. McFaul makes it clear that both Russia and China pose unique threats to the U.S. and the world order but that doesn't mean relations should be cut off or that we should side with one over the other. He argues that Russia is more of a roguish state under Putin with the intent to disrupt the world order. A huge threat is their influence campaigns inside the U.S. to affect the outcome of elections and the threat to use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Russia’s alliance with China is also a concern as is their aggressive attitude toward NATO nations. China’s main threat is its manufacturing prowess and its influence campaigns around the world to spread its state sponsored economic model. The major threat to the U.S. is a Chinese invasion of Taiwan that could draw the U.S. into a costly conflict as defenders of democracy and its semiconductor industry.

McFaul tends to believe that China is less of a threat to the U.S. than Russia. And while I might agree with this premise, I don't agree with some of McFaul's ideas about how to confront these relationship challenges. One of the things McFaul proposes is that the U.S. should increase military spending to modernize its nulcear weapons program because military superiority is the best deterrent to war. This hawkish view is disturbing. Why not emphasize nuclear disarmament talks? I find it hard to believe that he would advocate for an arms race. This logic is curious because he does believe that during the cold war, we wasted money and resources by expanding the nuclear arsenal to one up the Soviets.

And while I disagree with increased military spending, especially on nuclear weapons, I do agree with some of his recommendations such as increasing visas for Russian and Chinese students, even giving green cards to those who finish degrees in Science (and Music - my addition) to combat brain and artistic drain. He believes, as do I, in multilateral alliances and thinks the U.S. should restore funding to promote democracy and create more economic alliances with democracy friendly nations.

About the writing, it's fairly clear and basic - no long clauses and flowery or obscure language - mostly vanilla prose. The downside to the narrative is that there weren't enough anecdotes or storytelling to hold my attention. The book reads like a textbook and took me way too long to read. It's not that the information was useless or boring, though a few of his takes were repeated or reinforced one too many times. I have seen Professor McFaul speak on a number of occasions (on television) and believed he would offer lots of personal experiences in this book about his time studying in Russia and when he was the Ambassador to Russia, but he didn’t. What he did write about in textbook style was an important though basic primer of the historical and present relationships between the U.S., China, and Russia. I say basic primer because I knew most of the information presented in the book just from reading the NY Times and Washington Post over the years. But it is nice to have the book as a reference. And what is even nicer is that the book was a gift and signed by the author!

[Behrooz Parhami · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author, a former US Ambassador to Russia, is imminently qualified to write about the original Cold War and its new incarnation. He has organized his view in three parts, sandwiched between an introduction and an epilogue.

Introduction: New Cold War?

Part I: The Past (Chs. 1-2); Cooperation and Conflict with Russia; Working with and Against China

Part II: The Present (Chs. 3- 8); The End of American Hegemony; Russian vs. American Power; Chinese vs. American Power; The Waning of Democracy as a Universal Value; Exporting Putinism; Exporting Xi Jinping Thought

Part III: The Future (Chs. 12-14); Learning from Cold War Mistakes; Replacing Cold War Successes Today; New Policies for New Challenges

Epilogue: Don’t Bet Against America Just Yet

Many authors and analysts have told us that we have entered in Cold War II (or Cold War 2.0). America’s opponents in this new Cold War are China and Russia. In this 3-way Cold War, we have two autocracies and one (still) democratic country. The two autocracies are trying to weaken democratic institutions in the US, and their efforts are amplified by internal autocratic tendencies. Some commentators exclude Russia as a worthy US foe in the new Cold War, putting the focus solely on China.

Democracies around the world are weakening or falling apart. According to Freedom House, 2024 was the 19th straight year in a global democratic recession. America’s future in this emerging world order depends on how successfully it can confront threats from China & Russia and domestic threats from powerful interests who are trying to move us toward an autocratic system in the name of efficiency and elimination of waste.

This book presents a comprehensive review of today’s geopolitics. The rules of the new Cold War are different from those of the original one, which lasted a tad short of half a century, from 1945 to 1991. China is a far greater economic power that the Soviet Union ever was. The alliance between Russia & China gives the block formidable military power and geopolitical reach.

McFaul warns us against underestimating Russia’s disruptive ambitions, which put together with China’s capabilities (often overestimated, according to McFaul) and Trump’s isolationist and autocratic tendencies can spell doom for the US, and for the world at large. Confronting China & Russia requires a combination of hard power & soft power. While US’s hard power is on the rise, our soft power is in rapid decline, as we dismantle foreign aid programs and propaganda tools such as Voice of America.

McFaul prefers the Goldilocks approach in dealing with China and Russia. Over-reacting and trying to confront them in every step they take is misguided and will lead to disasters such as Vietnam. On the other hand, not being sensitive to acts of aggression and expansionism puts smaller countries at risk of being gobbled up, as we are witnessing in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Success by Russia in gobbling up some or all of Ukraine will make it more likely for China to invade Taiwan, whereas Putin’s failure in Ukraine will likely deter China’s aggression plans against Taiwan. The middle-of-the-road approach will place the emphasis on deterrence in areas such as Eastern Europe and the South China Sea.

McFaul describes his motivations for writing this book in the article “Why I Wrote Autocrats vs. Democrats”:

https://michaelmcfaul.substack.com/p/...

Briefly, he wanted to point out similarities and differences between the new Cold War and the original 20th-century version, the aim being to help avoid repeating the mistakes made, helping pinpoint & replicate the successes, and providing a blueprint for American foreign-policy makers & citizens, as we enter the second quarter of the 21st century.

[Zachary Sullivan · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was a fantastic, informative read. Coming from the former US ambassador to Russia under the second Obama administration, he is clearly well informed on foreign policy and in particular US-Russia and US-China relations.

I learned a lot:
- China is quite aggressive in ideological promotion in developing parts of the world, sometimes in semi-discrete infrastructure debt-trap projects like BRI, but also explicitly in parts of Africa with government development training academies whose stated goal is to teach African leaders to build what they deem to be an effective government.
- The weapons build up in space is real and expanding. Particularly, Russia has been extremely aggressive in testing anti-satellite weaponry in space, which has caused disturbances with space debris impacting other satellites.
- China is experiencing economic issues at home, including the build up of debt and its real estate crash. Additionally, they are struggling to recoup investments on key BRI
- Russia is more aggressive than I previously knew in election meddling across the world and social media botting meant to sway public opinion towards illiberal nationalism.
- There is widespread support for PRC crackdown on Hong Kong sovereignty and individual freedoms, with 53 nations voting with China in support of their crackdown law on the region
- US military spending as a share of GDP is actually quite low right now, which is not something you read about much as many politicians complain about a grotesque, enlarged budget
- Trump 2.0 has delivered some truly depraved outcomes: voting with Russia and North Korea regarding Ukraine in a 2025 UN resolution, as well as aligning with and ENDORSING Hungarian autocrat Viktor Orban
- Russia has arrested 20k+ anti war demonstrators since 2022, and hundreds of thousands of citizens have left the country since the war began
- Russian privatized militias (Wagner group prior to Putin assassinating Prighozin BY BOMBING HIS PLANE OUT OF THE SKY) are INSANE, doing contract work in Africa.
- Chinese surveillance state is extensive, targeting social media and arresting critics domestically and harassing Chinese nationals abroad
- Chinese mass internment camps in Xinjiang and repression in Tibet akin to "cultural genocide"
- US is WAY ahead of china in GDP/capita and since 2020, a widening gap in overall GDP with a US edge
- Chinese one-child policy seems to have backfired (massively)

I thought most of his policy prescriptions were on the money:
- Strengthen or create new multilateral institutions in trade and security arenas with other democracies to counteract all the damage of Trump 2.0
- Modernize, but do not expand, nuclear arsenal
- Enhance shipbuilding
- Raise military spending to modernize weapons systems through drones and also strengthen bioweapons defense, a key new arena in which we are vulnerable
- Enhance our capabilities in space
- Fix democratic disruption at home with policies like electoral college reform, jungle primaries, ending gerrymandering
- Do not ever use the military for democracy promotion
- Expand intelligence sharing with South Korea and Japan
- Attract students from around the world to come to the United States
- Strengthen the WTO, IMF, World Bank to compete against Chinese state owned banks to which the US does not have

I appreciated his focus on the state department and take that Trump is pushing young people away from public service. He specifically calls out the defunding of the state department bureau of democracy and human rights, a decline I saw happen in real time during my internship.

I think the book is lengthy and sometimes a bit repetitive. I did not fully agree with his take that we should be expanding US international media/radio organizations. To me, this seems outdated and ineffective compared to Chinese and Russian social media projects. I also do not agree with his assement that everyone in the United States reject "Xi Jinping thought." To me, there is a startling rise of such thought on social media, especially Tik Tok. Additionally, political streamers like Piker have made *explicit" statements in support of Mao Zedong, including taking a paid trip to China and accepting a gift from the PRC that was a copy of Mao's little red book. This is someone with a massive audience of young, impressionable viewers. To me, the rise of extremism is real and it is not just Pro-Russian, but also Pro-China.

I agree that these factions and the main fomenter of political extremism, Donald Trump, make it such that the biggest threat to our way of life comes from within, NOT from Russia and China.

[Vicki Boardman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a sharp, highly-detailed analysis of contemporary geopolitics focused on the Cold War to the present day, outlining the challenges to democracy currently fomented by the Big Pig’s second term (you know who I’m talking about – I don’t want to get death threats or weirdo bot attacks). Especially emphasizing the rise of autocracy in China and Russia, but calling in other rising autocrats around the world, Michael McFaul surgically deconstructs the various soft power schemes that the Big Pig dismantled or disrupted, alliances broken or tarnished, trade and economic policies upended, and so on. It’s even more dire than I believed, and even if we account for some bias on the author’s part, the uphill battle is looking ever steeper.

I believe McFaul is more charitable than I would have been in describing the Big Pig’s policies as calculated decisions or ideological stances and not just whims purely in venal self-interest, racist hatred, and rampant corruption – but he doesn’t shy away from extrapolating their global effects and implications. I was especially interested in Part III of this book, looking to the Future, framed through replicating Cold War successes, new policies for a digital age, and reasons to have hope. I don’t agree with all of his analysis and ideas (he argues for more military spending and more arms proliferation, for example, and he has a vastly more favorable opinion of AI than I do) but the reasoning was clear and well-presented, leaving lots of room for further consideration.

It’s cold comfort to say we over-estimated the Soviet Union’s technology and capabilities in the Cold War, so maybe we’re overestimating Putin and Xi now… but it was a little reassuring to at least look the nightmares in the face and take in the whole scope of things. I’m not sure if this was an intentional subtext, but looking at how past authoritarian regimes were toppled gave me some hope about the inevitable implosion of the Big Pig’s circle of corruption, which is to say there is always an economic tipping point where authoritarians take it too far and cost oligarchs too much. We may rapidly be approaching that point.

One particularly fascinating section that I hadn’t read much about before was China’s BRI project, the Belt and Road Initiative, a key foreign policy and diplomacy mission that invests in infrastructure and economic development in emerging countries to promote trade connectivity and China’s leadership. The exploration of various voices of support and opposition critiques for this project gave me a lot to think about in the future of diplomacy in a globalized economy and suggested a number of rabbit holes I’ll eventually fall down when I’m ready to dive into reading about geopolitics again.

[Jeff Brooks · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very important book that should be read by every American citizen. Michael McFaul lays out in exhaustive detail the history of American relations with both Russia and China, and the details of our present geopolitical conflicts with these two countries. He delves into everything from the number and quality of tanks each country possesses vis-a-vis the United States to how much money each side spends on research and development and policies regarding everything from humanitarian assistance to supporting for an exchange students. Needless to say, you will be a much better informed person if you read this book.

The underlying theme of this book is that the United States is today facing a challenge from the autocratic states of Russia and China similar to that faced during the Cold War with the Soviet Union. We have entered a new age of great power competition. He brings his vast wealth of experience in foreign policy to the task of explaining the details of this problem to the American people. His writing is lucid, clear, and engaging. One receives a vast wealth of information and knowledge from this book, but it never becomes dull. And when you’re finished reading it, you find yourself wondering what you can do to help support democracy and fight autocracy around the world.

We live in a time when democracy seems under threat, both around the world and within our own nation. McFaul pulls no punches with the Trump administration and emphasizes that the greatest threat to democracy in America comes not from Russia or China, but from our own partisan divisions. Yet the author ends on a hopeful note and his faith in America comes through on every page of this book.

If you care about the future of freedom around the world, and in America, I strongly urge you to read this book.

[Kelly_Hunsaker_reads ... · Rating 4 out of 5]

Autocrats vs. Democrats: China, Russia, America and the New Global Disorder is an important, timely and weighty book that should be read. The author, Michael McFaul is a professor of political scine and a form US Ambassador to the Russian Federation. He demonstrates how we have entered into a new Cold War era which is completely different than the previous one, bringing with it a new alliance between China and Russia, and a strong trend toward isolationism in the USA under the Trump administration. All of this has brought us into a new world with unique threats.

McFaul argues for a fresh approach with three important recommendations. First, Russia should not be underestimated. Second, China should not be overestimated. And, thirdly, Trump's moves toward autocracy will weaken the USA's position in the world. He backs up his work with meticulous research, showing how 300 years of history proves everything he argues.

We have watched as Donald Trump as withdrawn from the Paris Climate Accords, the INF, the World Health Organization, and the Transpacific Partnership. We see him criticizing the World Trade Organization, NATO, and the European Union. His argument for "America First" is leading to a position of weakness with loss of allies on the world stage, taking away our connections to the world and our negotiating power.

This book is an impressive analytical assessment of where we stand, how we got here, and what we need to do to move forward. Despite the heaviness of the topic, the author is hopeful. I am not sure that I am, but I will borrow his.

Thank you to the publisher, for my #gifted copy!

[Connie Tang · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed the historical insights of how power, type of regime and leaders really shaped whether countries collaborate or confront, especially when Michael McFaul started from the Russian tsars in the early 1910s to the present, and similarly for China, from the Qing dynasty in late 1700s to the present. His perspectives were well supported by historical events. His analysis of current environment is spot on, especially since he included President Trump’s executive orders and initial policies up until early 2025. The chapter on The Waning of Democracy as a Universal Value also resonates as America retreats from multinational organizations to increasing isolationism and disrupting the norms of international order. The analysis of political influencing approach between Xi vs Putin is also enlightening.

However, when it comes to the last section of the book about how to replicate Cold War successes to counter these threats, I think the solutions proposed are too academic and theoretical without consideration of the practicality of how it could be achieved. For instance, a critical success factor is “Reducing Domestic Polarization” in the New Policies chapter, which I totally agree with, but other than pointing out all the areas that are broken, the author did not really offer any ideas on how to fix these issues. The rest of the suggested policies are similar in that they do not take into account budget, manpower and the increasing resentment of America spending money to benefit citizens of other countries.
An interesting read nonetheless, albeit a bit dense and repetitive towards the latter half.

[Oliver · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a fairly good book covering the security competition between the democratic world and the autocratic world. But I have a few problems with it.

The author gives equal time to Russia and China implying they are of equal threat to democracies. I disagree with this argument, I think that while Russia is a threat to certain democracies they are not, and will never be powerful enough to overthrow the democratic world order. Whereas its not hard to imagine China eventually being that powerful.

Another problem i had with this book is that it argues that China only wants (or at least act like they want) to reform the system not overthrow it. The problem I have with this is that China is a dictatorship and when the dictator changes, so will policy. The west shouldn't count on China -more or less- supporting the international system in the long term.


My final problem with this is book is its statements on Taiwan. The author says that we (the west) should avoid war with China over Taiwan. We should avoid war with China as much as any of us should avoid getting sick. Nobody wants to get sick and nobody actively wants war with China but neither of which are particularly in our control. China alone has the ability to avoid this war. They can choose to not invade. Just as we dont let Russia conquer Ukraine we shouldn't let China conquer Taiwan.

[Bryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent overview of modern relations between the US and the nations of Russia and China that sets the table for how to assess US strategy in light of near-term and long-range considerations. Some of the author's prescriptions will prompt debate, most hotly where they at times they seem engineered to defend some decisions made by prior presidential administrations of which the author was a part, or where an insight of his seems to be in direct conflict with another. But his assessment of the state of play and the unique incentives that drive each of these three powers is a stable framework on which to build out a desperately needed dialogue on what US policies will best secure our security. On these facts, we could see Americans restoring to their ideas about national identity a case for why a doctrine of international engagement for the purpose of alliance development and maintenance is one that reflects our values and addresses realistic concerns.

[John Vanderpoel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Michael McFaul is clearly an experienced and knowledgeable author on this subject. He does, however, take a very “European-esk”/Obama approach to his thinking. He seems to lack a sufficient understanding that both Russia and China are our adversaries and will (and do) lie, cheat and steal to achieve their objectives. They only understand strength and power and will take advantage of perceived weaknesses wherever they find them. I do, however, like many of his ideas, such as PATO.

I would encourage him to look closer at the long run effectiveness that the “tough love” approach Trump is using with NATO and how it may push them to be real contributors in the defense of the NATO countries. We should demand actual 5% spending not promised defense spending by all NATO member as we should for any PATO members. The idea of a rules based globalization with interdependence on other countries and a measure of relinquished sovereignty has proven to be a mistake. Some of our allies still believe in that idea but to their own peril (the European Union). And, finally, he believes isolationists are back in vogue but I believe he misunderstands this. What he describes as isolationism is the simple demand that our partners must carry their own share of the load.

Well written but echoes the Democratic party’s historical approach toward conducting foreign affairs and war. We have the economic strength and the military power to negotiate from a position of strength, we should use it. Overall, I like many of his ideas and his thoughtful consideration of issues.

[Victor I.]

I believe the premise of this book is outdated. US is not a democracy anymore. Trump has unleashed the autocratic vein of US, and although not fully fledged yet, it is moving in that direction. Therefore, the power strugle is more complicated now. There are three major autocracies: China, Russia and US. Russia and US are pretty active using military power to shape the world, alrrhough Russia lacks real economic power to go the full long run. Europe still largely democratic, needs to balance and, for now, survive. The rest of the world needs to balance, considering that in many cases, China is the largerst economic partner.

[James Greenbury · Rating 4 out of 5]

There are plenty of non fiction books that imho could simply be a short article - a great single idea clearly explained. Here, however, we have 14 chapters each filled with dense content, clarity of thought and structure, and excellent writing.

For me the title is a little misleading: this is not democrats versus autocrats, but the USA versus China and Russia. From the initial historical overviews of the relationships between these powers to the common sense conclusions on how to manage them in the future the book is filled with detailed analysis from a genuine expert in the field.

[Kaylia Schunemann · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars. Dense and boring. However, it was incredibly informative. I especially appreciated the inclusion of actual solutions to improve US foreign relations and our standing in the global economy. Most books like this identify the problem without providing ideas for change. The author was exhaustive. Put him back in the administration! We have idiots running our country.

[James Hiestand · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good but too long

This book is a firehose of information. It emphasizes the difference between the economic threat of China and the political threat of Russia. But it is repetitive and too long. A properly edited version might be worth 5 stars

[Alie Leeflangs · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a lot- it’s very dense and comprehensive and definitely has a strong conclusion that some may not like- but grateful for his work, professionalism and strength to stand up for what he has seen and witnessed in his close study of these regimes. The writing is on the wall.

[Jerry Goff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ambassador McFaul is a great wealth of information on the history of autocrats and how countries can choose the wrong paths. His analysis of our-one-one relationships with China and Russia is enlightening.

[Alexander Allison · Rating 4 out of 5]

Twas good but twas a bit of a downer. THOROUGH read and fascinating if you’re interested in the subject matter though. Very dense, and will be bought, assigned, and not read in many an international studies class I am sure.

[Brian J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great summary of the current state of the world

Great analysis of the current state of the world. It’s long but worth the effort. Highly recommended it if you want to better understand how the world works.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

Review to come...