America in the World: A History of U.S. Diplomacy and Foreign Policy

by Robert B. Zoellick

America has a long history of diplomacy–ranging from Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson to Henry Kissinger, Ronald Reagan, and James Baker–now is your chance to see the impact these Americans have had on the world. Recounting the actors and events of U.S. foreign policy, Zoellick identifies five traditions that have emerged from America's encounters with the the importance of North America; the special roles trading, transnational, and technological relations play in defining ties with others; changing attitudes toward alliances and ways of ordering connections among states; the need for public support, especially through Congress; and the belief that American policy should serve a larger purpose. These traditions frame a closing review of post-Cold War presidencies, which Zoellick foresees serving as guideposts for the future.Both a sweeping work of history and an insightful guide to U.S. diplomacy past and present, America in the World serves as an informative companion and practical adviser to readers seeking to understand the strategic and immediate challenges of U.S. foreign policy during an era of transformation.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, American History, International Relations, International Affairs, The United States Of America

888 pages, Kindle Edition

First published August 4, 2020

About the author

Robert B. Zoellick's public experience spans six US presidencies over more than thirty years. He served as Deputy Secretary at the US State Department, as Ambassador and US Trade Representative, in the Treasury Department and the White House, and as President of the World Bank.

Reviews

[Aisling · Rating 5 out of 5]

Part history, part commentary, all rigorously researched and presented in an engaging readable (although necessarily dense) manner. I took my time with this one and enjoyed it all. Zoellick's background would make any book by him worth a second look but if you're interested in U.S. Diplomacy this is not only a must-read. it's a must-own.

[Edward Habib · Rating 2 out of 5]

5/10. I have read and reviewed twenty-nine books since I last dished out a two-star rating, but as the Good Book says, "to everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under heaven," so here we are.

What a disappointing book. You would think that a book titled America in the World: A History of U.S. Diplomacy and Foreign Policy, written by a former deputy secretary of state, U.S. trade representative, and President of the World Bank would be overflowing with novel insights, complex analysis, and an appreciation for how systems, ideas, and institutions propel history. Unfortunately, this is not that book. In the introduction, Robert Zoellick claims that this sweeping history of U.S. foreign policy and diplomacy will be framed by five traditions: 1) the importance of North America; 2) the roles of trade, technology, and transnational relations; 3) alliances and connections with other states; 4) the need for public and Congressional support; and 5) the belief in American policy serving a higher purpose. This is not how this book is structured at all. These themes are buried so deeply in the text that they do not emerge again in any organized way until the conclusion chapter. Rather, the top-line of the blurb at the back of the book explains this book's approach best: "Ranging from Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson to Henry Kissinger, Ronald Reagan, and James Baker, America in the World tells the vibrant story of American diplomacy." In other words, from the founding fathers to the patron saints of neoconservative Republican politics, this book is a plodding chronological account that overwhelmingly pushes a traditional "great man" theory of history, in which the story of American diplomacy is really the story of individual presidents' and cabinet secretaries' personalities and styles.

I picked up on Zoellick's approach very quickly, and while I found it disappointing and inadequate, I was still able to appreciate his work for what it was for much of the first half of the book. The big problem with this book comes in as readers get closer and closer to the period in which Zoellick himself served in the foreign policy establishment. As you read this book, you will quickly notice the snowballing frequency of namedrops of Zoellick's bosses, George H.W. Bush and James Baker. While Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan all get their dues, this book would reasonably have you believe that the American Presidency, American power, American greatness, and American genius peaked during the one-term presidency of George H.W. Bush. Zoellick makes sure to let readers know that not since John Adams and Thomas Jefferson has the American Republic been so blessed by a pair as close and competent as Bush and Baker, and that many of twenty-first century America's foreign policy wins have been rooted in the approach taken by George H.W. Bush.

I wish I had not taken Zoellick's impressive resume at face value before picking up this book. After eight years of living and working in Washington, DC, shame on me for not realizing that this is one of those books that is probably devoured and gushed over at think tank events, but has little constituency elsewhere. Rather than being a book about the history of U.S. diplomacy and foreign policy, this is a cherry-picked collection of stories about presidents who led the country during the wars we all know very well, and a pseudo-memoir that pines for the good old days when neo-conservatives dominated American foreign policy in the 1980s, but before the chickens came home to roost in the decades that followed. The chapter on Ronald Reagan was truly the point at which I stopped taking this book seriously. Across twenty-five pages, Zoellick regurgitates the tired narrative that "the Great Communicator" basically ended the Cold War with the power of his rhetoric, and calls Reagan a "romantic" at least six times. And yet there is but one throw away sentence in the final paragraph of the entire chapter that mentions Iran-Contra. There is no mention of anything related to Reagan and the CIA's activities in Latin America at all. Zoellick's sanitization here made me doubt the credibility of the narratives he presented in the earlier chapters that covered history I was much less familiar with.

For a book with this title published in 2020, Zoellick's work also feels incredibly incomplete. With the exception of a brief conclusion with a sub-section titled "Four Presidents," this book ends with the presidency of George H.W. Bush and the end of the Cold War. The entire Clinton, W. Bush, Obama, and Trump presidencies are covered in less detail than you could find on Wikipedia, and there is absolutely no reckoning at all with American foreign policy in the twenty-first century other than Zoellick offering his rushed takes that essentially Clinton copied the almighty George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush became a wartime president because he had to, Obama was smart but weak, and Trump does not respect traditions and alliances. Zoellick unconvincingly claims that he could not properly grapple with recent presidents' legacies because we are still sifting through everything that happened and that the politics are too close. Well, concerns about politics didn't stop Zoellick from building an altar to Reagan and Bush while eviscerating Lyndon Johnson and essentially wiping poor Jimmy Carter from history. Call me crazy, but I imagine, like his fellow Bush-era alumni, Zoellick just could not bridge the chasm of cognitive dissonance between the mythology he tells himself about the 1980s and actual damage neoconservative foreign policy did to the country and the world through the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that ended countless lives, wasted trillions of dollars, embarrassed the country, and discredited the entire Republican Party establishment, leaving the door wide open to the angry populism of Donald Trump.

Off the top of my head, in addition to the entire twenty-first century to date, here are a few major topics in the history of American foreign policy and diplomacy that this book does not tackle at all: the development and evolution of the modern national security council; the development and professionalization of the State Department and the foreign service; USAID, the Peace Corps, and international development; the U.S. role at the United Nations; the evolution of America's special relationship with Israel; international energy policy and relations with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC states; U.S.-China relations after Nixon; America's efforts at regime change in places like Iran and Chile.

In sum, if you want to read a history of U.S. foreign policy, there is no reason to pick up this book if you have access to George Kennan's classic American Diplomacy or Walter McDougall's Promised Land, Crusader State: The American Encounter with the World Since 1776. Both of those books are much more concise, informative, sophisticated, and thought-provoking.

[Chris Tolve · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is such an uncritical reading of the history of U.S. diplomacy and foreign policy that it can hardly be called analysis. The author takes individuals, not systems, as the principle object of inquiry, then conceives of those individual diplomats and statesmen as essentially problem solvers. His perspective is liberal to the point of justifying American empire. In most cases, the United States is basically presented as reacting to developments outside its own control, rather than being an aggressor. I almost had to put down the book out of frustration when I reached the chapter on Reagan and it claimed that he saved Grenada from becoming a Cuban outpost and rescued grateful American medical students. If you know anything about U.S. foreign policy history, this will be a tedious read.

[Frank Kelly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Robert Zoellick has, over the course of the last 40 years, served as one of the finest, smartest and consequential diplomats in recent US history. The pivotal role he played in the reunification of Germany, of dealing with a crumbling Soviet Union and then later as a superb and transformational President of the World Bank have indisputably changed the course of history for the better. Now Zoellick reveals a new exemplary skill: writing an engrossing history of key consequential periods and events in US diplomacy. I am sure we all agree the phrase "must read" is horribly overused in the book business. I tried hard to come up with another way of saying so about this book but if something deserves the moniker, it is this book. It is indeed "a must read."
The US has gone through intense debates, wrenching, emotional debates, in recent years over our nation's role in the world. At times - indeed, many times - I have sensed a good deal of those debates have lacked critical historical context. How did we get here? What does history - our history - have to teach us and guide us? Zoellick provides the "must read" necessary for such a debate. From our "first diplomat" Benjamin Franklin to our current President, we are rich in experience and challenges which must be critical to forming opinions and policy. If you are in anyway engaged in global diplomacy - either on the political side of the equation or the business side -- you will find this is a book you will return to time and again for reference. Rich in enthralling details and important side stories, he brings to life our 200 plus years engaged in diplomacy. A tremendous contribution.

[Brian Bridgeforth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Zoellick writes a more America-centric version of international relations, ostensibly to correct what he feels are the shortcomings in Henry Kissinger’s masterful book “Diplomacy.” Primarily those are the economic dimensions in America’s international decision making. Zoellick’s views and telling are extremely well researched with the insight and wisdom of a man who has spent decades navigating global economic and international relations. I consider this work a must read, and this book should properly sit next to Kissinger’s book on the shelf.

[Joe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Given all the kudos this book has received, I suppose I expected something more. To be sure, this is a sweeping history of major American foreign policy events from Ben Franklin and the Treaty of Paris to the alliance diplomacy of George HW Bush and beyond. While Zoellick's commentary, which is interspersed throughout the book, reflects the thinking of a very knowledgeable and experienced diplomatic hand, it did not strike me as particularly incisive or fresh. I'm sure my reaction arises more from my own ignorance of the art of high-stakes diplomacy than from any fault of Zoellick's analysis; nonetheless asserting that global alliances, international credibility, economic strength, Congressional support and a solid North American base are key ingredients of successful diplomacy and foreign policy seemed to me more obvious than insightful.

[Sarmat Chowdhury · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written by an experienced American bureaucratic and diplomatic figure, Zoellick compiled a comprehensive of American diplomacy and foreign policy from the nascent days of the American Republic, to the middle of the Trump Presidency in 2020. Zoellick, who in the past has served as 6 American Presidents and as the head of the World Bank is a man with a set of views on American diplomacy and foreign policy, and that comes across in his writings. A member of the realist with occasional constructivist leanings in IR, Zoellick taps some of the greatest grand strategists and statecraft developers in the American tradition such as James Baker, Henry Kissinger, Elihu Root, President Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams to name a few.

While identifying the concrete traditions of the arc of American diplomacy and foreign policy, Zoellick provides only the positive examples of A,Eric an diplomacy and statecraft. Even in his historical analysis of American diplomacy and foreign policy from previous eras, the blindside and lack of account leaves a verifiable hole in the analysis of the arc of American foreign policy. For example, Zoellick is unable to talk about the American failure of the various proxy wars that sprang up during the Cold War (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Suez Canal Crisis, Balkans Conflict, Troubles of Ireland, the Palestinian Question, etc) choosing instead to focus on the larger arcs that have either taugh Americans the merits of American foreign policy and diplomacy, or those that have resulted in the Americans shifting their focus, as was the case in Vietnam and the Cuban missile crisis.

For those blind spots and bias as a member of many GOP White House’s, Zoellick is uniquely qualified with his mix of State, White House and World Bank experience to talk about the US history of diplomacy and foreign policy, albeit with a Republican bent.

[Lucas Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this for an independent study on the history of Diplomacy and Foreign Policy. Zoellick provides less of a history of his topic than a collection of historical vignettes designed to highlight and clarify his five diplomatic traditions in US History. This framework doesn't complete set International Relations Theory aside, but consistently warns of its disconnect from actual governance. The author comes close to contributing his own IR theory of his five traditions, "pragmatism." But nailing this down theoretically isn't the main argument of the book.

The selectiveness of the incidents discussed in each era, make American Empire seems a relatively benign enterprise and excuses several US leaders of grievous war crimes. I think that the author could have been more even handed on this front, while maintaining the overall triumphant, patriotic tone.

There was some really skillful analysis in the book. I was particularly impressed by discussion of John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay in the 19th century and how significant it was in framing much of the 20th century. I also felt that the relatively brief chapter on LBJ, McNamara, and Vietnam was a fresh and interesting perspective on a much examined era.

The book really excels when the author indulges in personal anecdotes from his long service in foreign policy, especially his close working relationship with James A. Baker.

I enjoyed reading this for the most part, and it provides a good starting point in the field, but I stridently disagree with some of the major arguments. Feels like this will be a standard work in the field for the near future, however. Recommended.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

America is strengthened by a robust international diplomacy that leads the world toward peace, prosperity and freedom. Current US trends toward isolationism and nativism, coupled with world-wide trends toward autocracies and weakened alliances, increase the probability of conflict, economic upheavals, and environmental disaster. As America retreats from its responsibilities and cedes leadership for world affairs, less desirable actors rush to fill the vacuum and work for America’s decline. The US over reliance on military solutions to threats has proven time and again to be ineffective and destructive.

[Cory · Rating 5 out of 5]

Exceptional view of the U.S. way of diplomacy, starting with the original peace treaty and with great detail thereafter. Well-organized and comprehensive, with a tilt toward practitioners and keeping a record of those who made things happen.

[Ken Moskowitz · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fine episodic history of US foreign relations, focused for the most part on well-known historical figures. The work of the great secretaries of State is given the credit they deserve. One is struck by how bipartisan US foreign policy has been historically, especially compared to today's divisiveness.

Given Zoellick's broad, high-level government experience, his comments are well worth our consideration. His erudition and scholarship, so evident here, clearly did not begin when he left government service and joined Harvard University, but has been a lifelong passion.

[Zlata G. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty in depth, however clearly very one sided. Chronologically the book jumped around slightly. Overall a good refresher on the US policy.

[Ron · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book too often descends into republican party talking points, that facts do not support. The chapter on Reagan is unreadable outside the context of 1980s republican propaganda. The final chapter and afterward could have been used for a thesis and integrated themes but is limited to factoids and opinionated descriptions.

[Michael McCormick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading Professor Zoellick's book was a powerful experience for me. The reason why is that it did a tremendous amount to organize my thinking about US diplomatic history and foreign policy, especially including the events that took place to end the Cold War up through today. The writing makes powerful sense. Also, in reading it, I am reminded of the importance of experts in our society, as well as for expert politicians. "America in the World" is a joy to read, both in its cautionary tales and its examples of American triumphs. What else is great about it is that it includes stories about people who were not presidents of the United States and yet had powerful impacts on our country. When reading about Arthur Vandenberg, I am reminded and thankful for the admirable service of Senator Mitch McConnell, who worked for 25 years to become Senate majority leader. The final point of the book for me was to reiterate what I already knew, namely that in order for any nation or organization to succeed, it must first get its politics right. I guess that is why I was drawn to Professor Zoellick's book, "America in the World," in the first place: because for me public service is a noble aspiration.

[Justin Goldman · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this to be an excellent work of history from a distinguished practitioner of American diplomacy. Mr. Zoellick provides a good service by identifying five traditions that have endured throughout the diplomatic history of the American Experiment. #1 The importance of North America; #2 Trade relations among nations (from John Hay's Open Door Policy to negotiating the multinational trade agreements of today); #3 The challenge of alliance management; #4 The need for public support, including via elected leaders in Congress; and #5 A belief that American policy should serve a larger purpose. It is interesting to think about this work, published in August 2020 in a moment of populism on both the left and right in America, and how the issue of public support runs into the tradition of supporting a larger purpose. This sweeping work highlights the tension between the missionary impulses that have fueled eras of interventionism and eras where the pendulum swung to favor those of a more isolationist bent. Along those lines, I'm grateful to have learned more on the key role of Senator Arthur Vandenberg as a key Republican supporter of President Harry Truman's policies that laid the post-WWII foundation from the Truman Doctrine to the Marshall Plan.

[Theodore DeRosa · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's an admirable attempt to compile a diplomatic history of America, but it is severely disjointed, unfocused, and falls flat on many of its subjects. There are a few chapters that I enjoyed, learned from, and in the future will borrow some lessons from. The chapter on Elihu Root and international law was both new and interesting to me as was the one on Vannevar Bush. The chapter on Johnson's shortcomings in Vietnam was probably the best one with solid lessons about what led to his mistakes. However, the book feels rushed in trying to cover a rather expansive subject. By breaking each chapter up into sections, the author is only able to dedicate a few paragraphs in some cases to topics that deserve more. It leads to the discussions about some of America's greatest foreign policy leaders being presented in a very underwhelming way with a thin central theme that also often feels contrived to support the author's predetermined messages. The five traditions that he starts and ends with were more compelling than most of the content in the middle. I think the book would be better if he had done it thematically rather than dedicating a chapter to different leaders and trying to fit that leaders actions into these themes.

[Chris Damon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Full disclosure: I skipped chapters 13 through 17 (covering JFK, LBJ, Nixon/Kissinger, Reagan and GHW Bush) because (a) I have living memory of the foreign policy of that era and (b) felt the author's own, largely Republican, biases might unpleasantly distract me. I went directly from Vannevar Bush (ch 12) to the Chapter 18 wrap-up and the Afterword.

But I really liked the parts of the book that I DID read. In particular, some of the American statesmen and leaders I admire most were discussed at length in the book: Alexander Hamilton, Elihu Root, and Charles Evans Hughes. It's great for readers to be reminded how outstanding these individuals were. Illuminating to me was the chapter on Vannevar Bush about whom I knew next to nothing before reading this book. He was an amazing American visionary and sparkplug for scientific, technical, and engineering innovations.

Anyone interested in American diplomatic history should read this book.

[Joey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Zoellick's survey of certain episodes of American diplomacy over the past 250 years teases compelling threads from the tangle of history. He ably identifies and critiques key themes that have animated America's relations with the rest of the globe. As a diplomat and a student of diplomacy, I found Zoellick's observations astute and accurate. The book's weak point is that Zoellick did not liven up the volume with enough personal experiences and insights, in my view. He certainly sprinkles them here and there, but by and large "America in the World" reads a little dryly. It's interesting enough for readers bringing with them substantial exposure to political history, economics, international relations, and political economy, but newcomers to these fields may find themselves in a little deep.

[Sequoyah · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not an essential history of American foreign policy like the description says. It is more of a history of specific statesmen and what they did. Each section focuses on a single person and their specific foreign policy accomplishments, and considering how this book covers statesmen from the birth of America to Donald Trump, there is an immense amount of foreign policy that was skipped in order to focus on these handful of men.

Was it interesting? Kind of, but it wasn’t what I wanted to read. Zoelleck does write well seeing as how he is a veteran diplomat, but he often comes across as trying to insert himself into the narrative despite his relative unimportance compared to the rest of the personas covered. However, I just didn’t really enjoy the book, and that is all that genuinely matters to me.

[Greg Woods · Rating 3 out of 5]

A useful and insightful guide to America’s foreign policy history. That Zoellicke was a man in the room is simultaneously helpful and problematic. He writes a compelling narrative that offers a traditional conservative perspective but it also causes an unwillingness to engage with arguable foreign policy blunders. Kissinger and Nixon are credited, rightfully, for triangle diplomacy and opening China, but this book does not acknowledge US failings in the bombings of a Cambodia or the installing of dictators in Latin America. For those interested in foreign policy this book os a must, but it is woefully insufficient.

[Sanjay Banerjee · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book, written by a Senior US State Dept official across various Presidential administrations, provides a framework for understanding the history of America’s foreign policy. The author emphasises America’s pragmatic instincts, from Benjamin Franklin to George H W Bush as well as the role of technology and trade in furthering US influence. The last chapter extends the analysis briefly to the terms of Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump. Highly recommended reading for anyone interested in History - especially about international relations and diplomacy.

[Luc · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book is a lively account of the history of U.S. diplomacy from the 1776s declaration of independence to the end of the Cold War. The keyword to explain U.S. foreign policy and the conduct of U.S. diplomacy is "pragmatism". From the inception of the new Republic until the present day, the decisions made by policymakers and diplomats were the product of intense debates. Finally, Zoellick leaves us with one final lesson: "The deepest tradition of U.S. diplomacy has been to advance America's ideas (p. 492)."

[Amol · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written. Easy read. Covers key areas of US foreign policy history. But its clearly written by an establishment figure who only talks about the “good side” of the history. Little to no coverage on how US won land from Mexico, the imperialist history streak of the US in Puerto Rico, Guam and Philippines, US involvement in Central / South America, US engagement in Iran, etc. So to get a full history picture of America in the world, need to read on those stories as well.

[Mibin Mammen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an interesting book and provides a detailed understanding of the history of US foreign policy through the eyes of a Foreign Policy practitioner. The author looks at the various US presidents from the first President George Washington till the end of the cold war president George H W Bush and also their Secretary of State to provide a detailed understanding of the US Diplomacy that changed over the presidencies.

[Todd Cheng · Rating 5 out of 5]

From the foundering humans to the modern day - a panglossian biased narrative of the United States programming from one past event at a time. I greatly appreciated the threads that the author pulls out from the original intents and how these early investments was a catalyst for later events.

I am bias’ed and think this is a necessary read for all American when also read and contrasted with a less American view of the weave events.

[Curtis Stokes · Rating 4 out of 5]

I appreciated the structure of this book, even if the overall effect is a little overwhelming. Zoellick does a good job identifying what he considers to be core contributions to America's policies from influential figures and traces the impact of those contributions over a long period of time. It occasionally loses focus and editorializes or meanders, but I appreciated the perspective and attention to detail.

[Christelle Hagen]

Zoellick's _America in the World: A History of U.S. Diplomacy and Foreign Policy_ is a sweeping history of the impact of U.S. Presidents, Secretaries, diplomats, and others from the Revolution through recent times. In this lengthy volume, I discovered many significant changemakers I had never heard of. A worthy read for anyone wanting to deepen their understanding of American history and the influence of Americans and American ideas on world history.

[Madison · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was very dense but interesting. I learned a lot more about the history of foreign policy within the U.S. It’s definitely more in depth with older history, as the author points out that the policies of the presidents of the last few decades will still have consequences we can’t yet fully analyze. It was a nice nonfiction to balance a lot of the other fiction I’ve been reading.

I received a copy of the book from Goodreads in exchange for my honest review.

[Carlos José Zilveti Arce M. · Rating 4 out of 5]

indispensable book for those willing to understand US global role

Not an easy task to cover 250 years of the US role in the world, I think the best part of this book ends with the end of the Cold War. The author shows some key points in history with full details, the actors, the presidents, the policies, it also makes reference to other important books from Kissinger and Isaacson.

[Gabriel Stein · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good

A very good and surprisingly engaging overview of U.S. diplomacy and diplomatic history. Zoellick shows how the focus has changed back and forth between idealism and ideas on the one hand and power politics — realpolitik — on the other. Successes and failures are both highlighted and analysed. An excellent read.