■ Net Assessment, Air & Space Power Journal, Fall 2004, p. 110
The reviewer here, Col. Fullhart, apparently caught my brief earlier this year as part of the Air Force's Senior Leadership Orientation Course, or SLOC, that occurred at Arlie House out in rural VA last June. I've given my brief at the last two such SLOCs, which I love to participate in, because you're catching colonels just as they become generals (or one-star brigadier generals).
Here’s the complete review, followed by my commentary:
The Pentagon’s New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century
by Thomas P. M. Barnett. G. P. Putnam’s Sons Publishers (http://www.penguinputnam.com), 375 Hudson Street, New York, New York 10014, 2004, 320 pages, $26.95 (hardcover).
Run, don’t walk, to your local bookstore and buy this book or order it on your computer! Why? Let me explain. I first met Thomas Barnett in a briefing he gave to a group of recent brigadier-general selectees. At the beginning, some thought that this might be a square-filler lecture on world events. By the time he finished, however, much of the oxygen had left the room. I quickly followed up with a Web search (http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com), yielding an Esquire article on Barnett that outlined a new way of looking at where our future threats would come from and what implications they held for our military in general—and the Air Force in particular. Needless to say, I was delighted when I heard that a forthcoming book of his would expand on the subject. It didn’t disappoint.
In brief, The Pentagon’s New Map outlines the demise of the nation-state as the principal model for future adversarial scenarios. Barnett provides some credible statistics and evidence of the relationship between "disconnected" parts of the world—stretching in a band from parts of Africa, through the Middle East, and into Asia—that have recently served as a breeding ground for what we have collectively called terrorists. Dealing with such circumstances will challenge traditional military thinking, alter the types of programs and equipment needed, and expand the concept of jointness—including a totally revised and energized interagency process. Such ideas are now regularly making the rounds in Washington, DC, and other arenas, even to the extent that we will need a Goldwater-Nichols Act for the interagency process. Barnett’s book gives as good an insight as any I’ve read into some of the thinking taking place throughout the Bush administration. It promises to help shape discussions and decisions that will determine the outcome of the next Quadrennial Defense Review, assessment of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission, and changes contemplated for the Total Force. Thus, the answer to my question "Why do you need to buy The Pentagon’s New Map?" is that it will help you understand the most likely world in which you will lead and the changes that world portends for our military.
Col Randal D. Fullhart, USAF
Maxwell AFB, Alabama
COMMENTARY: As reviews go, this one was more "both thumbs up!" than a summary of the main points. That's fine, because I appreciate what Fullhart was trying to do in this short space of words: get other officers to read the book. In that regard, he certainly gives it his all, meaning he uses all the right buzz phrases and gives all the right reasons why somebody moving up the ranks of the Air Force should really make the effort to read PNM. Throwing out the notion of a Goldwater-Nichols Act for interagency processes is a good one. G-N set the standard back in 1986 for the concept of inter-service jointness that defines the modern U.S. military's unprecedented prowess in warfighting. I agree that something equally profound needs to be written into law regarding the interagency process that must come to define our unprecedented prowess in waging peace—if we're ever going to secure any lasting victories in this Global War on Terrorism. I look forward (hopefully) to meeting this guy when I brief at Air University in a few weeks.
| Permalink |
