The Real World Order
To the Editor:
COMMENTARY is a forum for great debates, but Patrick Glynn’s review of The Real World Order: Zones of Peace/Zones of Turmoil, which I wrote with the late Aaron Wildavsky [Books in Review, October 1993], leads away from debate about the new ideas our book presents concerning the long-term character of world politics, by conflating what we said with familiar positions in the current policy debate.
For example, his review accuses us of recommending a policy of “general noninvolvement in the outside world.” In fact, our recommendation is “to participate with other democracies in efforts to limit violence and encourage democracy in the zones of turmoil. . . .” And our conclusion is that “the United States must be engaged in the effort to improve international order in the zones of turmoil. . . .” We also argue that, “particularly during the current transition, . . . there may be an important need for the United States to take leadership responsibility in the world.”
About the Author