Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Tallinn Manual 2.0

9781316630372

Tallinn Manual 2.0 –
On The International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations
By the NATO Cooperative Cyber Centre of Excellence
Cambridge University Press – £49.99

Given the high-octane shenanigans currently taking place amid the Washington corridors of prime narcissistic persuasion – at the vanguard of which stands the vile, most bigoted and unpleasant leader the supposed Free World has ever known – surely it can only be considered a good thing that we have an open book such as this.

A publication which delves into the cyber operati of disingenuous fakedom.

Vladimir Putin’s laire if you will; aided and wholeheartedly abetted by such unsavoury characters as Donald of the Trump, Stephen Bannon, Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions and dare one come totally clean, the UK’s very own elderly Hitler Youth in disguise, Nigel Farage and Michael Gove.

That’s right folks, the cryptic consortium of Lies Are Us.

Not there so much for the choosing, but rather, the total perversion of (their own miscalculated) justice. All the more reason that Tallinn Manual 2.0 – On The International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations needs to be roundly and justifiably applauded. As not only does it expand upon the highly influential first edition by extending its coverage of the international law governing cyber warfare to peacetime legal regimes, it is also the product of a four-year follow-on project by a new group of 19 renowned international law experts.

In addressing such topics as sovereignty, State responsibility, human rights, and the law of air, space, and the sea. Tallinn Manual 2.0 identifies 154 ‘black letter’ rules governing cyber operations and provides extensive commentary on each rule. In so doing, it further represent the views of experts in their personal capacity by way of benefiting from the unofficial input of many States and over 50 peer reviewers.

Part I, ‘General International law and cyberspace,’ Part II, ‘Specialised regimes of international law and cyberspace,’ Part III, ‘International peace and security and cyber activities’ and Part IV, ‘The law of cyber armed conflict,’ these 562 pages (excluding International Group of Experts and Participants, a Foreword by the President of the Republic of Estonia, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, a further Foreword by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, Bert Koenders, Short Form Citations, Table of Concordance and a Glossary) are, if nothing else, an eye opener of epic, cyber-global proportion(s).

A mere tip of the iceberg of which is conveyed by Professor Michael N. Schmitt in the Introduction: ”The Tallinn Manual’s focus was on cyber operations involving the use of force and those that occur in the context of armed conflict. Although such cyber operations will typically be more worrisome from a national security perspective than those that occur in peacetime, States have to deal with cyber issues that lie below the use of force threshold on a daily basis. There,in 2013, the NATO CCD COE launched a follow-on initiative t expand the Manual’s scope to include the public international law governing cyber operations during peacetime. To do so, it convened a new International Group of Experts consisting of scholars and practitioners with expertise in the legal regimes implicated by peace-time cyber activities.”

From such chapters as ‘Sovereignty,’ ‘Due diligence,”Jurisdiction,’ ‘Obligations of States for internationally wrongful acts,’ ‘Diplomatic and consular law,’ ‘International telecommunications law,’ ‘The law of armed conflict generally,’ ‘Conduct of hostilities,’ ‘Perfidy and improper use,’ ‘Certain persons, objects, and activities,’ ‘Occupation’ and ‘Neutrality,’ these nineteen chapters diligently deliver on some sort of unspoken promise: ”The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs generously convened States in the Hague Process and has agreed to further support dissemination of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 following its publication. This contribution by the Dutch government helped ensure the Manual is grounded in State understandings of the law and that it addresses the practical challenges States face on a daily basis.”

Undeniably grotesque as the sad thing is, especially in this day and age of the Trump, scholarly thought and consideration by experts would appear to account for nada. That’s not to say this book is without value or without merit (nothing could be further from the truth), but it’s most certainly something worth bearing in mind as we witness humanity slowly self-implode.

David Marx

The Taming Of Free Speech

speech

The Taming Of Free Speech –
America’s Civil Liberties Compromise
By Laura Weinrib
Harvard University Press – £33.95

When civil liberty becomes wholly compartmentalised and chartered as if a cheap and convenient package holiday, one ought to intrinsically know that dark clouds will eventually emerge.
Not by chance.
Not as if deemed there were ever a choice.
Not unless one were to contend with the recent hurdy-gurdy drone of contemptuous, spurious, US inflicted denial thereof. In other words, the bonhomie of Washington’s brazen eradication from that of its own written constitution.

So roll over Thomas Jefferson and tell Donald Trump the news: read this book. Read it at your peril.

Indeed, embrace The Taming Of Free Speech – America’s Civil Liberties Compromise for all it’s worth; as within its eight chapters, authoress Laura Weinrib subliminally invites America’s current administration, to grapple with the gauntlet of its own, high-octane induced folly. The triggered trajectory of which, all but the most inflammatory assistance of the President’s (current) Chief Strategist, Steve Bannon; continues to openly condone America’s roller-coaster of ride of complicit division. The constitutionally decided upon mandate, or so we’re told, whereby nationalism – that all permissive illness inherited from only God knows where – is now allowed to run amok with all the unqualified persistence that only rabid blind faith entails.

Presumably, Kellyanne Conway, ye unleashed Rottweiler of America’s buzzing news networks, would wholeheartedly disagree; but then she probably hasn’t yet gotten round to reading: ”the story of how the radical vision of civil liberties was born and how, very quickly it transformed.” Of how ”at its centre is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which framed popular and judicial understandings of civil liberties during the interwar period and after.”

It’s hard to imagine Conway and her ilk even having heard of ACLU and that which it represents; all the more reason these 328 pages (excluding Abbreviations, Notes, Acknowledgements and Index) are to be nurtured as if a mode of historical, behavioural instruction: ”[…] historians have long recognized the central role of anti-Red repression in the early annals of free speech, and they have underscored the labour leanings of early civil liberties advocates. Yet most have treated such connections as incidental to, even incongruous with, the underlying civil liberties project. With the modern First Amendment as their benchmark, they have regarded the radicalism of the civil liberties leadership as an impetus for attacking sedition laws or a precursor to a principled speech-protective position: a galvanizing source of outrage over viewpoint discrimination and selective enforcement, but ultimately a bias to be expunged, not an independent motivating vision. Perhaps as a consequence, the dominant literature on the interwar ascendance of expressive freedom has not adequately explained why or how the modern understanding of civil liberties triumphed.”

The key word here being ‘triumphed,’ which partially explains why if nothing else, this book is capable of packing a mighty elongated punch, right into the face of Trump’s very own misconceived trump-card. Namely that of free speech itself – from whoever, from wherever – will not prevail.
Suffice to say, he’s wrong.
And in time, all those myopic, perhaps horribly misguided rust-belt voters with a penchant for the easy way out, will realise as much.

So too, hopefully, will the President’s prime Brexit compadres, Nigel Farage, Michael Gove and to a lesser degree, Theresa May herself.
All of three of whom are at the moment, embarrassingly vying for the big man’s attention.
As if the current cull of Rule, Britannia, weren’t enough.
As if a menagerie of Britain’s lionised lambs ever had it in them to actually know any better.
As if unconditionally led into the epoch of the country’s own disparaging, pending slaughter – ever ”more dreadful from each foreign stroke.” A lullaby of sorts, which, unbeknown to all but the most wizened electorate of sanctified democracy minus free speech, has now been unduly lulled unto a vicious knee-jerk reaction of vainglorious, hateful countenance.

To which many have already pronounced: let the vengeance commence, despite the fact that in: ”in the early decades of the twentieth century, business leaders condemned civil liberties as masks for subversive activity, while labour sympathizers denounced the courts as shills for industrial interests […]. As self-proclaimed partisans in the class war, the founders of the American Civil Liberties Union promoted a bold vision of free speech that encompassed unrestricted picketing and boycotts. Over time, however, they subdued their rhetoric to attract adherents and prevail in court […]. Conversely, conservatives eager to insulate industry from government regulation pivoted to embrace civil liberties, despite their radical roots. The resulting transformation in constitutional jurisprudence – often understood as a triumph for the Left – was in fact a calculated bargain.”

A bargain, surely worth it’s weight within the fine parameters of free- speech-actuated gold?

With such chapter headings as ‘Freedom of Speech in Class War Time,’ ‘The Citadel of Civil Liberty,’ ‘The Right of Agitation,’ ‘Old Left, New Rights,’ ‘The Civil Liberties Consensus’ and ‘Free Speech of Fair Labour,’ The Taming Of Free Speech – America’s Civil Liberties Compromise is an overtly bold and authoritative account of the history of free speech in America. Its assimilation thereof, might in some quarters be considered a little too dense, perhaps a little too dry for its own good; but given Weinrib’s acute account of what is clearly a complex subject, this is by the by.

As Mark Tushnet of Harvard Law School substantiates: ”Weinrib’s important reconstruction of the history of our notions of free expression shows how an idea first offered on behalf of labour radicals became transformed into a general account of why all dissent from the conventional should be protected.”

All in all, a major contribution to civil liberties; especially right now – in 2017.

David Marx

From The War On Poverty to the War on Crime

poverty

From The War On Poverty to the War on Crime – The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
By Elizabeth Hinton
Harvard University Press – £22.95

One cannot help but wonder how America’s new president, Donald of Trump Towers, would react to this book. A thought, to which all intents and perpetual purposes of incarceration, is a mode of impossible and inexorable practice, set in place some fifty years ago by President Lyndon Johnson.

Known as the ”War on Crime,” lest it be said that prison cells, unlawful arrest and law enforcement agencies have, for said time period, functioned as the ”central engine of American inequality.” Inequality, being the key word here, as one need look no further than what is happening in the United States right now. In 2017.

A country where one in every thirty-one adults is under some form of penal control, including one in eleven African American men.

It does indeed make one wonder how the supposed land of the free can boast of being the world’s largest prison system; especially when one takes into account that it has more wealth, more oil, more cars, more food-stocks, indeed, more of everything than anywhere else in the world.

Including more guns. And THEREIN lies the fundamental answer to a problem that is clearly out of control.

Out of control, because many would also agree with regards the trajectorial caveat, that America has more than its fair share of stupid people – many of whom buy the guns. Yet, perhaps more importantly still: the country is inundated with greed.

More greed than anywhere you care to name. Not to mention division, whereby most white people automatically receive a far, far bigger share of the pie when compared to their African American compatriots. So it’s hardly surprising the country has more people locked up than any other nation; less surprising still that there are more African Americans in jail than any other racial group. A social breakdown upon which From The War On Poverty to the War on Crime – The Making of Mass Incarceration in America sheds an abundance of clear and refreshing light.

For instance, in the chapter ‘The War On Black Poverty,’ Elizabeth Hinton writes: ”Declining job prospects for African Americans during the second half of the twentieth century exacerbated segregation and poverty in the neighbourhoods where displaced southern agricultural workers congregated. As 2 million white residents left cities for suburban areas, 1.5 million black Americans migrated to industrial centres in the North and West, joined by Latinos and white Appalachians, and moved into the neighbourhoods previously occupied by European immigrants and their children. By the early 1960s, 31 percent of African Americans lived in twelve northern cities, their living conditions characterized by the isolation, marginalization, and exclusion that stemmed from segregation.”

Segregation: a social stasis that throughout these nine chapters, is comprehensively addressed time again as being the most fundamental problem in American society today.
As well as yesterday.
A problem it would seem, that has, and continues to be shamefully exacerbated by society at large and Washington’s domestic policy: ”Under Richard Nixon and his successors, welfare programmes fell by the wayside while investment in policing and punishment expanded. Anticipating future crime, policymakers urged states to build new prisons and introduced law enforcement measures into urban schools and public housing, turning neighbourhoods into targets of police surveillance.

By the 1980s, crime control and incarceration dominated national responses to poverty and inequality. The initiatives of that decade were less a sharp departure than the full realisation of the punitive transformation of urban policy implemented by Republicans and Democrats alike since the 1960s.”

These 340 pages (excluding comprehensive Notes, Acknowledgements and Index), alert us to a problem that has been going on for far too long. So long in fact, it may well end up destroying America. Although it does seem as if Donald Trump is already doing quite well on that score – without any outside assistance whatsoever.

As author of The Silent Majority: Suburban Politics in the Sunbelt South, Matthew Lassiter has said, this is: ”an outstanding book – clear, compelling, and essential. Hinton excavates the deep roots of police militarisation, surveillance of minority communities, and the punitive shift in urban policy. Her argument that liberals were key architects of the war on crime is a necessary and even urgent corrective to conventional thinking about mass incarceration.”

So take note Messrs. Trump and Pence, and add this very fine book to your ever increasing stack of necessary, bedtime reading.

David Marx

The Rise Of The Far Right

fr

The Rise Of The Far Right –
Populist Shifts and ‘Othering’
Edited by Gabriella Lazaridis, Giovanna Campani
& Annie Benveniste
Palgrave Macmillan – £53.99

”From the 1960s onwards, influences coming directly from the neo-Nazi world, like the Odal or the Celtic cross, the symbol of an SS division, started to fascinate the youngest component of Italian neo-fascism. Introducing these symbols signified a detachment from Italian fascism and a new interest in Nazis and Eastern European fascism. The Romanian Codreanu and the Belgian Degrelle became reference points, together with Julius Evola, whose vision of the ‘tradition’ as a timeless entity running through the history of ancient times led to the discovery of the Nordic sagas (and indirectly to Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings).”

Does the above not highlight the preposterous depths to which the fanatical Far Right will stoop, in order to lend the tiniest thread of credence to their wildly shambolic and dangerous ideology?

Who, in their right mind of appropriated sanity, would even want to be associated with the symbol of an SS division? Let alone embrace it? And to what degree have these sad and utterly misguided people been drained of all self-worth, all sense of self-value; to feel obliged in commandeering Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings into their warped category of humanistic hate?

Will there be no let up?

Will they watch Denial – the new film release which centres on the legal battle for historical truth (between university professor Deborah E Lipstadt and the historian David Irving)?

Of course they won’t.

Just like they won’t read this excellent book.
Although if anyone should read it, it’s surely the likes of Beppe Grillo’s Movimento Cinque Stelle (Five-Star Movement), Marine Le Pen’s Front National, Geert Wilders’ PVV (Partij voor de Vrijheid) and every member of Nigel Farage’s vile UKIP.

The latter of whom are brazenly deciphered in the final chapter of The Rise Of The Far Right – Populist Shifts and ‘Othering,’ where Gabriella Lazaridis and Vasiliki Tsagkroni write: ”The UKIP logo is a pound sign (£), with many activists wearing a gold lapel badge, opposition to the Euro being obviously necessary to the party’s euro-scepticism. Another symbol used is the pint of beer and the fag (cigarette): a number of young activists we interviewed mentioned the pint as something that should be in one’s hand. Party leader Nigel Farage’s most obvious image is that of being in the pub with a pint of bitter or a cigarette in his hand, or both. With its references to elements of British culture, this plays into ideas of Britishness, the ordinary against the elite and freedom from bureaucracy (UKIP would repeal the smoking ban). On occasion UKIP have been described as the ‘BNP in blazers”’ (‘Majority Identitarian Populism in Britain’).

This measured and more than balanced description of UKIP, more or less sets the tonality of these 266 pages as a whole.

With such chapter headings as ‘Neo-Fascism from the Twentieth Century to the Third Millennium: The Case of Italy,’ ‘Far-Right Movements in France: The Principal Role of Front National and the Rise of Islamophobia,’ ‘Right-wing Populism in Denmark: People, Nation and Welfare in the Construction of the ‘Other’ and ‘Posing for Legitimacy? Identity and Praxis of Far-Right Populism in Greece’ (among others), this book traverses nigh every current political persuasion of ‘otherness.’ A mode of thinking, which, if you really think about, harks back to the medieval burning of innocent women who were deemed to be witches.

With the advent of the deplorable Donald Trump as President of the United States, this most enlightening and essential of books, really couldn’t be more timely.

David Marx

Before Auschwitz

auschwitz

Before Auschwitz –
Jewish Prisoners In The Prewar Concentration Camps
By Kim Wunschmann
Harvard University Press – £33.95

So tomorrow, January 20th, we have President (elect) Donald Trump to look forward to.

He, whose parents were members of America’s Klu Klux Klan organisation, will enter what has to be the most powerful office in the world. An ever increasing, wayward world might I add, in which tyrants and terrorists, deprivation and division, continue to make headlines; while those who kneel at the alter of hedge-fund hypocrisy, continue to succeed in keeping it that way.

It’s as if the populace of the so-called intelligent species, has learnt absolutely nothing.
Nada.
Nic.

Nic that is, other than:
a) wholeheartedly know how to turn away when someone else is in need (as in the cold, blooded murder of the MP, Jo Cox – who, as she lay on the ground being to stabbed to death, hordes of people did absolutely nothing because they far were too busy filming her murder on their mobile phones)
and
b) wholeheartedly embrace the dictum: what’s in it for me?

Just two exceedingly valid reasons why people need to at least be made aware of January 27th, Holocaust Memorial Day, to comprehend an iota of where blatant ignorance can lead. In a word, Trump., in anther word., ISIS., in another (chilling yet infamous) word, Auschwitz.

The world would indeed be wise to take note of Before Auschwitz – Jewish Prisoners In The Prewar Concentration Camps, which pioneers the formulaic and prerequisite ideological stance of nationally condoned suffering, barbarity and murder.

The book’s six chapters, Introduction and Conclusion, compellingly unearths the little-known origins of the concentration camp system in the years leading up to the Second World War, and reveals the instrumental role of these extralegal detention centres in the development of Nazi policies towards Jews (and its eventual plans to create a racially pure Third Reich): ”First of all, a historical study of the imprisonment of Jews before 1939 demands an understanding of the period in its own right. The concentration camps of the pre-war era were different from the wartime camps. They had different forms and different functions. Simply to place them into a seemingly linear development of Nazi anti-Jewish policy […] would miss the particularity of the pre-war period. The development that ultimately culminated in genocide on an unprecedented scale was neither preordained nor the direct result of a single man’s long-standing fantasies. Karl Schleunes’s concept of ”the twisted road to Auschwitz” is more apposite, helping us to grasp a process of gradual development in response to outside influences and internal power rivalries, a process that, at each stage, might have pointed to a different destination.”

A different destination indeed, which, from the relative comfort of hindsight, is all too easy say, come to terms with, and ultimately assimilate. But these 235 pages (not including Appendix: SS Ranks and U.S. Army Equivalents, Abbreviations, Notes, Bibliography, Acknowledgements and Index) really ought to shunt hindsight unto the Rose Garden of The White House – for all the world’s media to witness on a regular basis.

If not the Oval Office itself, although, knowing Trump, he’d probably deny the fact that The Holocaust ever took place.

In investigating more than a dozen camps, from Dachau, Buchenwald and Sachsenhausen to less familiar sites, authoress Kim Wunschmann uncovers a process of terror designed to identify and isolate German Jews, primarily from 1933 to 1939. During this period, shocking accounts of camp life filtered through to the German population, sending the preposterous message that Jews were different from true Germans: they were portrayed as dangerous to associate with and fair game for barbaric acts of intimidation and violence.

The latter of which is rather like Brexit’s reaction to non-Englanders, only on a far bigger, far more criminal level. But hey, it’s still early days.
And tomorrow we have Trump, to look forward to.

As Robert Gellately, author of Stalin’s Curse: Battling for Communism in War and Cold War has written, Before Auschwitz is ”an impressive, well-written study of a little-known chapter in the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany. Wunschmann has carried out prodigious archival research, unearthing all kinds of interesting and troubling material, particularly on the fate of Jewish citizens who were sent to the camps without trial and held without rights in what the police euphemistically called ‘protective custody.’ Her book will certainly find a wide readership.”

Here’s hoping it will, because it’s outwardly brave, memorably brazen and overtly bodacious.

David Marx

Republic Of Spin

spin

Republic Of Spin –
An Inside Story Of the American Presidency
By David Greenberg
W.W. Norton & Company – £27.99

Liberalism will become an enclave conviction of a shrinking minority unless those who call themselves liberal reconnect their faith in tolerance, equality, opportunity for all with the more difficult faith in the dirty, loud-mouthed, false, lying business of politics itself. This disdain is cynicism, making as high principle.

                                                            Michael Ignatieff (”Letter to a Young Liberal”)

From Teddy Roosevelt to Barack Obama, presidential historian David Greenberg herein recounts the rise of The White House Spin Machine
And what an eye opening read it is.

Republic Of Spin – An Inside Story Of the American Presidency, is a tantalising, variable history that traverses more than a hundred years of vibrant, vivacious politics; the seeming catharsis of which, comes to an equally tantalising head this Friday, January 20th. The day tolerance and intelligence will leave The White House (with Obama’s exit) and misogynistic mayhem will enter The White House, (with Trump’s arrival).

That said, this book’s 448 pages of sweeping, startling narrative, essentially takes us behind the scenes, wherein, we are all the more potentially enlightened, as to how the tools and techniques of image invention actually work. On the way, we meet Woodrow Wilson convening the first ever White House press conference, Franklin Roosevelt huddling with his private pollsters, Ronald Reagan’s aides, crafting his nightly, news sound bites (well who else was going to craft them – most certainly not he after all), and let we forget, George Dubya staging his ”Mission Accomplished” photo-op.

If that weren’t enough, we also meet the many backstage visionaries who pioneered new ways of gauging public opinion and mastering ye me/me/me/media…

Furthermore, Greenberg examines the many profound debates Americans have waged over the effect of spin in politics by asking: ”Does spin help our leaders manipulate the citizenry? Or does it allow them to engage us more fully in the democratic project? This book illuminates both the power of spin and its limitations – its capacity not only to mislead but also to lead.”

Indeed, its six Parts (‘The Age Of Publicity,’ ‘The Age Of Ballyhoo,’ ‘The Age Of Communication,’ ‘The Age Of News Management,’ ‘The Age Of Image Making’ and ‘The Age Of Spin’), are, if nothing else, something of an irredentist revelation; that in (equally revelatory) truth, most of us have known all along. A pivotal aspect of the book, which the author brazenly writes about in the Introduction: ”[…] in the broadest sense of the term, spin has always been a part of politics. Politics involves advancing one’s interests and values in the public sphere, and political leadership means winning and sustaining public support. From the orators of Plato and Aristotle’s day to the European monarchs who superintended their images, leaders have always given thought to the words and images that will help them remain popular and achieve their goals.”

Had such a sad, tremulous indictment of political leadership and array of home-truths, not run utterly r-i-o-t throughout the 2016 American Presidential Campaign, Republic Of Spin – An Inside Story Of the American Presidency, would be no-where near as urgent a read as it invariably is.

In fact, in a mere handful of months from now, it will – in all its rambunctious repository of hindsight – prove nigh irresistible. Mark my words; even if only to read the following from the book’s final chapter, ‘Barack Obama and the Spin of No Spin’: ”The sheer pervasiveness of spin inevitably leaves an unpleasant after-taste. The heavy investment in crafted talk and burnished images can make our political rhetoric and theatre feel empty and even meretricious. Because it’s ubiquitous and unremitting, and because it stands in opposition to the straight-up truth-telling that we idealize, spin is always going to strike us as a vexatious or lamentable feature of modern politics. Paradoxically, though, our persistent worry about spin, while at times debilitating, keeps us vigilant about its abuse. And ultimately democracy has to make for duelling perspectives; politics always demands a give-and-take. As long as the public remains sovereign and public opinion reigns supreme, the debates will go on, the disputes will rage, the media will yammer and thrum, the people will make their arguments and form their judgements, and spin – much as we might crave relief from its relentlessness – will endure as an essential part of our political world.”

How’s about that for a touch of ”yammer and thrum?”
If you think Messrs. Campbell and Blair were the most notorious Prince Regents of Spin, read this. You won’t be disappointed.

David Marx

Resolve In International Politics

resolve

Resolve In International Politics
By Joshua D. Kertzer
Princeton University Press – £29.95/$39.50

Desire, wish, will, are states of mind which everyone knows, and which no definition can make plainer.

                                                                                 William Jones

This is a book which undoubtedly needs to be fully read by the pending/upcoming Donald Trump administration, but probably won’t. Reason being, Resolve In International Politics is far too sensible, far too considered and, I hasten to add, far too internationalist in both tonality and persuasion.

From the very outset of the first chapter (which, lest it be said, opens with the above quote), author Joshua D. Kertzer writes: ”On January 12, 2010, an earthquake struck the island nation of Haiti, reducing much of the capital city Port-au-Prince to rubble. In the days afterward, as the casualty estimates grew by the hundreds of thousands and the international community turned its attention toward rebuilding the ravaged country, pundits pontificated on the uphill battle faced by a country that had suffered as many man-made disasters as natural ones. Bob Herbert, writing in The New York Times, struck an optimistic note: the Haitians would succeed, he argued, because they had shown ”resolve among the ruins.”

Herbert is not alone in positing resolve and its synonyms – willpower, self-control, dedication, tenacity, determination, drive, and so on – as a solution to political problems.”

No, he’s not alone, but from what I’ve so far seen and read of Messrs. Newt Gingrich, Steve Bannon and Corey Lewandowski et al, the pending US powers that be look far too isolationist and overtly yahoo orientated to be taken remotely seriously.

As statesmen at least. Let alone deduced as serious contenders thereof.

This essentially explains why, as mentioned above, Trump and co would be more than wise to fully digest this book’s six chapters and two equally important Appendixes (‘Supplementary Theoretical Materials’ and ‘Supplementary Empirical Materials). Especially if international relations and politics are to continue on some sort of even keel.

For as Kertzer states throughout, political endeavour really is far more than just a metaphor – or some sort of figure of speech.

By combining laboratory and survey experiments with studies of great power military interventions amid the postwar era of 1946 to 2003, the Assistant Professor of Government at Harvard University emphatically shows how time, risk preferences, honour orientation, self-control and leaders – along with members of the public – help define the tumultuous variant of situation(s) they invariably face.

And in so doing, weighing the fundamental trade-offs between the costs of fighting and the costs of ”backing down.”

As Columbia University’s, Robert Jervis has said: ”Resolve is central to much international relations theorizing, but all too often is underanalyzed. Not in this book. Kertzer develops and tests the foundations of resolve by combining the characteristics of the actor and the situation. Using experiments and historical data, Resolve In International Politics moves us a big step forward.”

As a continuing caveat, this book has critical implications for the understanding of public opinion about foreign policy, leaders in military interventions, political psychology and international security as a whole; all of which, Trump and his cohorts of calamity continue to know absolutely NOTHING about.

Admittedly, these 204 pages may be a dry and rather more scientific read than need be, which may explain why it will probably appeal more to those who are actively involved in international politics than the laymen reader or mere cultural bystander. That there are a number of specific Tables scattered throughout – from ‘Rationales for international theorizing’ to ‘Treatments effects based on initial decision to invade,’ from ‘Demographic characteristics and the duration of intervention’ to ‘Little evidence of heterogeneous casualty treatment effects’ – goes some way in substantiating as much.

That said, Rose McDermott of Brown University has stated: ”A tour de force, this rich and original book will become the seminal and definitive treatment of this topic.” So there you go (Donald).

David Marx