The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power and the Necessity of Military Force
by Eliot Cohen
Hardcover (2016): This book is definitely worth reading. Eliot Cohen’s central thesis pulls directly from Vice President Theodore Roosevelt’s 1901 “National Duties” speech, where after being shot point-blank, Roosevelt still delivered his address and spoke the famous proverb “Speak softly and carry a big stick — you will go far.” Cohen’s point is that the US must use hard power and that it has the responsibility and capability to remain actively engaged in the world by using it as needed. The key question that this book is trying to address is “when and under what conditions should the United States actually use military power?”
Over the course of 231 pages broken out in eight chapters and a postscript, Cohen lays out the justification and framework for his thesis that takes the reader through a review of the limits of soft power and a justification of the wars of the past fifteen years. He then provides a compelling overview of the threats facing the US and provides his perspective on qualitative advantages the US has against competitors. Cohen also touches on some fundamental principles that need to be resolved in the crafting of legitimate strategy for the ethical waging of war.
Cohen’s background in military history is vast, spanning officership in the Army Reserve, an academic career at the Naval War College and Johns Hopkins’ SAIS and a term as Counselor to Secretary Condoleeza Rice under President Bush. He has also been elevated to the spotlight for openly criticizing President Trump both before and since the election.
One of the more critical aspects of the book is that the justification for the use of hard military power is done with little acknowledgment for its real drawbacks. The critical fallout that inevitably proceeds acts of war are glossed over in the quest to describe its legitamacy. The most salient points he made include the acceptance of the inherent uncertainty of war and the need to reorient the military services towards a comprehensive doctrine that accepts all possibilities, rather than think that any one type of war is over, “A military system built around uncertainty accepts the possibility hat it may have to fight very different kinds of wars.” Cohen also notes a failure of the military to improve its own formation of leadership, “Creating the right intellectual culture for thinking about hard power should be an essential task of senior leadership rather than, as it is now, a mere afterthought for leaders preoccupied by budgetary and operational issues.” Cohen laments that the failure of civilian leaders to communicate the realities of war to the American public perpetuates the budgetary issues that plague the military.
In total, the book lays out an articulated, intellectual argument for the use of hard power and serves as an excellent primer to think about the ethical implications of war for the US. Ultimately, Cohen’s point is made clearly, but narrowly without a balanced treatment of the challenges that will arise as a result, which are also important to communicate to audiences.
