What do you think?
Rate this book
The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War
Instant New York Times Bestseller
“An absorbing account of 21st-century brinkmanship . . . . one that should be read by every legislator or presidential nominee sufficiently deluded to think that returning America to its isolationist past or making chummy with Putin is a viable option in today’s world.� �New York Times Book Review
The essential new book by CNN anchor and chief national security analyst Jim Sciutto, identifying a new, more uncertain global order with reporting on the frontlines of power from existing wars to looming ones across the globe.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 dawned what Francis Fukuyama called “The End of History.� Three decades later, Jim Sciutto said on CNN’s air as the Ukraine war began, that we are living in a �1939 moment.� History never ended—it barely paused—and the global order as we long have known it is now gone. Powerful nations are determined to assert dominance on the world stage. And as their push for power escalates, a new order will affect everyone across the globe. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a part of it, but in reality, this power struggle impacts every corner of our world—from Helsinki to Beijing, from Australia to the North Pole. This is a battle with many in the Arctic, in the oceans and across the skies, on man-made islands and redrawn maps, and in tech and cyberspace.
Ìý
Through globe-spanning, exclusive interviews with dozens of political, military, and intelligence leaders, Sciutto defines our times as a return of great power conflict, “a definitive break between the post–Cold War era and an entirely new and uncertain one.� With savvy, thorough, in-person reporting, he follows-up his 2019 bestseller, The Shadow Inside Russia’s and China's Secret Operations to Defeat America, which focused on the covert tactics of a hidden conflict.
Ìý
The Return of Great Powers analyzes a historic and visible shift in real time. It details the realities of this new post–post–Cold War era, the increasingly aligned Russian and Chinese governments, and the flashpoint of a new, global nuclear arms race. And it poses a As we consider uncertain, even terrifying, outcomes, will it be possible for the West and Russia and China to prevent a new World War?
“An absorbing account of 21st-century brinkmanship . . . . one that should be read by every legislator or presidential nominee sufficiently deluded to think that returning America to its isolationist past or making chummy with Putin is a viable option in today’s world.� �New York Times Book Review
The essential new book by CNN anchor and chief national security analyst Jim Sciutto, identifying a new, more uncertain global order with reporting on the frontlines of power from existing wars to looming ones across the globe.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 dawned what Francis Fukuyama called “The End of History.� Three decades later, Jim Sciutto said on CNN’s air as the Ukraine war began, that we are living in a �1939 moment.� History never ended—it barely paused—and the global order as we long have known it is now gone. Powerful nations are determined to assert dominance on the world stage. And as their push for power escalates, a new order will affect everyone across the globe. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a part of it, but in reality, this power struggle impacts every corner of our world—from Helsinki to Beijing, from Australia to the North Pole. This is a battle with many in the Arctic, in the oceans and across the skies, on man-made islands and redrawn maps, and in tech and cyberspace.
Ìý
Through globe-spanning, exclusive interviews with dozens of political, military, and intelligence leaders, Sciutto defines our times as a return of great power conflict, “a definitive break between the post–Cold War era and an entirely new and uncertain one.� With savvy, thorough, in-person reporting, he follows-up his 2019 bestseller, The Shadow Inside Russia’s and China's Secret Operations to Defeat America, which focused on the covert tactics of a hidden conflict.
Ìý
The Return of Great Powers analyzes a historic and visible shift in real time. It details the realities of this new post–post–Cold War era, the increasingly aligned Russian and Chinese governments, and the flashpoint of a new, global nuclear arms race. And it poses a As we consider uncertain, even terrifying, outcomes, will it be possible for the West and Russia and China to prevent a new World War?
368 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 12, 2024
345 people are currently reading
4,591 people want to read
About the author
Jim Sciutto
5Ìýbooks66ÌýfollowersJim Sciutto is CNN’s Chief National Security Correspondent and CNN Newsroom Anchor based in Washington, D.C. He reports, anchors. and provides analysis across the network's programs and platforms on all aspects of U.S. national security, including foreign policy, the military, and the intelligence community. Prior to joining CNN, Sciutto served as ABC News' senior foreign correspondent. - Amazon bio
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 129 reviews
June 30, 2024
“The new order of three great powers is lengthening and hardening dividing lines among the powers while breaking diplomatic and economic ties among them. It is sparking military expansions while reducing military-to-military communication. It is inflating nuclear arsenals and new categories of weapons. It is drawing middle powers and regional interests in unexpected, inconsistent ways. The return of great powers has upended the post-Cold War global order and replaced it with a new, less stable one…�
- Jim Sciutto, The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 ushered in a brief, unique period in the history of the world. After decades in which the United States and the Soviet Union had vied for global supremacy, America suddenly stood alone, able to do whatever it wanted, for good and ill.
For a variety of reasons, this unusual interim has ended. Change always creates destabilizing effects, of course. Personally, the slightest alteration to my daily routine will send me into a spiral of anxiety and irritation. But this change in particular � due to the aims and ambitions of China and Russia � threatens to rearrange the current economic and military order, with far greater impact than the lowered mood I feel when my wife has taken the last Diet Coke, depriving me of my morning caffeine boost.
In The Return of Great Powers, Jim Sciutto does a wonderful job of offering a snapshot of this new � and rapidly mutating � paradigm, and of making some predictions as to what it might mean for all of us going forward.
Spoiler alert: it might be bad.
***
Though it is not telling a straightforward, A to Z story, Sciutto structures The Return of Great Powers in a rough chronology that begins with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and ends in 2024, shortly before this book’s publication. As noted up top, Sciutto’s interest is with the return of a multipolar world in which there are numerous powerful nations all vying to be king of the mountain: flexing military muscle; gathering allies; threatening neighbors; and looking for every edge and angle, whether that’s new weapons technology, engaging in cyberwarfare and espionage, or disrupting the political processes of other countries.
A multipolar world is nothing new. Large, aggressive empires have always existed, and for much of human history, they have been bumping up against other large, aggressive empires. Thus, in a sense, today is no different from the 1800s or 1900s, when Great Britain, France, Germany, and the Ottomans all delineated vast spheres of influence. Still, it's been awhile since we’ve been in this position. For a couple decades, the United States stood alone. Before that, it was America and the Soviet Union. Moreover, for the first time in history, the contending great powers have nuclear weapons, which adds an element of we’re-all-going-to-die-if-this-goes-wrong to the proceedings.
***
Sciutto touches upon a lot of different topics in a relatively brief book that’s just over three-hundred pages of text. From the first page to the last, I was never disinterested. Sciutto gives a brisk, absorbing retelling of the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War; thoroughly discusses the role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), purportedly the longest-lasting alliance ever; dissects the response to Vladimir Putin’s nuclear threats, as well as the wildcard role atomic warheads play in the geostrategic games ahead; narrates a terrifying vision of how a Chinese-Taiwanese-American war might unfold; launches into space to visualize a brand new theater of operations; and deliberates on Taiwan as the next possible flashpoint in a tinder-dry world.
While it seems like The Return of Great Powers is all over the place, I can assure you: that’s just my review. The book itself is well structured, and all the discussions flow from the central thesis that one period of history ended in February 2022, and another is in the process of being shaped. What things will look like � according to Sciutto � depends on the outcome of the war in Ukraine, how this outcome is interpreted by Xi Jinping with regard to Taiwan, and whether or not the West is going to contest � or continue to contest � the bold moves made by Russia and China.
***
The Return of Great Powers is not a work of history, but one of reportage. Sciutto is a journalist � and former senior advisor to the U.S. Ambassador to China � and he is present on every page, making first-person observations, drawing on his own experiences, and talking to just about everyone, whether it’s a Cabinet member or a Ukrainian woman who fled the Russian advance with her family.
If we’re being honest, I have a tendency to be annoyed by journalists, especially when they make themselves part of the story, or treat their books like Instagram pages, in which they boast of how many important sources they’ve talked to. Sciutto neatly avoids these traps. When he describes himself going somewhere, it typically has a purpose. For instance, there is a marvelous scene with Sciutto accompanying a NATO naval patrol in the Baltic Sea, as Russian fighter jets fly at provocatively close ranges. In this one vignette, Sciutto limns part of NATO’s mission, informs the readers of a modern warship’s antiaircraft capabilities, and also provides a terrifying vision of how some young, hotdogging, dumbass pilot might trigger the last cataclysm we’ll ever know. It’s just tight writing.
Sciutto’s interviews are also fruitful. He doesn’t mention interviews just to brag about his access. Rather, he talks to people who have insight, and records them saying meaningful things. Beyond that, he talks to people from both sides of the political divide. This includes General Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General John Kelly, the Marine turned political advisor, and current Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Sciutto also spends a lot of time with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, effortlessly contorting himself into an apolitical posture, even as a potentially game-changing political event looms.
***
The event in question � I hesitate to mention � is the 2024 U.S. Presidential election. The outcome may determine whether or not the United States continues to fund Ukraine, or even stay in NATO. Of this, I’ll say no more, but Sciutto devotes an entire chapter to it.
***
Having never done cocaine, I can only assume it gives one the same sensation I experience when I purchase a shiny new � or preferably, gently used � book. I mention this because I have accumulated so many titles that it will take me years � perhaps a decade � to read what is already on my sagging bookshelves, a literary reminder of mortality, and the preciousness of fleeting time.
Anyway, when I first heard of The Return of Great Powers, I knew I wanted to read it. But rather than purchasing it impulsively, I gave grave consideration as to whether I was prepared to open it at once, as opposed to letting it languish for the foreseeable future. The reason is that this book has a short window of relevance. As Sciutto implicitly acknowledges, the upcoming elections may render it moot. Even if it does not, this is a piece about fluid current events. In terms of shelf life, a typical history is like beans or rice or pasta: it can last a while. A book like The Return of Great Powers is more akin to half-and-half. It expires quickly.
This is all a lengthy way of saying that while really liked The Return of Great Powers, it has to be read right now in order to be of any value. After all, it is a work of warning and prophecy as much as anything. Given this limitation, I’m likely to forget it sooner than others. Unless � that is � things go horribly, terribly wrong in the years to come.
- Jim Sciutto, The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 ushered in a brief, unique period in the history of the world. After decades in which the United States and the Soviet Union had vied for global supremacy, America suddenly stood alone, able to do whatever it wanted, for good and ill.
For a variety of reasons, this unusual interim has ended. Change always creates destabilizing effects, of course. Personally, the slightest alteration to my daily routine will send me into a spiral of anxiety and irritation. But this change in particular � due to the aims and ambitions of China and Russia � threatens to rearrange the current economic and military order, with far greater impact than the lowered mood I feel when my wife has taken the last Diet Coke, depriving me of my morning caffeine boost.
In The Return of Great Powers, Jim Sciutto does a wonderful job of offering a snapshot of this new � and rapidly mutating � paradigm, and of making some predictions as to what it might mean for all of us going forward.
Spoiler alert: it might be bad.
***
Though it is not telling a straightforward, A to Z story, Sciutto structures The Return of Great Powers in a rough chronology that begins with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and ends in 2024, shortly before this book’s publication. As noted up top, Sciutto’s interest is with the return of a multipolar world in which there are numerous powerful nations all vying to be king of the mountain: flexing military muscle; gathering allies; threatening neighbors; and looking for every edge and angle, whether that’s new weapons technology, engaging in cyberwarfare and espionage, or disrupting the political processes of other countries.
A multipolar world is nothing new. Large, aggressive empires have always existed, and for much of human history, they have been bumping up against other large, aggressive empires. Thus, in a sense, today is no different from the 1800s or 1900s, when Great Britain, France, Germany, and the Ottomans all delineated vast spheres of influence. Still, it's been awhile since we’ve been in this position. For a couple decades, the United States stood alone. Before that, it was America and the Soviet Union. Moreover, for the first time in history, the contending great powers have nuclear weapons, which adds an element of we’re-all-going-to-die-if-this-goes-wrong to the proceedings.
***
Sciutto touches upon a lot of different topics in a relatively brief book that’s just over three-hundred pages of text. From the first page to the last, I was never disinterested. Sciutto gives a brisk, absorbing retelling of the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War; thoroughly discusses the role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), purportedly the longest-lasting alliance ever; dissects the response to Vladimir Putin’s nuclear threats, as well as the wildcard role atomic warheads play in the geostrategic games ahead; narrates a terrifying vision of how a Chinese-Taiwanese-American war might unfold; launches into space to visualize a brand new theater of operations; and deliberates on Taiwan as the next possible flashpoint in a tinder-dry world.
While it seems like The Return of Great Powers is all over the place, I can assure you: that’s just my review. The book itself is well structured, and all the discussions flow from the central thesis that one period of history ended in February 2022, and another is in the process of being shaped. What things will look like � according to Sciutto � depends on the outcome of the war in Ukraine, how this outcome is interpreted by Xi Jinping with regard to Taiwan, and whether or not the West is going to contest � or continue to contest � the bold moves made by Russia and China.
***
The Return of Great Powers is not a work of history, but one of reportage. Sciutto is a journalist � and former senior advisor to the U.S. Ambassador to China � and he is present on every page, making first-person observations, drawing on his own experiences, and talking to just about everyone, whether it’s a Cabinet member or a Ukrainian woman who fled the Russian advance with her family.
If we’re being honest, I have a tendency to be annoyed by journalists, especially when they make themselves part of the story, or treat their books like Instagram pages, in which they boast of how many important sources they’ve talked to. Sciutto neatly avoids these traps. When he describes himself going somewhere, it typically has a purpose. For instance, there is a marvelous scene with Sciutto accompanying a NATO naval patrol in the Baltic Sea, as Russian fighter jets fly at provocatively close ranges. In this one vignette, Sciutto limns part of NATO’s mission, informs the readers of a modern warship’s antiaircraft capabilities, and also provides a terrifying vision of how some young, hotdogging, dumbass pilot might trigger the last cataclysm we’ll ever know. It’s just tight writing.
Sciutto’s interviews are also fruitful. He doesn’t mention interviews just to brag about his access. Rather, he talks to people who have insight, and records them saying meaningful things. Beyond that, he talks to people from both sides of the political divide. This includes General Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General John Kelly, the Marine turned political advisor, and current Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Sciutto also spends a lot of time with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, effortlessly contorting himself into an apolitical posture, even as a potentially game-changing political event looms.
***
The event in question � I hesitate to mention � is the 2024 U.S. Presidential election. The outcome may determine whether or not the United States continues to fund Ukraine, or even stay in NATO. Of this, I’ll say no more, but Sciutto devotes an entire chapter to it.
***
Having never done cocaine, I can only assume it gives one the same sensation I experience when I purchase a shiny new � or preferably, gently used � book. I mention this because I have accumulated so many titles that it will take me years � perhaps a decade � to read what is already on my sagging bookshelves, a literary reminder of mortality, and the preciousness of fleeting time.
Anyway, when I first heard of The Return of Great Powers, I knew I wanted to read it. But rather than purchasing it impulsively, I gave grave consideration as to whether I was prepared to open it at once, as opposed to letting it languish for the foreseeable future. The reason is that this book has a short window of relevance. As Sciutto implicitly acknowledges, the upcoming elections may render it moot. Even if it does not, this is a piece about fluid current events. In terms of shelf life, a typical history is like beans or rice or pasta: it can last a while. A book like The Return of Great Powers is more akin to half-and-half. It expires quickly.
This is all a lengthy way of saying that while really liked The Return of Great Powers, it has to be read right now in order to be of any value. After all, it is a work of warning and prophecy as much as anything. Given this limitation, I’m likely to forget it sooner than others. Unless � that is � things go horribly, terribly wrong in the years to come.
September 15, 2024
Sciutto begins with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2021. He sees this as just one step in Putin’s plan to reincarnate the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire. Likewise, Xi Jinping and China consider Taiwan part of China, the South China Sea theirs, and Asia its sphere of hegemony. Both countries see this as their time to put an end to the dominance of the United States and establish a new world order that would replace Western leadership and values with theirs. In pursuit of this both are increasingly belligerent. In short Sciutto sees the world on the threshold of a showdown. The US and the West are aware of the stakes but as democracies with politically polarized populations the road forward is uncertain.
Sciutto is a CNN reporter and the book is written in a journalistic style. It is straightforward and easy to read although a bit wordy and repetitive. While his points are well taken, most of the background and recent history will not be new to those who follow the news. He adds in personal stories of those caught up in the Ukraine war and international incidents involving China. He incorporates his meetings with military and political leaders presenting their views. However, he does not dote on himself. As Sciutto covers recent events, he presents the reaction of those he interviews at the time the events were taking place. Thus, we see how opinions and policies shift.
New and strengthened alliances are taking shape. Europe, surprising Russia, is stepping up with significant military aid to Ukraine. Sweden and Finland have joined NATO. I read while writing this that even Switzerland is considering loosening its restrictions on the use of its weapons by NATO countries. It realizes that if Russia destabilizes Europe, it too will suffer. NATO is reaching out to Asian democracies. The UK, Italy and Japan are developing next gen fighter jets jointly. The US is helping Australia, fearful of China, build nuclear submarines. On the autocratic side, China and Russia are cooperating. Russian oil and submarine technology are going to China in return for its support in the Ukraine war and against the West. Russia is transferring sensitive technology to North Korea in return for ammunition, weapons, and support against Ukraine. Russia is giving Iran new technology and captured US weapons to reverse engineer while Russia receives their drones and technology for use in Ukraine. Russian missiles are going to Hezbollah via Syria. I just read that Iranian ballistic missiles have been sent to Russia.
Sciutto went to sea with a NATO task force patrolling the Baltic Sea. He was there as Russian aircraft made fast close approaches to NATO ships and planes to intimidate them. Something they frequently do. He recounts his conversations with commanders of ships from several NATO nations. All believe that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and especially its brutal treatment of civilians means NATO forces must be quickly beefed up. One particularly ominous threat is Russia’s mapping the undersea cables and pipelines that cross not only the Baltic but the Atlantic. Russia is clearly prepared to interdict internet traffic and other vital communications to Europe. As I write this there are new reports of increased Russian mapping of undersea cables.
Sciutto highlights an extensive interview with Estonian prime minister Kallas. Former Soviet republics including those in the Baltics see the Ukrainian war as a matter of their own survival, certain that Putin will not stop with Ukraine. NATO is updating defense plans and moving more weapons into NATO countries like Estonia. Would Russia attack a NATO country? Until it became apparent few thought he would make an all-out attack on Ukraine. On the Black Sea Russia is working to destabilize the government of Moldova to set it up for takeover with a familiar playbook, false flag operations and cyber-attacks.
Sciutto also visits Taiwan and talks with military and administration leaders. Taiwan faces Chinese intimidation every day as Chinese planes try to penetrate Taiwan’s airspace and ships Taiwan’s waters. When Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan, the Chinese Navy encircled Taiwan. War game planning on a Chinese invasion shows horrific losses for all involved including the U.S. if it intervened. Taiwan has prepared its military defenses and is learning much from the Ukraine war. Drones and other asymmetric warfare tactics are the new name of the game. But China is learning from Ukraine as well. China could try to blockade Taiwan, cut its energy supply, food supply and connections to the outside world. China like Russia has mapped undersea cables connecting Taiwan. Like Russia with Putin, China’s decision rests with one man, Xi Jinping.
Xi Jinping has shown he will take risks and act brutally: Incarcerating a million Uighurs, smashing Hong Kong protests, imposing draconian Covid laws, and aggressively intimidating his Asian neighbors, those bordering the South China Sea, India and even Australia. China imposed severe sanctions on Australia upset with Australian policies including the blocking of Chinese telecom Huawei from supplying Australia’s 5G network, criticizing China for trying to control the South China Sea, and launching an investigation into the origins of Covid. In response Xi blocked a wide range of imports from Australia undermining his own economy. The Covid policy and trade restrictions added to other domestic issues have weakened the Chinese economy. Sciutto discusses China and Xi with then Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley, CIA Director Bill Burns, and many Taiwanese leaders. All believe Xi is fully committed to the takeover of Taiwan during his reign. The question is not if, but when and how. What would the American people think if we went to war to support Taiwan and we lost 2,000 sailors and soldiers overnight? In Afghanistan that took two decades. War games show that 2,000 deaths the first day would be just the beginning. Despite the US promise to defend Taiwan, would it really follow through? If not, would there be any hope of containing China’s expansion?
Could Russia use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war? Putin and Russian officials have repeatedly threatened their use. Their nuclear doctrine provides for using nukes in response to battlefield setbacks in conventional war. Tactical nukes could be deployed easily using artillery. Sciutto again talked with General Milley and others to explore this. In 2022 and 2023 the US military and intelligence agencies had serious concerns that Russia was considering it. Joint Chiefs Chair Milley, CIA Director Burns, Secretary of State Blinken and other US officials engaged their Russia counterparts and made clear the US would respond forcefully coming to Ukraine’s aid with conventional forces, not nukes. US officials also engaged their counterparts in China, India, and other countries to engage with the Russians. Both Xi and India’s Modi made clear statements denouncing any use of nukes. Xi is not as cavalier about using nuclear weapons as is Putin. The G7 issued a statement condemning Russian nuclear rhetoric and citing “severe consequences� for the use of nukes. NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg and other NATO officials warned Russian counterparts against using nukes. In 2023 Putin announced Russia was suspending its participation in the START Treaty which limits the number of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles both they and the US can have. Meanwhile China is rapidly growing its nuclear arsenal as is North Korea. Iran now freed from the restrictions of the nuclear treaty after Trump withdrew in 2018 is but a few steps away from having nuclear weapons. South Korea is considering developing nukes as are others. A question not lost on non-nuclear nations threatened by nuclear powers is: Would Russia have invaded Ukraine if Ukraine had nuclear weapons?
Sciutto gives us a sketch of modern multifront war. In addition to conventional and nuclear attacks, there are cyber-attacks and attacks in space. Cyber warfare can disable infrastructure, such as utilities, pipelines and communication systems weakening and disorganizing an adversary before a single bomb hits. In space China and Russia have launched satellites that follow American satellites and could take them out in the event of war, disrupting GPS and communications. Then there are ever evolving potentially game changing capabilities such as hypersonic weapons and strange iterations such as the nuclear-powered torpedoes the size of a bus which Russia is testing. Add in rapid advances in drones and AI powered autonomous weapons to complete the picture of new very different wars.
Sciutto talks with former Trump officials to assess how Trump would handle the great power conflict in a second term. According to general John Kelly who served as Trump’s Chief of Staff and Homeland Security secretary, there would be a radical change from current policy. Trump’s former national security advisor John Bolton concurs. Trump would force a deal on Ukraine, reduce support for NATO and South Korea, and likely not intervene to defend Taiwan. Kelley notes that Trump respects powerful dictators like Putin and Xi and envies their power. Trump believes if he has a good personal relationship with these dictators everything else will work out. Putin and Xi would quickly fill the vacuum as the US receded into isolationism.
Sciutto is a CNN reporter and the book is written in a journalistic style. It is straightforward and easy to read although a bit wordy and repetitive. While his points are well taken, most of the background and recent history will not be new to those who follow the news. He adds in personal stories of those caught up in the Ukraine war and international incidents involving China. He incorporates his meetings with military and political leaders presenting their views. However, he does not dote on himself. As Sciutto covers recent events, he presents the reaction of those he interviews at the time the events were taking place. Thus, we see how opinions and policies shift.
New and strengthened alliances are taking shape. Europe, surprising Russia, is stepping up with significant military aid to Ukraine. Sweden and Finland have joined NATO. I read while writing this that even Switzerland is considering loosening its restrictions on the use of its weapons by NATO countries. It realizes that if Russia destabilizes Europe, it too will suffer. NATO is reaching out to Asian democracies. The UK, Italy and Japan are developing next gen fighter jets jointly. The US is helping Australia, fearful of China, build nuclear submarines. On the autocratic side, China and Russia are cooperating. Russian oil and submarine technology are going to China in return for its support in the Ukraine war and against the West. Russia is transferring sensitive technology to North Korea in return for ammunition, weapons, and support against Ukraine. Russia is giving Iran new technology and captured US weapons to reverse engineer while Russia receives their drones and technology for use in Ukraine. Russian missiles are going to Hezbollah via Syria. I just read that Iranian ballistic missiles have been sent to Russia.
Sciutto went to sea with a NATO task force patrolling the Baltic Sea. He was there as Russian aircraft made fast close approaches to NATO ships and planes to intimidate them. Something they frequently do. He recounts his conversations with commanders of ships from several NATO nations. All believe that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and especially its brutal treatment of civilians means NATO forces must be quickly beefed up. One particularly ominous threat is Russia’s mapping the undersea cables and pipelines that cross not only the Baltic but the Atlantic. Russia is clearly prepared to interdict internet traffic and other vital communications to Europe. As I write this there are new reports of increased Russian mapping of undersea cables.
Sciutto highlights an extensive interview with Estonian prime minister Kallas. Former Soviet republics including those in the Baltics see the Ukrainian war as a matter of their own survival, certain that Putin will not stop with Ukraine. NATO is updating defense plans and moving more weapons into NATO countries like Estonia. Would Russia attack a NATO country? Until it became apparent few thought he would make an all-out attack on Ukraine. On the Black Sea Russia is working to destabilize the government of Moldova to set it up for takeover with a familiar playbook, false flag operations and cyber-attacks.
Sciutto also visits Taiwan and talks with military and administration leaders. Taiwan faces Chinese intimidation every day as Chinese planes try to penetrate Taiwan’s airspace and ships Taiwan’s waters. When Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan, the Chinese Navy encircled Taiwan. War game planning on a Chinese invasion shows horrific losses for all involved including the U.S. if it intervened. Taiwan has prepared its military defenses and is learning much from the Ukraine war. Drones and other asymmetric warfare tactics are the new name of the game. But China is learning from Ukraine as well. China could try to blockade Taiwan, cut its energy supply, food supply and connections to the outside world. China like Russia has mapped undersea cables connecting Taiwan. Like Russia with Putin, China’s decision rests with one man, Xi Jinping.
Xi Jinping has shown he will take risks and act brutally: Incarcerating a million Uighurs, smashing Hong Kong protests, imposing draconian Covid laws, and aggressively intimidating his Asian neighbors, those bordering the South China Sea, India and even Australia. China imposed severe sanctions on Australia upset with Australian policies including the blocking of Chinese telecom Huawei from supplying Australia’s 5G network, criticizing China for trying to control the South China Sea, and launching an investigation into the origins of Covid. In response Xi blocked a wide range of imports from Australia undermining his own economy. The Covid policy and trade restrictions added to other domestic issues have weakened the Chinese economy. Sciutto discusses China and Xi with then Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley, CIA Director Bill Burns, and many Taiwanese leaders. All believe Xi is fully committed to the takeover of Taiwan during his reign. The question is not if, but when and how. What would the American people think if we went to war to support Taiwan and we lost 2,000 sailors and soldiers overnight? In Afghanistan that took two decades. War games show that 2,000 deaths the first day would be just the beginning. Despite the US promise to defend Taiwan, would it really follow through? If not, would there be any hope of containing China’s expansion?
Could Russia use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war? Putin and Russian officials have repeatedly threatened their use. Their nuclear doctrine provides for using nukes in response to battlefield setbacks in conventional war. Tactical nukes could be deployed easily using artillery. Sciutto again talked with General Milley and others to explore this. In 2022 and 2023 the US military and intelligence agencies had serious concerns that Russia was considering it. Joint Chiefs Chair Milley, CIA Director Burns, Secretary of State Blinken and other US officials engaged their Russia counterparts and made clear the US would respond forcefully coming to Ukraine’s aid with conventional forces, not nukes. US officials also engaged their counterparts in China, India, and other countries to engage with the Russians. Both Xi and India’s Modi made clear statements denouncing any use of nukes. Xi is not as cavalier about using nuclear weapons as is Putin. The G7 issued a statement condemning Russian nuclear rhetoric and citing “severe consequences� for the use of nukes. NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg and other NATO officials warned Russian counterparts against using nukes. In 2023 Putin announced Russia was suspending its participation in the START Treaty which limits the number of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles both they and the US can have. Meanwhile China is rapidly growing its nuclear arsenal as is North Korea. Iran now freed from the restrictions of the nuclear treaty after Trump withdrew in 2018 is but a few steps away from having nuclear weapons. South Korea is considering developing nukes as are others. A question not lost on non-nuclear nations threatened by nuclear powers is: Would Russia have invaded Ukraine if Ukraine had nuclear weapons?
Sciutto gives us a sketch of modern multifront war. In addition to conventional and nuclear attacks, there are cyber-attacks and attacks in space. Cyber warfare can disable infrastructure, such as utilities, pipelines and communication systems weakening and disorganizing an adversary before a single bomb hits. In space China and Russia have launched satellites that follow American satellites and could take them out in the event of war, disrupting GPS and communications. Then there are ever evolving potentially game changing capabilities such as hypersonic weapons and strange iterations such as the nuclear-powered torpedoes the size of a bus which Russia is testing. Add in rapid advances in drones and AI powered autonomous weapons to complete the picture of new very different wars.
Sciutto talks with former Trump officials to assess how Trump would handle the great power conflict in a second term. According to general John Kelly who served as Trump’s Chief of Staff and Homeland Security secretary, there would be a radical change from current policy. Trump’s former national security advisor John Bolton concurs. Trump would force a deal on Ukraine, reduce support for NATO and South Korea, and likely not intervene to defend Taiwan. Kelley notes that Trump respects powerful dictators like Putin and Xi and envies their power. Trump believes if he has a good personal relationship with these dictators everything else will work out. Putin and Xi would quickly fill the vacuum as the US receded into isolationism.
March 30, 2024
A brief, concise summary of recent events regarding Russia and China over the past two years, like reading two years of CNN articles, with lots of un-challenging interviews with Western government officials, but utterly lacking in critical analysis, nuance, and depth. For example, when writing about the situation between Russia and Moldova, how does one not even once mention Transnistria? The book's also light on offering any sort of historical background or context. Anyone informed on the topic can skip this book, but the book is good as a quick, simple primer on the current state of US relations with Russia and China for less informed readers.
September 5, 2024
I won this book in a goodreads drawing.
Jim Sciutto, a guy from CNN, a dying network that nobody trusts, writes about the rise of Russia and China. Considering the source, I'm not sure what to believe.
Jim Sciutto, a guy from CNN, a dying network that nobody trusts, writes about the rise of Russia and China. Considering the source, I'm not sure what to believe.
March 23, 2024
The premise of this book is that recent geopolitical developments, especially the Russian invasion of Ukraine, have heralded the return of “Great Power Politics� and that we have to seriously consider what this means for the US and the world going forward. Sciutto is a smart and personable international war and national security correspondent and I suspect that most who pay attention to the media on the Ukraine war have seen him at work. It should not be surprising that he has written a very good book trying to make sense of global security developments.
What are “Great Power Politics�(GPP)? When did they leave? When did they return? Sciutto is a bit all over the map on this with implied suggestions that began in 1914, with the start of WW1; 1939 (with the start of WW2), or sometime afterwards with the Cold War. There are occasional reflections back to the age of the European dynasties prior to 1914 (I suppose with the Congress of Europe) after the downfall of Napoleon. Dynastic relations, however, are different from GPP � much too personal � and I would place a start date for GPP at around 1870 with the Franco-Prussian War and the rise of Bismarck. But this is nitpicking and not crucial to the book. When did GPP leave.go away thus permitting an eventual return? That is much easier. A good guess would be with the fall of the Soviet Union - December 1991.
For just about all commentators, world politics got hopelessly scrambled after 1991 and left open opportunities for a continuing US dominance - or so the story goes. Missteps after that left US leadership lagging, Europe letting down its guard, and the rise of Putin as the successor to Yeltsin. With Putin now firmly enscounced in power and China newly ascendant, a new pattern of global politics began to emerge. And the rest, so they say, is history - albeit recent history.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, coupled with a growing autocracy in China (and its Taiwan situation), brings us up to date for the book. Now what does it all mean? Is the return of GPP good or bad?
At one level, it is troubling, in that great power war now involves three (or more) nuclear powers and has the potential to revisit 1914 with nuclear weapons. Ok, that is disturbing. But wait, there is more. Modern conflicts in the new world of GPP are deeply concerned with principles, especially those of democracy, freedom, economic expansion, etc. So we cannot return to a period of appeasement and try to placate or buy off the autocracies. No more 1938-1939!! So we are back to snatching peace and continuity from the jaws of war and potential Armageddon. The new normal comes with antacids and pills for high blood pressure.
At another level, it doesn’t seem as troubling. Ok, so my Russian and Chinese vacations are off the table for now. …but trade continues, doesn’t it? And one of the biggest global fears making the rounds has to do with the 2024 US presidential elections. We have lived with global and national instability since at least 2016. And the world seems to keep going. We did this for a very long time during the Cold War, so what is the problem?
The problem is that during the Cold War, at least we had some sort of story and some coherence to how the US navigated foreign and security affairs. I might not agree with everything that George Kennan put in the “Long Telegram� but I read it and understood it. This provided guidance and direction and there was an effort at bipartisanship in foreign affairs. Now that is gone.
In Mr. Sciutto’s next book, I hope he spends some time remembering Kennan and thinking about the stories that the key players are currently trying to spin to make the new world order understandable.
This is not too long of a book and is well worth reading
What are “Great Power Politics�(GPP)? When did they leave? When did they return? Sciutto is a bit all over the map on this with implied suggestions that began in 1914, with the start of WW1; 1939 (with the start of WW2), or sometime afterwards with the Cold War. There are occasional reflections back to the age of the European dynasties prior to 1914 (I suppose with the Congress of Europe) after the downfall of Napoleon. Dynastic relations, however, are different from GPP � much too personal � and I would place a start date for GPP at around 1870 with the Franco-Prussian War and the rise of Bismarck. But this is nitpicking and not crucial to the book. When did GPP leave.go away thus permitting an eventual return? That is much easier. A good guess would be with the fall of the Soviet Union - December 1991.
For just about all commentators, world politics got hopelessly scrambled after 1991 and left open opportunities for a continuing US dominance - or so the story goes. Missteps after that left US leadership lagging, Europe letting down its guard, and the rise of Putin as the successor to Yeltsin. With Putin now firmly enscounced in power and China newly ascendant, a new pattern of global politics began to emerge. And the rest, so they say, is history - albeit recent history.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, coupled with a growing autocracy in China (and its Taiwan situation), brings us up to date for the book. Now what does it all mean? Is the return of GPP good or bad?
At one level, it is troubling, in that great power war now involves three (or more) nuclear powers and has the potential to revisit 1914 with nuclear weapons. Ok, that is disturbing. But wait, there is more. Modern conflicts in the new world of GPP are deeply concerned with principles, especially those of democracy, freedom, economic expansion, etc. So we cannot return to a period of appeasement and try to placate or buy off the autocracies. No more 1938-1939!! So we are back to snatching peace and continuity from the jaws of war and potential Armageddon. The new normal comes with antacids and pills for high blood pressure.
At another level, it doesn’t seem as troubling. Ok, so my Russian and Chinese vacations are off the table for now. …but trade continues, doesn’t it? And one of the biggest global fears making the rounds has to do with the 2024 US presidential elections. We have lived with global and national instability since at least 2016. And the world seems to keep going. We did this for a very long time during the Cold War, so what is the problem?
The problem is that during the Cold War, at least we had some sort of story and some coherence to how the US navigated foreign and security affairs. I might not agree with everything that George Kennan put in the “Long Telegram� but I read it and understood it. This provided guidance and direction and there was an effort at bipartisanship in foreign affairs. Now that is gone.
In Mr. Sciutto’s next book, I hope he spends some time remembering Kennan and thinking about the stories that the key players are currently trying to spin to make the new world order understandable.
This is not too long of a book and is well worth reading
February 18, 2025
2.7
Unsurprisingly dry. My biggest complaint is that it takes about half of the length to get to any real analysis and reporting, instead of just summarizing. Maybe another round of editing would have helped
Unsurprisingly dry. My biggest complaint is that it takes about half of the length to get to any real analysis and reporting, instead of just summarizing. Maybe another round of editing would have helped
May 5, 2024
A reporter’s notebook
Of quotes and impressions that could have been conveyed in a dozen editorials but was expanded into a book. Superficial and tedious.
Of quotes and impressions that could have been conveyed in a dozen editorials but was expanded into a book. Superficial and tedious.
August 3, 2024
This book made me think of Fav. It begins with a discussion on the events leading up to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, from there drawing parallels to the China-Taiwan trouble, with the main thesis being: China is watching the world’s response to Ukraine very closely, and will use the lessons learned in international diplomacy, asymmetrical warfare, and great power relations to determine feasibility of Taiwan occupation.
At any rate, nothing in this book is new, Fav and I have spent many late nights talking over these points, but still an interesting work, written by a journalist, and is riddled with interviews with heads of state/national security offices, anecdotes, historical primers, etc.
4/5
At any rate, nothing in this book is new, Fav and I have spent many late nights talking over these points, but still an interesting work, written by a journalist, and is riddled with interviews with heads of state/national security offices, anecdotes, historical primers, etc.
4/5
May 13, 2024
Review:
As with the book, 'Nuclear War: A Scenario' by Annie Jacobsen; Jim Sciutto brings the reader contextually into the power dynamics of current geopolitical frictions.
He threads an illustrative needle encompassing the Ukraine Russia War and the tensions potential of a major war with China over Taiwan.
'The Return of Great Powers', is a broad look at our fast paced ever changing world, its concise and to the point; it’s well structured as it takes the reader through past, present and future geopolitical scenarios including, and importantly the possibility of how another ‘Trump� presidency would drastically impact our interconnected world.
For those who purport to have an opinion regarding current affairs when referencing politics, whether geopolitically or domestically, this is an essential read.
~MR.
Synopsis:
The essential new book by CNN Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto, reporting from the front lines of political hotspots and warzones across the globe.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 dawned what Francis Fukuyama called “The End of History.� Three decades later, Jim Sciutto said on CNN’s air as the Ukraine war began, that we are living in a �1939 moment.� History never ended—it barely paused—and the global order as we have known it is now gone. Great powers are reinvigorated and determined to assert dominance on the world stage. And as it escalates, this new order will affect everyone across the globe. Peace has been shattered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but in reality, this affects every corner of our world—from Helsinki to Beijing, from Australia to the North Pole. This is a battle with many on the Arctic floor, in the oceans and across the skies, and in cyberspace.
Sciutto argues that we are witnessing the return of great power conflict, “a definitive break between the post–Cold War era and an entirely new and uncertain one.� The world order that marked the last thirty years is shifting, and Sciutto details the realities of this new post� post–Cold War era, the increasingly aligned Russian and Chinese governments, and the flashpoint of a new, global nuclear arms race. With savvy, thorough reporting, he follows-up his 2019 bestseller, The Shadow Inside Russia's and China's Secret Operations to Defeat America , which focused on the covert tactics of a hidden conflict. The Return of Great Powers is an analysis of a historic and visible shift in real time. And it poses a that as we consider uncertain outcomes, we ask whether the West and Russia and China can prevent a new World War
As with the book, 'Nuclear War: A Scenario' by Annie Jacobsen; Jim Sciutto brings the reader contextually into the power dynamics of current geopolitical frictions.
He threads an illustrative needle encompassing the Ukraine Russia War and the tensions potential of a major war with China over Taiwan.
'The Return of Great Powers', is a broad look at our fast paced ever changing world, its concise and to the point; it’s well structured as it takes the reader through past, present and future geopolitical scenarios including, and importantly the possibility of how another ‘Trump� presidency would drastically impact our interconnected world.
For those who purport to have an opinion regarding current affairs when referencing politics, whether geopolitically or domestically, this is an essential read.
~MR.
Synopsis:
The essential new book by CNN Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto, reporting from the front lines of political hotspots and warzones across the globe.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 dawned what Francis Fukuyama called “The End of History.� Three decades later, Jim Sciutto said on CNN’s air as the Ukraine war began, that we are living in a �1939 moment.� History never ended—it barely paused—and the global order as we have known it is now gone. Great powers are reinvigorated and determined to assert dominance on the world stage. And as it escalates, this new order will affect everyone across the globe. Peace has been shattered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but in reality, this affects every corner of our world—from Helsinki to Beijing, from Australia to the North Pole. This is a battle with many on the Arctic floor, in the oceans and across the skies, and in cyberspace.
Sciutto argues that we are witnessing the return of great power conflict, “a definitive break between the post–Cold War era and an entirely new and uncertain one.� The world order that marked the last thirty years is shifting, and Sciutto details the realities of this new post� post–Cold War era, the increasingly aligned Russian and Chinese governments, and the flashpoint of a new, global nuclear arms race. With savvy, thorough reporting, he follows-up his 2019 bestseller, The Shadow Inside Russia's and China's Secret Operations to Defeat America , which focused on the covert tactics of a hidden conflict. The Return of Great Powers is an analysis of a historic and visible shift in real time. And it poses a that as we consider uncertain outcomes, we ask whether the West and Russia and China can prevent a new World War
March 29, 2024
Jim Sciutto’s “The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War� is a gripping and thought-provoking exploration of the current global political landscape. Sciutto, a seasoned journalist and foreign correspondent, delves into the rising powers of Russia and China and their potential to reshape the world order in the coming years. From the very first page, Sciutto’s writing style is engaging and accessible, making complex geopolitical issues easily digestible for readers of all backgrounds. His thorough research and firsthand experiences add credibility to his analysis, giving readers a firsthand look at the inner workings of these powerful nations. One of the most intriguing aspects of the book is Sciutto’s examination of the potential for a new world war between the great powers. Drawing on historical parallels and current events, he paints a chilling picture of what could happen if tensions continue to escalate between the US, Russia, and China. Despite the weighty subject matter, Sciutto injects humor and wit into his writing, keeping readers entertained and engaged throughout. His anecdotes and personal reflections add a human element to the book, making it more than just a dry analysis of global politics. Overall, “The Return of Great Powers� is a must-read for anyone interested in international relations and the future of the world. Sciutto’s insightful analysis and engaging writing style make this book both informative and entertaining, leaving readers with plenty to think about long after they’ve turned the final page.
April 16, 2024
Overall a great read, really enjoyed the structure. Scuitto divided the focus between how Russia and China have been building up power in their respective regions and how Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has both informed China’s focus on Taiwan and Taiwan’s security concerns with lessons learned in Ukraine’s defense against a larger power.
Sciutto did a great job dividing the focus to cover intelligence community analysis pre-Ukraine invasion, current NATO concerns, and future nuclear discussions.
Recommend for anyone interested in the shift of global power, or global impacts of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Sciutto did a great job dividing the focus to cover intelligence community analysis pre-Ukraine invasion, current NATO concerns, and future nuclear discussions.
Recommend for anyone interested in the shift of global power, or global impacts of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
February 1, 2025
Well-written overview of the current geopolitical era by Jim Sciutto, CNN’s Chief National Security Correspondent and CNN Newsroom Anchor as well as author of several related books. Not post Cold War, but post post Cold War, a time when there isn’t a single dominant power (the US) but two other competing great powers (Russia and China). Also, two competitors that are becoming more powerful, less likely or no longer trying to fit into modern, Western, international norms, and in a throwback to the time before the Cold War, less worried about ideology and more worried about issues of power, particularly territorial gain.
It is a book that covers history, current events, and one in which the author takes the reader to such places as a NATO naval exercise in the Baltic Sea (one in which no American forces were present but did include German, Portuguese, Spanish, Polish, Danish, and Swedish forces, with the author spending time on Portuguese and German naval vessels) and to Estonia to get Estonian official’s perspectives on Russia and NATO.
Published March 2024. Though not a history of the Ukraine War, it is well-covered, including noting such things as how the war has affected NATO planning (an eye opener for Estonia; previous planning had been that NATO forces would arrive within 180 days, but after seeing the Russian war crimes in Ukraine, Estonia pushed hard for a new plan that has NATO forces arriving within 5 to 7 hours). Also, coverage of the nature of the war (both like World War I with trench warfare and artillery duels yet also involving drones and cyber warfare), comparing and contrasting the flexible nature of Ukrainian military leadership with the far more rigid Russians, how the Ukraine War has strengthened and broadened NATO, and the looming crisis in US shortages of 155 mmm howitzer ammunition thanks to the Ukraine War (and why there is a shortage).
Though I had read a good bit before on the Ukraine War, the parts of the book on China and Taiwan were all new to me. A lot of good discussion of potential Chinese strategies such as a boa constrictor-like asphyxiation strategy against Taiwan, a porcupine-like defense strategy for Taiwan (basically making any potential invasion far too costly for China even if China won), issues with supply lines aiding Taiwan, the changing nature of US defense policy with regards to Taiwan, potential lessons China and Taiwan learn from the Ukraine War, and the fundamentally different nature of China under Xi Jinping compared to Chinese leaders of the recent past and what this means for great power rivalry and conflict.
The book closes with an overall assessment of the post post Cold War world, how the world is pretty much in a Wild West situation with little or nothing regulating cyber space, outer space, near space (lots of coverage of the Chinese spy balloon incident of 2023), and Chinese nuclear weapons, and a decline in regulations of American and Russian nuclear weapons. Also, how Ukraine losing could cause a domino effect, showing authoritarian regimes that they can successfully simply take territory, that it is so important that Russia see far more losses than gains from the war, how the Ukraine War is in fact a nuclear escalation between Russia and the US, and how Russia isn’t so much worried about an attack from NATO as wanting a buffer from the Western democracies. In addition, discussion of lessons from the Cuban Missile Crisis, the path to World War I, and a sobering chapter discussing what a (at the time future) Trump administration might be like based on past actions.
It is a book that covers history, current events, and one in which the author takes the reader to such places as a NATO naval exercise in the Baltic Sea (one in which no American forces were present but did include German, Portuguese, Spanish, Polish, Danish, and Swedish forces, with the author spending time on Portuguese and German naval vessels) and to Estonia to get Estonian official’s perspectives on Russia and NATO.
Published March 2024. Though not a history of the Ukraine War, it is well-covered, including noting such things as how the war has affected NATO planning (an eye opener for Estonia; previous planning had been that NATO forces would arrive within 180 days, but after seeing the Russian war crimes in Ukraine, Estonia pushed hard for a new plan that has NATO forces arriving within 5 to 7 hours). Also, coverage of the nature of the war (both like World War I with trench warfare and artillery duels yet also involving drones and cyber warfare), comparing and contrasting the flexible nature of Ukrainian military leadership with the far more rigid Russians, how the Ukraine War has strengthened and broadened NATO, and the looming crisis in US shortages of 155 mmm howitzer ammunition thanks to the Ukraine War (and why there is a shortage).
Though I had read a good bit before on the Ukraine War, the parts of the book on China and Taiwan were all new to me. A lot of good discussion of potential Chinese strategies such as a boa constrictor-like asphyxiation strategy against Taiwan, a porcupine-like defense strategy for Taiwan (basically making any potential invasion far too costly for China even if China won), issues with supply lines aiding Taiwan, the changing nature of US defense policy with regards to Taiwan, potential lessons China and Taiwan learn from the Ukraine War, and the fundamentally different nature of China under Xi Jinping compared to Chinese leaders of the recent past and what this means for great power rivalry and conflict.
The book closes with an overall assessment of the post post Cold War world, how the world is pretty much in a Wild West situation with little or nothing regulating cyber space, outer space, near space (lots of coverage of the Chinese spy balloon incident of 2023), and Chinese nuclear weapons, and a decline in regulations of American and Russian nuclear weapons. Also, how Ukraine losing could cause a domino effect, showing authoritarian regimes that they can successfully simply take territory, that it is so important that Russia see far more losses than gains from the war, how the Ukraine War is in fact a nuclear escalation between Russia and the US, and how Russia isn’t so much worried about an attack from NATO as wanting a buffer from the Western democracies. In addition, discussion of lessons from the Cuban Missile Crisis, the path to World War I, and a sobering chapter discussing what a (at the time future) Trump administration might be like based on past actions.
September 21, 2024
In his book, "The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War," CNN Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto's examines the intensifying global competition between the U.S., Russia, and China. Vladimir Putin’s historical revisionism laid the groundwork for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which has evolved into a modern battleground for great power conflict. Meanwhile, China's ambitions, particularly regarding Taiwan, and its partnership with Russia, heighten tensions. The West’s support for Ukraine is not just about defending sovereignty but also standing against authoritarian regimes. The increasing militarization between these powers raises the threat of escalation, both conventional and nuclear, with potential global consequences.
Five Key Takeaways:
1. Putin's Historical Justification: Putin manipulated historical narratives to argue that Ukraine has always been part of Russia, creating a pretext for the 2022 invasion and undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty.
2. Modern Warfare in Ukraine: Ukraine has become a testing ground for modern military strategies, blending old and new warfare tactics, revealing the challenges of maintaining ammunition supplies, and exposing the limitations of conventional forces on both sides.
3. NATO’s Transformation: NATO's response to the Russian invasion has reinvigorated the alliance, leading to the inclusion of Finland and Sweden and a renewed focus on defending Europe from Russia while acknowledging China as a direct strategic adversary.
4. China-Russia Alliance: Russia and China’s partnership is rooted in a shared opposition to Western dominance. China has supported Russia in Ukraine and may be using the conflict to weaken the West ahead of its own possible moves toward Taiwan.
5. Escalation Risks: The war has raised the possibility of both vertical (nuclear) and horizontal (geographical) escalation, with concerns that the conflict could spread to NATO territories or lead to a broader global confrontation involving nuclear weapons.
The rivalry between the U.S., Russia, and China is pushing the world closer to a new era of great power conflicts, where small incidents or miscalculations could rapidly escalate into full-scale wars involving nuclear weapons, advanced cyber capabilities, and space-based systems. Preventing such escalation will, according to the author, require not only military preparedness but also renewed diplomatic efforts to manage and de-escalate tensions among these global powers.
Memorable Quotes:
(Retired General Mark) Milley told me the invasion is “extraordinarily high-risk� for Xi, and he views the Chinese leader as a Machiavellian assessor of risks, loath to lose a gamble with his power at stake. However, if Xi calculates the risk is worth it for him and for China, he may very well act. For the world, that means the risk of a great power war.
Over time, the Biden administration has been enlisting allies around the world to help discourage the Chinese leader from making a decision to invade, emphasizing the benefits of peace and the costs of war.
Nuclear weapons are not the only dangerous front of the new great power competition. All the great and middle powers are increasingly developing their military strategies on weapons in cyberspace, outer space, and near space. And yet no treaties or even discussions about treaties govern these realms. In the midst of this dangerous, rapid technological advancement is another technology with power to influence the wars of the present and future: artificial intelligence. Without international agreement among the great powers on these new technologies—guardrails that would place some limits on their use in emerging conflicts—the world is a fundamentally more dangerous place. Yet, this issue—while a subject of broad agreement among the US and its allies—lies once again on the dividing line of the great powers. The West may want to talk, but it’s not clear its adversaries do.
October 4, 2024
While the book presents itself as a balanced study of global politics, caveat: it does include critiques of U.S. leadership, especially with regard to the foreign policy of former President Donald Trump. Sciutto portrays Trump's approach as potentially destabilizing, particularly in relation to NATO and U.S. alliances, quoting figures like John Bolton and John Kelly to underline the potential risks of Trump's isolationist tendencies.
He also uses the word ‘admiration� of how Trump views world leaders like Putin and Xi, where I’d contend it’s more of a way that a businessman assesses and analyses the strategic moves of a competitor; a form of attentiveness rather than that ga-ga spin Scuitto asserts exists.
So yeah all-in-all, I’d say this one’s a bit politically charged and not too objective, despite Sciutto's background in professional journalism and national security. In fact I think those most-quoted people in the book (again: Bolton, Kelly) have all written anti-Trump books themselves.
But that ain’t nothing we’re not used to, so I still say this was an interesting four-star read on the power dynamics of the biggity big countries on the globe. Despite the bias, it was informative.
He also uses the word ‘admiration� of how Trump views world leaders like Putin and Xi, where I’d contend it’s more of a way that a businessman assesses and analyses the strategic moves of a competitor; a form of attentiveness rather than that ga-ga spin Scuitto asserts exists.
So yeah all-in-all, I’d say this one’s a bit politically charged and not too objective, despite Sciutto's background in professional journalism and national security. In fact I think those most-quoted people in the book (again: Bolton, Kelly) have all written anti-Trump books themselves.
But that ain’t nothing we’re not used to, so I still say this was an interesting four-star read on the power dynamics of the biggity big countries on the globe. Despite the bias, it was informative.
July 18, 2024
This book was clear, concise, and easy to read. It had an incredible amount of information to take in and digest. It was quite an intense read as well, with some very frightening possibilities. The wide range of interviews and perspectives went a long way in presenting the plethora of facts, figures, and potential realities. I was fascinated from start to finish and will definitely be looking into other books from this author.
June 26, 2024
The Return of the Great Powers
The book is superbly researched, thoughtful, comprehensive, and frankly sobering. I am very glad I read and strongly recommend it for people seeking to be thoughtful global citizens contemplating voting wisdom for 2024.
The book is superbly researched, thoughtful, comprehensive, and frankly sobering. I am very glad I read and strongly recommend it for people seeking to be thoughtful global citizens contemplating voting wisdom for 2024.
November 7, 2024
Interessant, detaljeret og ofte meget alarmistisk læsning, som trækker på talrige interviews med nøglepersoner i det internationale (vestlige) samfund. Dog undrer det mig, at man med så langt et essay � knapt 350 sider � ikke inddrager modstridende synspunkter (fra BRICS og ‘Global South�). Det gør argumentet utroligt ensidigt og fortællingen alt, alt for lang. Scuitto kunne klart have haft gavn Mies van der Rohe’s ‘less is more�.
March 31, 2025
Jim Sciutto, who served as chief of staff to U.S. Ambassador Gary Locke in China from 2011 to 2013, and has been a National Security Analyst and Anchor for CNN since, wrote a book that if we took the lessons seriously, gives me optimism for the future, but since Donald Trump won the election, and we’re already seeing (if having easily predicted beforehand) the fruits of his presidency, I’m not so optimistic. If anything, the regular American, and human on the planet, likely doesn’t consider how precarious everything actually is and how close we could be to a shooting war between the three Great Powers, three nuclear powers. One wrong move, one miscommunication or lack thereof, and we’re thrust into something far worse to contemplate than both global wars we thought we had learned from 80 plus years prior. Sciutto’s 2024 book, The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next Great World War is deeply reported, well-considered, and a clarion call about the precarious precipice the world hinges upon. And the American people elected an absolute moronic madman at this moment of precariousness and uncertainty. It’s dismaying and disconcerting, to say the least. Sciutto and the sources he talked to, including Williams Burns, former CIA Director, Richard Moore, Chief of the Secret Intelligent Service of the United Kingdom (MI6), John Kelly, chief of staff during Trump’s first term, and Mark Milly, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under the Trump and Biden administrations, made Sciutto actually feel rather optimistic about the future of the geopolitical dynamics of the Great Powers. But that was with the rather enormous caveat of whether Trump would achieve a second term or not. He did. Alas.
The book, which I consumed as an audiobook and thought Sciutto read exceedingly well with the right level of gravitas (not surprising since he’s an anchor!), is a harrowing look at the United States, Russia, and China, as they navigate amongst and against each other across land, sea, air, near-space, outer space, cyberspace, and artificial intelligence, along with the multitudinous elephants in the room: thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons. What brought the “return of great powers� into stark relief was the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Which is to say, the U.S., Russia, and China were already jockeying around all of those aforementioned potential areas of conflict prior to that moment, but a great power like Russia initiating an unprovoked land invasion of a European nation and then dangling the threat of utilizing a tactical nuclear weapon, or battlefield nuke, only crystalized that the relative global peace since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 is almost certainly over.
Indeed, the most succinct way to put it is how Sciutto did: the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 marked the beginning not of a new global order, but of a global disorder. Alongside Russia’s belligerence, is the U.S.’s own abdication of its “great power� role and responsibility since the end of WWII, maintained through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, the previous world order for 80 years. Trump is the figurehead of that abdication, a figure who sides more with Vladimir Putin, the aggressor, than Volodymyr Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine, the country invaded. A figure sure to give Putin everything he wants while quite literally mining Ukraine for what it has. A figure who finds more in common with Xi Jinping and his iron fist rule in China than with our closest, longest ally, Canada. A figure who sees nothing wrong with Xi Jinping’s atrocious treatment of the Uyghurs, even as he fills up modern day concentration camps. A figure who prefers receiving admiring letters from Kim Jong Un of North Korea and turns bellicose toward Panama over the Panama Canal and Denmark over Greenland. A figure who in his first term wanted to pull out of NATO, and in his second term, will likely try again. A figure whose administration is recklessly slashing agencies like that the United States Agency for International Development, which is how the U.S. projects soft power throughout the world, including vitally, the Global South. Indeed, he’s a figure who has no understanding of these great power dynamics, how NATO and USAID slot into them, and certainly, not someone who can at all be trusted with the vast power and responsibility that comes with presiding over our nuclear arsenal. The only thing he is sure of is his own assuredness and that is most certainly misplaced.
I went on a bit there because when you really start laying it all out, and that’s only scratching the surface, it is alarming that Americans have put themselves and the world in this situation, bolstered and elected a man to do so, and for what exactly? What do we gain out of it, as a people and a country? There are legitimate conversations to be had about America’s role in the world. I, for one, have long railed against America being the world’s police. But there is a way to go about scaling that back without cozying up to the world’s dictators, lambasting those fighting for freedom like Zelenskyy, and not cutting off aid to millions of people worldwide who depend upon it. Those people will die.
However, let me back up. Despite Russia’s bellicosity in the past (Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008 and annexation of Crimea in 2014), it’s interesting how many people, both in governments around the world, including Ukraine, and the media, were skeptical that Russia would attack and invade Ukraine. This wasn’t a situation like U.S. intelligent services, due to political pressure, overcooking the weapons of mass destruction story in the build-up to the Iraq War in 2003. In this case, the U.S. could just look at the satellite footage of the Russian military amassing on Ukraine’s border! They also had intercepted communication to back up what they were seeing. Rhetorically, as Sciutto noted, Putin had also been making moves inside Russia to rewrite Russian history to justify the invasion of Ukraine, i.e., that Ukraine has always been Russian, so it’s not a question of “sovereignty.� Of course, to Ukrainians, it absolutely is, which is why Russia (and the world) were shocked at how well Ukrainians were able to defend against the Russian invasion, and equally as surprised at how poorly the previously feared and vaunted Russian military performed. Maybe it’s only hindsight now that makes it laughable, but Putin thought he would take Kiev, the capital city of Ukraine, in 72 hours. We’re obviously more than three years after Russia initiated the war and Russia still hasn’t taken Kiev. Even more laughable is that Putin, who ostensibly said he invaded Ukraine partly out of agitation with NATO’s expansion, thought his invasion of Ukraine would weaken NATO, dividing it in its reaction. Instead, NATO reacted in a united, strong front, including admitting Finland and Sweden into NATO, longstanding neutral countries, in April 2023 and March 2024, respectively, and just recently, Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz reaffirmed Germany’s commitment to Ukraine by telling Zelenskyy, “Germany stands by your side � for as long as it takes.� If only we had a current U.S. President who believed similarly. In my humble opinion, there is no acceptable situation other than Russia pulling its forces out of Ukraine. “Giving� Russia any Ukrainian territory is unacceptable as a means of “peace.� We could have peace today the moment Russian forces leave Ukraine. But Putin won’t do that. The meat grinder goes on, and yet our leaders blame Zelenskyy.
Putin’s invasion of Ukraine also heightened the potential for great power conflict because of what it could portend for Taiwan. Like with Ukraine, China wants Taiwan to be part of China. Taiwan does not want to be part of China. The U.S. maintains that it will defend Taiwan, should China attack, albeit it’s not exactly formalized in the way NATO’s Article 5 outlines it for members of NATO. This is rather intentional: the U.S.-Taiwan-China relationship is referred to as “strategic ambiguity.� Basically, it’s a deterrent so China doesn’t actually invade because they won’t know what we will do in response while also ensuring (for domestic purposes mostly) that the U.S. doesn’t overcommit. As president, however, Biden rather unambiguously ended that posture, saying the U.S. would come to Taiwan’s defense. All of that said, it’s worth grounding ourselves. Just as the world had been overestimating Russia’s ability to exert force and influence beyond its borders, the world has also overestimated China’s “unyielding ascent.� Their economy was never going to keep going up, and in some measures, their success has been overinflated. That said, there is also the fear that a weakened Russia and a weakened China could also be dangerous. True enough. One of the scariest possibilities (however likely is a different question) Sciutto mentioned was that China would preemptively attack U.S. forces in the South China Sea to ensure a successful invasion of Taiwan. With Trump back in office, though, one has to wonder if Xi Jinping sees Taiwan as more ripe for the taking. Taiwan, of course, isn’t hedging everything on the U.S. coming to its defense; they’re preparing, not only because of what Russia did to Ukraine, but because they can’t be certain the U.S. will come to its defense.
Sciutto’s book and reporting elucidates how a modern war is and will be fought through the lens of the Russian-Ukraine war: as a mix of 20th century and 21st century tactics. Trench warfare and an infantry, alongside drones and electronic warfare. What has been particularly important to Ukraine’s success is a mix of the shoulder-mounted anti-tank Javelin missile and the use of drones. Because of this war, Sciutto said Ukraine’s military is now bigger than Britain’s and most notably, battle-tested. Unfortunately, the reason Putin’s forces can last in this war is because they have a mass of people and Putin doesn’t care about putting them through the aforementioned meat grinder. There’s no political cost to doing so for an authoritarian country.
While I’m always going to look at a John Kelly with skepticism � he did ultimately believe in the Trump agenda by and large, after all (and I also found him silly to say the biggest threat in the world is not all this, but � opioid trafficking) � he did make a good point to Sciutto that when we talk about America’s role in the world, we too often look to the military as the solution rather than utilizing the State Department and/or the U.S. Treasury. The military cannot always be the solution. One of the better things the U.S. did from a communications standpoint was stave off any potential use of a battlefield nuke by Russia when Russia started insinuating its use in 2022. We (the U.S. and NATO) could not allow even a tactical nuke (made scarier by the fact that unlike a city-destroying nuclear weapon, a tactical nuclear weapon is easier to conceal and move about) to be utilized without a response. Before it got to that point, though, the U.S. used a pressure campaign, which resulted in China and India, two countries closer and supportive of Putin and Russia, to forcefully denounce any such use. Russia then backed off.
Nuclear weapons are what threads the conflicts of the previous century and this century together. However war is happening, whether it’s bringing back trench warfare and an infantry, or going into near-space and using uncrewed drones, cyberspace and artificial intelligence, the throughline is that nuclear weapons are still in the conversation. The U.S. has a little more than 5,000 nuclear weapons; Russia has nearly 6,000; and China has about 500, with a goal of having 1,500 by 2035. What Russia’s invasion did, and the reigniting of great power conflict, is not only likely ensure a new nuclear arms race � China’s goal by definition is that � but it also means the “middle power� countries, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and so on also start looking at the nuclear option. Whether you’re talking about maintaining a country’s stockpile, expanding it, or developing it, the situation for the world is always going to be one of danger, if the great powers make one wrong mistake. That’s all it takes to have a “momentous� (to paraphrase Sciutto) and calamitous entry into a new global war. No thank you, please. Sciutto, from talking to his sources, said the way to avoid such mistakes, echoing President Kennedy’s own lessons he took from WWI and WWII during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 to avert that nuclear catastrophe, is to ensure open lines of communication and respecting “red lines.� All it takes is one miscommunication, or lack thereof, to go down a road nobody in the world wants.
From a variety of standpoints � militarily, historically, politically, and certainly, thinking about the present moment and the immediate future � Sciutto’s book was endlessly fascinating and frightening. Again, if we hadn’t elected Trump to a second term, I would feel as optimistic as Sciutto and his sources did, save the potential “Trump wild card.� Instead, since we have now played that card, I’m absolutely erring more on the side of highly concerned about this new global disorder stewarded by the ultimate chaos agent. Because in reality, even if the Democrats regain power four years from now, it doesn’t matter for the rest of the world: they can’t keep doing this back-and-forth game amidst the great power conflict. Britain, Germany, France, Canada, Taiwan, the Balkans, and certainly, I believe, Ukraine, among others, must secure their own futures without the U.S.’s guaranteed steady leadership.
The book, which I consumed as an audiobook and thought Sciutto read exceedingly well with the right level of gravitas (not surprising since he’s an anchor!), is a harrowing look at the United States, Russia, and China, as they navigate amongst and against each other across land, sea, air, near-space, outer space, cyberspace, and artificial intelligence, along with the multitudinous elephants in the room: thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons. What brought the “return of great powers� into stark relief was the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Which is to say, the U.S., Russia, and China were already jockeying around all of those aforementioned potential areas of conflict prior to that moment, but a great power like Russia initiating an unprovoked land invasion of a European nation and then dangling the threat of utilizing a tactical nuclear weapon, or battlefield nuke, only crystalized that the relative global peace since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 is almost certainly over.
Indeed, the most succinct way to put it is how Sciutto did: the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 marked the beginning not of a new global order, but of a global disorder. Alongside Russia’s belligerence, is the U.S.’s own abdication of its “great power� role and responsibility since the end of WWII, maintained through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, the previous world order for 80 years. Trump is the figurehead of that abdication, a figure who sides more with Vladimir Putin, the aggressor, than Volodymyr Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine, the country invaded. A figure sure to give Putin everything he wants while quite literally mining Ukraine for what it has. A figure who finds more in common with Xi Jinping and his iron fist rule in China than with our closest, longest ally, Canada. A figure who sees nothing wrong with Xi Jinping’s atrocious treatment of the Uyghurs, even as he fills up modern day concentration camps. A figure who prefers receiving admiring letters from Kim Jong Un of North Korea and turns bellicose toward Panama over the Panama Canal and Denmark over Greenland. A figure who in his first term wanted to pull out of NATO, and in his second term, will likely try again. A figure whose administration is recklessly slashing agencies like that the United States Agency for International Development, which is how the U.S. projects soft power throughout the world, including vitally, the Global South. Indeed, he’s a figure who has no understanding of these great power dynamics, how NATO and USAID slot into them, and certainly, not someone who can at all be trusted with the vast power and responsibility that comes with presiding over our nuclear arsenal. The only thing he is sure of is his own assuredness and that is most certainly misplaced.
I went on a bit there because when you really start laying it all out, and that’s only scratching the surface, it is alarming that Americans have put themselves and the world in this situation, bolstered and elected a man to do so, and for what exactly? What do we gain out of it, as a people and a country? There are legitimate conversations to be had about America’s role in the world. I, for one, have long railed against America being the world’s police. But there is a way to go about scaling that back without cozying up to the world’s dictators, lambasting those fighting for freedom like Zelenskyy, and not cutting off aid to millions of people worldwide who depend upon it. Those people will die.
However, let me back up. Despite Russia’s bellicosity in the past (Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008 and annexation of Crimea in 2014), it’s interesting how many people, both in governments around the world, including Ukraine, and the media, were skeptical that Russia would attack and invade Ukraine. This wasn’t a situation like U.S. intelligent services, due to political pressure, overcooking the weapons of mass destruction story in the build-up to the Iraq War in 2003. In this case, the U.S. could just look at the satellite footage of the Russian military amassing on Ukraine’s border! They also had intercepted communication to back up what they were seeing. Rhetorically, as Sciutto noted, Putin had also been making moves inside Russia to rewrite Russian history to justify the invasion of Ukraine, i.e., that Ukraine has always been Russian, so it’s not a question of “sovereignty.� Of course, to Ukrainians, it absolutely is, which is why Russia (and the world) were shocked at how well Ukrainians were able to defend against the Russian invasion, and equally as surprised at how poorly the previously feared and vaunted Russian military performed. Maybe it’s only hindsight now that makes it laughable, but Putin thought he would take Kiev, the capital city of Ukraine, in 72 hours. We’re obviously more than three years after Russia initiated the war and Russia still hasn’t taken Kiev. Even more laughable is that Putin, who ostensibly said he invaded Ukraine partly out of agitation with NATO’s expansion, thought his invasion of Ukraine would weaken NATO, dividing it in its reaction. Instead, NATO reacted in a united, strong front, including admitting Finland and Sweden into NATO, longstanding neutral countries, in April 2023 and March 2024, respectively, and just recently, Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz reaffirmed Germany’s commitment to Ukraine by telling Zelenskyy, “Germany stands by your side � for as long as it takes.� If only we had a current U.S. President who believed similarly. In my humble opinion, there is no acceptable situation other than Russia pulling its forces out of Ukraine. “Giving� Russia any Ukrainian territory is unacceptable as a means of “peace.� We could have peace today the moment Russian forces leave Ukraine. But Putin won’t do that. The meat grinder goes on, and yet our leaders blame Zelenskyy.
Putin’s invasion of Ukraine also heightened the potential for great power conflict because of what it could portend for Taiwan. Like with Ukraine, China wants Taiwan to be part of China. Taiwan does not want to be part of China. The U.S. maintains that it will defend Taiwan, should China attack, albeit it’s not exactly formalized in the way NATO’s Article 5 outlines it for members of NATO. This is rather intentional: the U.S.-Taiwan-China relationship is referred to as “strategic ambiguity.� Basically, it’s a deterrent so China doesn’t actually invade because they won’t know what we will do in response while also ensuring (for domestic purposes mostly) that the U.S. doesn’t overcommit. As president, however, Biden rather unambiguously ended that posture, saying the U.S. would come to Taiwan’s defense. All of that said, it’s worth grounding ourselves. Just as the world had been overestimating Russia’s ability to exert force and influence beyond its borders, the world has also overestimated China’s “unyielding ascent.� Their economy was never going to keep going up, and in some measures, their success has been overinflated. That said, there is also the fear that a weakened Russia and a weakened China could also be dangerous. True enough. One of the scariest possibilities (however likely is a different question) Sciutto mentioned was that China would preemptively attack U.S. forces in the South China Sea to ensure a successful invasion of Taiwan. With Trump back in office, though, one has to wonder if Xi Jinping sees Taiwan as more ripe for the taking. Taiwan, of course, isn’t hedging everything on the U.S. coming to its defense; they’re preparing, not only because of what Russia did to Ukraine, but because they can’t be certain the U.S. will come to its defense.
Sciutto’s book and reporting elucidates how a modern war is and will be fought through the lens of the Russian-Ukraine war: as a mix of 20th century and 21st century tactics. Trench warfare and an infantry, alongside drones and electronic warfare. What has been particularly important to Ukraine’s success is a mix of the shoulder-mounted anti-tank Javelin missile and the use of drones. Because of this war, Sciutto said Ukraine’s military is now bigger than Britain’s and most notably, battle-tested. Unfortunately, the reason Putin’s forces can last in this war is because they have a mass of people and Putin doesn’t care about putting them through the aforementioned meat grinder. There’s no political cost to doing so for an authoritarian country.
While I’m always going to look at a John Kelly with skepticism � he did ultimately believe in the Trump agenda by and large, after all (and I also found him silly to say the biggest threat in the world is not all this, but � opioid trafficking) � he did make a good point to Sciutto that when we talk about America’s role in the world, we too often look to the military as the solution rather than utilizing the State Department and/or the U.S. Treasury. The military cannot always be the solution. One of the better things the U.S. did from a communications standpoint was stave off any potential use of a battlefield nuke by Russia when Russia started insinuating its use in 2022. We (the U.S. and NATO) could not allow even a tactical nuke (made scarier by the fact that unlike a city-destroying nuclear weapon, a tactical nuclear weapon is easier to conceal and move about) to be utilized without a response. Before it got to that point, though, the U.S. used a pressure campaign, which resulted in China and India, two countries closer and supportive of Putin and Russia, to forcefully denounce any such use. Russia then backed off.
Nuclear weapons are what threads the conflicts of the previous century and this century together. However war is happening, whether it’s bringing back trench warfare and an infantry, or going into near-space and using uncrewed drones, cyberspace and artificial intelligence, the throughline is that nuclear weapons are still in the conversation. The U.S. has a little more than 5,000 nuclear weapons; Russia has nearly 6,000; and China has about 500, with a goal of having 1,500 by 2035. What Russia’s invasion did, and the reigniting of great power conflict, is not only likely ensure a new nuclear arms race � China’s goal by definition is that � but it also means the “middle power� countries, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and so on also start looking at the nuclear option. Whether you’re talking about maintaining a country’s stockpile, expanding it, or developing it, the situation for the world is always going to be one of danger, if the great powers make one wrong mistake. That’s all it takes to have a “momentous� (to paraphrase Sciutto) and calamitous entry into a new global war. No thank you, please. Sciutto, from talking to his sources, said the way to avoid such mistakes, echoing President Kennedy’s own lessons he took from WWI and WWII during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 to avert that nuclear catastrophe, is to ensure open lines of communication and respecting “red lines.� All it takes is one miscommunication, or lack thereof, to go down a road nobody in the world wants.
From a variety of standpoints � militarily, historically, politically, and certainly, thinking about the present moment and the immediate future � Sciutto’s book was endlessly fascinating and frightening. Again, if we hadn’t elected Trump to a second term, I would feel as optimistic as Sciutto and his sources did, save the potential “Trump wild card.� Instead, since we have now played that card, I’m absolutely erring more on the side of highly concerned about this new global disorder stewarded by the ultimate chaos agent. Because in reality, even if the Democrats regain power four years from now, it doesn’t matter for the rest of the world: they can’t keep doing this back-and-forth game amidst the great power conflict. Britain, Germany, France, Canada, Taiwan, the Balkans, and certainly, I believe, Ukraine, among others, must secure their own futures without the U.S.’s guaranteed steady leadership.
June 2, 2024
Provides a solid overview of the current state of geopolitics and the tensions between the US, Russia, and China - drawing lessons from history, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, and the potential for conflict in Taiwan. Great insights, but small comfort in our fraught times.
January 22, 2025
WE ARE ON THE BRINK OF A THIRD WORLD WAR
Remember the Peace Dividend? The Berlin Wall had fallen, the Soviet Union was no more, history had come to an end, and the United States had won the Cold War—right? Well, if only it were so simple. Here we are, three decades later, and relations among the world’s most powerful countries now more closely resemble those in Europe in 1914 than a century earlier after the Congress of Vienna. And, worse still, the United States is now under attack around the world by the autocratic forces that rule its two principal adversaries, China and Russia, with liberal democracy steadily losing ground within many of its former allies. Jim Sciutto, CNN’s veteran chief national security correspondent, ably explores today’s superpower politics in his new book, The Return of Great Powers. His is a sober and sometimes grim assessment of the prospects for World War III.
SOURCES THAT SPAN THE GLOBE
Sciutto’s book is based almost exclusively on interviews with current and recent past officials in the United States and Europe. He cites dozens in his acknowledgements, but six come most readily to my mind after reading the book.
** General Mark Milley (Ret.), former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under both Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden
** Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly
** Former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, now Vice-President of the European Commission
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken under President Joe Biden
** NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg
** And former US National Security Advisor and White House Chief of Staff for President Donald Trump, General John Kelly
There are others as well. Taiwanese. British. Finnish. And American. As a group, they cover the ideological spectrum. But Sciutto’s conclusions skew to the right. That may be the result of his emphasis on military affairs and the rising threat of Great Power conflict. Which, after all, is the theme of his book.
FROM THE FRONT LINES TO THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Sciutto approaches his subject with the instincts of a reporter, going directly to the source. For example, in assessing the possibilities for Russia to invade the Baltic countries, NATO’s most vulnerable members, and for China to invade Taiwan, he speaks directly to some of the people who would be most directly affected. Estonia’s outspoken former Prime Minister, who fears that NATO is unprepared to defend her little country. And Taiwanese Air Force and Army officers stationed on the Penghu Islands in the Taiwan Strait, midway between Taiwan and mainland China, who bravely declare their willingness to die in the event of an invasion by the PRC—knowing full well they would be unlikely to survive.
In the end, Sciutto conveys a powerful sense of the contrast between those on the front lines of today’s Great Power standoffs and those removed from immediate danger who might not share their conviction that the prospects for war are great.
THE THREE GREAT POWERS THROUGH THE LENS OF GEOPOLITICS
POPULATION SIZE
As a first step in evaluating the long-term prospects for the three Great Powers, a grand strategist would look to a few basic numbers. Population size, for starters. China, ranked #2 in the world, has a current population of about 1.4 billion. But its median age is 40, its fertility rate 1.0 (far below the replacement level), and its population has declined for the third straight year as I write. The population of the United States (345 million) is only about one-quarter the size of China’s but it has consistently risen for many years (although at a slower rate of growth). And while the American median age at 38 is little different, the country’s fertility rate is 1.6 (closer to the replacement level).
SIZE OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
The size of the national economy is also a significant factor in grand strategy. With a current GDP of $30.4 trillion, the American economy is considerably larger than that of China, at $19.6 trillion. (For the record, some economists take buying power into account and claim that China and the US are roughly equal economically.) However, the United States has demonstrated considerable economic dynamism in recent years, growing at the rate of 2% and is projected to continue doing so for the balance of this decade. By contrast, China’s vaunted economic growth of recent decades has long since stopped. By some measures, the Chinese economy is shrinking, the result of poor economic policy, an aging population, outmigration, and the collapse of the country’s housing bubble.
THE THREE GREAT POWERS COMPARED
Russia is not in the same league as China and the US in any of these metrics. The country ranks #9 overall, with an aging population of 145 million (about one-tenth the size of China’s and less than one-half that of the US). But that number is shrinking, the result of out-migration, a fertility rate (1.5) below replacement level, and losses in the war in Ukraine. Economically, too, Russia pales by comparison with the other two Great Powers. At $2.1 trillion, its GDP is only one-tenth the size of China’s and one-fifteenth that of the US. Its economy is growing through military spending and social handouts but is likely to slow in the near future.
THE MILITARY
In military terms, the picture looks a little different, but less so than meets the eye. The total number of military personnel on active duty is 2.2 million (China), 1.3 million (US), and 1.2 million (Russia). By all accounts, however, military specialists rank the Chinese and American militaries as highly effective, far more so than the Russian.
By contrast, in sheer numbers of nuclear weapons, Russia (5,899) and the US (5,224) far outpace China (410). The three countries together possess more than 9 out of every 10 nuclear weapons known to be in the world. However, the size of the military and the number of its nuclear weapons are not effective measures of a country’s ability to wage war, as we’ve seen in the poor performance of the Russian army in Ukraine. For one thing, China’s nuclear arsenal is growing, and its weapons are new. And while both Russia and the US have newly designed nuclear warheads, most of the weapons they possess are aged. And in any case, how many warheads would a country need to win a nuclear war? How many could it even use except in a doomsday scenario that might bring civilization to a halt?
WHICH COUNTRY MIGHT WIN A THIRD WORLD WAR?
Assume, for the sake of argument, that none of the three Great Powers opts for the doomsday scenario. (That would entail releasing all their nuclear weapons in a preemptive move to knock out one of the adversaries.) To my mind, it seems far more likely that nuclear weapons would be used more sparingly.
For example, in a Russian invasion of the Baltics, Poland, or Romania, or in a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, the US response is far more likely to be to target one of the major Russian or Chinese cities with thermonuclear weapons. Then whichever country is hit would respond in kind, hitting an ever larger city in the US. Might the hostilities escalate into a wider use of nukes? Perhaps. But I don’t believe any of the world’s current or near-future leaders is suicidal and would opt for attempting to destroy an adversary. Why? Because they would expect to be hit in response by highly automated systems.
So, which of the three Great Powers might win the war? None of them. Because any use of today’s supremely destructive nuclear weapons would guarantee deaths in the millions. And even a conflict limited to conventional weapons but which extends into the realms of near space, cyberspace, and applied artificial intelligence to robots or other weapons might achieve the effect of “bombing them back to the Stone Age.� So, a settlement, whether it’s called a truce, an armistice, or a cease-fire, seems likely in any of the most probable scenarios that might be termed the Third World War. Something short of full-blown war.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Now, I’m no expert, but I’ve read a great deal on these matters, and I’ve been around since the Second World War. So I have some perspective on military affairs. Take it all with a generous dose of skepticism and make up your own mind.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
James Ernest (Jim) Sciutto has been the chief national security correspondent for CNN since 2013. Immediately prior to taking that job, he served as chief of staff to the US Ambassador to China for two years. But he is, above all, a newsman. He had been a senior foreign correspondent for ABC News out of London. He is the author of four nonfiction works about world politics. Sciutto was born in New York in 1970 and studied Chinese history at Yale, graduating cum laude. He married in 2006.
Remember the Peace Dividend? The Berlin Wall had fallen, the Soviet Union was no more, history had come to an end, and the United States had won the Cold War—right? Well, if only it were so simple. Here we are, three decades later, and relations among the world’s most powerful countries now more closely resemble those in Europe in 1914 than a century earlier after the Congress of Vienna. And, worse still, the United States is now under attack around the world by the autocratic forces that rule its two principal adversaries, China and Russia, with liberal democracy steadily losing ground within many of its former allies. Jim Sciutto, CNN’s veteran chief national security correspondent, ably explores today’s superpower politics in his new book, The Return of Great Powers. His is a sober and sometimes grim assessment of the prospects for World War III.
SOURCES THAT SPAN THE GLOBE
Sciutto’s book is based almost exclusively on interviews with current and recent past officials in the United States and Europe. He cites dozens in his acknowledgements, but six come most readily to my mind after reading the book.
** General Mark Milley (Ret.), former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under both Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden
** Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly
** Former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, now Vice-President of the European Commission
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken under President Joe Biden
** NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg
** And former US National Security Advisor and White House Chief of Staff for President Donald Trump, General John Kelly
There are others as well. Taiwanese. British. Finnish. And American. As a group, they cover the ideological spectrum. But Sciutto’s conclusions skew to the right. That may be the result of his emphasis on military affairs and the rising threat of Great Power conflict. Which, after all, is the theme of his book.
FROM THE FRONT LINES TO THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Sciutto approaches his subject with the instincts of a reporter, going directly to the source. For example, in assessing the possibilities for Russia to invade the Baltic countries, NATO’s most vulnerable members, and for China to invade Taiwan, he speaks directly to some of the people who would be most directly affected. Estonia’s outspoken former Prime Minister, who fears that NATO is unprepared to defend her little country. And Taiwanese Air Force and Army officers stationed on the Penghu Islands in the Taiwan Strait, midway between Taiwan and mainland China, who bravely declare their willingness to die in the event of an invasion by the PRC—knowing full well they would be unlikely to survive.
In the end, Sciutto conveys a powerful sense of the contrast between those on the front lines of today’s Great Power standoffs and those removed from immediate danger who might not share their conviction that the prospects for war are great.
THE THREE GREAT POWERS THROUGH THE LENS OF GEOPOLITICS
POPULATION SIZE
As a first step in evaluating the long-term prospects for the three Great Powers, a grand strategist would look to a few basic numbers. Population size, for starters. China, ranked #2 in the world, has a current population of about 1.4 billion. But its median age is 40, its fertility rate 1.0 (far below the replacement level), and its population has declined for the third straight year as I write. The population of the United States (345 million) is only about one-quarter the size of China’s but it has consistently risen for many years (although at a slower rate of growth). And while the American median age at 38 is little different, the country’s fertility rate is 1.6 (closer to the replacement level).
SIZE OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
The size of the national economy is also a significant factor in grand strategy. With a current GDP of $30.4 trillion, the American economy is considerably larger than that of China, at $19.6 trillion. (For the record, some economists take buying power into account and claim that China and the US are roughly equal economically.) However, the United States has demonstrated considerable economic dynamism in recent years, growing at the rate of 2% and is projected to continue doing so for the balance of this decade. By contrast, China’s vaunted economic growth of recent decades has long since stopped. By some measures, the Chinese economy is shrinking, the result of poor economic policy, an aging population, outmigration, and the collapse of the country’s housing bubble.
THE THREE GREAT POWERS COMPARED
Russia is not in the same league as China and the US in any of these metrics. The country ranks #9 overall, with an aging population of 145 million (about one-tenth the size of China’s and less than one-half that of the US). But that number is shrinking, the result of out-migration, a fertility rate (1.5) below replacement level, and losses in the war in Ukraine. Economically, too, Russia pales by comparison with the other two Great Powers. At $2.1 trillion, its GDP is only one-tenth the size of China’s and one-fifteenth that of the US. Its economy is growing through military spending and social handouts but is likely to slow in the near future.
THE MILITARY
In military terms, the picture looks a little different, but less so than meets the eye. The total number of military personnel on active duty is 2.2 million (China), 1.3 million (US), and 1.2 million (Russia). By all accounts, however, military specialists rank the Chinese and American militaries as highly effective, far more so than the Russian.
By contrast, in sheer numbers of nuclear weapons, Russia (5,899) and the US (5,224) far outpace China (410). The three countries together possess more than 9 out of every 10 nuclear weapons known to be in the world. However, the size of the military and the number of its nuclear weapons are not effective measures of a country’s ability to wage war, as we’ve seen in the poor performance of the Russian army in Ukraine. For one thing, China’s nuclear arsenal is growing, and its weapons are new. And while both Russia and the US have newly designed nuclear warheads, most of the weapons they possess are aged. And in any case, how many warheads would a country need to win a nuclear war? How many could it even use except in a doomsday scenario that might bring civilization to a halt?
WHICH COUNTRY MIGHT WIN A THIRD WORLD WAR?
Assume, for the sake of argument, that none of the three Great Powers opts for the doomsday scenario. (That would entail releasing all their nuclear weapons in a preemptive move to knock out one of the adversaries.) To my mind, it seems far more likely that nuclear weapons would be used more sparingly.
For example, in a Russian invasion of the Baltics, Poland, or Romania, or in a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, the US response is far more likely to be to target one of the major Russian or Chinese cities with thermonuclear weapons. Then whichever country is hit would respond in kind, hitting an ever larger city in the US. Might the hostilities escalate into a wider use of nukes? Perhaps. But I don’t believe any of the world’s current or near-future leaders is suicidal and would opt for attempting to destroy an adversary. Why? Because they would expect to be hit in response by highly automated systems.
So, which of the three Great Powers might win the war? None of them. Because any use of today’s supremely destructive nuclear weapons would guarantee deaths in the millions. And even a conflict limited to conventional weapons but which extends into the realms of near space, cyberspace, and applied artificial intelligence to robots or other weapons might achieve the effect of “bombing them back to the Stone Age.� So, a settlement, whether it’s called a truce, an armistice, or a cease-fire, seems likely in any of the most probable scenarios that might be termed the Third World War. Something short of full-blown war.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Now, I’m no expert, but I’ve read a great deal on these matters, and I’ve been around since the Second World War. So I have some perspective on military affairs. Take it all with a generous dose of skepticism and make up your own mind.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
James Ernest (Jim) Sciutto has been the chief national security correspondent for CNN since 2013. Immediately prior to taking that job, he served as chief of staff to the US Ambassador to China for two years. But he is, above all, a newsman. He had been a senior foreign correspondent for ABC News out of London. He is the author of four nonfiction works about world politics. Sciutto was born in New York in 1970 and studied Chinese history at Yale, graduating cum laude. He married in 2006.
September 15, 2024
As CNN’s chief national security analyst, Jim Sciutto has the opportunity to conduct extensive interviews with global security and military leaders. In The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War, Sciutto offers his latest assessment of current global security dynamics and where they may be headed.
Sciutto begins by exploring Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. He writes, "The Russian invasion of Ukraine marked the clearest break between the post-Cold War period and the new world disorder." This conflict showcases the realities of twenty-first-century warfare, including autonomous weapon systems, unmanned drones, and electronic warfare. Russia's "scorched-earth" campaign makes "no distinction between military and civilian targets." Sciutto stresses the importance of U.S. and European weapons for Ukraine's defense but reveals how the "just-in-time" weapons production system is falling short. He quotes experts who outline the need for a fivefold increase in the U.S. industrial base.
Sciutto explains how Ukraine represents a proxy war between great powers, leading to an unexpected new unity within NATO and strengthening alliances on both sides of the conflict. There is a real danger of escalation to other countries. Sciutto discusses how Putin believes the Baltic States—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania�"are rightfully part of Russia," and how he is subtly pursuing the retaking of Moldova. Why should the U.S. continue defending Ukraine? Quoting Winston Churchill, Sciutto notes, "appeasing the dictator is like feeding the crocodile, hoping that you are the last to be eaten." Additionally, the war has significantly degraded Russian forces, with devastating losses of hundreds of thousands of troops, which may prevent Putin from invading other countries.
Sciutto next examines the conflict with China, where, for the first time, NATO has "identified China as a direct challenge to its security." China is rapidly expanding its military capabilities to confront the U.S., making "massive investments in long-range anti-air and anti-ship missiles" to target U.S. carrier groups and naval forces.
At the center of a potential U.S./NATO conflict with China is Taiwan. China is increasingly aggressive and reckless toward Taiwan, risking a "mistake" that could quickly escalate into a hot war. Again, why should the U.S. care about Taiwan? A war between China and Taiwan would devastate the global economy. "Fifty percent of commercial traffic passes through the Taiwan Strait every single day, and more than seventy percent of semiconductors are made in Taiwan." Thus, if China attacks Taiwan, the global economy could implode. U.S. security experts warn that if the U.S. fails to defend Taiwan, "we will be desperately trying to defend a perimeter that is much bigger and much closer to home."
Sciutto provides a detailed discussion of the current strategies of China, the U.S., and Taiwan. War games suggest that any conflict would result in catastrophic losses for all involved. What would a war over Taiwan look like? "Instead of tank battles, artillery barrages, and trench warfare, planners envision lightning-fast air and sea combat, with rapid waves of missiles, including China's new hypersonic missiles, anti-satellite weapons, and cyberattacks disabling key military and civilian technologies in advance." However, Sciutto notes that China is likely learning from Ukraine how badly a war can go, which may give its all-powerful dictator, Xi Jinping, pause before attacking Taiwan.
Sciutto also delves into the potential for nuclear war. Russia's invasion of Ukraine "marked the first time that a nuclear-armed power had invaded a neighbor." Russia has repeatedly threatened to use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, making the use of such weapons "no longer unthinkable." "By virtue of having nuclear weapons, Russia has threatened not just Ukraine but all of Europe." If Russia were to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, "the U.S. and its allies would, for the first time, directly engage Russian forces, targeting them with a devastating campaign of air strikes and missiles." However, it's unlikely the U.S. would respond with its own nuclear strike. Alarmingly, Russia has been stepping away from nuclear arms treaties and is already violating existing agreements. We may be nearing the end of the era of nuclear arms control and have "entered a truly dangerous period."
Sciutto discusses other potential conflict zones, including near-space (up to sixty thousand feet), outer space, and the Arctic. He also examines the likely impact of emerging technologies, such as cyber capabilities and artificial intelligence, on future conflicts.
Sciutto then addresses the "Trump wild card." He asserts that the forecasts and concerns of the global leaders he has interviewed could be upended by Trump. Trump's former military advisors have repeatedly stated that "it would be a fundamental catastrophe for us" if Trump were reelected, and European leaders are "petrified" at the prospect. "At the core of their concern is the former president's character and self-interest." According to Trump's former Chief of Staff, retired Marine Corps general John Kelly, "Trump repeatedly expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler." Sciutto argues that Trump is clearly enthralled by dictators and often sides with them over U.S. allies. "He envies their power and believes he should have wielded similar power." Foreign actors are likely to continue interfering in the 2024 U.S. election in support of Trump.
Sciutto concludes with several "paths to peace." He argues that nations are now "navigating this new and more uncertain world order without many of the guardrails built up during the Cold War." This needs to change. New treaties are needed to cover emerging areas of conflict, such as AI, cyber, and space. A new "joint strategic framework between Washington and Beijing" is essential. We can't lose Ukraine because if we do, China will likely take Taiwan, and "every authoritarian state will feel empowered to grab whatever land it desires." We must revive efforts to negotiate new nuclear treaties and arms control measures. Cooperation between global powers is also crucial in addressing climate change, particularly with China. Additionally, we must not forget the Global South and ensure food security. Coalition-building must continue. Finally, we must find cohesion at home in the U.S. and overcome the rise of isolationist factions. Above all, we cannot yield to dictators, or we will be their next victims.
In closing, I would add that we cannot elect a dictator to run the good old U.S. of A.
Sciutto begins by exploring Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. He writes, "The Russian invasion of Ukraine marked the clearest break between the post-Cold War period and the new world disorder." This conflict showcases the realities of twenty-first-century warfare, including autonomous weapon systems, unmanned drones, and electronic warfare. Russia's "scorched-earth" campaign makes "no distinction between military and civilian targets." Sciutto stresses the importance of U.S. and European weapons for Ukraine's defense but reveals how the "just-in-time" weapons production system is falling short. He quotes experts who outline the need for a fivefold increase in the U.S. industrial base.
Sciutto explains how Ukraine represents a proxy war between great powers, leading to an unexpected new unity within NATO and strengthening alliances on both sides of the conflict. There is a real danger of escalation to other countries. Sciutto discusses how Putin believes the Baltic States—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania�"are rightfully part of Russia," and how he is subtly pursuing the retaking of Moldova. Why should the U.S. continue defending Ukraine? Quoting Winston Churchill, Sciutto notes, "appeasing the dictator is like feeding the crocodile, hoping that you are the last to be eaten." Additionally, the war has significantly degraded Russian forces, with devastating losses of hundreds of thousands of troops, which may prevent Putin from invading other countries.
Sciutto next examines the conflict with China, where, for the first time, NATO has "identified China as a direct challenge to its security." China is rapidly expanding its military capabilities to confront the U.S., making "massive investments in long-range anti-air and anti-ship missiles" to target U.S. carrier groups and naval forces.
At the center of a potential U.S./NATO conflict with China is Taiwan. China is increasingly aggressive and reckless toward Taiwan, risking a "mistake" that could quickly escalate into a hot war. Again, why should the U.S. care about Taiwan? A war between China and Taiwan would devastate the global economy. "Fifty percent of commercial traffic passes through the Taiwan Strait every single day, and more than seventy percent of semiconductors are made in Taiwan." Thus, if China attacks Taiwan, the global economy could implode. U.S. security experts warn that if the U.S. fails to defend Taiwan, "we will be desperately trying to defend a perimeter that is much bigger and much closer to home."
Sciutto provides a detailed discussion of the current strategies of China, the U.S., and Taiwan. War games suggest that any conflict would result in catastrophic losses for all involved. What would a war over Taiwan look like? "Instead of tank battles, artillery barrages, and trench warfare, planners envision lightning-fast air and sea combat, with rapid waves of missiles, including China's new hypersonic missiles, anti-satellite weapons, and cyberattacks disabling key military and civilian technologies in advance." However, Sciutto notes that China is likely learning from Ukraine how badly a war can go, which may give its all-powerful dictator, Xi Jinping, pause before attacking Taiwan.
Sciutto also delves into the potential for nuclear war. Russia's invasion of Ukraine "marked the first time that a nuclear-armed power had invaded a neighbor." Russia has repeatedly threatened to use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, making the use of such weapons "no longer unthinkable." "By virtue of having nuclear weapons, Russia has threatened not just Ukraine but all of Europe." If Russia were to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, "the U.S. and its allies would, for the first time, directly engage Russian forces, targeting them with a devastating campaign of air strikes and missiles." However, it's unlikely the U.S. would respond with its own nuclear strike. Alarmingly, Russia has been stepping away from nuclear arms treaties and is already violating existing agreements. We may be nearing the end of the era of nuclear arms control and have "entered a truly dangerous period."
Sciutto discusses other potential conflict zones, including near-space (up to sixty thousand feet), outer space, and the Arctic. He also examines the likely impact of emerging technologies, such as cyber capabilities and artificial intelligence, on future conflicts.
Sciutto then addresses the "Trump wild card." He asserts that the forecasts and concerns of the global leaders he has interviewed could be upended by Trump. Trump's former military advisors have repeatedly stated that "it would be a fundamental catastrophe for us" if Trump were reelected, and European leaders are "petrified" at the prospect. "At the core of their concern is the former president's character and self-interest." According to Trump's former Chief of Staff, retired Marine Corps general John Kelly, "Trump repeatedly expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler." Sciutto argues that Trump is clearly enthralled by dictators and often sides with them over U.S. allies. "He envies their power and believes he should have wielded similar power." Foreign actors are likely to continue interfering in the 2024 U.S. election in support of Trump.
Sciutto concludes with several "paths to peace." He argues that nations are now "navigating this new and more uncertain world order without many of the guardrails built up during the Cold War." This needs to change. New treaties are needed to cover emerging areas of conflict, such as AI, cyber, and space. A new "joint strategic framework between Washington and Beijing" is essential. We can't lose Ukraine because if we do, China will likely take Taiwan, and "every authoritarian state will feel empowered to grab whatever land it desires." We must revive efforts to negotiate new nuclear treaties and arms control measures. Cooperation between global powers is also crucial in addressing climate change, particularly with China. Additionally, we must not forget the Global South and ensure food security. Coalition-building must continue. Finally, we must find cohesion at home in the U.S. and overcome the rise of isolationist factions. Above all, we cannot yield to dictators, or we will be their next victims.
In closing, I would add that we cannot elect a dictator to run the good old U.S. of A.
May 22, 2024
America used to lead the unipolar world. Now it has to share the Great Power status. And there will be conflicts. Russia has already invaded Ukraine and it is not going to budge. China ‘s Xi has the ambition to take Taiwan; it is sending planes and ships on a daily basis. The Taiwanese armed forces are rather convinced of war, but the civilian society cannot care less. Anyway a Taiwanese war will lead lots of deaths. Will America defend Taiwan? Biden seems to think so, upgrading Taiwan to a defence ally. But the Taiwanese do not fully agree. All they know is Taiwan must fight for itself. Oh Thucydides� trap!
The rest of the book repeated the author’s idea in the Shadow War. Arctic, low orbit space (with Balloon now), and cyber are all new fronts. America must adapt to fight this Russo-China alliance with Europe.
The rest of the book repeated the author’s idea in the Shadow War. Arctic, low orbit space (with Balloon now), and cyber are all new fronts. America must adapt to fight this Russo-China alliance with Europe.
March 27, 2024
While informative, not really surprising in its review of current events and assessment that the invasion of Ukraine could be a precedent encouraging China to do the same with Taiwan, that there are similarities between the invasion of Ukraine and Hitler’s invasion of Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland, etc�
It reads more like a sequence of news articles with interviews than a book.
It reads more like a sequence of news articles with interviews than a book.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 17, 2024
This is a book that had a lot of potential, but was ruined by the author’s political biases.
January 3, 2025
Well written and “factual� according to the author’s clear and nakedly unapologetic bias. The world is a zero sum game, America is unequivocally the moral superior and all other systems and nations are inferior. Those that project a counter balance to American are morally bankrupt and violence is necessary to ensure that no earthling may possibly be subject to their morally bankrupt ideas. All violence perpetrated by those America has deemed enemies is terrorism (a word designed to allow no argument regarding necessity or validity, terrorism is universally bad, so the biggest coup in language this century was the west’s success making Arab violence synonymous with terrorism and never justified while ensuring that all violence instigated and perpetrated by American and its allies is “military�, justified, and necessary). The author further instills this falsehood and doubles down on it with his view on any of the countries that he’s deemed enemies of the American designed “rules� based order. The entire idea that the west not only has the ultimate right, but the moral obligation to direct the rest of the world is the morally bankrupt idea. If you are looking for an echo chamber of the America first, best, and responsible for the paternalistic guidance if the world, look no further. If you have the penchant to think for yourself and believe others should as well, read and find all the blatant double standards that run through every argument. Of course Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to take back land that Putin claims belonged historically to Russia through his revisionist history is the greatest threat to the planet, but European Zionists invasion of Palestine with the open and express intent of violently overthrowing the native peoples and establishing a European outpost in the Middle East and justifying it based on a complete revision of historical fact, is morally just and necessary for the betterment of the planet. The rules based order of self determination applies to everyone except the people who are in the way of the conquest sought by Christian Zionist and Jewish Zionists, two groups with unparalleled influence in the political circles of America. Sadly America is no less corrupt than the enemies sited in this book and America only rules the world because we happen to dedicate so much of our gdp to building up the biggest and most violent military in the world. This book attempts to rewrite history and our current reality as a moral balance, but it is simply a bunch of men measuring their junk with massive militaries and a total disregard for the innocents killed in their war games. America has no moral imperative to lead the world and their “enemies� are not terrorists or morally depraved, that us simply the schema they need you to believe so they can take your tax dollars because they have created a boogie man that must be vanquished since “power� is a zero sum game that must be won. It’s all a self perpetuating game that makes some unbelievably wealthy, keeps the citizens inline and under control, and ensures that anyone who questions this absurdity is quickly and throughly dismissed as morally bankrupt. It is brilliant and all a facade made real by the ability of men like this author to twist words and make true believers out of us all.
November 19, 2024
The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War, Jim Sciutto, 2024, 353 pages, ISBN 9780593474136, Dewey 327.47 Sci89r
Top Men say that a second Trump presidency would be a disaster. p. 256. Trump wanted to take the U.S. out of NATO. p. 263.
President Biden said the U.S. would respond militarily if China attacks Taiwan. p. 184.
ERRATA
The tone is, nothing is America's fault.
The fact is, U.S. presidents of both parties have been provoking Russia and China.
Clearer-eyed views are:
/The Myth of American Idealism: How U.S. Foreign Policy Endangers the World/, Noam Chomsky and Nathan J. Robinson, 2024, Dewey 327.73 C454m, /book/show/2...
/A World of Enemies: America’s Wars at Home and Abroad from Kennedy to Biden/,
Osamah F. Khalil, 2024, /book/show/1...
Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, Vol. 76, No. 3, July/August 2024, 132 pages. John Bellamy Foster (1953-), editor. This issue is all about Imperialism in the Indo-Pacific:
/War in Ukraine/, Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J.S. Davies, 2022, Dewey 947.7086, /book/show/6...
/Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II/, William Blum, updated edition 2014, Dewey 327.1273, /book/show/2...
/Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. World Dominance/, Michael Hudson (1939- ), 2d ed 2003 (1st ed 1972), Dewey 337.73, /book/show/3...
/The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time/, Karl Polanyi (1886-1964), 1944, Dewey 330.9034, /book/show/5...
And at Nathan J. Robinson's excellent magazine, /Current Affairs/, online:
Back to Jim Sciutto's book:
Sciutto calls the 2014 civil war in Donbas, and Crimeans' referendum to secede from Ukraine, a Russian invasion. pp. 4, 8. For the truth, see /War in Ukraine/, Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J.S. Davies, 2022, /book/show/6...
Calls the CIA's 2003 claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction a "mistake." p. 8. It was a lie.
Pretends that the U.S. obeys international agreements, and that China and the USSR are the ones subverting them. pp. 61-62. The U.S. obeys nothing. U.S. provocation has been pushing China and Russia toward closer alliance with each other.
Top Men say that a second Trump presidency would be a disaster. p. 256. Trump wanted to take the U.S. out of NATO. p. 263.
President Biden said the U.S. would respond militarily if China attacks Taiwan. p. 184.
ERRATA
The tone is, nothing is America's fault.
The fact is, U.S. presidents of both parties have been provoking Russia and China.
Clearer-eyed views are:
/The Myth of American Idealism: How U.S. Foreign Policy Endangers the World/, Noam Chomsky and Nathan J. Robinson, 2024, Dewey 327.73 C454m, /book/show/2...
/A World of Enemies: America’s Wars at Home and Abroad from Kennedy to Biden/,
Osamah F. Khalil, 2024, /book/show/1...
Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, Vol. 76, No. 3, July/August 2024, 132 pages. John Bellamy Foster (1953-), editor. This issue is all about Imperialism in the Indo-Pacific:
/War in Ukraine/, Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J.S. Davies, 2022, Dewey 947.7086, /book/show/6...
/Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II/, William Blum, updated edition 2014, Dewey 327.1273, /book/show/2...
/Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. World Dominance/, Michael Hudson (1939- ), 2d ed 2003 (1st ed 1972), Dewey 337.73, /book/show/3...
/The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time/, Karl Polanyi (1886-1964), 1944, Dewey 330.9034, /book/show/5...
And at Nathan J. Robinson's excellent magazine, /Current Affairs/, online:
Back to Jim Sciutto's book:
Sciutto calls the 2014 civil war in Donbas, and Crimeans' referendum to secede from Ukraine, a Russian invasion. pp. 4, 8. For the truth, see /War in Ukraine/, Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J.S. Davies, 2022, /book/show/6...
Calls the CIA's 2003 claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction a "mistake." p. 8. It was a lie.
Pretends that the U.S. obeys international agreements, and that China and the USSR are the ones subverting them. pp. 61-62. The U.S. obeys nothing. U.S. provocation has been pushing China and Russia toward closer alliance with each other.
December 8, 2024
Reading this in the gray space of the days before Trumps inauguration as the 47th US president was sobering.
It is indeed true that time has moved in a circle - "the end of history is no more", and the globalisation that we learned in school as being the harbinger for international peace and prosperity is now increasingly politicised and polarised, with the world splitting over the past decade into two clear camps of the ideological east and west.
What does this new version of great power politics behold? On the one hand, (i) additional strategic considerations with a new three player dynamic, (ii) the disintegration of key avenues of pressure relief such as arms control agreement and military communications, (iii) new means of warfare in the cyber, outer and AI spaces. On the other, greater economic trade between the primary players than during the Cold War and also hopefully, the lessons we've learnt about how to avoid (or stumble into) great power conflict in the 20th century.
The players? The US - the economic, military, and cultural behemoth yet one that is increasingly divided and prone to interference. China, the ascendant power and one with the economic and manufacturing power to potentially do what the US did in the last world war. And finally Russia, the fading petrol station masquerading as a nuclear state.
Their motivations? The protection or rebalancing of the global balance of power, at least that's what it seems from the western lens. In this regard, the track record of history doesn't paint a starry future ahead. An ascendant revisionist power and a power keen to hold onto the status quo rarely make for good bedfellows.
Are there paths to peace ahead? Perhaps there is. By clearly communicating redlines, players can better understand one another and create win wins (or avoid lose loses). Competition can also be constrained towards non-hot areas, albeit that I am doubtful in the prospects of this given how "total" conflict can be. And finally (perhaps most importantly) powers have to be willing to communicate, understanding that communication goes beyond and above competition, perhaps brokered by the middle powers.
The odds of avoiding a hot war, in my opinion, are staked against us - all we need is one incident to create a momentum towards conflict. But perhaps, humans have indeed evolved.
It is indeed true that time has moved in a circle - "the end of history is no more", and the globalisation that we learned in school as being the harbinger for international peace and prosperity is now increasingly politicised and polarised, with the world splitting over the past decade into two clear camps of the ideological east and west.
What does this new version of great power politics behold? On the one hand, (i) additional strategic considerations with a new three player dynamic, (ii) the disintegration of key avenues of pressure relief such as arms control agreement and military communications, (iii) new means of warfare in the cyber, outer and AI spaces. On the other, greater economic trade between the primary players than during the Cold War and also hopefully, the lessons we've learnt about how to avoid (or stumble into) great power conflict in the 20th century.
The players? The US - the economic, military, and cultural behemoth yet one that is increasingly divided and prone to interference. China, the ascendant power and one with the economic and manufacturing power to potentially do what the US did in the last world war. And finally Russia, the fading petrol station masquerading as a nuclear state.
Their motivations? The protection or rebalancing of the global balance of power, at least that's what it seems from the western lens. In this regard, the track record of history doesn't paint a starry future ahead. An ascendant revisionist power and a power keen to hold onto the status quo rarely make for good bedfellows.
Are there paths to peace ahead? Perhaps there is. By clearly communicating redlines, players can better understand one another and create win wins (or avoid lose loses). Competition can also be constrained towards non-hot areas, albeit that I am doubtful in the prospects of this given how "total" conflict can be. And finally (perhaps most importantly) powers have to be willing to communicate, understanding that communication goes beyond and above competition, perhaps brokered by the middle powers.
The odds of avoiding a hot war, in my opinion, are staked against us - all we need is one incident to create a momentum towards conflict. But perhaps, humans have indeed evolved.
February 24, 2024
Are we in a period of a new "Cold War"? Well it would seem that Russia is trying to reassert itself as a superpower again, but Ukraine is putting a damper on Puting restoring the power of the Soviet Union. On the other hand China wants to be the 'premier' nation in the world surpassing the USA, the EU and Russia. China wants to recover from the humiliation it suffered in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Putin expected that the invasion of Ukraine would take three weeks and destroy the cohesiveness of NATO. But the ineptitude of his military strategy, the weekness of his troops and weapons have put a destructive hold on his plans. Not only did he not weaken NATO, but strengthened it and help to expand it to all the Nordic countries. It also hurt him economically (Europe has found other ways to get oil and natural gas), but countries that relied on grain from Ukraine has suffered from famine.
China has the second largest economy in the world. They also hold trillions of dollars of US government treasury bonds. Quietly China is helping third world nations but is also putting them into debt they can never repay. China has set its' sights on controlling the South China Sea even though many other nations claim sovereignty. At the top of China's list is to reabsorb Taiwan into the PRC.
But both China and Russia suffer from the same demographic population problems. Young people aare putting off having families, because they fear losing their place in the middle class. The one child policy in China left them with a generation that was short of woman, to give birth to the next generation. Without a younger generation China will soon find itself not only short of workers but also those to serve in their Armed Forces.
So this is where we find ourselves today. They question is whether those in charge of China and Russia will decide to resort to the use of "tactical" nuclear weapons to gain what they want.
Putin expected that the invasion of Ukraine would take three weeks and destroy the cohesiveness of NATO. But the ineptitude of his military strategy, the weekness of his troops and weapons have put a destructive hold on his plans. Not only did he not weaken NATO, but strengthened it and help to expand it to all the Nordic countries. It also hurt him economically (Europe has found other ways to get oil and natural gas), but countries that relied on grain from Ukraine has suffered from famine.
China has the second largest economy in the world. They also hold trillions of dollars of US government treasury bonds. Quietly China is helping third world nations but is also putting them into debt they can never repay. China has set its' sights on controlling the South China Sea even though many other nations claim sovereignty. At the top of China's list is to reabsorb Taiwan into the PRC.
But both China and Russia suffer from the same demographic population problems. Young people aare putting off having families, because they fear losing their place in the middle class. The one child policy in China left them with a generation that was short of woman, to give birth to the next generation. Without a younger generation China will soon find itself not only short of workers but also those to serve in their Armed Forces.
So this is where we find ourselves today. They question is whether those in charge of China and Russia will decide to resort to the use of "tactical" nuclear weapons to gain what they want.
July 14, 2024
Most people talk about international politics without knowing almost anything, just superficial readings of newspapers that say what they want to read (everyone buys the newspapers they believe in) or worse, they get the information from X (Twitter).
This book tells us about the war scenario: the United States, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Japan, among others, are its protagonists.
First, it analyzes in detail the Russian war in Ukraine (the book is quite new and is quite up-to-date and with background information, having spoken in many cases with the participants directly). What would happen if Russia takes the territory definitively? What would happen if Russia is expelled?
And Russia, after Ukraine, what will it do? Can it attack other neighboring countries like Moldova? Putin is really crazy and wants to remake the old Soviet Union.
Then it talks about the possible war with China with Taiwan. What would happen if China invades? Would Americans really support this war knowing that in the first few days there may be losses of 50,000 soldiers, countless warships and planes?
There are three countries with the most powerful armies in the world. What would happen if the war were to be fought between those three?
And the book, of course, talks about the possible return of Trump. It defines him as someone who thinks he knows a lot but knows nothing, who makes childish decisions based on his personal interests (not those of the United States) and who can really destroy the world as we know it.
I thought it would be good for Mexico and stop everything the leftists want to do here, but now, after reading this book, I think it would be a danger to the world.
The path to peace? Perhaps the most interesting part of this book.
If you want to know about geopolitics and war, this is the book.
This book tells us about the war scenario: the United States, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Japan, among others, are its protagonists.
First, it analyzes in detail the Russian war in Ukraine (the book is quite new and is quite up-to-date and with background information, having spoken in many cases with the participants directly). What would happen if Russia takes the territory definitively? What would happen if Russia is expelled?
And Russia, after Ukraine, what will it do? Can it attack other neighboring countries like Moldova? Putin is really crazy and wants to remake the old Soviet Union.
Then it talks about the possible war with China with Taiwan. What would happen if China invades? Would Americans really support this war knowing that in the first few days there may be losses of 50,000 soldiers, countless warships and planes?
There are three countries with the most powerful armies in the world. What would happen if the war were to be fought between those three?
And the book, of course, talks about the possible return of Trump. It defines him as someone who thinks he knows a lot but knows nothing, who makes childish decisions based on his personal interests (not those of the United States) and who can really destroy the world as we know it.
I thought it would be good for Mexico and stop everything the leftists want to do here, but now, after reading this book, I think it would be a danger to the world.
The path to peace? Perhaps the most interesting part of this book.
If you want to know about geopolitics and war, this is the book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 129 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.