PDF Summary:Battlegrounds, by H. R. McMaster

According to Gen. H.R. McMaster, the United States views the world through a self-centered lens, assuming that its policy decisions are the main driving force behind global events. Because of this distorted perspective, the US has lost influence on the global stage at a time when authoritarian aggression is on the rise. In Battlegrounds, McMaster, who was US national security adviser in 2017-18, contends that American leaders must learn to see the world through the eyes of the US's adversaries in order to defend against foreign threats and compete in the modern global landscape.

In this guide, we’ll explore McMaster’s criticism of the assumptions driving US foreign policy, his assessment of the threats America faces, and the steps he believes the US must take. We’ll compare McMaster’s views with those of other experts on diplomacy, while placing his assessments in their larger context and updating some of his information based on events since the book’s publication.

(continued)...

China’s Economic Warfare

In order to transform China into the world’s economic axis, McMaster asserts that the CCP uses a combination of infrastructure spending, predatory lending, and industrial espionage to reach its goals. The Chinese government implements the first two of these strategies with the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative. OBOR funnels vast amounts of money into foreign infrastructure development, including improvements to ports and transportation by which imports and exports flow to and from China. These infrastructure projects come with many strings attached, such as high interest rates, political concessions, and bribes paid to high-ranking officials. McMaster argues that One Belt One Road becomes a form of economic colonialism that China then uses to elbow the US and its allies out of world markets.

(Shortform note: In order to compete with One Belt One Road, the US Congress passed the BUILD Act in 2018 and created the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC). Under the BUILD Act’s mandate, the DFC facilitates private sector investment and technical assistance in developing countries around the world. In 2022, the DFC dedicated over $7 billion to projects such as renewable energy development in Asia, farming in Africa, and protecting businesses and infrastructure in eastern Europe that were impacted by the war in Ukraine.)

Another arm of China’s economic warfare is the Military-Civil Fusion project that enlists Chinese companies and citizens into the intelligence-gathering process. Through Military-Civil Fusion, the CCP appropriates foreign technology and intellectual property, which it uses to undercut foreign competitors and bolster China’s military capabilities. This process feeds into the Made in China 2025 program to establish tech monopolies inside the Chinese market.

(Shortform note: McMaster’s warnings on the topic of IP theft aren’t new. Every US president since Ronald Reagan has attempted to halt China’s technological espionage, to no avail. Now, more private corporations have become well aware of China’s aggressive pursuit of intellectual property. In 2019, 20% of US companies claimed their data was stolen by Chinese competitors. A cybercrime report in 2022 exposed a vast campaign of intellectual property theft by a state-sponsored group of Chinese nationals collectively known as APT 41.)

McMaster points out that China’s economy is now so large that outside companies, even those in the US, are financially coerced to not criticize the Chinese government—even in their home countries—in order to do business there.

(Shortform note: The American film industry serves as a case study for the CCP using its economic power to extend its censorship to the US. As China’s standard of living increased, its enormous film market became an essential source of income for many movie studios. In Red Carpet, Erich Schwartzel claims that because of their dependence on Chinese audiences, American studios deliberately avoid producing films on issues that would displease the CCP, such as protests in Hong Kong or China’s treatment of religious minorities. However, beginning in 2022, US filmmakers began to push back against Chinese restrictions, producing high-profile films such as Top Gun: Maverick that weren’t expected to get past Chinese censors.)

Afghanistan

Unlike Russia and China, which are pushing for dominance on the world stage, the people of war-torn Afghanistan face a daily struggle for survival. Nevertheless, Afghanistan poses a threat to world peace as a refuge and training ground for multinational terrorist organizations. McMaster describes Afghanistan as a tragic missed opportunity where the US had a chance to foster peace and failed due to inconsistent policies and its flawed understanding of the history and character of the Afghan people.

The Afghan nation has been traumatized by decades of war and internal strife. The struggle to end the Soviet occupation attracted legions of radicalized Islamist fighters to the cause from throughout the Middle East and southern Asia. However, after the Soviets withdrew, scores of criminal warlords took their place. The Taliban, a violent terrorist group, consolidated power by promising peace—which it established through brutal subjugation. The Taliban and other groups, such as Al-Qaeda, developed a closely linked, mutually supporting terrorist ecosystem through their shared, radical Islamist ideology and their ability to recruit young people to their cause of uniting the Muslim world under a fundamentalist theocracy.

(Shortform note: The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979 when it feared that Afghanistan’s political instability would undermine its fledgling Communist ruling party. The Soviets’ 10-year occupation prompted the formation of mujahideen resistance groups which garnered support from many foreign nations, including the United States. When the Taliban came to power in 1994, it was composed of mujahideen rebels who believed that the leaders of the anti-Soviet resistance had betrayed their extremist interpretation of Islam. Critics of American foreign policy sometimes blame the US for the Taliban’s creation, but those in alignment with McMaster’s views argue that the US couldn’t have imposed its values any more than the Soviets could.)

McMaster says that the US’s mistake following its campaign to oust the Taliban in 2001 was not following through on the political front to help establish new, stable leadership. Instead, its support for the fledgling Afghan government was inconsistent due to assumptions that military triumph was enough and that Western-style democracy would naturally emerge as long as the terrorists were beaten. This belied the fact that the Afghan people aren’t one group but many, and building a stable multiethnic coalition requires a long-term commitment. Many people in Afghanistan worked hard for such a thing, but the US’s limited and uncertain presence gave the Taliban and its partner organizations the time and space they needed to regroup.

(Shortform note: In Why Nations Fail, Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson state that open political institutions that represent all groups within a population are a prerequisite for national stability. Governments dominated by one ethnic or sectarian group become unsustainable when they empower a select minority over the larger population. Acemoglu and Robinson argue that struggling nations can turn around and become open societies if their internal factions make use of compromise instead of violence and if those compromises are fairly enforced. McMaster suggests that it’s precisely in this area—preventing violence and enforcing compromise—that the US had an opportunity to foster democracy and growth in Afghanistan.)

The Middle East

Similar problems exist in the Arab world, where the clash between secular and Islamist rule has made the region a hotbed of instability. While the Middle East’s sectarian violence is rooted in divisions that are centuries old, it is fueled today by agitating factors (such as radical Islamist groups and the Iranian government) with vested interests in maintaining the chaos. McMaster explains the Middle East’s tangled history, the motivations of Iran in particular to disrupt its Arab neighbors, and the US’s bungled approach to diplomacy and military action in the region.

The Crossroad of the World

Though McMaster keeps his focus on the last hundred years, the Middle East has served as a global trade route for most of recorded history. In The Silk Roads, Peter Frankopan explains the geopolitical importance of the region going back to the Persian Empire, the most advanced nation of its age. Throughout the Roman era and the Middle Ages, the Middle East was a vital corridor for the flow of goods and ideas between Europe, India, and China, enriching the Persian Empire on its eastern border and the Byzantine Empire to the west.

In between these two states, the tribes of Arabia proved fertile ground for the birth of Islam in the 7th century CE. The new religion united the Arabs into a force that conquered Persia, North Africa, and Iberia (present-day Portugal and Spain). The success of the Muslim conquest and the wealth that it brought gave birth to the idea of an Islamic caliphate. One such kingdom, centered in Baghdad, economically united parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe and preserved much ancient knowledge that was lost in the Post-Roman West.

Over the last century, Middle Eastern nations have witnessed the fall of every system of government, from colonialism to monarchies, dictatorships, and theocracies. McMaster says the Islamist movement developed as a response to corrupt secular institutions and dictators. However, the theocratic movement to power reignited ancient bitterness between Sunni and Shia practitioners of Islam. In countries such as Egypt and Iraq, dictators kept a lid on Sunni-Shia conflict while perpetrating abuses of their own. In non-Arab Iran, the Shah’s repression of religion led to the rise of a Shiite Islamist countermovement, led by Ayatollah Khomeini, which toppled the former government and set up the preeminent theocratic state.

The Rise of Islam in the Middle East

Many people in the US and Europe equate the Middle East with Islam, but historically this wasn’t always the case. Though Muslim rulers achieved political dominance of the region in the 7th century CE, Islam did not become the majority religion until between the 12th and 14th centuries. In Christian Martyrs Under Islam, Christian C. Sahner presents evidence that the transition was more gradual and peaceful than earlier historians believed.

McMaster’s focus on the past 100 years reflects the fact that Islam didn’t become politicized until the 20th century, as Middle Eastern countries shook off colonial European rule and their people became disenchanted with attempts to westernize their societies. The turning point for the Islamist movement was the Arab world’s shocking military defeat by Israel during the Six Day War of 1967. The war shook public confidence in the secular governments of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, and paved the way for the growth of Islamism as a rival political ideology.

The Modern Middle East

Today, the Middle East is still reeling from the effects of the war between Iran and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, a war that cost half a million lives and rekindled Sunni/Shia and ethnic divisions. McMaster argues that Iran’s conservative leaders harbor deep hatred for the whole Arab world and seek to sow discord throughout the Middle East. They do this by providing funding and support for terrorist groups, both Shia and Sunni. Iran’s leaders also make use of the false narrative that the Shah was a US puppet to direct the Iranian people’s attention outward and solidify the government’s grip on power internally.

(Shortform note: The Modern War Institute at the West Point Military Academy presents a different take on the Iranian government’s motivations. It contends that Iran sees itself as engaged in a primarily defensive war against the US, Israel, and other neighboring states. Iran’s leaders know that direct military engagement would be disastrous, so instead they sponsor cyberattacks and other forms of asymmetric warfare. Their end goal, according to some analysts, is to diminish American and Israeli power without crossing the threshold into conventional war.)

Meanwhile, the removal of secular dictatorships, such as in Iraq by the US invasion and in other countries during the Arab Spring movement, had the unintended side effect of uncorking the bottle of sectarian conflict. McMaster affirms that there are many Arab leaders working to end the cycle of violence, but that they face resistance on every side from radical groups motivated by revenge and fanaticism. In the Middle East, the US has squandered many chances to build coalitions and protect democratic governance, while instead focusing on military objectives as a way to limit its exposure in the region. By trying not to get involved in “another Vietnam,” the US eschewed long-term political commitments that may have been more beneficial in the long run.

McMaster insists that the US’s interventions in the Middle East should have been part of a long-term plan to coordinate military, diplomatic, and humanitarian missions. The US and its allies could have enabled economic development and encouraged new governments to include the voices of ethnic and religious minorities. Instead, after the realization that military action alone achieved little, the US resigned itself to withdraw forces from the region, believing that doing so would help bring an end to conflict. This view is also self-centered in that it assumes the US is the reason behind the region’s problems in the first place.

Paths Forward in the Middle East

The Brookings Institution presents a starkly different analysis than McMaster’s of the US’s Middle Eastern prospects. They suggest that the dual economic shocks of Covid-19 and falling oil prices will further destabilize the region while rendering any US economic sanctions moot against nations such as Iran. Brookings argues that the US should diminish the scope of its military presence while increasing its diplomatic efforts to resolve regional conflicts.

The nonpartisan Middle East Institute suggests its own policy recommendations for the US in regard to the region’s crisis points. In particular, finding a way to pivot the US’s relationship with Iran is crucial. They point out that Iran’s leadership may soon go through a period of transition during which the US will have an opportunity to encourage reforms that will favor the Iranian people. In Iraq, the US should invest in education, assist the fight against corruption, and help strengthen the country's economy.

North Korea

Despite the chaotic tension of the Middle East, the true wild card among the US’s potential adversaries is North Korea. McMaster paints the North Korean government as the most oppressive regime in the world and possibly the most dangerous due to its leader Kim Jong-un’s desire to acquire nuclear weapons. McMaster explains how a history of conflicting diplomatic strategies has led to the current untenable situation, and how defusing the situation with North Korea will require coordination of the US’s allies in the region.

Korea’s modern woes go back to the end of World War II, when the north and south were occupied by the Soviet Union and the US, respectively. After the stalemate of the Korean War, South Korea’s economy boomed while the North languished under three generations of dictators. With the North Korean people living in abject poverty, the US and South Korea held out hope for decades that the northern regime would eventually collapse. It has not, and has only become more aggressive under Kim Jong-un, who has continually advanced his nuclear ambitions. The US has inconsistently used economic sanctions to apply pressure on the Kim regime, while South Korea has sought reconciliation by proffering economic aid to the North.

(Shortform note: Publicly, North Korea has long gone back and forth on its intentions to develop nuclear weapons, which began as early as the 1950s. However, in1985, North Korea signed the UN’s nonproliferation treaty, and in 1991, the US withdrew most of its own nuclear weapons from the region. President Bill Clinton’s conciliatory deal to halt North Korea’s arms program didn’t take the form of an actual treaty and was later criticized by President George W. Bush, who cut off the supply of oil to the country. This also proved ineffective, and North Korea conducted its first nuclear test in October, 2006.)

McMaster says that neither hard nor soft economic strategies have worked. Kim Jong-un resents South Korea because of its economic strength, but he doesn’t dare open North Korea to the world lest he undermine his family’s grip on power. What’s needed to halt North Korea’s aggression is a coordinated effort toward economic and technological isolation of the country by the US, South Korea, Japan, and even China. Such an alliance will be difficult to achieve because of the region’s historic animosities—between Japan and South Korea, and between different generations within South Korea toward the US itself. Most important of all is making China understand that a nuclear North Korea would be a danger to them as well.

(Shortform note: For decades, North Korea has defied expectations about the sustainability of its dictatorial government. Some of its modern resilience is due to the North Korean government's efforts since 2018 to bolster its economy that, while not growing, maintains an internal status quo. Though McMaster touts sanctions as an effective tool against the Kim regime, they haven’t been successful at halting North Korea’s weapons development. In the shadow of North Korea’s nuclear threats, South Korea has declared its willingness to target its military capabilities at Kim Jong-un personally as a deterrent against North Korean aggression.)

Necessary Pivots

As McMaster shows, there are plenty of global challenges facing the United States, and while none can be ignored, they can be met so long as the American people and their leaders set aside their simplistic, self-centered worldview and embrace long-term goals instead of short-term objectives. McMaster sets out strategies the US should adopt in order to help defend the free world and remain competitive as a leading world power. These include remaining vigilant against open aggression, using truthful information to counter the propaganda of oppressive regimes, turning American diversity into a strength, and reaffirming education as a fundamental bulwark of democracy.

Answer Aggression With Vigilance and Truth

First, it’s vital to acknowledge that there are authoritarian forces in the world that view democratic nations as a threat to their power. McMaster insists that the US must stand firm against these forces, whether they be governments or terrorist organizations. America and its allies must be prepared for conflict while improving their defense against cyberattacks and making use of information media to counter the narratives spread by oppressive regimes.

McMaster recommends that the US and NATO increase their military preparedness, specifically as a defense against Russian aggression. Diplomatic ties across the world should be bolstered against China’s divide-and-conquer economics. In the Middle East, the long-term goal should be ending the sectarian conflicts while partnering with law enforcement and allied intelligence networks to cut off funding and support for terror groups. Meanwhile, America must engage with the community of nations to let aggressor states know that violent action is not a viable path to their goals.

The US on the Global Stage

To implement McMaster’s diplomatic strategies, the first step for the US is to reestablish its standing with its allies. Early in his presidency, Biden set repairing alliances as a top foreign policy priority. A Gallup poll confirms that global views of US leadership rebounded soon after Biden took office, even as Biden’s approval ratings within the US faltered.

The war in Ukraine has served as a litmus test for Americans’ willingness to engage in global conflict. By the start of 2023, the US had provided $25 billion in military aid to Ukraine, $15 billion in financial support, and $10 billion in humanitarian assistance. Polls in 2022 showed a shift from a belief among Americans that the US wasn’t providing enough support toward a general feeling that the country was taking the appropriate steps in the conflict. A majority of Americans have been following the conflict and remain in favor of providing assistance.

Beyond these traditional avenues of diplomatic and military intervention, the US must go on the offensive and regain ground in the world of cyberspace. This includes intercepting cyberattacks before they happen and countering attempts to subvert elections through social media. McMaster also points out that America must maintain control of its information infrastructure. In this, the private sector is just as important, if not more so, than the government. US companies and academic institutions must recognize the national security risks involved with breaches of their information security and be prepared to defend themselves accordingly.

(Shortform note: According to the International Telecommunication Union’s Global Cybersecurity Index, the US leads the world in terms of cyber threat prevention, laws to protect data, and readiness to defend against attacks in cyberspace. Nevertheless, perpetrators of cybercrime are growing more sophisticated, and while some forms of online attacks are in decline, the total harm done by internet criminals may soon grow beyond $10 trillion per year.)

However, while technological secrets must be protected, it’s been shown that despotic regimes are vulnerable when their people have access to information outside of government channels. Radical groups such as the Taliban also rely on an uneducated populace susceptible to propaganda. McMaster says the US should establish information paths into oppressed societies, both through online media and by befriending communities of expats. The latter can be accomplished through community outreach programs and by welcoming foreign students into academia. When America creates a positive impression on those who’ve fled from dictatorial rule, that impression often trickles back and undermines their leaders’ claims to power.

(Shortform note: The Internet would seem to be the easiest way to provide outside news to countries with no free press. However, the freedom of the Internet has been declining worldwide for years, with many governments finding ways to restrict access and block content. China uses its control of the Internet to spread propaganda and crack down on anti-Communist thought. There are ways to get around authoritarian controls, such as virtual private networks and anonymous browsers, though people take a risk when they access information their governments deem to be illegal.)

Harness the Power of Pluralism and Education

Autocratic governments often portray cultural, ethnic, and ideological diversity as a weakness of democratic societies. While America’s collage of differing ideas, cultures, and institutions can make it slow to react as a unified whole, McMaster argues that it also represents the country’s greatest potential. To make use of that potential may require removing the bureaucratic barriers to cooperation between government, academia, and industry, while renewing the country’s focus on education as a means to empower all levels of society.

Authoritarian nations such as China are able to mobilize government, military, and industrial strategies as one, because under such a system the boundaries between them are blurred. However, such systems also shackle the creative freedom that fuels innovation. The US would be ill-served to give up its creative edge, but McMaster suggests that America could better utilize its strengths if there were easier ways to share ideas between the public and private sectors. At present, there is a wall of red tape between government agencies, tech corporations, military branches, and academic research. If the US wants to stay on the leading edge of technological development, then it may be past time for that wall to come down.

(Shortform note: One area in which the US is technologically competing with China is in the development of microchips and the semiconductors on which they are based. Taiwan has led the world in semiconductor production for years, but its tensions with China create a vulnerability in the world’s supply chain for computer circuitry. The Biden administration has enacted measures to restrict the export of microchip technology to China and funnel billions of dollars into semiconductor research. However, there are concerns that the US’s high labor costs will keep it from being competitive unless American companies develop ways to cost-effectively automate microchip production.)

In addition to its intellectual diversity, America’s cultural diversity can be used to set an example to others that internal divisions of race, creed, and culture don’t necessarily lead to violence and oppression. McMaster says that America’s diplomatic missions abroad, especially in places like the Middle East, should promote recognition of equal rights for all groups, not just the ruling ethnic or religious majority. To drive the point home, the US should welcome more immigrants from abroad, especially those who’ve faced oppression in their home countries.

(Shortform note: In order to serve as a model for cultural tolerance, the US may have a lot of work to do at home to overcome its own history of racial violence. By various metrics and rankings, such as the Social Progress Index and the World Values Survey, the Netherlands, Canada, and the Nordic countries consistently score higher than the US in terms of racial and cultural equality. In Caste, journalist Isabel Wilkerson says the US’s internal divisions break down even further along lines of religion, wealth, and labor, and have contributed greatly to the US’s current political polarization.)

However, for such a strategy to work, the American people have to be on board. To achieve this, McMaster insists that education should once again be made a national priority. In addition to the sciences and humanities, though, emphasis must be given again to teaching civics in school and universities. American people, young and old, need to relearn that democracy works, how to engage in civil discussion, and why the US needs to stay engaged with allies and competitors elsewhere in the world. Students shouldn't be taught a sugar-coated version of American history, but they should be made aware of its virtues so that they can understand American democracy as a continuing experiment on the world stage of which they are all a part.

(Shortform note: McMaster’s views on US civics education are backed up by research. A 2016 study revealed that less than a fifth of US states require high school social studies courses, and as a result, less than a quarter of US adults can even name the three branches of government. However, more voices are calling out for an increased emphasis on civics education and public involvement as essential to maintaining American democracy—in the wake of the January 6, 2021 attack on the US capitol, 34 state legislatures introduced bills to bolster civics teaching at all levels of public education, many of which passed with strong bipartisan support.)