Books reviews, current events, and other musings

Derek Leebaert's The Fifty-Year Wound: The True Price of American's Cold War Victory had definite possibilities. Now that a decade has passed since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and previously hidden US and Soviet archives are becoming available, a first-rate historian could write a perceptive account of the Cold War and its consequences. Unfortunately, limitations of The Fifty-Year Wound prevent it from reaching that goal.

Leebaert treats the book mainly as a soapbox for addressing controversial issues, instead of a balanced summary of Cold War events and their costs. He spends a lot of time criticizing various policies without clearly explaining his views of what the US should have done. In fact, during the first two thirds of the book, you could only deduce Leebaert's beliefs by analyzing his critique of others. He does possess definite opinions about Soviet dangers, military actions, nuclear weapon strategy, etc., but rarely takes the time to justify those opinions.

Leebaert's claims often seem inconsistent, such as when he faults the Kennedy administration for unnecessary increases in defense spending to address a non-existent missile gap relative to the Soviets, but later criticizes the Johnson administration for not building an expensive anti-ballistic missile system. The reader has to speculate how to reconcile the apparent contradictions.

Leebaert treats the Kennedy and Nixon administrations harshly, while he thinks better of Truman and Eisenhower. However, he utterly adores Ronald Reagan, unable to contain his admiration for that public figure. Reagan is portrayed as an insightful, clear-headed, strong leader, which naturally makes it difficult for me to take anything else in the book seriously. Had I noticed the back-cover endorsements by Paul Johnson and someone from the American Enterprise Institute, I wouldn't have purchased the book in the first place.

Also, despite the reference to "The True Price" in the book's subtitle, Leebaert neglects the largest sacrifice that Americans made during the long struggle: the members of the armed forces who fought in Korea and Vietnam. Even the soldiers who weren't killed or wounded went through a horrendous ordeal. Leebaert discusses the death toll in Korea for one paragraph, mainly focusing on initial overestimates, and never mentions the injured or the war's brutality. His long analysis of Vietnam emphasized policy concerns and paid scant attention to the experiences of the soldiers.

Leebaert closely examines the enormous military expenses under Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson, though he bypasses that issue when praising Reagan. He illustrates how the Cold War pulled brainpower from more constructive pursuits and made American society more bureaucratic. Finally, besides condemning the radicals of the 60's, he didn't explore how the Vietnam War tore the country apart.

Overall, I would not recommend The Fifty-Year Wound to anyone. Even conservative readers should seek out a more coherent analysis.