Introduction
It is hard to disagree that the history of America is filled with controversial events. Every time a president and their team have to decide regarding the country’s domestic or foreign policy, it is possible that they will draw wrongful conclusions or make a mistake. There is a vast number of reasons for even the best politicians and specialists to fail and make errors when trying to do their best for the U.S. For instance, some of the causes are human factors, ambiguous circumstances, lack of useful information, or overconfidence of authority figures.
One such debatable event in American history is the Vietnam war. It took McGeorge Bundy, who served as the national security adviser during the conflict, thirty years to admit his mistakes and try to understand their causes. In his brilliant 2008 book Lessons in Disaster: McGeorge Bundy and the Path to War in Vietnam, Gordon Goldstein from the Council on Foreign Relations writes about Bundy. The book describes him as a talented and smart person who made mistakes during the Vietnam war and wants to share the lessons he learned. It is possible to say that this is outstanding research in which Goldstein managed to convey Bundy’s ideas and views, as well as add his perception of the situation and its consequences. The main argument of the Lessons in Disaster is that America can avoid similar mistakes in the future only if it uses the Vietnam war situation to learn.
Book Review
The Book’s Objective
The author of Lessons in Disaster: McGeorge Bundy and the Path to War in Vietnam had a specific purpose. In 1995, after thirty years of being silent about the Vietnam conflict and one year before passing away, former national security adviser McGeorge Bundy decided to write a memoir. He wanted to create a unique book about the role he played in the participation of the U.S. in the Vietnam war and asked a scholar Gordon Goldstein for collaboration. The objective of the book was to unveil some errors and discuss “the key historical inflection points and pivotal players in Vietnam policy during the Kennedy and Johnson years” (Goldstein 10). Additionally, Bundy wanted to use this book to “understand the significance of the air-strike strategy he had advocated in the winter of 1965” (Goldstein 11). Unfortunately, he died before the writing was finished, and it took Goldstein about a decade to rewrite the book and add his perspective to this fundamental work.
The Author’s Perspective
The author believes that the book can provide readers with valuable insights into the real factors and circumstances of the U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war. He stated that the writing’s significance would outweigh the first negative reactions of the audience, and this was the reason why Bundy decided to unveil his true attitude toward the conflict. According to the author, “Bundy, had he lived to complete his final work, would have attempted to address his shortcomings during his years at the center of Vietnam strategy” (Goldstein 37). This is why Goldstein decided to do the same and list six key lessons that this brilliant yet not perfect politician had learned from the war.
Summary
It is fair to notice that the author proves his argument by outlining the six lessons. The clear discussion of these ideas, as well as relevant evidence that Goldstein provides, allows consider this book one of the best research about the Vietnam war and its consequences for America. While it is irrelevant to summarize all the lessons, it would be effective to discuss one of them. For example, to prove the sixth lesson, “Intervention is a Presidential Choice, Not an Inevitability,” and to partly support the first lesson, “Counselors Advise but Presidents Decide,” Goldstein mentions the Bay of Pigs case (299). Initially, the CIA insisted that Kennedy launch the exile invasion. However, the mission failed, and Kennedy decided not to listen to others’ advice again and accepted defeat (Goldstein 299). Therefore, presidents need to make final choices based on their ideas and opinions.
Evaluation
The purpose of the following subsections is to provide an objective evaluation of the writing. Despite the uniqueness, brilliance, and significant role of Lessons in Disaster, this book has both advantages and disadvantages. During the evaluation, it is also essential to consider the fact that it was initially prepared by two persons, but only one of them managed to finish the work. Consequently, it is possible to suggest that the audience would have received a slightly different book had Bundy not passed away before the completion of the research.
Weaknesses, Strengths, and Limitations of the Research
Any fundamental writing has its advantages and disadvantages because it is almost impossible to avoid the latter. The strengths of Lessons in Disaster include the uniqueness of the book and the author’s great style. Indeed, there is an extended number of literary works dedicated to the Vietnam war. However, this research is the only one that “offers insight into how Bundy, a man of surpassing skill and reputation, could have advised two presidents so badly” (Holbrooke). Other strengths are that Goldstein manages to write about Bundy’s errors without judging him and also indicates his co-authorship.
The weakness of the writing is simultaneously its limitation. Although the book was Bundy’s initiative, and he managed to complete a major part of the research, he passed away long before the book was published. Consequently, Bundy could not review and approve the finished writing, and it is possible to suggest that Goldstein could misinterpret some ideas or convey them in the wrong way. What is more, the book is based primarily on Bundy’s and Goldstein’s perceptions more than thirty years after the end of the war. Thus, the time could have altered some memories of Bundy or made it impossible to get some valuable information.
General Impression
Overall, it is possible to say that it is indeed extremely valuable and fundamental research that provides readers with numerous insights and unique perspectives on Bundy and the Vietnam war. Despite some weaknesses and limitations, Goldstein managed to find a balance between adding his own and Bundy’s thoughts and ideas. Consequently, this work is not written by an outside observer or McGeorge Bundy himself. Rather, this is a result of an outstanding collaboration of two professionals who desperately wanted to spread the key lessons that the U.S. should have learned from its involvement in the Vietnam conflict.
Conclusion
To conclude, one may say that Lessons in Disaster by Gordon Goldstein will probably never lose its relevance. It is common for people to make errors, and even professional and talented politicians can be wrong in their judgments and decisions. Overall, this book proves that it is necessary to admit one’s mistakes, especially if they result in a disaster. Errors allow people to learn their lessons, and the two presidents’ and Bundy’s misjudgments during the Vietnam war provide America with at least six beneficial ideas. Therefore, only in case the U.S. and its authorities and citizens get the lessons outlined in the writing will it be possible to avoid making similar mistakes in the future.
Works Cited
Goldstein, Gordon M. Lessons in Disaster: McGeorge Bundy and the Path to War in Vietnam. Holt Paperbacks, 2008.
Holbrooke, Richard. “’The Doves Were Right’.” The New York Times, 2008.