Book Review of Richard Haass's: A World in Disarray: American Foreign Policy and the Crisis of the Old Order (2017) (work in progress)

By:  Richard Haass

Why I got the Book: Richard Haass is a pretty important author in the world of international relations, and I remember reading a couple of books of his back when I was studying, especially   The Reluctant Sheriff: The United State After the Cold War. So basically when I found out he was coming out with a new book in late 2017 I was interested in reading.
What I liked :
•    The book has a very well written introduction, Haass explains exactly what he wants to achieve with the book and basically how.
•    The author takes time to explain the title of the book, so we understand also what is the objective of the book and how he's defining the international system, which is not in a situation of anarchy and it is not a new order either, it is the old order that is in trouble.
•    Haass does a good job defining fundamental terms like World Order at the beginning of the book, I as a reader one appreciates this because you understand exactly what the author is talking about.
•    The book can be divided into three big parts, one focused on the history of the international relation of the twentieth century, the second part centers on the state of international relations during the twenty-first century and finally Haass's recommendations on what the United State should do referring to foreign policy from here on out.
•    Book explains the evolution of the international system during the twentieth century especially analyzing WWII, the post-WWII order, the Cold War and the fall of communism, focusing not only of US foreign policy but also the birth of a constellation of International Organization, NGOs and bilateral and multilateral treaties. 
•    The book has at least two filler chapters and the end where the author gets into his recommendations for future US international policy.
•    Haass is pretty critical of Barack Obama the way he telegraphed his intention with withdrawing troops from Irak and Afganistan or with Iran with the nuclear deal. Also criticizing the comment of the red line with Siria, US involvement in Libya and being very inconsistent with the Arab spring affecting the United States credibility across the world. Richard does mention the succes of killing Osama Bin Ladden is one of the few things that the Obama administration did very well.
•    Haass also complains that the George W Bush and Obama administrations had a very informal way of operating that had a negative impact on making mistakes in foreign policy.
Central Thymes:
•    We are living a grand backlash against globalization, international trade, US involvement around the world and the maintenance of alliances. But this is not only in the United States there is a rise of Populism and Nationalism across the world.
•    The United State is still the most powerful State, but it must share more and more power, because of its ever-changing nature of power, but it is losing influence because of a lack of a proper foreign policy.
•    Power is more distributed, and Richard does not talk about World Order but World Orders. Haass define world order as the nature of the international relations it a measure of the world condition that includes the arrangments the promote peace, prosperity and freedom and those actions that promote the contrary. For there to be order the must be legitimacy, an agreement of the parties of the nature of the relations amongst States (and other actors) the can create a workable situation to operate, we still live in a post westfelian world order. The rules must be defined and no order is safe without physical safeguards. Also for Haass Order depends on the balance of power in the international system and respect for sovereignty.
•    This disorder is a product of structural changes in the international system power  has become more diffuse and there is an ever grown presence of new actors
•    People live longer and better lives, they are more people living in the middle class than any other moment in history.
•    A central aspect of the traditional world order is States and their governments are free to act as they wish within their respective borders.
•    The progressive decolonization during the twentieth century created high levels of disorder in the system on a large scale, the emergence of self-determination that was respected ora least tolerated by many States lead to many countries independence that were not ready for. Also after the end of the cold war and the fall of the USSR 15 new countries appeared on the world stage. Also during this time, we had the emergence of failed States like  Somalia and Haiti, and colossal humanitarian disasters like Ruanda.
•    Post cold war order was incomplete and fragile and international organizations were not up to the task into ushering in a new more solid international order. The Unipolarity the US found itself in a progressively eroding consensus and decreasing legitimacy as time past. The United State being viewed as a superpower is a mistake.
•    The idea of Soverine responsibility becoming more and more important to the modern international system. Issues like Terrorism, Refugees, climate change, cyber crimes/ terrorism, pandemics... all international phenomena that can only be addressed by states working together, unilateral action literal go nowhere and is a waste of time and many find their origin within States and transcend them as they grow, putting in debate the concept of State Sovereignty.  States and their government must understand the ever-growing responsibilities that their internal policies may impact on an international level, Haass explain once State assume this  we will have an evolution of the current international order  
What I didn't like or Debatable Stuff:
Overall: 8 out of 10 good for newbies in international relations.