2034: A Novel of the Next World War

Yearning for a good military fiction set in the near future. Unfortunately this wasn't it. Maybe it's because as an American I have a really hard time with stories like this that start out with America getting gut punched really hard by technology that they have no understanding of, which while is possible is unlikely, and then usually it go on to prevail in the end... End... But with this story of course we did not.All the usual bad actors are present of course like Russia and Iran and now China. Any stories usually start out with decisions made by a state who later winds up regretting it. Maybe they should just think it through before they pull the trigger in the first place?The book does make some very good points though. America is just as likely or more likely to implode from within versus from external factors, although nuclear war probably changes that equation quite a bit.While I would like to see the US disengage from a lot of the world shenanigans that are going on, I think we know that if we did that we'll have more problems down the road then we would confronting it while trying to keep it from escalating into world conflict again.Another issue I have is a tactics that they've used in this book. Why would you send two carrier battle groups into the same situation that you just lost a destroyer battle group without clearly knowing what was the reason that you lost them in the first place? Just dumb things like that make this story less readable to me. I don't question the fact that people make stupid decisions sometimes, but I'd like to see a story where maybe we don't start out with decision after decision being poorly thought out. We're getting to a age now that a wrong move could jeopardize not just one country, but almost the entire population of the world. And while not everybody may die, the standard of living for 99% of the survivors will not be good.Don't forget about that.

To begin, I recommend this book to you. It is an interesting and entertaining novel of future history. It is reminiscent of the non-fiction book, "The Coming War With Japan" by Friedman and Lebard, 1991. However, that volume was political science while this book is fiction.There are several protagonists in this book: Hunt, Chowdhury, Mitchell, and Farshad. In the case of Sarah Hunt, in my opinion the character is a bit overdrawn as "one of the first women in the SEALS" and "first in her class at everything." And, the characterization of a young male naval officer calling in updates over the radio "with all the baritone hysteria of plays being called at the line of scrimmage" is a bit overdrawn as well. I have never heard plays at the line of scrimmage being called with hysteria, but that is solely my own personal experience. Perhaps Ackerman and Stavridis have differing experiences. I wonder what readers would think if this character had been a female officer and the radio callouts were described as "the falsetto hysteria of plays being called on a volleyball court." Either way, it's too much. Some of the bureaucratic situations as described wouldn't turn out, in real life, the way these are presented in the story (Mitchell being given command of a fighter squadron in the way described, for example) but these are not show stoppers. The main point of the novel, at least for me, is that it serves as a warning to us (the USA) that we should not misunderstand our relative power in the world. We are not as powerful as we tend to think we are, and failure to realize this could result in geo-political miscalculations the like of which this nation has never seen. Sometimes our policymakers act as though this is the 1950s, whereas our relative power is much less today than then. The ending of this novel really makes that point. You really should read this book.

I've read negative comments on this book, and agree some of those points are valid, and yet I give this book five stars and urge voters and those in positions to set policy to read it.The gist and ultimate message of the book is what we should take away.The novel centers on five characters, told from their point of view. I am a geek that prefers focus on technology or science, so this human centered narrative was a turn-off at first. Further in I became more engrossed with the book and saw the relience on characters as an efficient means to convey the military-geopolitical dynamics.I certainly prefer dry, unsentimental military strategy such as in my science fiction military theory short story "Treason Alaska : The Story of the Treason Trade Route", which in spite of it's title is more about Chinese-American antagonism and a surprising outcome.Still, I endorse this sentiment drenched 2034 for it's few very important statements Americans need to see. There are pro-Russian statements, and pro-Chinese statements, and are very counter to the a priori moral assumptions we see in US journalism and State Department policy rhetoric.Here are my favorite quotes:On Russia:"Kolchak began to pontificate about the Rodina, his “Mother Russia,” how in its many iterations, whether they be tsarist, imperialist, or communist, it had never enjoyed the legitimacy of other world powers. “During the empire our tsars spoke French at court,” said Kolchak. “During communism our economy was a hollow shell. Today, under the federation, our leaders are viewed as criminals by the rest of the world. In New York City, or in London, they don’t respect any of us, not even President Putin. To them, President Putin isn’t the grandfather of our Federation; no, to them he is simply another poor Russian, a gangster at best, even though he has retaken our ancestral territories in Crimea, Georgia, and Greater Ukraine; even though he has crippled America’s political system, so that now their president doesn’t even have a party but has to run as one of these enfeebled ‘independents.’ We are a cunning people. Our leader is one of us and is equally cunning."On America:"The America they believe themselves to be is no longer the America that they are. Time changes everything, doesn’t it. And now, it is changing the world’s balance in our [Russia's] favor.”America’s hubris has finally gotten the better of its greatness. You’ve squandered your blood and treasure to what end? ... For freedom of navigation in the South China Sea? For the sovereignty of Taiwan? Isn’t the world large enough for your government and Beijing’s?On War:"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. -Sun Tzu"By the way, the dynamics of escalation in the book match the "If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat" formula.And finally, the ideal the book pursues is in this passage:"He could feel his loyalties shifting, not from one nation to another, but between those who wanted to avert an escalation and those who believed that victory, whatever that meant, could exist along this spectrum of destruction. Receiving the appropriate authorizations to visit the Defense Ministry suddenly seemed like an irrelevance. He increasingly felt as though his allegiance didn’t reside with any government but with whoever could reverse this cycle of annihilation."Spoiler alert, the geopolitical surprise comes from India:"We are not supporting Beijing. And we are not supporting Washington. We are allied with no one. Our support is for de-escalation. Do you understand?”Yes the book has a mighty big magic wand in the form of Chinese cyber attack ability, but fiction often relies on these implausible rhetorical devices to get the reader to that place the story needs to go, so the reader receives a much needed message.This book has many such needed messages.

o livro especula sobre a futura geo politica

Its been quite a few years since I read such good fiction, so close to the reality that its almost terrifying.Awesome book!

Uno spaccato su un prossimo futuro che (speriamo di no) potrebbe avverarsi.Fondamentale per capire la debolezza della “troppa democrazia” dell’occidente, la stessa che aveva fatto crollare l’Impero Romano.Da consigliare ai nostri governanti che spesso fanno accordi con nazioni governate da “tiranni” ispirandosi alle nostre regole occidentali, senza tenere conto che davanti hanno dei “predatori”.

Un bon roman d’anticipation, qui bien qu’écrit avant la guerre en Ukraine semble parler de l’actualité.Bref j’ai passé un bon moment à le lire et à le relire.

The deeper message is clear, but the story is not really well detailed. The gaps between major events cry for some substance. And for a European reader, the American spirit is too abstract to follow through.Overall a terrifying thought experiment, but missing the depth to make it “live”.