2034: A Novel of the Next World War

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.

"2034: A Novel of the Next World War" by Elliot Ackerman and Admiral James Stavridis provides a gripping and thought-provoking glimpse into a potential future shaped by geopolitical tensions. The novel's strength lies in its richly drawn characters, each representing different global perspectives, which lend depth and nuance to the unfolding narrative. The authors' military and national security backgrounds bring authenticity to the descriptions of strategy and warfare, making the scenario they paint all the more plausible and unsettling.The book vividly portrays a world on the brink, weaving together the threads of technology, diplomacy, and human emotion into a compelling tapestry. Its exploration of the potential impacts of cyber warfare on global politics is particularly noteworthy, offering readers a sobering look at how such conflicts could evolve.However, "2034" is not without its weaknesses. The pacing sometimes feels uneven, with certain sections dragging or feeling underdeveloped. Additionally, while the novel aims for a broad geopolitical scope, some readers may find the treatment of certain regions or nations lacks depth or nuance, potentially oversimplifying complex international relationships.Overall, "2034" is a fascinating and engaging read that offers valuable insights into the potential pathways of future global conflicts. Its blend of realistic speculation and character-driven drama makes it a notable addition to the genre of speculative fiction. Despite some flaws in pacing and depth, the book succeeds in sparking reflection on the current trajectory of world events and the importance of striving for peace in an increasingly interconnected and technologically advanced world.

I've pre-ordered this book because I read the first few chapters in the Wired magazine, and got intrigued.I like it. Here are the reasons:1) This is not a Tom Clancy - like adventure thriller. It is a "thinking person's" adventure novel, if you like. What I mean by that is that the main story and the main thrill & risk is less in the heroics of individual people but the unintended consequences of various domestic agendas, personal insecurities playing on a global scale to get humanity to the brink of extinction.2) The blindness of the current hegemon to the decline that's already started, the cockiness of the upstart that overreaches, the rise of the improbable forces that punch above their weight - all are clear to see in this story. Too often, even in the professional foreign policy circles, those lessons of history are lost.I've read some of the critical comments below and here's my response (informed by not just a thorough read of this novel, but by years of participating in foreign policy debates in America as a member of a few foreign relations associations):Critique: There's no war! Much less a world war.Answer: This war resulted in nuclear incineration of 2 mid-size US cities, one mid-size Chinese city plus one of the largest cities on the planet (Chinese too). This war involved almost half the humanity (populations of the belligerents) and sunk dozens of warships including aircraft carriers. What is your definition of a 'world war'? Should it be just like the WW1 and WW2? That is, start in Europe and be mostly land-based (as against a Naval operation here)? Get over it - we're not in Kansas anymore.Critique: India? Really? They can't even [fill in the blank here]Answer: That's the intent of the authors. To wake us from the stupor where our worldview is set in the past. They wanted to not just re-do another Hollywood movie where we are the good guys and the Russians (or now, Chinese) are the bad guys, and the good guys win. You want something like that, the bookstores are full of books like that. Take your pick. It looks like the authors wanted to show those who 'finish' a war are better off than those who 'start' a war. They wanted to pick an improbable power (remember, for most of the 19th century, US was written off as a third-rate power - we couldn't even defend our White House from the Brits). Those in power rarely see their own decline clearly. What choice did the authors have to pick an improbable power? Japan? Already WW2. Singapore? Switzerland? Too small. It has to be India or Brazil, or some country with the size.Critique: Russians can cut a bunch of cables with a bomb and half the US loses the Internet?Answer: You have a point here. I know TCP/IP and the way the internet works. The authors just didn't have the depth to put that in there. They should have done more research.Critique: How can they just appear near the aircraft carrier without being detected?Answer: Technology in 15 years may be unrecognizable form today's. Just look at the last 15 years. The next 15 will be exponentially faster. Chinese already did quantum computing and quantum coupling. We already have CRISPR.I see these traits in our foreign policy establishment all the time. (Don't even get me started on our politicians - there are no statesmen left - just petty politicians that will do anything to get back to power.)1) Lack of imagination on what's possible.2) Utter smugness in our dominance forever.3) Reckless behavior that erodes our soft power for no other reason than ignorance and it twin brother hubris.We can use more books like this.

o livro especula sobre a futura geo politica

Reading this novel, 2034, I lived through a rare experience, different from reading other fiction. Completed reading the novel in three days. A rarity in itself. The eagerness and anxiety of 'what next' compelled to read on and on. Even in sleep, like it happens with one of the characters of the novel, Sarah Hunt, shiploads of ghosts, tumbled out. And among the ghosts, in my dream, I was looking for myself.The novels of Arthur Hailey had a knack for making the reader a part of the novel, overseer of its plot. Reading 2034 created a similar experience. I found myself in the Siuation Room at the White House with Chowdhury, on the bridge of the Russian naval ship Rezkiy in the Barent Sea with Farshad, agonizing with Lin Bao,

Believable characters and an even more believable scenario. It wouldn't take much to start WW3. A must read for every politician.

Heb dit boek niet ontvangen, alhoewel dit zogezegd afgeleverd werd aan een bewoner.Was de hele dag aanwezig en heb niemand gehoord of gezien.Wie was deze bewoner dan ?

Novela amena, sin más. Una aproximación plausible a la escalada de tensiones que podría llevar a una tercera gran guerra. Aunque lo que se describe es una confrontación entre dos potencias más que una guerra mundial entre alianzas internacionales. Novela de fin de semana.