What do you think?
Rate this book
Diplomatic Afterlives
No longer content to fade away into comfortable retirement, a growing number of former political leaders have pursued diplomatic afterlives. From Nelson Mandela to Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton, to Tony Blair and Mikhail Gorbachev, this set of highly-empowered individuals increasingly try to make a difference on the global stage by capitalizing on their free-lance celebrity status while at the same time building on their embedded ?club? attributes and connections. In this fascinating book, Andrew F. Cooper provides the first in-depth study of the motivations, methods, and contributions made by these former leaders as they take on new responsibilities beyond service to their national states. While this growing trend may be open to accusations of mixing public goods with private material gain, or personal quests to rehabilitate political image, it must ? he argues ? be taken seriously as a compelling indication of the political climate, in which powerful individuals can operate outside of established state structures. As Cooper ably shows, there are benefits to be reaped from this new normative entrepreneurism, but its range and impact nonetheless raise legitimate concerns about the privileging of unaccountable authority. Mixing big picture context and illustrative snapshots, Diplomatic Afterlives offers an illuminating analysis of the influence and the pitfalls of this highly visible but under-scrutinized phenomenon in world politics.
186 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 2014
6 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 25, 2015
Political Afterlives or a Political Kardashians?
This book was reviewed as part of Amazon's Vine program which included a free copy of the book.
With DIPLOMATIC AFTERLIVES, Andrew Cooper touches on a more modern trend of prominent world leaders’ who simply refuse to retire following their terms in office. Cooper selectively highlights a few of these “hyper-empowered” individuals and illustrates how they “cash-in” (figuratively and literally) on their global political clout. The results of his study shed additional light on the deeds being done by a handful of individuals (most of which the media readily reports), but never attempts to flesh out what really drives their efforts … altruism or ego?
Cooper’s book is a narrowly-focused work that centers on a select few leaders who have seemingly never retired from their former day jobs. Nowadays, it seems, leading a country is merely a stepping-stone to reach the political and financial pot-of-gold they were unable to attain while in office. These former leaders, freed from the confining chains of an electorate, roam the world to spread their power and influence on an unprecedented scale and making a lot of money for themselves in the process. Cooper claims the model for post-statesmen globe-trotting is Jimmy Carter, a man whose post-presidential passion may be rooted in honest altruism or simply serve as a means to right an arguably flawed presidential legacy. While the author acknowledges both as being possible motivators for Carter’s still-active presence on the national and global stage, he prefers to show support for the more favorable motivator: altruism. And with that, readers are spared from any recap of Carter’s polarizing and reckless meddling in US domestic and foreign policy. Unfortunately, this sets a somewhat skewed tone throughout the book, especially when one considers the individuals Cooper chooses to highlight and how he encapsulates their “political afterlives”.
With Carter providing the initial template, Cooper delves into the post-office careers of Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Mikhail Gorbachev, Nelson Mandela and, to a lesser degree, Margaret Thatcher. The majority of the book is dedicated to Clinton and Mandela and the author documents how they have considerably expanded Carter’s more modest approach to a politically-active retirement. While one cannot argue the personal motivators when considering Mandela’s storied life, Clinton’s motivations are not-so-easily defined in the book. While much of Clinton’s involvement on the world stage following his Presidency are shown as successful and for just causes, Cooper presents an overly glorified image that tends ignore the considerable wealth amassed by Clinton in his political afterlife and really only factors the political ambitions of his wife to the year 2008. The controversial financial element of Clinton’s globe-trotting has been newsworthy for a while, but really isn’t explored by Cooper, who seems to take “the end justifies the means” approach to Clinton’s post-presidential life. The post-office lives of Gorbachev and Blair are less-favorably presented as being more “dash-for-cash” driven and tend to elevate the statures of Carter and Clinton. Toward the end of the book, we see how the author views those he has selected to examine for his book: the “earnest commitment” of Carter, the “charisma” of Clinton, the “iconic status” of Mandela, the “historical importance” of Gorbachev and the “mixed legacy” of Blair. It may be hard to argue with the list of successes associated with some of these leaders when only the successes are presented. I would have preferred a more critical analysis as to what these individuals could have done, but for some reason, did not or could not. Did some of their efforts make matters worse, was all the money received wisely appropriated? Are these globe-trotting second careers simply a means of supporting a healthy ego and amassing wealth under the guise of being helpful?
In addition to being a rather dry read, DIPLOMATIC AFTERLIVES comes across as an incomplete work. While Cooper brings forward other world leaders towards the end of his book (mostly by listing their participation in post-office diplomacy/cultural gatherings), it is a Carter-Clinton centric work the mostly shows how Clinton expanded/exploited what Carter started. The inclusion of Mandela serves to parallel/support the more positive Carter-Clinton post-leadership careers with Blair, Gorbachev and Thatcher being presented in a negative, contrasting manner. I was hoping for a better picture of the post-office careers of more world leaders than a stereo-typical presentation of a select few. Understandably, Cooper feels that those he selected were the most important (the “hyper-empowered”), but are they necessarily the best choices? I’ve never sensed Gorbachev and Blair as being as “overly-involved” following their terms in office. Hard to believe the political afterlife of Al Gore wasn’t included (even though he was a VP, he certainly threw his weight around the world enough to get a Nobel Prize). It would have been nice if the book could have presented a broader scope of leaders and their post-political careers. While I don’t have a problem with Cooper favoring the works of Clinton or Carter, I felt a more thorough approach could have been taken toward examining the controversial aspects of their legacies to present a more well-rounded understanding to readers.
Are these former leaders working for the good of others or are they simply self-aggrandizing, money-grubbing overnight guests that refuse to leave? DIPLOMATIC AFTERLIVES provides some food for thought, but presents too narrow an approach to the subject matter.
This book was reviewed as part of Amazon's Vine program which included a free copy of the book.
With DIPLOMATIC AFTERLIVES, Andrew Cooper touches on a more modern trend of prominent world leaders’ who simply refuse to retire following their terms in office. Cooper selectively highlights a few of these “hyper-empowered” individuals and illustrates how they “cash-in” (figuratively and literally) on their global political clout. The results of his study shed additional light on the deeds being done by a handful of individuals (most of which the media readily reports), but never attempts to flesh out what really drives their efforts … altruism or ego?
Cooper’s book is a narrowly-focused work that centers on a select few leaders who have seemingly never retired from their former day jobs. Nowadays, it seems, leading a country is merely a stepping-stone to reach the political and financial pot-of-gold they were unable to attain while in office. These former leaders, freed from the confining chains of an electorate, roam the world to spread their power and influence on an unprecedented scale and making a lot of money for themselves in the process. Cooper claims the model for post-statesmen globe-trotting is Jimmy Carter, a man whose post-presidential passion may be rooted in honest altruism or simply serve as a means to right an arguably flawed presidential legacy. While the author acknowledges both as being possible motivators for Carter’s still-active presence on the national and global stage, he prefers to show support for the more favorable motivator: altruism. And with that, readers are spared from any recap of Carter’s polarizing and reckless meddling in US domestic and foreign policy. Unfortunately, this sets a somewhat skewed tone throughout the book, especially when one considers the individuals Cooper chooses to highlight and how he encapsulates their “political afterlives”.
With Carter providing the initial template, Cooper delves into the post-office careers of Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Mikhail Gorbachev, Nelson Mandela and, to a lesser degree, Margaret Thatcher. The majority of the book is dedicated to Clinton and Mandela and the author documents how they have considerably expanded Carter’s more modest approach to a politically-active retirement. While one cannot argue the personal motivators when considering Mandela’s storied life, Clinton’s motivations are not-so-easily defined in the book. While much of Clinton’s involvement on the world stage following his Presidency are shown as successful and for just causes, Cooper presents an overly glorified image that tends ignore the considerable wealth amassed by Clinton in his political afterlife and really only factors the political ambitions of his wife to the year 2008. The controversial financial element of Clinton’s globe-trotting has been newsworthy for a while, but really isn’t explored by Cooper, who seems to take “the end justifies the means” approach to Clinton’s post-presidential life. The post-office lives of Gorbachev and Blair are less-favorably presented as being more “dash-for-cash” driven and tend to elevate the statures of Carter and Clinton. Toward the end of the book, we see how the author views those he has selected to examine for his book: the “earnest commitment” of Carter, the “charisma” of Clinton, the “iconic status” of Mandela, the “historical importance” of Gorbachev and the “mixed legacy” of Blair. It may be hard to argue with the list of successes associated with some of these leaders when only the successes are presented. I would have preferred a more critical analysis as to what these individuals could have done, but for some reason, did not or could not. Did some of their efforts make matters worse, was all the money received wisely appropriated? Are these globe-trotting second careers simply a means of supporting a healthy ego and amassing wealth under the guise of being helpful?
In addition to being a rather dry read, DIPLOMATIC AFTERLIVES comes across as an incomplete work. While Cooper brings forward other world leaders towards the end of his book (mostly by listing their participation in post-office diplomacy/cultural gatherings), it is a Carter-Clinton centric work the mostly shows how Clinton expanded/exploited what Carter started. The inclusion of Mandela serves to parallel/support the more positive Carter-Clinton post-leadership careers with Blair, Gorbachev and Thatcher being presented in a negative, contrasting manner. I was hoping for a better picture of the post-office careers of more world leaders than a stereo-typical presentation of a select few. Understandably, Cooper feels that those he selected were the most important (the “hyper-empowered”), but are they necessarily the best choices? I’ve never sensed Gorbachev and Blair as being as “overly-involved” following their terms in office. Hard to believe the political afterlife of Al Gore wasn’t included (even though he was a VP, he certainly threw his weight around the world enough to get a Nobel Prize). It would have been nice if the book could have presented a broader scope of leaders and their post-political careers. While I don’t have a problem with Cooper favoring the works of Clinton or Carter, I felt a more thorough approach could have been taken toward examining the controversial aspects of their legacies to present a more well-rounded understanding to readers.
Are these former leaders working for the good of others or are they simply self-aggrandizing, money-grubbing overnight guests that refuse to leave? DIPLOMATIC AFTERLIVES provides some food for thought, but presents too narrow an approach to the subject matter.
Displaying 1 of 1 review