The Tragic Mind: Fear, Fate, and the Burden of Power

Robert D Kaplan’s The Tragic Mind: Fear, Fate, and the Burden of Power is a mediation on war, geopolitics, and the human condition. In the 115-page book, the author makes the case for realist foreign policy being informed by ‘tragic sensibility’. Kaplan asserts that even the most visionary statesmen may be unable to rectify injustices, hindered by pervasive human flaws such as hubris, ambition, and hatred. These imperfections underscore the inherent limits of progress. Kaplan’s insight, suggests a cautionary approach imbued with tragic realism, advocating for prudence to steer clear of idealistic misadventures— to “think tragically to avoid tragedy”.

Kaplan is a seasoned geopolitical analyst and boasts a resume of 25 books on history, war, and geopolitics, well-known for their incisive and realist explorations of international relations and strategic thinking. This book is a synthesis of Kaplan’s learnings of war and statesmanship, its title encapsulates the core theme of the book: the tragic dimension of leadership, where fear and fate intertwine, imposing a heavy burden on those in positions of power. The thesis portrays that a statesman with a tragic mindset acknowledges that global challenges often extend beyond simple dichotomies of good and evil, to encompass the challenges between a lesser evil and graver evil. In such complexities, the optimal course of action frequently involves decisions aimed at minimising the most profound tragedies.

Kaplan’s analysis is organised thematically, with each chapter addressing a different aspect of the tragic mind. This book continues his discography of blending historical analysis with contemporary concerns, providing a profound examination of the mental and emotional toll of wielding power. Considering geopolitics as tragic is not a novel concept, Kaplan’s book serves as a continuation of the works of Greek dramatists, Shakespeare, and German philosophers who have understood the great dilemmas of international politics through a realist paradigm. Kaplan draws upon their wisdom to glean insights into the enduring traits of human nature and behaviour that transcend historical epochs. From their work, the author concludes the ‘the terrible power of irrational inscribed in International Relations and Geopolitics. The book traces an intellectual journey through Western literature to explore tragic thinking, so that the readers can retrain their understanding of tragedy from a pessimistic view to that of exploring endless possibilities, whilst also being aware of one’s limits.

Kaplan’s work can be placed in the midst of works of classical realists and neo-realist authors. For Kaplan the world is led by the inherent tragedy of human nature and irresolvable dilemmas, nevertheless, understanding these structural factors can help reason within limits. Consequently, Kaplan’s worldview suggests that order and security differ from justice and ethics in international relations. However, Kaplan forgets that justice and ethics cannot be isolated from security and interest, rather they are continuative of each other.
Influenced by his experience in Iraq, Kaplan argues that even if something is unjust, it should still be followed because order is essential and must be respected, even if it seems unfair. This thought serves as a mordant mea culpa and an atonement for Kaplan’s promotion of the Iraq War. For Kaplan, removing tyranny in Iraq seemed preferable but the anarchy that followed Saddam Hussein’s removal was worse. Kaplan believes he failed the test of realism as his approach was tainted by the traumatic experiences of 20th-century totalitarian dystopia led by figures such as Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. For “every villain is not Hitler, and every year is not 1939”.

Therefore, the Tragic mind posits that to think tragically one must follow the Greek understanding of the world where order precedes freedom as orderly tyranny reflects inherent imperfections but also the beauty of the human condition. Kaplan goes on to argue that the core of tragedy is not evil, it is fate which leaves human beings to face inescapable choices, as all scenarios incur irreparable loss. Therefore, the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide are evil crimes not tragedies.

The thesis adopted by Kaplan of irremovable and immensely inscribed evil subscribes to the belief that humanity is not advanced and that practical reasoning and efforts do not exist. So, while Kaplan believes that tragic alternative to tyranny in Iraq was anarchy it is also important to consider that tragedies could be mistakes and weakness of will. Sudan today illustrates an incoherence between sovereign interests, embodying tragic sensibility recognising global injustices and unintended consequences. Are these due to tragic sensibility or lack of will?
For Kaplan, the tragedy contends with fate, and insurmountable problems that cannot be resolved. This perspective reveals a lack of engagement with new ideas and debates, this borders on defeatism. While contingency plays a significant role in human affairs, suggesting we are not entirely in control of our destinies, outcomes in war and peace are not merely matters of chance or luck.

Moreover, while Ancient Greek literary works, are profound in their enduring wisdom, they do not necessarily align with the complexities and realities of the 21st century. Seeking moral guidance on matters such as the ethics of warfare through classical texts and citing figures like Sophocles who viewed tragedy as a divine lesson in humility, may not always resonate in strategic analysis.

Kaplan’s interpretation of tragedy aligns with fatalism, suggesting that political outcomes are heavily influenced by historical and geographical factors, limiting the impact of individual choices, even within democratic societies. Tragedy thus becomes a crucial consideration in the analysis of international politics. The author’s view of geopolitics as primarily a contest for territory and power within specific geographic contexts positions makes him as a neoclassical geopolitician who emphasises geographic determinism in understanding global power struggles. Therefore, Kaplan’s interpretation represents a Eurocentric and reductionist perspective on geopolitics, viewing it primarily through the prism of imperial, militaristic, and capitalist agendas.

However incompatible, choosing between two radical but equally undesirable outcomes, from one perspective will always be wrong and unjust. Kaplan’s analysis overlooks the fact that the adverse consequences of tragic choices are predominantly experienced by countries in the Global South, rather than those in the Global North. This raises the question of whether the effects of tragic choices with irreparable outcomes applies exclusively to non-Western countries: Afghanistan, Syria etc.

For Kaplan, literature often mirrors the evolution of social and cultural contexts, revealing enduring truths about human existence. Therefore, he devotes a significant portion of the book to explaining the concept of tragic sensibility, by drawing upon the insights of literary figures like Shakespeare. Tragedy according to them runs parallel to a certain amount of chaos which is inherent to humanity. Macbeth and Julius Caesar vividly depict themes of hubris, frailty, and the downfall of tragic heroes, illustrating Kaplan’s view of the irresistible pull of ambition and the inability to deal with the complexities and moral dilemmas inherent in leadership.

Kaplan has high praise for George H. W. Bush, Richard Nixon, and Henry Kissinger who acknowledged the tragic aspects of their roles. He projects disdain of modern western statesmen such as Barack Obama for lacking humility and foresight as rather they prioritise short-term gains over long-term ethical considerations, ultimately leading to superficial and ineffective leadership. While tragedy can foster self-awareness by dispelling illusions, it is important to consider that sometimes, illusions and myths are necessary to maintain social order, and their loss can lead to division and chaos in imagined communities like nations.

In reality, making Kissinger and Churchill the model for tragic sensibility gives the book a heterogeneous scope as it cannot contribute to those in the Global South who have faced irreparable loss by the hands of those who defend their actions as lesser evils. Kaplan’s real tragedy is becoming one of the many in the western literary discourse that do that pay attention to postmodernism and post colonialism, alienating students of colour that cannot relate to good old-fashioned western centric History, Politics, and International Relations.

Overall, Kaplan’s book is not a valuable addition to the literature on leadership and power it appears to serve as a personal journey for him to find inner peace. His argument is unable to envision beyond the present or possesses a lack of foresight into the future. Such presentism is not expected of Kaplan whose previous work such as “The Coming of Anarchy” have contributed significantly to Political Science. However, laden with dense and laden philosophical jargon the book can only appeal to individuals that mistake a well written prose as a bold argument.