The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939 by E. H. Carr

9/10

This book is incredible – in fact, many people suggest that it should be required reading for all politics students.

Edward Hallett Carr was an English diplomat, historian and journalist, and lived an incredible life. After graduating from Trinity College, Cambridge, he joined the Foreign Office to pursue diplomatic work, getting particularly involved in Anglo-Russian relations. His notable books are What is History?A History of Soviet Russia and The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939.

For many, The Twenty Years’ Crisis is a neoliberal book, though I seriously beg to differ. In the book, Carr analyses the “peace” between World War I and World War II to criticise both neoliberalism (the idea that nation-states can cooperate over mutual, strategic gains) and neorealism (the idea that nation-states are inherently aggressive and driven by their perceived, selfish interests). Essentially, Carr believed the following:





  1. A neoliberal worldview is too idealistic to provide political thinkers with a realistic framework for strategising.
  2. A neorealist worldview is too grounded in reality, devoiding political thinkers of any goals, aspirations and tangible progress to work towards.

I’m almost certain that the aftermath of World War I – that came at the cost of 40 million lives, a Versailles Treaty and revolutions across Europe – had contributed, in some way, to the bittersweet air of pessimism enshrouded within Carr’s book.

What I found particularly genius about was Carr’s pre-World War II prediction that the next superpower to emerge would be an English-speaking nation. Carr explains that, following the British Empire, most of international politics had been institutionalised in the English language. For example, international law had begun being transferred from French to English. Therefore, the “game” of politics would be more easily played by a nation who shares this common language and has a formidable command of it.

Indeed, following World War II, the United States is now the major player in international politics. This may seem obvious in hindsight, but it is a genius prediction that has been lost amongst other great postmodern writers of Carr’s time, such as Radiguet, Camus and Foucault.

Unfortunately most of the writers that were recognised for this period were men. Nonetheless, Carr’s prediction for the English-speaking power begs many current questions for today’s world. In a world where currency is pegged against the dollar, and where the English language is even more embedded international institutions such as NATO, the EU, the ICC and the UN, what would it take for a non-English-speaking nation to replace the US as a dominant power?

More Articles for You

Founder represents Arab Millennial at JW3

Last August, I represented Arab Millennial at Keith Kahn-Harris’ book launch. His book, Strange Hate, discusses the evolving nature of …

Qatar’s turbulent response to China’s clampdown on Islam

*** A podcast version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spreaker, Pocket Casts, Tumblr, and …

What Erdogan’s nuclear ambitions mean for Arab politics

*** A podcast version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spreaker, Pocket Casts, Tumblr, Patreon, …

Saudi Arabia and press censorship in Pakistan

*** This is an edited article that can be found in its original format on Ayesha Siddiqa’s website *** Was …

Religious scepticism and colonial attitudes

I am a sceptical Muslim. I deeply believe in our underlying religious message, but do not take many of the …

Sh. Hossam Ed-Deen Allam Al-Azhary joins Arab Millennial

Hossam Ed-Deen is an Azhar graduate currently studying his MA in Diplomacy at Lancaster University. He lectures on Classical Arabic …