Orrin Schwab's book focusses on an important area of study for scholars of the Vietnam War: the complex relationships between civilians and the military. Rather than examining these relationships in close detail at the highest levels of the US government, Schwab broadens his analysis to encompass relations at different levels of society in the US and South Vietnam. As the title suggests, Schwab's argument is that the two were mutually antagonistic and this was a cause of major difficulties for the US effort. He suggests that while the US military attempted to follow Clausewitzian principles involving “the quick application of force” (14), the civilian authorities prevented this from occurring because of the incremental nature of American escalation. In order to demonstrate this, the author delves into many different areas. He discusses the events surrounding the US build-up to war, operational aspects of the conflict, the nature of the enemy and the ally, “alternative means” that the US employed, including the infamous Phoenix assassination programme, and propaganda efforts.

Schwab's argument is broadly convincing and his book is impressive in placing the civil–military clash in a broad context. While civil–military relations are often narrowly conceived as being the relations between those at the very top, Schwab's decision to examine many facets of the relationship is laudable. Yet at times it is simply too broad and the analysis tends to lose focus at certain points, reading more like a general history of the war than a detailed discussion of the main issues. Some sections are very brief and he does not have time to develop these issues in enough detail. A very interesting sub-chapter on “the psychology of war,” for example, is dealt with in not much more than a page (55–56), when it could have been an important theme of the book. As a result, the argument has a tendency to get slightly lost in his attempt to cover such a broad range of material. This is not helped by the awkward organization of some of the chapters.

Therefore this book is invaluable as an introduction to civil–military relations during the war, and as a basis for further research. It answers some important questions, but it also raises more.