Reception
In February 2015, The Hundred-Year Marathon landed the number one spot on The Washington Post bestseller's list, [9] and The Christian Science Monitor included it on their list of the top ten books of the month. [10]
Reviewers from The Washington Post and Fox News commended Pillsbury for his depth of knowledge and insight into Chinese strategic thinking and considered the book a wake-up call for American policymakers. [5] [11] PBS NewsHour, however, indicated that the book overstated China's capabilities and intentions by relying too heavily on the view of Chinese hawks. [12] Rasmussen Reports criticized the book for not addressing competing views. [13]
A Washington Times article noted that the book, cleared for publication by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the Pentagon, discussed cooperation between the CIA and Chinese intelligence services to work against Russia. [14]
Gordon Chang, writing in The National Interest, said the book “looks at the critical issues of who is in fact making policy in the Chinese capital,” calling Pillsbury “our time’s Paul Revere.” [15]
Foreign Affairs praised the book as “pungently written and rich in detail,” with Andrew Nathan noting it “deserves to enter the mainstream of debate over the future of U.S.-Chinese relations.” [16]
The Wall Street Journal described the work as “provocative… detailed and rigorous,” stating that assessing China’s ambition “may be the central foreign-policy challenge of our time.” [17]
Elizabeth Economy of the Council on Foreign Relations called it “a highly engaging and thought-provoking read” that is “well worth a careful read.” [18]
The Christian Science Monitor noted the book “deserves to be widely read and debated,” despite its weighty subject matter. [19]
The Weekly Standard highlighted Pillsbury’s “eye-popping amount of declassified material,” stating that “the marathon is hardly over.” [20]
The Washington Times warned that the book presents a scenario where the West may ask “‘Who lost the world?’ The answer will be, ‘We did.’” [21]
Robert Kagan called it “a sobering corrective to what has long been the dominant, soothing narrative of Sino‑American cooperation” and “the most important book written about Chinese strategy and foreign policy in years.” [22]
Graham Allison described it as “a provocative exploration of the historical sources of China’s grand strategy to become #1.” [23]
James Mann noted that “given the direction China has been taking in the past few years, Pillsbury’s book takes on immediate relevance.” [24]
James Woolsey, former CIA Director, said the book is “a fascinating chronicle… He shows that we face a clever, entrenched, and ambitious potential enemy… We have vital work to do, urgently.” [25]
Major Newspaper Reviews
- Wall Street Journal – Howard W. French reviewed The Hundred-Year Marathon as a compelling and provocative narrative about China's long-term ambitions to surpass the United States. French highlighted Pillsbury’s shift from a leading proponent of engagement with China to a strong critic of its strategic deception. [26]
- Washington Times – Steven W. Mosher praised the book as a “devastating critique” of America's naiveté regarding China's ambitions. He emphasized Pillsbury’s use of declassified Chinese documents and interviews to reveal China’s long-term plans. [27]
- Washington Post – The book was discussed in comparative analyses of China-related works, emphasizing its influence on debates about Beijing’s global strategy, particularly under Xi Jinping’s leadership. [28]
Academic Journal Reviews
- Naval War College Review – The journal analyzed Pillsbury’s thesis and its implications for understanding China's military and political posture. It assessed the book as influential in strategic and military education circles. [29]
- Journal of Global Analysis – A review explored Pillsbury’s framing of China's strategic deception and its resonance in international relations debates. The journal appreciated the empirical sources used to support his conclusions. [30]
- Military Review (U.S. Army University Press) – This professional military journal discussed the relevance of Pillsbury’s analysis for U.S. defense planning and strategic competition with China. [31]
