Rating: 
Summary: The Roots of Trouble
Review: This book is an invaluable guide to the roots of today's trouble in the Middle East. It began with a careless and ignorant imposition of the imperial vision of a European Imperial vision on the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. This book explores much the development and implementation of that vision between 1914 and 1922 which was based on much misunderstanding by the British and the French. It goes into the role of T.E. Lawrence(yes the so called "Lawrence of Arabia"), Winston Churchill, and many others. Fromkin demonstrates that the problems in the Middle East have deep historical roots that are not going to yield to quick fixes offered by anyone.
Rating: 
Summary: the real root of problems in the Middle East
Review: Fromkin's A Peace to End All Peace is a challenging read, but the reader is rewarded with a much clearer understanding of the causes of so many of the regions problems. In a nutshell the inept, myopic and largly ignorant bureaucracy of the Entente Powers (Britian and France specifically) laid the foundation for the issues the Middle East now struggles with. From the Sykes and Balfour proposals in Palestine, to the support given the Saud family in Arabia, to the creation of "Trans-Jordan", "Iraq" and "Kuwait" (all of which were artifically created entitites desigend to suit the needs of the European powers) we see the rivalries and tensions that persist to the present day emerge, as voices of reason (T.E. Lawrence, for example) are drowned out by bureaucrats. While Fromkin argues that European involvement in the Middle East had been ongoing for nearly a century by 1918, the bulk of the book is concerned with events between 1917 - 1922. The result was a hodge-podge mosaic of European "mandates" (ie. colonies) and locally run fiefdoms (such as Arabia). Little wonder the area is known for its political instability.
A Peace to End all Peace is balanced in its approach to the subject and its treatment of key figures (both European, Jew, and Arab). The only criticism I have is its emphasis on politics at the expense of social and economic factors. It seems to me that one of the major flaws in the creation of the modern Middle East was a lack of understanding of local society and economics - a fact that persists to this day, and an obstacle to the establishment of effective communication between West and East. Nonetheless, I recommend this book to anyone seriously interested in a deeper examination of the Middle East.
Rating:
Summary: Complex Recounting of a Complex Time
Review: Having read this book when it first came out some years ago, I read it from my professional viewpoint, that of a user of finished and raw intelligence,in order to make decisions as to how to proceed with a program. The recurring theme throughout is that the Allied Powers, through a lack of understanding of the political dynamics and capabilities of the weak Ottoman Empire, made a series of major mistakes which pushed the Turks into an alliance with the Central Powers, even though for centuries, the Austro Hungarian Empire and its predecessors had been fighting and quarreling with the Empire in the border zone which covers modern day Bosnia, Macedonia, Serbia, and other Balkan countries. At the time Bulgaria had only been independent since the late 1870s, Greece since the 1820s (remember Lord Byron et all) and the Turks had fought a major war with Russia in the 1870s. The unrest in Armenia which broke out after the Turks entered the war (Armenia straddles the Russo-Turkish area) led to pogroms and ethnic cleansing during the Great War. All of this bloodshed could have been avoided if the "Young Turks" (the reformers) had been left to carry out their programs. After the war when the Allied Powers divvied up the Middle East, the result was frustration of the Arabs' legitimate desires for self-government in Palestine and Syria, and the introduction of the Zionist colonies led to more unrest. Finally, the Greek Turkish War of the early 20s led to a huge migration and the permanent impoverishment of the Greek economy for many years. Add in the brutal King Zog of Albania and an ineffective bunch of other nation's royals and the situation was even more unstable up until 1940s. Then many years of Communist rule imposed stability until the death of Tito and the disintegration of Yougoslavia. The result seventy years on is the current ethnic strife in the Balkans.
Rating:
Summary: At last... Somebody has written...
Review: This is absolutely the best book written on Middle East... It is one of the books that makes you get the grip on a subject widely diluted by the "winners" of the history. I felt like reading a scienific braveheart. For the first time, somebody writes T.E Lawrence and Winston Churchill in an objective and scholarly manner... Must read if you are sick of history written by those who`ve hanged the heroes.... At last people know king is nude...
Rating:
Summary: The Evil Empires
Review: This is one of my all-time favourite historical works, and I've read a lot of them. David Fromkin tells the story of how the colonial re-adjustments made by England and France during World War I in anticipation of the demise of the Ottoman Empire were ultimately responsible for the continuing mess that is the modern Middle East. It is a story that has been told many times, but seldom with such eloquence and rarely with such a sure eye for the telling detail. Mr. Fromkin has the gift of explication and the ability to really see the big picture. From the fateful voyage of the German warships Goeben and Breslau to the violent death of Enver Pasha in the wilds of Central Asia, and from the fictions of TE Lawrence to the cynical accomodations of Sykes and Picot, the reader is conducted expertly through an incredible but factual story whose ending has yet to be determined. As he shows in other books such as "In the Time of the Americans," Fromkin is a stern critic of the old colonial powers, and some readers may find his account of French and British politics and policies to be a little one-sided, but what really good book isn't? An amazing work of history - six stars!
Rating:
Summary: A Brilliant Book
Review: If you're interested in knowing how today's Middle East emerged, this is the book to buy. Not only is it for newcomers, but also for those who have some background. The book is about the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire by the Great Powers during the I.World War. The book could be separated into two parts: Before the war and after the war. Before and during the war allied countries share the lands of the empire. There are promises given to each other and given to native people of the Middle East such as Jews and Arabs. Britain, and France are the victors. But now there are betrayals and lies after the war. There are politicians ready to integrate the Middle East into their colonization empire but there are also politicians of the Middle East whom are underestimated by the great powers but in fact better in politics by playing off one power to another. At the end, soldiers like Mustafa Kemal (later to-be Ataturk) and tribe leaders like Feisal become presidents and prime ministers by coming to terms with the Great powers but at the expense of some people such as Palestinians or Syrians or Iraqies. The book is brilliantly written narrative history of the Middle East. You can't stop reading. Fromkin is also very analytic writer and this makes the book more valuable. He doesn't just present the facts. He questions them, make deductions, guesses. If a historian is analytic in his book, then you will find new and interesting new facts, possibilities too. Fromkin thanks to his analytic thinking, tells us about how Enver Pasha duped Germans before entering the war,for instance. He also argues that the pact signed between the Ottoman and German Empires in 1914 does not mean a declaration of war. There are interesting insights about the entry of the Ottoman Empire to the war. There are more interesting ideas, but these are the things I remember now. It is absolutely worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: Great over view of Middle East
Review: Hard to read, very detailed, but worth the struggle. This book will help you understand the current situation in the ME.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing treatment of an important topic
Review: The post-war disposition of the Ottoman empire lands in the Middle East still affects us today. This book provides a broad overview of the diplomatic and bureaucratic struggles that produced the settlement, from the British point of view. Unfortunately, it is poorly written, poorly edited, oddly footnoted, and generally disappointing. It almost appears to have been written in bits and pieces that were later stitched together, with little effort made to eliminate redundancy or streamline the writing. A more rigorous editing would have shortened it considerably with no loss of impact. However, the breadth of its coverage, and the importance of the topic, may make it a useful starting point for those interested in this area.
Rating:
Summary: Eh
Review: Some people conceive of history as written from the top down- a history of rulers, and how their decisions affected society. Others see it from the bottom up- a history of the faceless little people whose decisions in aggregate ultimately drive society. Fromkin's book is the first I've seen which sees history as written from the middle, by the bureaucracy. The book suffers from this perspective in two ways. First, the amount of detail presented is overwhelming. Even in the best-organized work this would be tedious stuff, and this work is not very well organized. The consequences of events or character traits are traced individually throughout the time period, leading to jumps in the narrative and retreading information. The second problem is to separate the wheat from the chaff. Many of the details are interesting, but of little consequence in trying to understand major events. Some of the chaff is obvious- Is it really important to know what articles were written in the Arab Bureau's weekly periodical, and who was copied on it? Other chaff is less obvious. Muhammed Sharif al-Faruqi may have played a funny game going between the British and the Arabs, but would British policy ultimately have been any different if he never defected? From reading the book my guess is no. The British employed him based on prior misconceptions he merely confirmed, and if he hadn't someone else would have done so in his place. The two faults combined make for extremely difficult reading. If I were an expert on Middle Eastern history some of the detail might be more interesting, but as a novice the book seems more like an unnecessary chore.
Rating:
Summary: Breathtaking Grasp of History
Review: This book is of critical importance to any student of Middle East history. Fromkin recounts a great deal that he might have left out of a less complete survey. Its inclusion is but one thing that makes this work priceless. What emerges, before one is even halfway through, is a sweeping portrait of the many tragedies that seeded conflicts still plaguing the Middle East today. One major culprit can only be described as legendary British stumbling throughout World War I. At the core of Britain's Middle Eastern advisers was a group of bigoted, bumbling idiots, who could not see past the end of their noses. Sir Mark Sykes, for example, described many groups whose destiny he influenced with disgusting pejorative. Town Arabs, he described as "cowardly," "insolent yet dispicable [sic]" and "vicious as far as their feeble bodies will admit." Bedouin Arabs he called "rapacious, greedy...animals." Sykes was also obsessed with fear of Jews, Fromkin writes, "whose web of dangerous international intrigue he discerned in many an obscure corner." Not the least of these was the sadly mistaken view that the Young Turks party were governed by Jews, when in fact none were privy to their inner circle. This pathetic distortion of reality was informed by oriental affairs interpreter Gerald FitzMaurice, and shared by Gilbert Clayton, an adviser to Lord Kitchener. Like too many other British misconceptions about the Middle East, it was never investigated or much less corrected. Disasters resulting from the "Cairo group's" ill-informed advice abounded. Take the bungled attack on Gallipoli--caused horrific 500,000 combined casualties, which could have been sharply reduced, if not eliminated, had the allies acted swiftly. Another was the reliance on the "diplomacy" of an Arab imposter, Lt. Muhammed Sharif al-Faruqi, who pretended to represent the Emir Hussein, Sharif of Mecca, but whom neither Hussein nor his son Feisel had ever met, much less entrusted with diplomatic powers. But there is plenty of blame to go around. Fromkin also plumbs the weakenesses of the Ottoman lords themselves, as well as those of duplicitous Arab leaders. Emir Hussein's actual emisaries neglected to inform the British that he did not know al-Faruqi--perhaps because he advanced an agenda which suited Hussein in many respects. But it caused problems. Worse, Arabs often negotiated in bad faith, knowing that they could deliver on few if any of the promises they made in pursuit of their goals. David Fromkin's intense scholarship is informed with the grace of a classic novel. Had there ever been any doubt, he proves that fact is stranger than fiction--and often a great deal more tragic. Alyssa A. Lappen
|
