Rating: 
Summary: Well Done.
Review: If you have visited the Middle East or are interested in the region, this book makes sense of the whole affair. Written with a nod to mystery/thiller novels, you will not find the book containing a lot of boring drivel concerning the area. On the contrary, from Churchill to the foot soldier, Fromkin keeps you interested
Rating: 
Summary: A very good read.
Review: It has been over five years since I finished this book, but I do recall that it is very well written. Far from being dry history, it reads as an intriguing story. As well as being entertained by the cast of characters and the storyline, you will acquire a good deal of historical knowledge which will help you to understand the area today.
Rating:
Summary: If you like this stuff- read it
Review: For me, this was a hard book to read without context. When I first grabbed it 7 years ago, I put it down after 50 pages. When I picked it up last month after having read more on the history of the region, I could not put it down. For anyone with an interest in Middle Eastern History, the book is fascinating and has some truly "truth is stranger than fiction" nuggets. The events surrounding Turkey's entry into the first world war, the story (myth) of T.E. Laurance, and the Dardenelles fiasco all translate into great stories and when viewed in detail serve to reiterate the idea that history is a chain of blunders rather than any kind of coherent conspiracy.The author's clear anti-British bias, not undeserved mind you, does detract a little but only because such tales stand best on their own without sarcasm. One thing that was missing, which I like to see in a book like this, is a better indication of the author's credentials or motivations.
Rating:
Summary: Read this now! It could all happen again!
Review: It's a bit spooky to read this account of events in the Middle East during the decade that bracketed World War, while the occupation and rebuilding of post-Saddam Iraq is unfolding. The parallels (both good and not-so-good) are fascinating, almost to the point where one could substitute current names like Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Condoleeza Rice for Lord Kitchener, Lord Asquith and Sir Mark Sykes. More than one scholar has suggested that this work from David Fromkin is a must-read for anyone wanting to understand the roots of the politics and current animosities of the Middle East. I'm no scholar, but I can't imagine another source that could provide a better accounts of the events and personalities from 90 years ago that have shaped (and often misshaped) the most problematic region of the world. The movie "Lawrence of Arabia" may have been cinema at it's best. But it was also history at it's most trivial. This is the real history, laced with context and the full implications of each development. Fromkin relates in fascinating detail the various acts of hubris, misdirection, treachery, imperialism, nation building, cowardice and more that shaped the arbitrary borders and ruling classes of today's Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Iran and Israel. From the Young Turks of the Ottoman Empire to the early leaders of Zionism, each player in this vast geopolitical game comes under the author's critical eye. And Fromkin is impartial with both his praise and his criticism. While his portrait of Winston Churchill tosses body blow or two to Sir Winston's image, it also establishes a firm foundation for those that regard Churchill as one of the most dominate and influential leaders of the twentieth century. Knowledge of the mistakes in the past is no guarantee that future mistakes will not occur, but it does help to avoid a repeat of past errors. This book should be required reading for any American, particularly our current leadership!
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, Excellent, Excellent!
Review: One of the best historical accounts I've ever read. Every page is chock full of interesting facts presented in uncomplicated format. I recommend this book as a must read in the classroom and anyone interested in European/Middle Eastern history.
Rating:
Summary: Tortuous Destiny of Middle Eastern Tapestry
Review: David Fromkin gives his readers a sweeping account of the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the birth of the contemporary Middle East, defined as Egypt, Israel, Iran, Turkey, the Arab states of Asia, Central Asia and Afghanistan (pg. 16).
Fromkin mainly focuses on the decision-making process of Europeans and Americans who, between 1914 and 1922, determined the fate of the region without any input of its inhabitants (pg. 17, 400). The area that the much-diminished, anachronistic Ottoman Empire occupied in 1914 was one of the few territories that the European empires had not yet shared among themselves (pg. 24, 32). The European powers did not wait for the fall of the Ottomans before arguing about their respective zones of influence in the region after the war. Statesmen such as Lloyd George, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Kitchener, T.E. Lawrence, Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin played leading roles in re-shaping the region. Winston Churchill - at times unintentionally - had the most enduring impact on its cartography (pg. 19, 25, 73, 385-388, 493-529, 558-567).
After losing the patronage of Britain against Russia, the weakened Ottoman Empire, anxious to pursue its modernization while living in fear of Western powers' designs, convinced Germany to become its partner in 1914 (pg. 33-50, 75, 142). Fromkin convincingly demonstrates that Churchill was not to blame for pushing Turkey into the arms of Germany (pg. 54-76). Britain and allied powers believed that the Ottoman war would be a sideshow that could be easily managed (pg. 83, 115, 119-123) but they were repeatedly proven wrong (pg. 200-203, 215, 248, 289, 301).
The poorly executed attack on Turkey at the Dardanelles could have considerably shortened the duration of the war (pg. 127, 264). Churchill was the scapegoat for the fiasco and was demoted within the government (pg. 128, 154, 159, 161-162, 233). After resigning and spending a few months in the wilderness, Churchill, who was perceived as dangerous across the board, was brought back to the government at the insistence of Lloyd George, the new British Prime Minister (pg. 166, 234, 265-266).
Kitchener and his Lieutenants acting on his behalf in British Cairo imposed their design on government's policy towards the Middle East at the expense of the India Office (pg. 88-95, 106-110). Britain would rule the region indirectly after the fall of the Ottoman Empire (pg. 85). Like the French, Kitchener and his men wrongly assumed that the Moslem Middle East would be glad to be ruled by Christians (pg. 93-94, 102, 106). The British looked at Hussein, the Sherif of Mecca and its Emir, as the ideal candidate for the position of "Pope" of Islam (pg. 105). The British leadership wrongly believed that Islam was a single entity and that temporal and spiritual authority could be easily split (pg. 96, 104).
The Arabs misled the Allies about their true strength to fight the Ottoman Empire. This cost Britain dearly because their core competency was only guerilla warfare against the Turks, until the capture of Jerusalem (pg. 186-187, 219-222, 309, 313, 377-378, 396). Over time, the British became disillusioned with Hussein. However, they supported two of his sons in the fulfillment of their ambitions (pg. 326-329, 506-512).
Britain entered into negotiations with France, Russia, and later Italy that ultimately resulted in the cursed Sykes-Picot-Sazanov agreement and other secret treaty understandings to share the spoils of victory in the Middle East (pg. 189-199, 267, 287, 330, 334-335, 342-344, 373-379, 391-402). The Allies had no intention to pay the price Hussein demanded for his support to the allied cause (pg. 186, 227); only lip service was paid in the field to the nominal pro-Arab independence policies of London during and after WWI (pg. 325, 345). The French and Russians showed similar contempt for Arab and Islamic aspirations of independence in the Middle East in the same period (pg. 378, 435-440, 463-490).
Much to their dismay, the Americans discovered the existence of all the secret arrangements of the Allies to partition the region after the overthrow of Tsarist Russia in 1917. As Colonel House and Arthur Balfour presciently remarked, these imperialistic arrangements were sowing the seeds of future wars in the region (pg. 257, 400). Similarly, President Wilson predicted that peace would be illusory if its terms were not basically fair to all sides (pg. 399).
To the surprise of some 21st century observers, British leaders in London first anticipated no negative reaction against the Balfour Declaration from their Arab Allies. Like some prominent Jews, they believed that there was no essential incompatibility between the Arab and Zionist ideals (pg. 283, 321, 324, 444, 519-520, 527). British leaders had seen France as their only obstacle (pg. 292-293, 297). The local British administration was to some extent supporting Arab violence against Jewish settlements. They sowed doubts about the feasibility of a Jewish homeland cut out of Palestine that was encompassing present Jordan, in the minds of some enthusiastic pro-Zionists (pg. 445-448, 504-505, 513-529). The uncompromising position of Amin-al-Husseini and his successors greatly harmed the Palestinian cause (pg. 517-518).
Iraq was another British creation that has not shown much stability since its beginnings in the 1920s. The recently terminated Sunni Arab dominance over the other population groups has cast a long shadow over the inter-ethnic relationships in this fragile country (pg. 449-454, 503-506).
Similarly, the French did not fully realize the risks when they carved Lebanon out of Syria and put the Maronite minority in charge of the new country. The marginalization of the predominantly Muslim population eventually led to the civil war in the 1970s and 1980s and later on to the ineffectual "syrianization" of Lebanon (pg. 17, 439).
Fromkin's book remains as relevant as ever to persons committed to the prosperity of the Middle East.
Rating: 
Summary: The 1000 pound elephant.
Review: How can anyone write a serious text about World War One and the Ottoman Empire without several chapters dedicated to the discussion of the Armenian Genocide and its implications. Imagine discussing World War Two and Nazi Germany without including a serious discussion of the implications of the Holocaust. Under the cover of World War One the Turks murdered almost two million Christian Armenians - Armenians who had lived peacefully on their ancient homeland for 3000 years. One of Teddy Roosevelt's most famous quotes is that the greatest tragedy of WWI was what happened to the Armenians. The fixing of the Turkish border on the east was highly influenced by the fact that hundreds of thousands of Armenians on the Ararat plateau were murdered and thousands of their productive villages and cities from Trebizond to Kars to Van to Moush were destroyed. The Armenian Genocide is the one thousand pound elephant that Mr. Fromkin stayed away from. There is a story to tell regarding the Ottoman Empire, but Mr. Fromkin didn't tell it. For a more accurate and compelling account of the fall of the Ottoman Empire I recommend The New York Times best seller The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America's Response by Peter Balakian.
Rating:
Summary: A great testimonial on elitist policies !
Review: Mr. Fromkin from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and an expert on conflicts has written a marvelous book that thoroughly delineated the policies of the dominant powers in the early 1900s, which led to the creation of the modern Middle East.
Mr. Fromkin discusses how the seeds of conflict were created by the colonial powers, in order to ensure their continuous dominance over the Middle East and its natural resources.
This book subtly addresses the politics of discord creation, and the importance of well designed conflicts in attaining the desired results.
Peace to end all peace is a great reading for the history buff who is interested in an elitist perspective.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Research and Presentation!
Review:
Excellent Research and Presentation!
Hands down, A Peace to End All Peace is most educational when it comes to the history and development of our contemporary Middle East. Fromkin spares neither effort nor personage in his research and presentation.
Of particular interest to me was the detailed information evidencing colonialist intent of various national interests involved, particularly French and English.
Marvin Shilmer
Rating:
Summary: A history book that ignores history
Review: Fromkin is to be commended for a compilation of historical facts in great detail and thoroughness that I can only envy. This book must have been a great burden to assemble, and the facts that Fromkin has detailed, and put into much better perspective than most of his fellow historians of the period, are very important to understand his title of "The Peace to End all Peace". Some of the best sections deal with the trade-offs of the various governments after WW I who were exhausted and in financial ruin, or who just abandoned their greater responsibilities, like the USA. The whole issue of the "Jewish Conspiracy" of the Bolshevik revolution, anti-Semitism, Zionism, is dealt with in a very open and refreshing way.
But the problem with most of these books, whether it is Macmillan's "1919", or Kagan's "On the Origins of War", and other extraordinarily well researched and wonderful books is that they seem to be writing for an audience of their fellow academics and fail to understand the need for modern day historians to place history into proper perspective. I shouldn't pick on Fromkin because he is no more guilty of this than the hundreds of other authors of similar books, but after reading this wonderful book, I felt the same way I do two hours after a totally filling Chinese meal at my favorite restaurant across the street from my home. I'm hungry again. The essential conundrum that this book details is that the Balfour Declaration has set in place a situation where we have had, and probably will have, perpetual war in the Middle East. This conflict has now expanded all around the world, from the World Trade Center, Bali, Madrid, Kenya, Tanzania, etc and the dilemma for Western society is whether to abandon Israel and the Zionist dream in hopes that the Islamist fanatics will go back into their caves, or whether mankind can advance in an area which Islam has held the power for well over a millennium. Fromkin completely skates around this issue. While I am sure there is some lunchroom or annual convention somewhere where a bunch of academics who live their lives in minutia give points to the author of the book with the most extensive bibliography, they really fail the greater society in producing studies of historical value that places things such as WW I, the fall of the Ottoman Empire (or any other empire) in perspective. While they may argue that such was not the purpose of their book, in fact, much of history is an indictment of human nature to have to relive history over and over again. Historians need to get out of their shell and recognize the forest for the trees. If their works are to have any real value at all, it must be that they are written to advance mankind and not have us read such books and observe how foolish our ancestors were. We know that. What a historian needs to do to be relevant is show us the common threads of the past so that we can avoid that path in the future. The fall of the Ottoman, Hapsburg, and other empires is really no different that that of Rome, the Greeks, the Tatars and the Khans, but seldom do you read a book that shows just how much of a treadmill this is for mankind. Churchill stood alone against the Nazis while the USA slept, and Bush if fighting the same ostriches who think that the Islamist fascists are somehow different, but on one connects the dots. If you want to read a book that shows what an extraordinary scholar Fromkin is, and he is, this is a great book to read, even though it will take a long time to do so. If you want to read something that lifts you past the compilation of facts and details of the past and gives you something to think about how to shape the future so that we don't have to keep going "one step forward and two steps back", I recommend Harris' "Civilization and its Enemies" book as a much better use of your time.
|
