Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" 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: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" Summary: Outstanding Review: "A Peace to End All Peace" is a book to end all books on the middle east. The book studies the formation of the modern middle east-and the crumbling of the former Ottoman Empire-from the period 1914-1922. At the onset of this time, Britain ruled the world, the Czar ran Russia, and the US was just an up and comer. At the end of this period, Britain's imperial ambitions were waning, Russia was now the Soviet Union, and the US had demonstrated its power through its presence in WW I. Through the careful research and well thought-out text, the reader can see how the modern day nations of Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, and Turkey were formed. You can see also see how their modern day troubles were created. It's all here: the beginning of Jewish-Arab troubles in Palestine, the shaky start to Iraq, the careless partioning of Lebanon and so on. Many thing impressed me about this book but perhaps none more than the role that bad intelligence played in the formation of Britain's foreign policy. I know: it's unbelievably relevant in the world of 2004 also! However, Britain made a number of decisions throughout World WAr I and after based on information and analyses that were simply untrue. While much has changed since then in terms of the transmitting of information, still the problems of the gathering of critical intelligence one-to-one remains. I would recommend this book to just about anyone who cares (or who should care) about Middle East politics. Before you voice your next opinion on American intervention in Iraq, you might want to read this book to sharpen your insights and arguments.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" 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: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" Summary: Excellent perspective on this period- Highly recommended! Review: For those that are interested in the events surrounding WWI and its aftermath, this book is an incredible resource for gaining a wider understanding the events that led to the sometimes coincidental developments that continue to have repurcussions today. Particulary interesting is the developments leading up to the Sykes-Picot agreement that pretty much arbitrarily divided up the Middle East between France and Britain; the Balfour Declaration and the conflicting ideas many leaders at the world stage at that time had about their intentions therein; placement of the different regimes in artificially created states in the Middle East; and the often conflicting views and actions of officials on the ground and politicians back home, most of whom did not have an accurate grasp of the real situation. Particularly interesting is the section on Iraq, where some note the difficulties of forcing together a country of Shiis, Sunnis and Kurds, and to be ruled by a Christian, hasn't anyone in a decision making position today read their history?! I recommend this book to leaders dealing today with the Middle East. Also very impressive is the strength of Mustapha Kemal and the Turks in saving their country from total occupation, an endless array of fights going on for many years, while at the same time fighting internally with the small groups loyal to the corrupt, west-loving sultan. His accomplishment, when viewed within the wider context of how hopeless their situation seemed at the outset, their success in creating a new country out of the remains of a partitioned, ruined, exhausted empire is incredibly impressive, he is a rare leader in world history who has accomplished true greatness, and the Turks are right in revering him so. Overall, though the details can get to be so many that one can lose focus of the main events (they are very interesting nonetheless), this is an excellent source for understanding the interaction between the Allies during a very turbulent period, and many mistaken beliefs that led to wrong policies, repurcussions of which are still held today. It's a fascinating read given the current situation in Iraq, Israel and Palestine today. Fromkin has researched the period thoroughly, refutes commonly held beliefs about the period, and leaves the reader with a sense of awe at the fascinating interactions between the various actors on the stage. I would recommend it to those who have some basic knowledge of the period, this is not a textbook of learning the basics, but an excellent source of enriching one's knowledge that helps to understand similar intricacies in international relations that go on today.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" 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.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1ec5/a1ec560d31997acb7dd2692b78e6ce4e8bb54cba" alt="2 stars" 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: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" 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: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" 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: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" 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: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" Summary: Detailed Book on How the Midle East Became What it is Today Review: The origin's of the Middle East's hostility to the west is often referenced back to the fall of the Ottoman Empire and World War I, this book by Fromkin provides all the details and give you a total appreciation for the global political situation involving all the countries at war and their alliances that crave and carve up the Middle East, creating the countries of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Palestine (Now Israel). England is the major architect of the post WWI changes in the Middle East and the book is dominated by the Prime Ministers of England notably Lloyd George at the latter end of the war and by Churchill who later tries to reduce England's tremendous military responsibilities that are put to great strains by the end of the war. Of course Turkey is the other great center piece of the book and their own political changes starting with the Young Turks and their virtual eclipse of the Sultan who ruled the empire and the emergence of the military strongman Kemal who after the war is lost, rallies his countrymen against victors who try to claim the spoils of victory notably the British and Greeks. Within all this is the roles of France, who want Lebanon but Syria, Germany', and their alliance with Turkey and later Russia, and Russia whose quitting of the war starts an imbalance between the pre-war alliances. The Bolsheviks accession to power also does not negate Russia's continuous desire to expand and actually becomes more of a challenge as they have a secret treaty of support for Germany and expand into weakened countries on their border. In the midst of these activities is England's leading role in taking over responsibilities for countries in the Middle East by supporting kings such as the Hussiens and the Sauds to hopefully become client states or members of the Commonwealth. Also, incorporated in these complexities is the Balfour Declaration that provides a homeland for Zionist Jews. There are notable splits between Jews in Palestine (Israel) that initially support Turkey and then those that support the Western Alliance such as the Jewish legion. Later, after the war, two of the Jewish leaders in Israel split over what the borders of Israel should be and today that is still in dispute from the seeds of this split over 80 years ago. Other that is complicating these issues are George's under the table manipulation to have greater control at the expense of his allies notably France, his failed support of Greece against Turkey and the desire of the Arab countries to become independent and England's failed attempt to manipulate Muslim leaders for political purposes. Every major character in the Middle East is covered in the book from Lawrence of Arabia to the leaders of the Arab countries, France, Turkey, Russia, Germany, Italy and England in great detail. From reading this book you can see how the victor attempted to carve up the world around them that has its parallel in the aftermath of WWII. And of course oil is already an economic and political entity almost 100 years ago. The only thing I would add to this book is a glossary for all the major characters as a reference for this readable book of 567 pages. After reading this book, you will have a greater understanding of how the Middle East resents the west and any occupation no matter temporary as well as the fact that to conquer a country does not mean its easy to occupy.
|