Books reviews, current events, and other musings

T. J. Cornell’s The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000-264 BC) is a thorough, somewhat academic examination of early Rome. Much of the book focuses on the historical evidence for various claims: Livy says this, these archeological findings imply that, and so on. Cornell discusses the political, military, cultural, and social history of Rome. He describes the organizational structure of the Roman state and how it dealt with conquered people and client states, giving Rome the ability to expand throughout the Italian peninsula. He incorporates recent research, rebutting, for example, the conventional belief that the Etruscans had a dominant influence on Rome. Though the book is dry at times, it provides insight into how historians study the ancient world. For someone who has read a broader treatment, like Michael Grant’s History of Rome, The Beginnings of Rome provides the best English-language description of Rome’s early history.

posted by Julian at 9:05 PM

This cartoon is pretty funny (from Nathan Newman).


posted by Julian at 10:30 PM

The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century is a collection of Paul Krugman’s New York Times editorials, along with a couple other articles and some introductory material. Krugman, an economist, has been one of the strongest critics of the Bush administration’s policies. Some of his economic analyses were a bit dull and out-of-date. However, his numerous discussions of tax cuts, the national debt, social security reform, and corporate corruption are informative and infuriating, as he reveals how much damage Bush’s policies have caused. Krugman wrote each essay to be read in isolation, and going through them in bulk can be repetitious and overly intense. Mainly, The Great Unraveling crystallizes, in the liberal reader’s mind, the disastrous policies of the Bush White House.

posted by Julian at 10:45 PM

Everyone has probably heard of Richard Clarke’s memoir Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War of Terror. Clarke was in charge of the US counterterrorism efforts under both Clinton and Bush Jr. He was one of the first Americans to recognize the threat of al Qaeda, and he struggled to mobilize the US government to face those threats.

The book starts with a riveting account of 9/11, as Clarke led the White House struggle to deal with the unprecedented events of that day. Next, he provides background information about events he dealt with as a mid-level member of the State Department: US-backed mujahedeen resistance to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, relations with Iran and Iraq, the marine barracks attack in Lebanon, and the first Gulf War.

After that comes the central focus of the book – Clarke’s experiences fighting terrorism as a member of the NSC. The 1993 WTC bombing was a shock, since America had not faced any domestic terrorism in years. Nobody had heard of bin Laden or al Qaeda, who, as they found out much later, were behind the bombing. Later that year, evidence emerged of an Iraqi attempt to assassinate Bush Sr. in Kuwait. Clarke and Clinton, unlike many liberal skeptics, believed that evidence and Clinton responded by bombing Iraq. There was no other Iraq-sponsored terrorism against Americans until the 2003 invasion.

In 1996, the Iran-sponsored Hezbollah group bombed a housing complex in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 Americans. The US directed an intelligence operation and a strong private-channel diplomatic message towards the Iranians. Clarke is vague about the details, but in any case Iran was not involved in any subsequent terrorist attacks against Americans.

As the dangers of terrorist attacks became more apparent, the Clinton administration devoted increasing funds and attention by top-level officials towards the fight against it. While they didn’t carry out all of Clarke’s recommendations, the Clinton team seems to have done a pretty good job. For example, they managed to track down and prevent an al Qaeda attack, involving bombing of Los Angeles International Airport and other locations, planned for the new millennium.

The CIA and, even more so, the FBI had organizational and prioritization issues that hindered their counterterrorism efforts. Clarke was very critical of FBI Directory Louis Freeh, who Clinton was reluctant to fire because of Freeh’s ties to Congressional Republicans and FBI investigations of the Clinton scandals. The DOD blocked administration desires to snatch overseas terrorists, by proposing grandiose invasion plans instead of a small focused operation.

The Bush administration, before 9/11, viewed terrorism as a lower priority, despite the efforts of Clarke and Clinton NSA directory Sandy Berger to convince them otherwise. For example, their first cabinet-level meeting to discuss terrorism occurred on September 4th, 2001, even though Clarke urgently requested such a meeting on January 25th, and Clarke’s position of National Coordinator for Counterterrorism was downgraded.

Clarke was very critical of Bush’s actions after 9/11. Insufficient funding went towards domestic counterterrorism efforts. Creating a Department of Homeland Security, which both parties supported, focused government efforts on bureaucratic reshuffling instead of security issues. The Iraqi War, for numerous reasons, greatly increased the risk of terrorist attacks. Instead, the US should have paid attention to Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, working towards governments and popular attitudes that would be less inclined to launch terrorist attacks.

Conservative critics have questions the accuracy of Clarke’s statements. However, Clarke mainly reports what he observed, and no evidence has emerged to challenge any of his major points of fact. He spent a decade battling terrorism, and as a private citizen he has far less reason to distort the truth than any politician does.

I highly recommend reading this book, instead of waiting for the movie.

posted by Julian at 2:55 PM