The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East by Robert Fisk

BUY IT NEW

  • $40.00 List price
    $38.00 Online price
    $34.20 Member price
    (Save 14%)
    Limited Time Offer! Everyone receives the Member Price on books.
    See Details
  • skip to cart
  • Add To List uiAction=GetAllLists&page=List&pageType=list&ean=9781400041510&productCode=BK&maxCount=100&threshold=3

GET FREE SHIPPING ON ORDERS OF $25 OR MORE

DELIVERY & GIFT DETAILS:

Usually ships within 24 hours

Delivery Time and Shipping Rates

Eligible for gift wrap & gift message.

BUY IT USED

22 copies from $5.54

See All Available

(Hardcover)

  • Pub. Date: November 2005
  • 1136pp
  • Sales Rank: 126,579
    More Formats 
    Available in eBook$17.60
    Paperback - Reprint$20.90
    Buy it Used: 22 copies from $5.54 See All Available

    Customers who bought this also bought

     
    • Overview
    • Editorial Reviews
    • Customer Reviews
    • Features

    Product Details

    • Pub. Date: November 2005
    • Publisher: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group
    • Format: Hardcover, 1136pp
    • Sales Rank: 126,579

    Synopsis

    A sweeping and dramatic history of the last half century of conflict in the Middle East from an award-winning journalist who has covered the region for over thirty years, The Great War for Civilisation unflinchingly chronicles the tragedy of the region from the Algerian Civil War to the Iranian Revolution; from the American hostage crisis in Beirut to the Iran-Iraq War; from the 1991 Gulf War to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. A book of searing drama as well as lucid, incisive analysis, The Great War for Civilisation is a work of major importance for today's world.

    Reaching back into the long history of invasion, occupation and colonization in the region, Robert Fisk sets forth information in a way that makes clear how a history of injustice "has condemned the Middle East to war."

    He lays open the role of the West in the seemingly endless strife and warfare in the region, traces the growth of the West's involvement and influence there over the past one hundred years, and outlines the West's record of support for some of the most ruthless leaders in the Middle East. He chronicles the ever-more-powerful military presence of the United States and tracks the consequent, increasingly virulent anti-Western - and particularly anti-American - sentiment among the region's Muslim populations.

    The Washington Post - Stephen Humphreys

    In short, The Great War for Civilisation is a book of unquestionable importance, given Fisk's unmatched experience of war and its impact in the contemporary Middle East and his capacity to convey that experience in concrete, passionate language. … The Great War for Civilisation is also a deeply troubling book; it may well confirm the conviction of many that the Middle East is incurably sunk in violence and depravity and that only a fool would imagine it could ever be redeemed. As tragic as the last three decades have been, there are different lessons to be learned -- one must hope so, at least.

    More Reviews and Recommendations

    Biography

    Robert Fisk received a Ph.D. in Political Science from Trinity College, Dublin and was The Times's (London) Belfast correspondent from 1971-1975 and its Middle East correspondent from 1976-1987. Currently based in Beirut as Middle East Correspondent for The Independent, he has lived in the Middle East for almost three decades and holds more British and international journalism awards than any other foreign correspondent. His last book, Pity the Nation, a history of the war in Lebanon, was published to great acclaim.

    Customer Reviews

    CONQUESTS vs. conquests (2 of 2)by Beirut768

    Reader Rating:
    See Detailed Ratings

    November 10, 2008: (1 of 2) is posted in Sofcover edition.

    CC) Bob! You are right. It is true that in 1979 Ayatollah Khomeini "intriguingly left out his activities more than a quarter of a century earlier" - Page 98 - because he disapproved of Mossadaq policies of `Nationalization' and `Secular' approach in education.
    In the early fifties, the Ayatollah was not against the Shah. In fact he had no power base then, but the term "nationalize' was anathema to the ears of the Mullah's who possessed large tracts of lands.
    (Actually, in the late forties Winston Churchill advised King Farouk of Egypt to introduce Land Reforms in favor of the Egyptian fellaheen - peasants - to help upgrade their standard of living -- the King promised to do so and leaked out his plans in a way which added fuel to the estrangement of the Wafd, the strong right wing party, whose leaders were the major owners of large tracts of fertile lands--. King Farouk's son in law, the Shah of Iran, was surprised to learn of possible Land Reform Projects in a monarchy like Egypt. But alas in politics, what the British saw as fair in Egypt, was not as fair in Iran).
    When Mossadaq began with Oil - to transfer from private to State ownership in the early 1950's to be able to improve the standard of living of the Iranians - he was labeled `a Communist'. His secular approaches were focused on overdue reforms that should have been put in place since the discovery of oil - the black gold mines - of Iran.
    However, twenty-five years later, the Ayatollahs became uncompromising with the Shah because he intended to introduce wide Land Reform Programs something the Mullah's could not accept with coldness of nerves. Some went out to the extreme and described the Shah of the seventies as another Mossadaq.

    DD) referring to torturing techniques administered on Iranian dissident groups opposing the Shah's regime. Who taught the SAVAK the 'art' of 'body roasting', ' psychological methods of rough interrogations' ` nail plucking' `sole beating' etcetera? And worse still, who provided the SAVAK with the related equipment, gadgets, listening instruments, mistreated medicines, poisoned needles, radioactive feeding that penetrates the human bodies without leaving traces? This `hitech' calls for well-trained suppliers who possess the know-how and the means, of which, as you can appreciate, the Iranians have been lacking.
    You have alluded to CIA, MI6 and the Israeli Mossad.
    The irony of the matter though is that, all of a sudden, Britain and the USA have been criticizing the Shah - when his voice became prominent in the Oil Industry - that he had been using `Nazi' methods of incarcerations and interrogations of the Iranian opposition groups and that the Shah had actually transformed his country into a Police State. (Same accusations they had many times heaped on Abdul Nasser, Saddam Hussein and Abdul Hamid el Sarraj).
    The drama of the matter is that Great Britain and the USA have `now', by the pressure of multiplying security events after 9/11, applied similar methods as the ex- `police states' to guard against the same `fanatical groups' that had once been harassing Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Iran.

    Bob; you've given us a great book ........

    CONQUESTS vs. conquests (1 of 2)by Beirut768

    Reader Rating:
    See Detailed Ratings

    November 10, 2008: On my way from Montreal (Canada) to Beirut (Lebanon), my youngest brother handed over to me "The Great War for Civilization' (Hardcover) to enjoy reading on board of BA flight to Heathrow.

    I must say Robert Fisk made sober `guide' to many events that led to the shaping of the Middle East. The author has also been able to provide the backgrounds to everyday questions about expanded patterns set out in the introduction of `new' episodes still classified (or now unclassified) according to their function and position in the present different time situations.

    This book, however, should have been split in three volumes, with a bigger sized `Characters' to enable many readers (notably elderly) to make reading of its 1110 pages much easier.

    There are good number comments that I would like to add to Mr. Robert Fisk's vivid and thorough descriptions of the many memorable happenings that he had seen and dared to live.

    AA) on his encounter with Bin Laden, I can appreciate Bin Laden's hesitance to meet him.
    Bin Laden is a Sunni Muslim from Yemen, and the historical background of the Sunni and notably the Wahhabi Confession with the successive British oligarchy has been discouraging, unlike the Ismaili (a branch of Shia) who rendered assistance to the British Empire in the course of their military conquests and political influence in the Punjab as far back as the late nineteenth century.
    During `The Afghan War' of 1841-42 the Ismaili raised a highly skilled regiment of cavalry to support Generals Nott and England and Ismaili leaders could reach a promising political understanding with Sir Charles Napier when the British troops moved northwards and southwards out of Sind.

    Such historical conditions remained vivid in the memories of the Sunni Afghan `sheikhs and mullahs' for the next one hundred fifty years that:

    --England is the number one enemy of the Muslim Sunni (not the Muslim Shia) and their major aim had been to inherit the Ottoman Empire, divide the Muslims and devour the Arab `World'

    --In order to gain material advantage, Britain has always been supportive of the minorities (Shia, Druze, Christians and Jews) and a staunch enemy to the Caliphate (The Spiritual and Temporal Succession in the Muslims' leadership - always a Sunni). Britain abolished through the firearms and firmness of the British Empire, the Khalif (the successor of the Prophet Muhammad) in order to take over the temporal capacities, and only leave weakened spiritual guidance to Imam-el-Muslimin (or spiritual chief of the devout) within the British Empire, with English commanders to lead the `true believers'.
    Nevertheless, given the fact that there has been some sort of rough communal rivalry between the Afghan Sunni and Shii, a Sunni `warrior' like Bin Laden would immediately take the presence of a British Journalist for `a Spy'.

    The heavy load of persecution between the two confessions of the same Muslim faith brought about fanatical hostility that `the friend of my enemy is ipso facto my enemy'. Robert Fisk, irrespective of the gist of his mission in Afghanistan, in the eyes of Bin Laden's supporters, advisors and entourage, has naturally been regarded with extreme suspicion.


    More Customer Reviews