A highly readable account on how Europe went to war in 1914, Prof Clark thesis is very simple, he unravels the events that led to first world war by uA highly readable account on how Europe went to war in 1914, Prof Clark thesis is very simple, he unravels the events that led to first world war by using How approach rather than why, He explains this that when you ask why Europe went to war, this approach is blame centric whereas How approach is seeing the event through multilayered actors taking their decisions simultaneously.
The book is divided in three parts, the first part discuss the Austro-Hungarian Empire and The Serbian state, the recent history of both the states is analysed in these chapter, and it has succinctly pin points the roots of tension between the two states.
The second part focuses on the key decisions makers in Europe and the divide within the continents, this chapter highlights the key players who calls the shots in their respective countries, The Russian Tzar or Its army chief, German Kaiser or Its army chief, French Foreign minister or French President, British prime minister or Foreign Secretary?
Third part is about the crises itself, when the fatal shot at Sarajevo was fired, Prof Clark state that 'European decision makers were sleepwalkers, watchful but unseeing, haunted by dreams but blind to the reality of horror they were about to bring into the world'. This part is the most exciting one, it is about the nuances of the early days of the crises, it is about who was doing what when the crisis was unfolding and what were they doing either to prevent it or to exacerbate it. The Russian mobilising in the event is very dramatic, the decision to mobilise was done, order were passed, telegrams were being typed to be sent to their respective diplomats but then Tzar received the call from Kaiser Wilhem, and Kaiser convinced for the moment to halt the mobilization, it worked for a day only, 24 hours later Russian orders were passed for full mobilisation. Germans have had their tensions and dramatic scenes, when Russian announces its mobilisation, German chief of staff Helmut von Moltke was eager to initiate Schlieffen plan, Kaiser was opposed to that at that point, the troops were sent, orders were passed by Moltke about the Schlieffen plan, some of the divisions were entering the Belgium, German were on their way for a quick victory in the west against French by encircling the Paris and enforcing a quick peace treaty upon them, before returning to the east to fight the Russians, but Kaiser's ambassador in London have had some discussion with British secretary Edward Grey, and Grey assured him that British will remain neutral if German doesn't invade Belgium and do no attack France, Kaiser happy to know about it wrote a letter to King George V, thanking him for British neutrality, Edward Grey was summoned to the Buckingham Palace that very day, and was asked to explain what conversation he have had with German Ambassador, and then king George made Grey to write a reply to Kaiser Wilhelm, and Kaiser was told that 'it is a misunderstanding'. Before receiving the reply of King George, kaiser having had a fierce discussion with his army chief Moltke, when Kaiser forced Moltke to halt the mobilisations plan, his chief said 'It will be a suicide, mobilisation once initiated can't be halted, Kaiser said 'Uncle if I said you to do it then there must be a way', Moltke with tears in his eyes left the room, and ordered his troops to stop at the borders of Belgium. Next day, upon receiving the letter from King George, Kaiser was in shock, he summoned his army chief, and said ' Do what you want to do now', and so begins the German military machine. The tensions and drama was also prevalent among French and British policy makers, French ambassador when met with Grey, he was so devastated that he said to one of his college, 'They are going to drop us, they are going to drop us', Grey was clear that his country has no obligations to go to war for one party or another, and even if Belgium is attacked, the International treaty of 1839 that Guarantees the security of Belgium is not upon Great Britain to enforce, Paul Cambon, French envoy to British, explained grey that French north western coast is without a fleet, and without protection due to the reasons that we have sent our fleet to the Mediterranean for the interests of British, so the moral authority lies on Britain to defend France, Grey got the point, he raised this in the next cabinet meeting, and when German declared war upon France and subsequently invaded Belgium, Great Britain declared war on Germany on 4 August.
Kaiser Wilhelm's remarks summons up everything, He said ' if their grand mother Victoria was alive, she would have never allowed Nickie( Tsar Nicholas), and Georgie( King George V) to have gang up upon me like that'.
The schlieffen plan was the Brian child of Alfred Von Schlieffen, the Schlieffen plan was the most ambitious plan ever devised, it is named after Alfred von Schlieffen, the German military chief from 1891 to 1905, he envisioned this plan, it was his thought experience, he was obsessed with Hannibal, and his masterpiece at Cannae in 216 B.C, defeating the Roman army through history's most famous double envelopment, Schlieffen wanted to do the same, he even wrote a influential book called Super Cannae....more
One of the most authentic account on the life of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, founder and creator of Pakistan.
Stanley Wolpert has meticulously discussed the lOne of the most authentic account on the life of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, founder and creator of Pakistan.
Stanley Wolpert has meticulously discussed the life of M.A Jinnah, his personality, work ethic, his contributions.
Besides this biography other work on Jinnah that comes to my mind is that of Hector Bolithio's Creator of Pakistan, although Bolithio's biography of Jinnah has its merits but Wolpert's Jinnah of Pakistan stand out, it is more detailed, comprehensive, highly researched, at times very engaging and on moments very poetic and mesmerizing. Maybe the reason of this is that Wolpert's biography is written in the 80s, so he had the advantage of extensive research available to him whereas Bolithio's biography is of 50s, so there weren't many academic research on the subject back then.
This biography is above all is the story of Jinnah's life, his ups and down, his journey as a leader, as a Barrister, as a Statesman, his work ethic, of his resilience against all odds, Jinnah was no doubt a shrewd and skillful leader, Jinnah's journey is indeed a rollercoaster one.
This biography is candidly written, Professor Wolpert has delve into great depth and details about Pakistan's founder life.
Well, Stanley Wolpert started his book with following lines, and I'm cutting my review short on those lines..
" Few individuals significantly alter the course of history. Fewer still modify the map of the world, Hardly anyone can be credited with creating a nation state. Muhammad Ali Jinnah did all three....more
The book is all about Pakistan, it covers all the history of Pakistan from the its independence to the 2An excellent book, comprehensive and profound.
The book is all about Pakistan, it covers all the history of Pakistan from the its independence to the 2000s, Hussain haqqni presents a unique history, the book profoundly outlines the nexus between military and mosque in the politics of Pak, it talks a little about the ideology of Pak, and the background of the creation of Pakistan, then it talks about the military rules in Pakistan, how the military has ruled Pakistan in half of its history, it discusses the Four military coup in details. 1. Ayub Khan (1956-1969) 2. Yahya Khan 1969-1971) 3. Zia ul haq (1977-88) 4. Parvez Musharraf The book is based on facts and figured, author has quoted significantly, this is one of the most authentic book, it is meticulous in its contents, it tells in detail how the East Pakistan separated, what was its reasons and causes, it also talks about the Rise and fall of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, a secular leader, compromised during his rule, and those very causes become the downfall of Bhutto, first getting fired and later executed.
The book also covers very important but very damaging years of Pak during the reign of Zia ul haq, it was the time when Pak became an Islamic state, the radicalization of different religious groups, the talibanization of Pakistan, the effect of this regime were so wide and horrifying that we are still unable to get out of this radicalization, hatred, intolerance from our society.
In the last part book discusses the Time of Pervez Musharraf, he was an army chief of Pak in 1999 during the Nawaz Shariff government, military at that time played their game without consulting the govt, which is the norm in Pak politics, in the battles of kargil which military initiated, Nawaz Shariff was called on by the then Us president, he scolded Pm Pak, about the carelessness and irresponsible behavior of Pak, he said that the war between the two nuclear power was so close to be escalate, Nawaz Shariff came home, tried to fire Musharraf, but military taken its own course, entered the pm house, announced the another Coup de'tat in Pakistan history, the fourth in his short history. Musharraf ruled from 1999-2007....more
A very thorough, well researched book. A great read indeed. On the back cover of the book in praise of this book Pankaj Sharma of Guardian has stated A very thorough, well researched book. A great read indeed. On the back cover of the book in praise of this book Pankaj Sharma of Guardian has stated that "Over turn many prejudices, so manifolds and obdurate are the cliches about Pakistan that you need a whole book periodically to shatter them, Lieven's Pakistan (a hard country) is one such blow", and after reading this I couldn't agree more with the assessment of Pankaj Sharma, absolutely spot on, a very revealing book, and particularly the analysis of the authors makes sense and are well researched and articulated and this book tackles the core questions regarding Pakistan in great depth.
The book consists of four part. The first part is basically about the genesis of Pakistan, it discusses the land, people, and history. It discusses in great length the rule of Muslims in South Asia, the arrival of east India company, the fall of Mughal Empire and with this the decline of Muslims prestige in South Asia, the British Raj and then the struggle of independence. This part discussion mainly focuses on the basis of foundations of Pakistan as a separate homeland for Muslim, the role of Sir Syed ahmed Khan, Muslim league and Muhammad Ali Jinnah in creation of Pakistan.
The second part of the book has great significance as it is about the structures, it is the very part which describes and analyzes the functioning and working of Pakistan. In structures it covers Justice, Religion, Politics, and Military.
In this part Lieven's described the functioning and non functioning of those structures, it analysis where and why the problems lies in Pakistan structuring, the main problem as the book discuss is that Pakistani has a choice, they can choose between the state's law, religion law, or the local or communal law, the very thing that is at the root of the modern state is the uniformity of the laws and codes, and here the state is unable to enforce the common codes through out the country, the customs in Pakistan varies hugely, the kinship structures is at the very heart of these things it is the very reason that Pakistani state is so weak, and the most problems in country aren't because the state is strong but because it is weak.. The one exception that this book talks are the Urdu speaking or Mohajirs of karachi, as the book notes that they migrated from different parts of India so the structures of kinship and other local or communal customs which bounds any ethnicities are not in the case of this nationality of Pakistan, this is at the very heart that first the Jamat and then more ruthless MQM rose from the Karachi and shook the very foundations of the country, it was the most ideal party and too good for the country like Pakistan, because of its background it was alienated from the patronage politics of Pak as seen in all other major Political parties, it was organized, well structured, and MQM was the only mass Political party of the western style in Pakistan. Anatol Lieven has written that whatever the social and economic progress the Pakistan has was because of the progressive and educated Mohajirs.
The book further discusses the provinces of Pakistan, it analysis all the four key provinces, Punjab, Balochistan, Sindh, Pathans(Kpk) in great depth and meticulously sheds the light on various ethnicities of the provinces. This book also takes in detail the four main rulers of Pakistan, it discusses the rule of General Ayub Khan(57-69) and Musharraf (99-07) jointly as they were the only secular rulers of Pakistan, the rule of both of these is well discussed, the reforms that country went through this period and the modernization and the liberalization of the economy of the era, Ayub's period was rather more successive as at that time west was more proselytizing the industrial revolution so Ayub Khan also took on this path, whereas by the time of Musharraf, the Soviet Union had collapsed, the communism was faded and there was no any challenge to liberal world so at that time west was branding their liberal economic policies of Lassie's fair so Musharraf followed this path, which brought some boom to the Pakistani economic but that didn't last for too long, despite the personality and the secular vision of Musharraf his rule was not up to the mark with his own standards. Could have done a lot better.
The book discusses the rule of Zia ul haq and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Bhutto did some land reforms but because of his background he soon had to back off, as. Bhutto's power weakens the feudals and landowners were the very class that he needed to have their support so with this their were compromises, whereas Zia ul haq hasn't done any good to Pakistan either, even today his menace of islamization is rooted in society and the society is deeply intolerant, extremists, and very narrow minded..
In last part the book discusses the Taleban, it talks about the rise of Afghan Taleban and then the Pakistan Taleban, as this book is written in 2010 so it provided the Analysis and recommendation of dealing with the talebans how they can be defeated and what should the Pakistan and USA should do to deal Taleban.
Overall a great book, very thought provoking at times and revealing, however sometimes the tone of the author is very soft where I think it should have been hardliner and whereas at other moments where it needed to be soft it goes all out with all gun blazing. Some subjective description aside the book is a gem....more
Excellent book, A thorough, detailed account of Pakistan, from the country's independence to the second decade of the 21st century.
Christophe JaffreloExcellent book, A thorough, detailed account of Pakistan, from the country's independence to the second decade of the 21st century.
Christophe Jaffrelot has written a very informative, revealing book that is meticulous in details, and eloquent in style.
The author defines the 70 odds years of Pakistan's history in 3 Paradoxes, hence the book is structured into 3 parts.
The first of the paradox is about the country's integration through one language Urdu, or the unitary system of Pakistan, a centralized authority that Pakistan founders and then later on successive leaders chose for the integration of its nation against the ethnolinguistics regional provinces sovereignty.
The second paradox is about the power politics, the tussle between two forces, the civilians and the military, each wants to exert its authority over the Pakistani society, and the military succeeded heavily in this cause. This part talks about Pakistan in the years when it was ruled by the Military, and about the years when it was ruled by civilians.
The third paradox is that related to its religion, which revolves around the idea of Pakistan, being a Republic, Or Islamic state.
The three-way structure of the book is the very equivalent of the symbol of Pakistan, that is the Unity, Faith, Discipline.
I liked this book for several reasons, first, it has covered everything, seconding it is unique as it has discussed meticulously events such as 71, Bhutto's trial proceedings, the period of 88-99, and lastly but more importantly its brilliant account on the rise of sectarianism, and Jihadism in Pakistan, and then the details accounts on American war on terror, the Taliban, and TTP in the context of Pakistan....more
A very well written book, highly readable and knowledgeable.
The book start with the foundation of East India Company in 1599, king James sent His envoA very well written book, highly readable and knowledgeable.
The book start with the foundation of East India Company in 1599, king James sent His envoy Thomas Roe to the Mughal India for a trade deal, English monarch gave away the the monopoly of trade to EIC with India. EIC was a newly formed joint stock company, headquarted in London. Rich english merchants were looking for a profitable project at that time, first they tried desperately but unsuccessfully for getting an upper hand in the spices and peppers trade which was a monopoly of Dutch company, in the end they left the spice island for dutch and then headed for India for the trade of Cotton, textile, and which for better or worse proved to be more profitable and productive. Any way after the glorious revolution of 1688/89 dutch and the English became the two side of the same coin.
The story telling of the book is exceptional, it discusses the event of EIC meticulously.
EIC was a private corporation, as soon as it established its trade monopoly in India, it started to straightened itself by playing the dirty game of playing the rival section against each other, EIC was a cold, brutal fascist, and racist corporation. The only aim of the company was to extract as much benefits for its beneficiaries as possible.
Robert Clive was one of the very bad guy of the company, at the battle of Plassey when Mir Jaffir deceived his native people, and trenchsouly helped EIC in defeating the Nawab of Bengal, Shuja ul daula. So company helped him in return by installing Mir Jaffir as the puppet nawab of bengal.
This was the first instant that opened a very rich and prosperous province of Bengal to the outrageous plunder for the company. 8 years later in 1765, the Mughal emperor Shah Alam signed a diwani after the defeat at the battle of Buxar, a contract which was handed over to the company, which allowed the company to collect taxes, imposed laws in the three richest province of India, Bengal, Bihar, Orissa.
The company plundered Bengal so ruthlessly that in 1770, Bengal was to be ruined by famine, the town after town was full of corpses, Bengal which was not so long ago was the most prosperous, and richest province of India, in a moment was back in the stone ages. Pressure mounted on company as now due to famine and huge number of casualties the crops of Bengal were no more as productive, neither there was enough money left on the people for them to be taxed. Company sold opium to china, and in turn bought tea from there, the company was on the brinks of bankruptcy, they needed some money to be raised, through company's influence British parliament passed a tea act for their colonies in North America. Well tea was shipped to North America, the European settlers and native people of America were aware of the ruthless plundering of the EIC, so they thought they are going to treat us the same way as indian people, and like India, this company will exploit North America. So they were never going to allow this to happen, the ships full of tea in the Boston harbour was drowned by them, so this began the chain of events which is going to be fatal for British in North America as it resulted in the declaration of independence of America.
Mughal were a powerful and richest empire of the world in 17th century, its subject produced almost 60 percent of the global manufacturing, in the Raj era that began in 1857/58, lasted for almost 90 years, British thought that they were on a civilizational mission, well in early 17th century in the great Mughal era of Akbar, and Jahangir, the latter thought of launching a civilizational mission for Europe, but then let go of the idea, this was the prestige of Mughal of that time, they were the richest and mightiest empire on the earth at that time.
Mughal were weakened once Aurangzeb became their emperor, the multi cultural, tolerant, peaceful legacy of India was torn into pieced by Aurangzeb, He attacked the Hindus seminaries, and divided the India on this line. The second factor for their decline was the sacking of Delhi by Nader Shah of persia in 1739, Nadir shah plundered the Mughal capital, took away all the wealth that Mughal emperors collected in 300 years, he looted every home, and palace of the emperor, when Nader shah went back, the peacock throne, Koh i Noor, Diar i Noor, some 6000 elephants, 8000 horses, and 600 platoons full of jewelries, were accompanying him. Muhammed shah Rangila, the mughal emperor was never going to recover from this humiliating plunder
The weakness of indian rulers, and the heinous and outrageous role that EIC played by using the native rulers against each other gave the company a great authority in the region. Company defeated one rival after other, untill in 1803, it was to become the unrivalled ruler of India. Companies rule wasn't lasted long in India though, company faced huge resistance from some members of the parliament, and its authority was soon become a point of discussion, it was first regulated in 1773, after British government gave them a bailout, a first mega bailout for a corporation, it was too big to fail, the Government bounced on the opportunity and in return regulated the company, and took away some of the authority. In 1813 amid growing concerns, the trade monopoly of EIC was revoked, so now it was open for any other competing company to trade with India. In 1835, the trade was altogether removed from the distinction of the company, and it became a governing company, and in 1857, after the sepoys mutiny amidst the chaos, and killing that company committed, British government took over from EIC, and all the withholdings of EIC were nationalised, the company was dismantled, and in 1873 when its charter expired, EIC was gone....more
M Jahangir
>
Books:
Read
(119)
Loading...
