Disarming Iraq is, in one sense, a viciously torpid book. It is one man's account of his part in the events leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and it is so lacking in any sweeping claims (as made by many other books about this subject) and full of dispassionate assessments that indeed, it reminds you not of politics but academia.
The writer is Hans Blix, a Swedish diplomat and also the former head of UNMOVIC, the UN body tasked with inspecting Iraq for WMD. He was one of the key players (I didn't know him until I read this book, as I was 13 years old at that time and couldn't really bother with the news) in this whole affair, and this is his subjective account that, ironically, has a remarkable element of objectivity in it. There are no references here but himself.
And it is convincing. Blix displays a remarkable even-handedness: he may be a Swedish diplomat, but he was never averse to an armed intervention in Iraq (as he states). What he wanted was more time, and tried to make the point again and again, that war was a very serious and as of yet, unnecessary next step.
He recounts meetings with folks like Blair, Rice, Powell and Bush (and his impressions of them). And what are my impressions? That they are people with their own viewpoints, and the author understands that, too. He is surprisingly sympathetic (or perhaps empathetic, being a diplomat himself) while at the same time critical of what he sees as bad decisions.
Agree or disagree, this is one man's viewpoint. We all now know that no WMD have been found in Iraq (as of yet, but of course, many already can see that there is probably none at all). Thus, he and others of his perspective could be said to be vindicated.
Blix is also intelligent enough to not speculate beyond the US' prima facie reason for invading Iraq: that it had WMD. Not a single mention about oil, to which he must be thank (a reason that is unfounded at best).
Worth a read, but don't expect a gripping narrative. It is, rather, a slow and factual (despite being one man's recount) account of the US and UK's preparation for war with Iraq and their detractors, presented in an evenhanded and (almost) neutral manner. Blix does pepper the book throughout with his own opinions and conjectures, but of course, he can be forgiven. Most of what he guessed hasn't been refuted. Yet.
The writer is Hans Blix, a Swedish diplomat and also the former head of UNMOVIC, the UN body tasked with inspecting Iraq for WMD. He was one of the key players (I didn't know him until I read this book, as I was 13 years old at that time and couldn't really bother with the news) in this whole affair, and this is his subjective account that, ironically, has a remarkable element of objectivity in it. There are no references here but himself.
And it is convincing. Blix displays a remarkable even-handedness: he may be a Swedish diplomat, but he was never averse to an armed intervention in Iraq (as he states). What he wanted was more time, and tried to make the point again and again, that war was a very serious and as of yet, unnecessary next step.
He recounts meetings with folks like Blair, Rice, Powell and Bush (and his impressions of them). And what are my impressions? That they are people with their own viewpoints, and the author understands that, too. He is surprisingly sympathetic (or perhaps empathetic, being a diplomat himself) while at the same time critical of what he sees as bad decisions.
Agree or disagree, this is one man's viewpoint. We all now know that no WMD have been found in Iraq (as of yet, but of course, many already can see that there is probably none at all). Thus, he and others of his perspective could be said to be vindicated.
Blix is also intelligent enough to not speculate beyond the US' prima facie reason for invading Iraq: that it had WMD. Not a single mention about oil, to which he must be thank (a reason that is unfounded at best).
Worth a read, but don't expect a gripping narrative. It is, rather, a slow and factual (despite being one man's recount) account of the US and UK's preparation for war with Iraq and their detractors, presented in an evenhanded and (almost) neutral manner. Blix does pepper the book throughout with his own opinions and conjectures, but of course, he can be forgiven. Most of what he guessed hasn't been refuted. Yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment