For reasons unforeseen at the time of writing, “Iraq the Cost of War” was not released in 2005 as planned. That same year, the British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Jack Straw asked author Jeremy Greenstock to delay the publication until the ministers concerned left their posts. This was followed by the Iraq Inquiry, a British Public inquiry into the nation’s role in the Iraq War. After a seven-year investigation, Sir John Chilcot delivered his findings in 2016 and Greenstock decided the time had finally come to publish his account.
The book, which has just been published in paperback form, presents an in-depth understanding, in narrative form, of what really went on behind the scenes at the UN and in Baghdad. “I believe there is still room for a story to be told that sets in live context the decisions taken and the mistakes committed, and perhaps makes more intelligible the swirl of conflicting considerations that weighed on political leaders at the time,” Greenstock writes. For that reason, he kept the original text.
Greenstock, as UK permanent representative to the United Nations ambassador in New York, shows us the intricacies of foreign policy decision making in the lead-up to the Iraq invasion. And then, as special envoy for Iraq, the UK’s highest authority on the ground, he was a witness to the acute lack of post-war preparation in Iraq. First and foremost, this seasoned diplomat asserts a truth that runs like a mantra throughout the book — “the story of Iraq is the story of the application of American power.”
The United States’ involvement in Iraq comes as no surprise. Greenstock acknowledges that as a young diplomat he discovered that the US has two preserves, superpower politics and the Middle East peace process. Whereas the diplomatic world recognizes the French and the British inherited privileged relations with the Middle East that no other foreigners possessed, the American administration has never hidden its distaste for the European colonial past.
Another important point is that no political strategy can be discussed in Iraq without bringing up the Palestinian question. Iraqi people, known for their nationalistic feelings, would feel hostile to an American presence in their country if the US would not contribute to improving the Palestine situation, according to the book.
However, there were no indications that a political change in Iraq would trigger change in the Middle East and the road toward Arab-Israeli peace does not run through Baghdad. However, Greenstock had sensed from the beginning that the outcome in Iraq would exert a broader influence on the region.
If we go back in time, we discover that the harshest sanctions ever imposed against a state were adopted against Iraq under UN Resolution 687 until full reparations for the damage done to Kuwait were repaid and all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) had been accounted for.
General sanctions tend to affect the population at large, so a government takes measures to help its people avoid harm. Saddam Hussein did exactly the opposite, he used his people’s suffering to condemn the UN’s resolution. As a result, the Iraqi population suffered a lot from food deprivation, especially the children, and they blamed the US.
The big question at this point is why did Hussein risk a devastating invasion of his country by lying about his actual weapons capacity? Did he want to give the impression that he was a champion of Arab causes? By projecting an image of toughness and a will not to comprise, he wanted the world to know that he remained a challenge to the superpowers and he played a role on the world stage, perhaps. “There is not a shadow of doubt whatsoever that Iraq had long harbored ambitions to develop a WMD capability and had actually used chemical weapons in the 1980s. Saddam Hussein could have used chemical weapons in 1991, but chose not to,” writes Greenstock.
The problem with Hussein is that nobody knew what was going on in his mind. Nobody knew whether he was lying or telling the truth and this explains why there was not a greater opposition to pre-emptive action in the United Nations Security Council and elsewhere. The French and the Russians believed the inspectors had not been given enough time and they also hoped that more time would get the Iraqi leader to admit the truth. The French and Russians were also not the only ones to warn the US not to flout international order and not to initiate an invasion of Iraq without a prior discussion in the Security Council.
Tony Blair’s speech on March 18, 2003, one of the best speeches of his political career, sealed the decision to intervene in Iraq. The argument was based on the unfounded assumption that Iraq had hidden stockpiles of WMDs. “That does not alter the fact that Iraq was in breach of UN resolutions. But it does magnify the accusation that the punishment was out of proportion to the offense,” writes Greenstock.
No one anticipated that the Iraqi forces would be defeated so easily. The coalition led by the US did not do much better. The American and British authorities displayed an inability to control — “we lost the initiative in the early weeks when we failed to secure the country. The new Iraq has not yet recovered from that mistake,” writes Greenstock. President George W. Bush also never allocated the funds and the resources needed to secure a successful future for the Iraqi people. The US failure in Iraq reminds us of how the Americans handled the Russians after the Cold War — the apparent lack of diplomacy triggered feelings of resentment and humiliation, which paved the way for Vladimir Putin to take power and reestablish Russia as a superpower on the world map.
Greenstock wrote the epilogue to this book just before it was submitted for publication. Eleven years had passed and the world had changed, presenting an opportunity to measure the impact of the war in Iraq on the countries involved in it. Iraqis have paid a high price for the promise of peace and freedom, which remains elusive, and even its future within its UN-approved borders is not yet secured.
Greenstock also believes that Blair did not respect the domestic interests of the British. “I think that Blair going with the Americans on Iraq has, in some ways, done more damage to the UK than (former British Prime Minister Harold) Wilson not going with the Americans in Vietnam,” he said in an interview with the Huffington Post.
Greenstock is very critical of American mistakes, saying: “To most people on the planet, it is unacceptable for the US on its own to interpret international legitimacy,” but he concludes that “a world without an America in top form is always going to face a poorer and more threatened future.”
Book Review: Recounting the cost of war in Iraq
Book Review: Recounting the cost of war in Iraq
What We Are Reading Today: ‘The African Revolution’
- The African Revolution demonstrates that “the Scramble” and the resulting imperial order were as much the culmination of African revolutionary dynamics as they were of European expansionism
Author: RICHARD REID
Africa’s long 19th century was a time of revolutionary ferment and cultural innovation for the continent’s states, societies, and economies.
Yet the period preceding what became known as “the Scramble for Africa” by European powers in the decades leading up to World War I has long been neglected in favor of a Western narrative of colonial rule.
The African Revolution demonstrates that “the Scramble” and the resulting imperial order were as much the culmination of African revolutionary dynamics as they were of European expansionism.
What We Are Reading Today: "Beautiful Ugly"
- Alice Feeney is a New York Times bestselling author. In addition to “Beautiful Ugly,” she has also published “Rock Paper Scissors,” “Sometimes I Lie,” and “His & Hers”
Author: Alice Feeney
“Beautiful Ugly,” released in January, is a novel by British author Alice Feeney.
The story concerns Grady Green, an author, who is on the phone to his wife while she is driving home. During their conversation, he hears the screech of brakes as she spots an object on the road ahead.
Green’s tries to prevent his wife from leaving the car to investigate the object, before she mysteriously disappears.
To cope with his depression and grief, Green travels to an island in search of solace and perhaps a way to restore his life, particularly after losing sleep and his appetite for writing.
On the island, he is shocked to encounter a woman who resembles his missing wife, and the story takes another dramatic turn.
Although the novel has been rated by more than 87,000 users on Goodreads with an average of 3.6 out of 5 stars, some readers found the pace a bit slow.
“It’s a bit of a slow-burn mystery, which I feel is difficult to pull off since it doesn’t keep you on the edge of your seat the whole time,” one of the reviewers commented.
Despite being a work of fiction, another reader found the narrative unreliable and unrealistic, making it difficult to connect the events. Nevertheless, most readers appreciated the author’s writing style and imagination.
“All in all, I don’t hate the book, but there is too much melodrama and theatrical antics for a thriller. Since this is my favorite genre, I tend to be quite particular about how I like these novels to be constructed,” another reader said.
Alice Feeney is a New York Times bestselling author. In addition to “Beautiful Ugly,” she has also published “Rock Paper Scissors,” “Sometimes I Lie,” and “His & Hers.”
What We Are Reading Today: ‘Shooting an Elephant’
- While Orwell’s self-awareness is commendable, some readers may find his portrayal of the Burmese people overly passive, raising questions about perspectives that remain unheard in this narrative
Author: George Orwell
George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” relates his experiences of a police officer in Burma who is called on to shoot an aggressive elephant that has broken free from its handler.
However, the essay — first published in 1936, and thought to be autobiographical — quickly turns into a searing indictment of power’s corrosive grip, with the unruly creature becoming a metaphor for the absurdity of empire.
Orwell sets the stage with quiet tension: the heat, the hostile stares of the Burmese, and the weight of his uniform. He is a man trapped — despised by those he governs, yet bound to the system he serves.
When the elephant rampages through a village, the crowd’s expectation becomes a noose around his neck. Orwell’s prose, stripped of sentiment, lays bare the hollowness of authority. He does not pull the trigger out of duty, but out of fear of appearing weak in the eyes of the villagers.
The essay’s brilliance lies in its ruthless self-exposure. Orwell refuses to cast himself as hero or even victim. Instead, he is complicit, a puppet of imperialism, forced to enact its violence in order to maintain the illusion of control.
Yet, one wonders: Does his introspection absolve him, or merely sharpen the hypocrisy? The dying elephant, gasping for air, is not just an animal, but a truth Orwell cannot escape.
Unlike traditional anti-colonial critiques that focus solely on oppression, “Shooting an Elephant” exposes the trap facing the oppressor.
Orwell’s shame is palpable, his confession unflinching. There is no redemption here, only the sickening realization that power does not liberate, but enslaves.
While Orwell’s self-awareness is commendable, some readers may find his portrayal of the Burmese people overly passive, raising questions about perspectives that remain unheard in this narrative.
The elephant falls, but the real tragedy is that no one — not the crowd, the empire, or even Orwell — walks away clean.
The bullet that kills the elephant also shatters the myth of imperial righteousness. And in that destruction, there is a terrible truth: Tyranny corrupts both the oppressed and the oppressor, leaving both bleeding in the dust.
What We Are Reading Today: Republics of Knowledge
Author: Nicola Miller
The rise of nation-states is a hallmark of the modern age, yet we are still untangling how the phenomenon unfolded across the globe. Here, Nicola Miller offers new insights into the process of nation-making through an account of 19th-century Latin America, where, she argues, the identity of nascent republics was molded through previously underappreciated means: the creation and sharing of knowledge.
Drawing evidence from Argentina, Chile, and Peru, Republics of Knowledge traces the histories of these countries from the early 1800s, as they gained independence, to their centennial celebrations in the 20th century.
Miller identifies how public exchange of ideas affected policymaking, the emergence of a collective identity, and more. She finds that instead of defining themselves through language or culture, these new nations united citizens under the promise of widespread access to modern information.
What We Are Reading Today: The Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting
- Focusing on brittle fracture and rock friction, this book will appeal to graduate and research scientists in seismology, physics, geology, geodesy and rock mechanics
Author: Christopher H. Scholz
A massive earthquake hit Myanmar and Thailand recently. Humanitarians are struggling to deliver assistance.
Why do earthquakes happen? “The Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting” offers a study on connections between fault and earthquake mechanics, including fault scaling laws, the nature of fault populations, and how these result from the processes of fault growth and interaction.
Focusing on brittle fracture and rock friction, this book will appeal to graduate and research scientists in seismology, physics, geology, geodesy and rock mechanics.
