Inventing Iraq: The Failure of Nation Building and a History Denied

by Toby Dodge

Book Overview

If we think there is a fast solution to changing the governance of Iraq, warned U.S. Marine General Anthony Zinni in the months before the United States and Britain invaded Iraq, "then we don't understand history." Never has the old line about those who fail to understand the past being condemned to repeat it seemed more urgently relevant than in Iraq today, with potentially catastrophic consequences for the Iraqi people, the Middle East region, and...

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0231131666
• ISBN13: 9780231131667
• Release Date: November 2003
• Publisher: Columbia University Press
• Length: 260 Pages
• Weight: 1.20 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 6.3" x 9.3"
• Grade Range: Postsecondary and higher

Customer Reviews

Parallels Between 1920 and 2003??

Toby Dodge, a British political scientist who has studied Iraq extensively, has produced this book in order to educate others about one role that an occupying power has taken, 1920's Iraq via London, or 2003 Iraq via Washington. In 1920, The British officials in charge f Iraq imported many British ideas on Iraq. For example, the was a colonialist disregard for urban iraqis opposed to urban dwellers. This had larDodge Review Toby Dodge, a British political scientist who has studied Iraq extensively, has produced this book in order to educate others about one role that an occupying power has taken 1920 Iraq via London, or 2003 Iraq via Washington. In 1920, The British officials in charge f Iraq imported many British ideas on Iraq. For example, the was, a colonialist disregard for urban Iraqis opposed to urban dwellers. This had largely to due to political feelings in Europe at that time. However, additionally, Iraq became a more difficult issue for the UK because of domestic issues. These issues includes, political, mainly economic, and other issues. But in both instances domestic politics played a part in the ultimate rule. gely to due to political feelings in Europe at that time. However, additionally, Iraq became a mere difficult issue for the UK because of domestic issues. These issues includes, political, mainly economic, and other issues. But in both instances domestic politics played a part in the ultimate rule.

Inventing Iraq: The Failure Of Nation Building And A History Denied

great background history to today's strategic events in Middle East

Analysis of early "nation-building" in Iraq

This very useful volume's goal is an analysis of British policies at the end of World War I towards their new mandate of Iraq. Dodge offers a careful analysis of a British policy constrained by limited resources, limited political will, little on-the-ground knowledge, and a considerable load of baggage based either on other imperial experiences or a heady mix of Orientalist preconceptions and romanticism. The result, according to Dodge, was a series of mis-steps which weakened the nascent Iraqi state and set the stage for Iraqi history thereafter. Although this work is primarily concerned with the period directly after World War I, Dodge offers some useful - if tentative comparisons between the British experience and that of the United States today. Overall, this is a useful book for serious students of Iraq or Middle Eastern history. It may be too specialized for casual readers.

Orientalism redux

This short book presents the (failed)attempt at nation-building in Iraq under the British Mandate system of post WWI. In 170 pages of actual text, the author shows how Orientalist discourse colored the declining British Empire's perception of Iraq and the middle east, relying on templates that were formulated in the Indian colony and then applied wholesale and on the cheap (sounds familiar) to the Iraqi area. The book doesn't go very far in discussing the roles of the sunnis, shi'ites and kurds; it focuses more on the ideology of the colonizers and then briefly applies these sentiments towards the US current babylonian adventure. This isn't the final word on European colonialism in Iraq, but it's an excellent start. I recommend reading David Fromkin's "peace to end all peace" first of all to get the total overview of the great power conflict at the heart of the reconstruction of the middle east and its continuing repercussions today. Edward Said, now we need you more than ever ...

Fine explanation of why occupations fail

This scholarly and fascinating book studies a previous occupation of Iraq, by the British Empire's rulers, and it shows how and why this occupation failed. British forces seized Iraq at the end of World War One and until 1932 successive British governments tried to rule it. To support this forcible occupation, Britain's ruling class used a network of self-serving deceptions. It believed, and wanted everybody else to believe, that the majority of Iraqis wanted British rule; that Iraqis would freely choose a pro-British government rather than a pro-Iraqi government; that it could divide Iraq into `good' countryside and `bad' city, `good' Kurds and `bad' Sunnis and Shia; that its desire to rule Iraq was selfless, nothing to do with the Empire's demands for Iraq's oil and for airbases; that the continuing violence and unrest were legacies from the Ottoman Empire, not responses to being occupied; and that withdrawal would lead to anarchy. The forms of the Empire's control shifted from annexation, to League of Nations mandate, to a treaty of alliance, to an advisory role, and finally to disengagement. But the British people were not fooled by the propaganda or by the shifting constitutional arrangements. Dodge writes of `the long-running public hostility of British public opinion towards maintaining an interest in Iraq'. This anti-imperialism helped Labour to win the 1929 general election, but Labour in government failed to do what the nation wanted - withdraw immediately from Iraq. Now Blair seems to want to repeat the dismal, costly and futile cycle. He follows Bush in rejecting the Iraqi people's demand for rule by Iraqis who win democratic elections. He denies the power and validity of nationalism, a nation's legitimate, democratic desire for sovereignty and self-determination. The people of Iraq have already defeated the Pentagon's effort to rule Iraq directly, and General Garner has been sacked. The Iraqi people have vetoed the State Department's effort to rule by courtesy of the returning exiles, and they have overturned Bush's proposal of rule by US-selected caucuses. Since 1990, US and British governments have forcibly occupied one country after another. But, as Dodge sums up, "Post-Cold War military interventions into failed or rogue states with the overt aim of reforming their political systems ... have been uniformly unsuccessful." These interventions all failed because intervening is wrong. The effort to run another country is not noble and selfless; it is immoral because it is undemocratic and anti-national, and it is bound to fail. Blair damns nationalism as old-fashioned and reactionary, but what could be more reactionary than waging an illegal war of aggression then trying to rerun the Empire? Only the people of a country can rebuild it. Outside interference always worsens the problem and delays a solution.