Take a photo of a barcode or cover
pepperthephoenix 's review for:
I struggled with this book and I really couldn’t figure out why until I read this review https://www.e-ir.info/2012/05/28/review-the-wars-of-afghanistan/
I only got to chapter 3 before deciding I didn’t want to read more. It’s a competently written book and Tomsen knows his stuff and clearly has had a lot of experience in the region but my problem with the book is that it has the tone of someone looking in and making judgments while only providing a shallow understanding and little context to the deeper issues at play within Afghanistan. For example in chapter 2, Tomsen quickly runs through the massive changes in power in Afghanistan’s neighbors and how that led to several invasions but doesn’t take the time to tell that tale from Afghanistan’s point of view. Instead we get several paragraphs of invaders but little understanding on what effect those invasions had on local politics, culture, and religion (except for a sentence or two about how Afghanistan fully embraced Islam by the 19th century).
Additionally the book perpetuates the idea that Afghanistan is intrinsically fractured, tribal, and warlike and it utilizes several stereotypes. Now this is only judging from the first three chapters, but the entire attitude of the book towards the region and Afghanistan itself was a barrier for me. I don’t think it’s done purposefully by Tomsen, but I don’t know if he interrogated his own preconceived notions enough while editing this book. A good example of what I’m talking about is the very first sentence of the very first page
“America and its allies are mired in Afghanistan’s endless war”
As if Afghanistan alone is responsible for the Taliban, the ISI’s influence in the country, and the US declaring war after 9/11. A better sentence would acknowledge that it is as much America’s war and there should have been some acknowledgement of America’s complicity in the creation of the Taliban and the current problems facing the country. The book seems to delve into some of that but there also seems to be an understanding that violence and “ruler rotation” is inherent to the region and the US’s biggest mistake was not understanding that.
Another gem is the following:
“Forsaking a sure loser for a probable winner was a key survival mechanism in Afghan tribal warfare”
As If this phenomenon happens ONLY in Afghanistan and isn’t a key survival mechanism in any kind of life-threatening context.
Or this gem
“Violence, after all, was an accepted and expected option in Afghan tribal politics when consensus was out of reach”
While I certainly agree that the US as a whole is woefully ignorant of anything outside it’s own borders (and as recent events have proven WITHIN its own borders), I have grown wary of any book that pretends that the Army just needs to read more if it wants to win more wars.
I think there is a difference in acknowledging that the US as a nation must be more aware of its role in destabilization, rise of authoritarianism, and perpetuating endless wars, and making the argument that this country in the East is strange and bizarre and has its own rules that the West must crack in order to solve the problems created by decades of a Cold War and then abandonment of properly resolving the Cold War
So overall I think this is a decently written book but employs too many stereotypes and not enough depth into the country’s internal workings for my tastes.
I only got to chapter 3 before deciding I didn’t want to read more. It’s a competently written book and Tomsen knows his stuff and clearly has had a lot of experience in the region but my problem with the book is that it has the tone of someone looking in and making judgments while only providing a shallow understanding and little context to the deeper issues at play within Afghanistan. For example in chapter 2, Tomsen quickly runs through the massive changes in power in Afghanistan’s neighbors and how that led to several invasions but doesn’t take the time to tell that tale from Afghanistan’s point of view. Instead we get several paragraphs of invaders but little understanding on what effect those invasions had on local politics, culture, and religion (except for a sentence or two about how Afghanistan fully embraced Islam by the 19th century).
Additionally the book perpetuates the idea that Afghanistan is intrinsically fractured, tribal, and warlike and it utilizes several stereotypes. Now this is only judging from the first three chapters, but the entire attitude of the book towards the region and Afghanistan itself was a barrier for me. I don’t think it’s done purposefully by Tomsen, but I don’t know if he interrogated his own preconceived notions enough while editing this book. A good example of what I’m talking about is the very first sentence of the very first page
“America and its allies are mired in Afghanistan’s endless war”
As if Afghanistan alone is responsible for the Taliban, the ISI’s influence in the country, and the US declaring war after 9/11. A better sentence would acknowledge that it is as much America’s war and there should have been some acknowledgement of America’s complicity in the creation of the Taliban and the current problems facing the country. The book seems to delve into some of that but there also seems to be an understanding that violence and “ruler rotation” is inherent to the region and the US’s biggest mistake was not understanding that.
Another gem is the following:
“Forsaking a sure loser for a probable winner was a key survival mechanism in Afghan tribal warfare”
As If this phenomenon happens ONLY in Afghanistan and isn’t a key survival mechanism in any kind of life-threatening context.
Or this gem
“Violence, after all, was an accepted and expected option in Afghan tribal politics when consensus was out of reach”
While I certainly agree that the US as a whole is woefully ignorant of anything outside it’s own borders (and as recent events have proven WITHIN its own borders), I have grown wary of any book that pretends that the Army just needs to read more if it wants to win more wars.
I think there is a difference in acknowledging that the US as a nation must be more aware of its role in destabilization, rise of authoritarianism, and perpetuating endless wars, and making the argument that this country in the East is strange and bizarre and has its own rules that the West must crack in order to solve the problems created by decades of a Cold War and then abandonment of properly resolving the Cold War
So overall I think this is a decently written book but employs too many stereotypes and not enough depth into the country’s internal workings for my tastes.