The Korean War - Max Hastings - book review

"The Korean War", written by Max Hastings, was originally published in 1987.  Having read this book about four years ago, I recently went back to it.

I won't fall into the trap of describing it as "the forgotten war".  That said, if you ask people, even those who consider themselves reasonably well informed, the finer details and the precise chronology might be somewhat hazy.

This is just the sort of history book which I relish.  It feels comprehensive and authoritative, but does not outstay its welcome and, whilst satisfying curiosity, induces a thirst for more knowledge on a range of topics.

There is a good outlining of the background to the conflict. The failings of the South Korean government, the shaky unity in the south, the ill-preparedness of the US and its allies. Throughout the work a picture is created of post-war exhaustion, and of the world adjusting to new circumstances and new alliances. It may surprise some people how stretched the military resources of the US were, early in the war at least. Everybody's inventory was depleted, and forces had to be scraped together and improvised in a short timescale.

The unflattering portrayal of the South Korean regime of that period is a reminder of how many times the West has found it necessary to prop up distasteful administrations in pursuing what it perceives to be noble ends. Hastings does assert that the nature of the North Korean regime justified Western intervention, though.

"The Korean War" is written in a lively  but forthright style. Whether the reader agrees with the author's opinions or not, his arguments are generally well reasoned and supported by evidence. A strength of Max Hastings is his knowledge in both political and military spheres. This gives the book some real depth and authority, and his views and interpretations carry some weight.

As the story unfolds, numerous "case studies" are given, detailing the experiences and recollections of servicemen and civilians. These passages serve as a window on how things were on the ground, as well as hinting at some of the prevailing social and political attitudes in the early Fifties. This "personal" dimension assists in enhancing understanding, as well as instilling some variety, when set against the analysis of grand strategy, Cold War politics and military tactics.

A recurring theme here is the lack of knowledge and reliable intelligence possessed by the West about North Korean intentions, and of attitudes in Moscow and Peking. Also, the differing interpretations between the Americans and the British about the extent of Soviet involvement or control are illuminating, and perhaps reflect the contrast in intensity between the anti-Communist crusades on the two sides of the Atlantic.

This work contains some pretty hard-hitting stuff about the unrest among commanders, and the tensions and military "culture clashes" between the UN countries. The role of Douglas MacArthur is naturally a major topic, especially in the first half of the book. The author spends considerable space explaining why and how the mercurial general made his position untenable.

Whole chapters are devoted to the role of air-power in the war, and to the question of prisoners-of-war. The section which deals with the POW camps on both sides is very powerful and illuminating, and in places disturbing.

I must admit that I found the political and "social" questions more interesting than the discussions of military intricacies. I see this as a tribute to the quality of the book, and a barometer of my own attitudes...

Hastings's summing-up at the end of the book is well-argued, based as it is on an assessment of the geo-political fall-out and the reflections of those who were involved. I was also impressed by the author's capacity to blend a humane approach with a cool appraisal of political realities. It seems that military and political lessons were not learned as fully as they should have been.

The Rising Sun - John Toland

For me, the Pacific theatre of World War Two holds a special fascination. Not only because of  certain peculiar strategic issues, but also because of the perceived cultural factors which contributed to the outbreak of hostilities and to how the campaign was conducted.

 

The period, and the Japanese empire of that time in general, are comprehensively chronicled in John Toland's epic "The Rising Sun". Here the story is told primarily, but not exclusively, from the Japanese perspective. For some unfathomable reason, I had imagined that this book commenced with the Pearl Harbour episode, but in fact the opening chapters are an illuminating and gripping look at the factors which triggered the conflicts in Asia and the Pacific, and the rebellion (s) by Army officers. 

 

People often assume that the Japanese conquests were motivated solely by blind nationalism and rapacious economic greed, but these pages stress that, at least in the beginning, the position was more complex. Japan suffered grievously in the wake of the Great Depression in the early 1930s, and there was also revulsion about political corruption. It is often forgotten that some in the military and elsewhere saw Manchuria as a "new Jerusalem", where socialist ideas could be implemented, and then possibly transplanted to the homeland itself.

 

The book also amply illustrates how Japan's clock was set ticking once the oil embargo was imposed in the summer of 1941, and how the mixed messages emanating from both sides helped to breed mistrust. Were Japanese officials simply trapped by encroaching economic woes and also by fear of a revolt by sections of the Army, and did the Americans do all that they could have done?

 

There is an extended description of Pearl Harbour, largely from the point of view of individuals. The unpreparedness of the Allies in the face of the Japanese onslaught is sobering to be reminded of. The horrors of the Philippines campaign are afforded stark attention, with unflinching detail of the hardships inflicted on Allied troops, and the agonizing over the decision to surrender. The author does mention that some Japanese officers repudiated the harsh methods employed by their colleagues.

 

The sections dealing with the Battle of Midway really bring across what a psychological turning point this event was, because of the dent which was delivered to Japanese confidence, and the knowledge that the material advantage of the US and its allies was now likely to prove decisive.  The harsh reality was that perceived spiritual virtues would largely be powerless to sway things.

 

Throughout "The Rising Sun", Toland looks at the broader question of Asian self-determination, and Japan's efforts to harness these energies.  The condescending attitude of many in the West to the Asian peoples is also clear, and one is left wondering whether the Japanese might have had more success if they had adopted a different attitude to the populace in the territories which they occupied. As with the proclaimed socialistic sentiment, it is a moot point whether the rhetoric about fighting colonialism was a ploy to seduce and entice the people of Asia. Perhaps some were more sincere than others in adhering to these views.

 

In addition to the documenting of the military events, and the first-hand accounts, there is some fascinating coverage of the big wartime conferences attended by the major leaders, and some amusing anecdotes concerning the dialogue between Stalin and Churchill in particular.

 

The thing which never ceases to amaze, and depress, me when reading military histories is the petty wrangling between commanders, and the egotism on show. It seems absurd and bizarre that professional self-interest and vanity were allowed to interfere with the overriding objectives, but that is human nature, I guess. Perhaps such things are less easy to understand from the vantage point of seven decades later. How many lives were lost because of compromise decisions, effected to smooth over ruffled feathers?

 

It was interesting to read, towards the end of the story, examples of Japanese soldiers questioning the ethos which guided the nation and its military, and the self-sacrifice which was expected. This belies the conventional "wisdom", and is in keeping with the tendency of this book to pose some awkward questions about both sides who were engaged in the struggle.

 

Needless to say, the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are given due prominence. The stories from the cities are harrowing, and should trouble the conscience of anyone who blithely and complacently states unquestioningly that the attacks were necessary or unavoidable.

 

I must admit that reading this book again has affected me quite deeply, in its portrayal of the futility and cruelty of war, and the intransigence and callousness of  some of those who wield power.  A thought-provoking and rewarding read.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alexander The Great - Robin Lane Fox - book review

Until comparatively recently, Alexander The Great was a bit of an enigma for me. Yes, from early childhood the name had been familiar to me, but this did not persuade me to conduct any great research into who he really was, and how he acquired his legendary status. Until recently, that is....

Robin Lane Fox's book is less a biography than a quest to strip away some of the layers of myth and distortion which have amassed over the centuries, as a consequence of the limited first-hand evidence, and the unreliability and questionable motives of some of the most prominent sources.

The period immediately before and after Alexander's accession to the throne is one of the more intriguing sections, with a cogent outlining of the political and social landscape which he grew up in, and the legacy bestowed by his father.

The author frankly points out the scarcity of  information concerning Alexander's childhood, and eschewing idle speculation, draws together strands from what is known about the region in that period, to offer theories about how he might have developed. The tutelage by Aristotle is naturally looked at, but Lane Fox is careful not to over-play the influence which the great thinker might have exerted.

The role of superstition, religion and myth cannot be ignored in a book about Alexander The Great, or about ancient/classical times, but this telling does not become weighed down by such considerations. The importance of Homeric legend is clear, although it is mentioned less as the story proceeds.

Because of the often dubious nature of the historical "records", much of this tome is taken up in weighing up the bewildering number of interpretations placed on pivotal episodes in Alexander's life. The author's knowledge and erudition come into play, as does an ability to see the "big picture" and to place contentious events into a wider context. These arguments are put forward clearly and plausibly, when one considers the complexity of the subject matter.

I think there is a tendency to portray Alexander as some kind of "superman", but Lane Fox rationalises things by offering earthly explanations for his qualities and prowess, citing factors such as his inheritance, his upbringing, his environment and his intellectual and military nurturing, as well as his innate strengths and foibles. It could be argued that he built on very solid foundations, and reaped the benefits of other trends which had little to do with him directly. Another strength of this book is that it does not attribute every change or upheaval to the foresight, will or "genius" of Alexander. It acknowledges that there was a rich and formidable cast of characters, many of whom were significant players in the drama which unfolded...

The passages which deal with Alexander's pursuit of diplomacy and geopolitical planning are excellent, and I found them more engaging than any descriptions of battlefield derring-do. Not everything was accomplished via "heroic" deeds. Much was relatively mundane, informed with a deal of pragmatism or common sense. To understand these parts of the story, it is necessary to see through the morass of propaganda issued by apologists and detractors. This is all part of the fun, though.

The book comes into its own for me when it deals with the period after Alexander had achieved his initial objectives, by way of "revenge" against the Persians. He had to adjust his tactics, vision and aims, and even he was occasionally afflicted by indecision. Significantly, Lane Fox does not neglect what was still happening in Macedonia, Greece and the Aegean generally, and its ramifications for the campaign much further east.

One is also struck by the varied and unpredictable nature of the threats which Alexander and his army faced as they ventured further into the unknown.  He had to juggle and marshal his resources adroitly, and also make tough decisions about priorities. He did not always arrive at the correct balance, and the localised failures are not concealed.

The whole picture knits and blends together well. Many accounts concentrate excessively on Alexander's charisma at the expense of a broad and accurate picture of the state of play in his newly conquered domains. This version illustrates the magnitude and intricacy of the achievement, and the effort required to sustain and consolidate it.

In the end, the thing which makes this story real, and Alexander seem "human", is the sense of fallibility which intruded towards the end, even though his ambitions remained momentous. The mutinies, and the Makran desert episode, are looked at in depth.

In taking all this in, it is easy to forget the fact that Alexander was approaching what was thought, in Western eyes at least, to be the "edge of the world". The author points out what had been going on foe centuries beyond these frontiers, and this helps in adding perspective. It also tells us what Alexander and his colleagues missed out on, and helps us to conjecture how history might have worked out differently if the army had not turned back.

Naturally, there is a fairly exhaustive probe into the conspiracy theories which surrounded Alexander's demise. As with so much else concerning the man, we will never know for sure....

The book concludes with a look at Alexander's legacy, largely in terms of his enduring impact, and that of Greek culture, on the lands which were subject to conquest. Their limitations are also accepted. If anything, these final chapters left me wanting more...

This is a fine book, and it left me with a much enriched understanding of Alexander the man, and of a dramatic period in history.

History Lessons

One news item which caught my eye yesterday concerned plans to broaden the scope of the History A-level examination courses, here in the UK. It is being proposed that a greater diversity of topics will be included in the new course, being put forward by one of the exam boards, including an increased emphasis on pre-colonial events in Africa and Asia.

From my own perspective, this can only be a good thing, although I would go further and suggest that some of these additional topics should be included in the syllabus at an earlier stage of secondary education. I studied history in my early years at high school, but found the diet of medieval and Early Modern British history very stodgy and bland. This lack of sparkle and variety prompted me to discard history from the list of subjects which I engaged in at the "business end" of my time in school. Perhaps if I had been taught about Genghis Khan or the Ottoman Empire when I was thirteen or fourteen years old I might have been sufficiently enthused to maintain my interest in history as an academic pursuit.

In a wider sense, anything which encourages young people to broaden their horizons, to become more conscious and inquisitive about other cultures, and become less insular and "Anglocentric" should be welcomed.