Kenneth J. Perkins

The Maghrib in Question: Essays in History and Historiography

A wealth of historical writing dealing with the Maghrib (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya) has been published during the roughly forty years since European colonial control ended in the region. This book provides a state of the field survey of this postcolonial Maghribi historiography. The book contains thirteen essays by leading Maghribi and North American scholars. The first section surveys the Maghrib as a whole; the second focuses on individual countries of the Maghrib; and the third explores theoretical issues and case studies. Cutting across chronological categories, the book encompasses historiographical writing dealing with all eras, from the ancient Maghrib to the contemporary period.

Morocco: The Islamist Awakening and other Challenges: Howe, Marvine: New York: Oxford University Press, 428 pp., Publication Date: June 2005

ty and nationalism. Specifically, it was (and is) assumed that ethnicity determines political affiliation in Iraq. Yet, in several of the essays, this assumption is convincingly challenged. For example, one essay looks at the historical case of Mosul and the question of its inclusion or exclusion from Iraq after World War I. The author shows that economic interests, local political alliances, and social networks were all equally important considerations in the minds of the residents of Mosul when it came to deciding on national affiliation. Moreover, the drawing of artificial boundaries highlighted how embedded Iraq was in a set of regional relationships. Some of the essays make it patently clear that the various regions that ultimately became Iraq were as much, if not more, involved with the surrounding region as they were with each other. Moreover, lines on maps did not sever these intimate and historical connections, nor did they erase the fact that the future of Iraq depended as much on these continuing, albeit changed, relationships as it did on internal dynamics. Finally, this book provides a good illustration of the limitations and hubris of imperial power. Creating a nation-state called Iraq was conceived by the British government as a way to safeguard communication and transportation routes within the British imperial dominion, control access to oil resources, and maintain a presence in the Middle East. Yet, publicly, the British described their project as one of establishing a constitutional monarchy for the benefit of the peoples of Iraq. This contradiction was compounded by the fact that this centralized political system was given absolute control over oil resources. The failure to perceive the disastrous irony of this situation was due to the fact that British policy was haphazardly constructed out of various contesting parts of the government. Despite an uneven quality to the essays, The Creation of Iraq provides a good historical background not only to the establishment of that nation-state but also a relevant backdrop to today’s crisis. It is a primer that is accessible to nonspecialists, while providing enough insights to be of use for those with prior scholarly knowledge of the history of Iraq.

Algeria, 1830–2000: A Short History: Stora, Benjamin: Trans. Jane Marie Todd Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press 283 pp., Publication Date: March 2004

(2004). Algeria, 1830–2000: A Short History. History: Reviews of New Books: Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 155-155.

Deadly Embrace: Morocco and the Road to the Spanish Civil War: Balfour, Sebastian: Oxford: Oxford University Press 349 pp., Publication Date: August 2002

governed by their “king,” Lewanika, and three ol‘his sons. the last of whom, Mwanawina 111, was in ofice until 1968. Assisting the process were the British district officers, several of whom were interviewed by Herbert in their r‘elirement. These cooperating constituencies managed colonial policy in the region in the I C)SOs, going beyond the simple maintenance of law and order to emphasize the importance of economic development. Later tensions were political and emanated from the creation, in 1953. of an extra level of colonial authority in the region: the Central African Fcdcration, an unsuccessful attempt to extend indefinitely the colonial twilight in Northern and Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland. Although most of Herbert’s account is drawn from secondary sources, she has described and interpreted the motivations, successes, and failures of policymakers in

Uncivil War: Intellectuals and Identity Politics during the Decolonization of Algeria: Le Sueur, James D.: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 352 pp., Publication Date: May 2001

reign and the one with the clearest view of the reforms necessary to modernize Russia’s political and socioeconomic structures to bring thc enipirc into the new century and stave off’ the rising revolutionary movement. During his five-year tenure, Stolypin pursued five main goals: defeating those who challenged autocratic rule; strengthening the iiutocratic system itself while maintaining the Duma as a participating body in the decisionmaking process: transforming the empire into ii more modern state through agricultural and socioeconomic reforms; strengthening the wcstern borderlands by increasing the political role of ethnic Russians; and pursuing a peaceful foreign policy. In the wake of the I005 revolution, it is understandable that Stolypin was accused by his political enemies of being over ambitious. In fact, most of his reform proposals were never enacted, and those that were resulted i n slower growth than anticipated. Only because of his determination and willingness to resort to strong-arm tactics was he able to push through any of his platform. For example, the introduction of agrarian relorrns, the most notable in fifty years and perhaps the measures most associated with his name, could not have occurred without his indomitable political will. But in the end the inajor obstaclc hc had to overcome was the resistance t o change o f the tsar himself. I t bccamc evident that Stolypin’s days in office were numbered long before he was removed from the scene through assassination. Stolypin’s legacy is ambivalent. As long as he focused on suppr ing the revolutionaries, his position was rly secure. When he turned to reforming the socioeconomic-politicnl system, however, his position became precarious. Stolypin struggled with the same issues that have plagued Russia throughout the twentieth century and that have reappexed since the demise of the Soviet Union. For that reason alone, a study of the man and his alternpts to change Kussia a century ago is important today.