Customer Reviews

Endgame: Solving the Iraq Crisis

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I am at pains to try and figure out which Scott Ritter book Mr. Barron actually read: the real one, or the one seen through Mr. Barron's myopic view of the world. Indeed, even a cursory examination reveals that Ritter's proposed solution to the Iraq problem is the exact opposite of what Mr. Barron contends: Ritter advocates -- in light of certain moral, political, and strategic realities -- a route of diplomatic engagement with Saddam Hussein's regime, a stance which once again has made him the target of various segments of the foreign policy elite.

As for the book itself, readers will be surprised to learn that this is not a "kiss and tell" book consumed with CIA manipulations, insider accounts of derring-do and so forth. True, a good part of that story is here -- in particular, a well-written account of a dangerous attempt to inspect Iraq's Special Security Organization. More importantly, however, Ritter provides a much needed and incisive chronicle of how Iraq really works, from tribal feuds to nearly unspeakable violence, doing so with a scholar's attention to detail and decisive moments. Agree with his conclusions or not, he paints a sophisticated picture of Iraq and how, perhaps, we might bring the country and its people back into the family of nations.

Regional experts, military professionals and even those with a passing interest in today's headlines should read this book (and believe me, you'll wind up saying, "This Marine can really write!"). Scott Ritter has once again done something that is so lacking in today's society: he has told it as he saw it.

It isn't often that we get a "I was there" book which truly focuses on what happened "there" more than on the conflicts between the author and others - if someone thinks that the press gave him or her short shrift during a war or other intense, highly publicized endeavor, a book usually results. But Scott Ritter troubles to walk us through the labyrinthine maze of Iraqi power politics, with special attention to how Saddam Hussein got to be sole ruler of Iraq, and how Saddam managed to stay astride that tiger until he lost his final war in 2003. Most of "Endgame" is an extremely erudite discussion of Saddam Hussein's rise to power up to and during the UNSCOM weapons inspections of which Ritter was a part.

And Ritter succeeds in making his case, that decision makers in Washington and New York (the UN) were simply dropping the ball, failing to act resolutely when it was needed and only applying pressure when it would have a minimal effect on Iraqi leadership.

I'm more than a little puzzled at the sniping at Ritter from other Amazon.com reviewers - certainly if Ritter was pursuing a self-serving agenda while at UNSCOM, the thing for him to do would be to not rock the Clinton administration's boat on Iraqi policy, to play the game along with everyone else in hopes of getting Richard Butler's job down the line. Simply nodding stupidly and not pushing the Iraqis into allowing real inspections would have been easier than what Ritter actually did, as would relying on inadequate intelligence instead of working out deals with the Israelis for better overheads and human source intel (one of the major criticisms leveled at Ritter was that he was too "cozy" with the Israelis and did not clear his contacts with them with Washington - here, the critics conveniently forget that Scott Ritter was NOT an American officer but an employee of the United Nations. Also, the evidence, not just in Ritter's book but in other well-researched accounts of the UNSCOM work, indicates that Ritter acted well within his duties).

Ritter, in my opinion, not only vindicated himself but in his book did so in a way that allows the reader to judge intelligently whether or not to agree with Ritter and leaves the reader much better informed about the entire issue of Iraq's arsenal of weapons of mass destruction than if the reader relied on reports from television or the popular news magazines.

I have some problems with Ritter's final chapter, specifically with the course of action he recommends that we take to deal with Saddam - but I certainly agree with him that the sanctions do nothing but starve and kill children and cement Saddam's status with his people, and should be stopped as soon as possible.

I recommend Ritter's book as essential to a complete understanding of UNSCOM - together, of course, with other readings such as Andrew and Patrick Cockburn's "From the Ashes," an unsparingly critical but intensively detailed look at Saddam's survival of what should have been an ignimonious and crushing defeat in 1991, and all that has passed since then in that part of the world.

I have lived in Iraq for ten years (1980-1990). During that period I formed some kind of an idea about Iraq. So, I found Mr. Ritter's account of Iraqi problems very realistic. Finally an American who seems to understand power structures of a non-western country.

It seems that American government is still largely guided by the racial hierarchy- thinking, which Michael Hunt argued to be U.S. foreign policy ideology. I.e. there is no point in trying to understand how savage people behave - civilized nations (i.e. anglo-saxons) should guide sub-humans.

People in Finland - where I come from - are racially more white than Americans, but for us it is a sign of intellect to understand other cultures. Perhaps our location as Russian neighbours has taught us some realism. That's why it is painful to read, for example, how American mission to Moscow intepreted Russians in the 1930's. The first American ambassador thaught that Litvinov was a bad guy, who should be removed - as if that would change something etc.

Endgame is filled with insights of Iraqi reality. Scott Ritter understands clearly how all the major problems in Iraq are not created by Saddam - i.e. border disputes with Iran and Kuwait and the kurdish question. So removing Saddam will not solve much. Saddam is defeated and humiliated many times. So it is not a sign of submission to Baghdad if Americans now take leadership position and try to control Iraq by giving them something. At least for the sake of Iraqi population and American image.

I have the feeling that Iraqis have never serously thaught of themselves as a world scale super power. Instead they have been struggling with some kinds of national trauma and pride issues. Saddam got away with nationalizing oil in the early 1970's. So taking Kuwait was seen as third phase of nationalizing "Iraq's" oil. I think Saddam's regime understands now that they were in totally different position when Americans were losing the Vietnam war. Also nationalizing raw materials within a certain country has been "more acceptable" than claiming old territories.

Scott Ritter has given very good analysis on the weapons of mass destruction issue. According to Ritter Iraq can not threaten its neighbours with her present army or use chemical weapons or she will face very bad consequences. As long as Iraq is saying that they haven't got any chemical weapons, it is senseless for the iraqis to use them against any minorities in their own country either.

Ritter has also very realistic picture as to what Americans can do. Iraqi government is experienced in crushing down revolts. The regime cannot be weakened with inspections or other means to the point that some uprising could succeed. American direct intervention might succeed according to Ritter, but is it a great cause enough to lose American lives?

So, if American government is not ready to provide leadership to the rest of the world and knock Iraqi government out, they should pay heed to what Mr. Ritter says. Otherwise the picture of America as a moral and sincere nation will shatter. Some decisions are expected after the presidential elections.

A good book for anyone interested in the subject!

Good to read now while inpsectors are packing their bags to head to Iraq yet again. One cannot dispute this author's success in at least one area: Scott Ritter has been an extremely effective lightning rod for controversy for almost as many years as he was an inspector! No matter where you are on the spectrum of opinion regarding the man himself, it is useful and enlightening to read this record of what happened while he was at UNSCOM. The writing does bog down at times as the author attempts to make the mostly tedious task of arms control inspection seem more action-packed -- for every trigger-happy Iraqi soldier with a gun in your face or fleet-footed chase through a laboratory there are pages and pages of exposition. Overall though Mr. Ritter blends the exposition to build his case well and it rings as true today as it did four years ago; international political committment to the process of inspection is the safest path to effective disarmament of Iraq. This is not a question of loyalty, patriotism,or personalities -- it is a simple commitment to what works best and costs least.

The one emotion all readers will come away from with this book is a sense of frustration. Not only because of the roadblocks and shell games that Iraq was doing but also that the U.S. was and is in the position that we have to do this monitoring in the first place. The author of this book was the lead weapons inspector for the U.S. group during the mid 90's until Iraq throw him out for spying. He divides his book into two main sections, the hinting for the weapons and what should be done moving forward.

The details of the weapons systems they were looking for and the methods the Iraqi went to in order to hind them was very interesting. There is even humor in the book when the author talks about how inept the Iraqi's were with many of the attempts to hide information. I especially liked the military commander that was told to move all the machines used in nuclear experimentation but he left all the diagrams, test plans and results and the machine operating manuals there because they only told him to move the equipment. The author even finds a few ways to detail some genocide in the book just we do not forget what Saddam uses these weapons for.

The second part of the book is the authors plan to solve this problem. I will not ruin the book for you, but it is interesting. This is a good book that is interesting to read. The author is a very confident and somewhat brash man and that comes through in the writing. He does a very good job of not bogging the reader down in too much detail about the fine points of the chemical processes or laundry lists of ingredients. The book is worth the time to read if for no other reason to prep you for what may start happening all over again.

This book reads like an intrigueing spy novel - you might want to read it solely for the entertainment value. But as a historical account, I found it indispenseable in my journey to understand the middle-east conflict, the justification for the sustained economic sanctions in Iraq during the 90's that was claimed to be responsible for so may Iraqi children's deaths, the politics and manuvering of our country and the hidden motives. What I found particularly interesting is the Ritter's paradox: How can you expect Saddam to accept inspections if the inspectors are CIA agents trying to assasintate him? Pick one: assasination or inspections, and persue it. A great read and an essential element in understanding where we are today and why.

Instead of watching the news coverage of the war that is currently going on in Iraq I have spent some of my spare time reading this excellent work by someone who deserves attention. The behind the scenes account of political intrigues in Iraq, the US, and the UN is very telling and informative and puts a lot of events into their proper perspective. After I got half way through the book I was sort of surprised that Ritter has opposed the war, but in the closing chapters he makes his case (I think too briefly) and says that too much is made of the problems around weapons inspections, and not enough is made of the great successes that have been achieved (his own book seems to also have something of this problem.) I found the accounts of Richard Butler helped a lot to resolve my impression of the man as being very oddly political in his role in the UN. I never found him to be credible and Ritter's book backs up my impression somewhat.

Anyway - if you are at all interesting into how the situation in Iraq got to where it is today I highly recommend this book.

Since the original publishing of Endgame in 1999, the world has bore witness to the second Gulf War and the subsequent incarceration of the perpetually troublemaking Saddam Hussein. No matter where you stand politically on the war in Iraq, however, the beauty surrounding Scott Ritter's memoirs of his tenure as a UN weapons inspector is that it enlightens us to the realities of dealing with both a secretive, noncooperative regime in Iraq as well as the many indecisive American presidential administrations who couldn't quite make up their minds about how to take care of Saddam.

Ritter gives us a powerful firsthand account of Iraq's frequent noncompliance with UNSCOM inspectors, recounting the frustration of dealing with a regime that played a tense game of chess with the international community --- hiding secret technology it did not wish for inspectors to uncover yet cooperating enough so that it would not be found to be in "material breach" of UN arms control regulations.

So what's the bottom line? Well, the whole world knew that Saddam and his cronies were being blatantly dishonest with UNSCOM and often did whatever they could to throw them off the trail of their weapons programs, but what motivation did they have to be transparent anyway? The US eventually made it clear that even if inspections proved that Iraq had completely abandoned its WMD program, sanctions would not be lifted until Saddam Hussein was removed from power --- an event that could only succeed with the direct military support of the United States, as we saw in Spring 2003. Indeed, American foreign policy makers spent over a decade trapped in an ineffective policy of containment that continued until the very day US troops marched on Baghdad.

Ritter's Afterword, written shortly before the commencement of the second Gulf War, leaves us with a haunting last word of caution: "The unfortunate reality is that if the United States proceeds with its invasion of Iraq, we may succeed in overthrowing Saddam Hussein while losing the war on terror. Our unilateral military action will push many moderate and intellectual Arabs and Muslims into the bin Laden camp by giving credence to the concept that the United States has in fact declared war on Islam and the Arab World." Only time will tell the veracity of that statement.

By resigning in protest and being free to accurately tell the truth, meant that an aggressive program to discredit Scott Ritter from the highest levels of the Clinton administration was a certainty. Even if he were only partially right, he should go down in history as a modern day patriot for the civilized world. Ritter saw in the UNSCOM inspection arm of the United Nations the potential for creating precedents that would guide future programs to contain the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. He states in detail how the Clinton administration subverted the inspections into a vehicle to sustain the sanctions on Iraq longer than the international community desired. This resulted in a complete collapse of the inspection program and will likely evolve into the end of sanctions on Iraq. . Ritter clarifies the reality. As deceitful as Iraq was, an endgame required that with some level of co-operation the Western world would receive benefit from true elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. If there is a good defense of the Clinton policy it would be intertwined with its stated desire to end the era of Saddam Hussein. Ritter shows how the Clinton inter circle saw sanctions as a tool to bring him down. In light of the views of the international community, this has been shown to be a dreamy eyed approach. Between the push of USA and the pull of the contrary forces of the international community, Ritter shows the Secretary General of the United Nations as little more than a cork bouncing in the waves.

In the broader picture this book should cause you to think about abusive governments. Brutal dictatorships are extremely difficult for its citizens to overthrow. (Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, Yugoslavia, China and on and on.) While knowledgeable people were fully aware that Iraq is run by gangsters in every sense of the word, he added details that we did not know. This is not propaganda, the most accurate word is gangster. Ritter’s book only adds to the overwhelming information about these thugs....

The United States boldly needs to restore bi-partisanship to international relations. Until citizens demand more depth and integrity from the media there is little hope for well conceived international relations. The book provides powerful information on why you should be concerned. The book reveals how close Iraq was to having long range nuclear missiles at the start of the Gulf war. Chemical and biological weapons were well developed. Israel was a prime target well before the Gulf war and has much to lose as the international community proceeds to give up on its past efforts to eliminate these weapons as proscribed by the surrender terms signed by Iraq. No matter what Saddam does from this point forward, history will record that he has been the greatest fool on the stage of world leaders. Iran war, Kuwait war and weapons retention—each was a bizarre act. All the time underneath his feet is vast oil wealth. With western technology as opposed to its historical dependence on backward Russian technology, the potential for even more discoveries in Iraq is provocative. It is not a fantasy to imagine the proved oil reserves could be doubled. French oil exploration assistance subsequent to the Kuwait invasion created considerable promise. At the end of the book, Ritter’s advise appears to complex and to dependent of multiple actions from various nations. His desire to get the message out on a timely basis rushed the books research and construction. History should treat him well nonetheless.

The United Nations' recent "inspection" of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program makes it painfully clear little has changed since Scott Ritter resigned from UNSCOM in 1998. The UN and the United States seem stuck in a time warp, which Ritter predicted in Endgame: Solving the Iraq Problem--Once and for All.

The weakest aspect of Endgame, ironically, is Ritter's envisioned endgame; his proposed detente seems unrealistic and contradictory. Even so the book makes for a good and relevant read. The author isn't anyone to be taken lightly on the subjects of Iraq, disarmament, Saddam Hussein, and war and peace. Given the recent demonization of Ritter because of his anti-war stance, it is good to remember this retired Marine intelligence officer almost lost his life while he served as an arms inspector (in fact, the passage where an Iraqi soldier prepares to shoot Ritter is stunning). Ritter's proposed solution to the Iraq question is flawed but this is a man of unquestioned patriotism, humanity and integrity. His opinions obviously were shaped by first-hand observations of the suffering of the Iraqi people under both Saddam and the UN sanctions. Ritter also seems to have been nauseated by several U.N. and U.S. officials, particularly former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. The author does acknowledge the heroes who managed to emerge. Among these brave souls are former United States ambassaor to the UN Bill Richardson, who recently was elected governor of New Mexico. Another admirable character is former UNSCOM head Richard Butler, who has reached completely different conclusions from Ritter about how to deal with Iraq.

Ritter provides great insight into the tribalism and rank gangsterism that propelled Saddam to power and keeps him there. He paints a damning portrait of a dictator who uses rape as a weapon of mass personal destruction. In one particularly memorable scene, an angry Saddam torches his son's garage and 12 sports cars. Iraq's concealment policy seems a logical extension of such insanity although, as Ritter notes, the inspectors mostly found incriminating documents but few prohibited weapons.

Given the fraud and deceit Ritter details it is inexplicable that the author recommends dropping economic sanctions if Saddam promises not to develop weapons of mass destruction. Further, Ritter's suggestion that Iraq be allowed to develop a peaceful nuclear program borders on the bizarre. The author never explains why a regime with a history of compulsive lying should be trusted. Yet Ritter also makes a compelling case that war will not solve anything in Iraq, and the ultimate goal there should be disarmament. Saddam truly is just one part of the Iraq problem.

A word of caution is in order to the reader: Ritter has a military man's love of acronyms and there is no glossary for quick reference to all the letters strung together. On the other hand, he predictably likes maps and these prove useful. Another strong point is that the author manages to keep his personal role proportional to what happened.

As war drums once again sound along the Potomac, this is a good book to read. Ritter's proposed solutions clearly will not work, but he explains why war won't, either.