To Live or to Perish Forever: Two Tumultuous Years in Pakistan (Hardcover)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Journalist Schmidle offers a gripping, grim account of his two years as a journalism fellow in Pakistan, where his travels took him into the most isolated and unfriendly provinces, and into the thick of interests and beliefs that impede that nation's peace and progress. The author reports on the murky relationship between the Pakistani intelligence agencies and the Taliban and how American bombings have actually helped the Taliban gain influence in the border regions. While Schmidle amplifies the danger an unstable Pakistan poses to its neighbors and the world, he also turns a constructively critical eye back to American support of mujahideen during the Afghan war against the Soviets and shows how American intervention was both a help and an exacerbation of problems between Pakistan and Afghanistan. As a witness to Musharraf's last days in power and the rage that followed Bhutto's assassination, Schmidle has, with this effort, established himself as a fresh, eloquent and informed contributor to the ongoing dialogue regarding Pakistan, terrorism and the strategic importance of engaging Central Asia in efforts toward peace and stability. (May)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist

In 2006, wanting to become a journalist but lacking any journalistic experience, Schmidle decided he would go to Iran, but political upheaval there nixed that plan, so he chose Pakistan instead. After hurriedly gathering background, he spent two years in the country, exploring its past and present, living among its people, writing about them. The book is a fascinating account of his years in Pakistan, where on any given day he could be spending time in a Taliban training camp, interviewing a Shi’a preacher, or meeting a political leader. Schmidle explores the country’s short but turbulent history (Pakistan, both the word and the country, is less than a century old), showing it to us from the perspective of someone who came to the country ill-prepared for what he would find. He eventually learns to love the country and its people, but the memory of Daniel Pearl, an American journalist who was kidnapped and murdered in Pakistan, is never too far from Schmidle’s mind, or from the reader’s. This is really the story of the two Pakistans the author discovered: one beautiful and friendly, the other frightening and deadly. --David Pitt

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 272 pages
• Publisher: Henry Holt and Co.; First Edition edition (May 12, 2009)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0805089381
• ISBN-13: 978-0805089387
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.1 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (11 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #164,807 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #26 in	Books > History > Asia > Pakistan
  #87 in	Books > Biographies & Memoirs > Travel

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

40 of 43 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A compelling account about a critical area in the world, May 19, 2009

By	Stephen C. Long (Albuquerque, NM United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Schmidle grabs your attention from the beginning and in just a few pages introduces you to the real Pakistan and the way it works. The police come to his apartment at night and tell him he must leave the country immediately. Schmidle's wife Rikki, who knows influential people in government, suggests calling a senior "patron," who takes the phone and intercedes with the police to leave them alone. The Schmidles have been in Pakistan for two years, Nicholas on a writing fellowship learning all he can about Pakistan and its people.

The next morning they call their patron again. Schmidle notes that knowing the right people in Pakistan is critical, but it's far more important not to know the wrong people, who can get you in more trouble than the right people can get you out of. Schmidle's patron tells him the matter is "way above his head" in government and they should leave Pakistan immediately. Schmidle had published an article in the New York Times Magazine exposing the new generation of Taliban leaders.

The book begins with a quotation suggesting no one can truly understand another person. Nonetheless, you believe when you have concluded this book that you truly understand the people and the situation in Pakistan better.

As I write this (May 2009), Pakistan may well become, in the next year, the most important place in the world in terms of the security of the United States and Europe. This book will give you insight into this country and these people that will be critical in understanding the news coverage.

Nicholas became fluent in Urdu, wore local mufti, and personally met with all of the key players in Pakistan, as well as many of the common people. Pakistan is not so much a country as a confederation of competing ethnic and ideological groups, each of whom seek complete hegemony.

I was first introduced to this book through an interview heard on NPR and was captivated by Schmidle and his insights. The major networks, with 30-60 second news stories, will never be capable of communicating what is really happening in Pakistan. This book is a must-read for understanding Pakistan today -- and it is compellingly interesting to read.

35 of 49 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars A Missed Opportunity, June 24, 2009

By	Saleem Ali (Vermont, USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Journalists who cover Pakistan have a certain bravado to their demeanor that is understandable at one level. Covering the tribal areas of the country is dangerous for foreigners and they certainly have to be credited for undertaking such assignments despite all the travel warnings. However, when the assignment to cover the story is somewhat undermined with a reporter's impulse to "become the story," then the reporting becomes problematic. While Mr. Schmidle's book has some good insights about the Taliban's roots in Pakistan, there is a persistent self-indulgence in the narrative. This tendency can be seen right at the start of the book which recounts the author's expulsion from Pakistan - an episode that he portrays as a mysterious plot by the intelligence services against him. With the help of the Pakistani ambassador he is able to return in 2008 to cover a more benign story on Sufi dervishes for the Smithsonian. Again he claims to be shadowed by the intelligence services and leaves the country under security provided by the US consulate in Karachi. He seems very self-absorbed about his own importance in the narrative which I found troubling and it detracts from the seriousness of the topic being covered. Mr. Schmidle makes his interaction with Pakistan "personal" but in a more self-centered and negative way. At once he says that he pities poor Pakistanis who can't leave the country like he did under US escort while he also envies other foreign reporters who were able to continue to work there. It would have been useful if Mr. Schmidle had also included some self-reflection about why he may have been singled out? One of the reasons may be that his reporting style is caustic and condescending (as exemplified by his little piece for Foreign Policy titled "An Idiot's Guide to Pakistan), and his prose is provocative without persuasion. He also has a tendency to amplify rebellion and dissent to magnify chaos that meets his story line.

The epigraph at the start of the book from Graham Greene's "The Quiet American," is also a bit enigmatic. The statement offers a critique of religious nationalism on the one hand but in correspondence with me via email Mr. Schmidle indicated that he intended the quote to show how reporters need to be embedded in the field rather than being quietly on their desks (which underscores my earlier point about bravado).

While the issue of Pakistan's complex identity should be challenged by scholars and reporters, it needs to be done with nuance, and an appreciation of how the complex identity of this country has still endured against many odds over a period of more than sixty years. In these troubled times reporters have a duty to go beyond writing entertaining stories about their travels but rather to unravel the causes of conflict with care rather than comic relief at the expense of a stressed community.

One could give the book a pass as a travelogue of an itinerant adventurer but the author's base as a researcher at a Washington think tank indicates that his aim with this book was to establish himself as a policy analyst. This book clearly does not meet those standards and media outlets should recognize the distinction between anecdotal travel writing, peppered with self-selected interviews versus carefully fact-checked research.

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars An interesting read, only on long haul flights or lengthy lay overs, September 30, 2009

By	Arshad Altaf (Karachi, Sindh Pakistan) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Mr. Schmidle has put together an interesting narrative on the expense of using his host country's hospitality for his own good and gaining immediate attention with a twist of cheap thrills, some of which are out of proportion.

The start distorts the facts. On page 18 he write, "A fight broke out after the death of Prophet Mohammad's death, in 632, over who should succeed him as leader of the Muslims." And then on the same page in the subsequent paragraph he writes, "Hussein, set out to avenge his father's death." Both these statements are thoroughly incorrect and only written to make the flow of the content better or perhaps develop the reader's interest, especially those who are not aware of Islamic history. On page 48, last paragraph, about his adventures in the North West Frontier region, in the penultimate sentence of the page he implies that everyone in Pakistan is willing to offer help to Taliban. He is generalizing a specific area's situation to the rest of the country and its people which is again to malign the mentality of moderate Pakistanis who equally dislike the Taliban and their tactics as any sane person would. Chapter 6 titled "What is Wrong with Pakistan?" is basically all about Bangladesh and one wonders why would he use this title? The author also lies and involuntarily writes it down on page 143, when a police officer asks for his introduction and also asks him whether the book is against Pakistan his reply, "Sir, Pakistan is my home. I live and love it here. Why would I write against it?" And later on the conversation casually dwells on wife and kids. What a glaring example of hypocrisy!

I wish he had mentioned somewhere in this falsely acclaimed thriller that how well foreigners are mostly treated wherever they go. Many locals go out of their way to help and treat them well. Obviously I am not referring to troubled areas where kidnapping and killings are going on. The book and the experiences are nothing more than a trivial example of double standards of a Western journalist who uses this as a jump board, that too on a country's expense.