REDLINE: THE UNRAVELING OF SYRIA AND AMERICA’S RACE TO DESTROY THE MOST DANGEROUS ARSENAL IN THE WORLD vy Joby Warrick

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad speaks during an interview with Yahoo News in this handout picture provided by SANA on Feb. 10, 2017. — (Syrian President Bashir Assad)

In his presidential memoir A PROMISED LAND Barack Obama does not reveal much about his thinking when it came to events in Syria other than that “our options were painfully limited…and Assad could count on Russia to veto any efforts we might make to impose international sanctions through the U.N. Security Council.” This was the conundrum the US faced as it approached how to deal with the slaughter that was Syria since the Arab spring in 2011; a president who was seemingly obsessed with the fear Washington could be drawn into another war in the Middle East, and who if any of the rebel groups the US could rely on and not face blowback if Assad were overthrown. Eventually President Obama announced his “red line” warning that if Assad continued to employ nerve agents in the Syrian civil war it would be a game changer for the US. The warning that was issued on August 20, 2012 did not deter Assad and the American response was marginal at best. With twenty-twenty hindsight this was one of the worst decisions the Obama administration made in relation to the carnage that was Syria and its results have been catastrophic. In Obama’s defense had the US bombed Syria and taken out most of Assad’s chemical weapons would it have altered the war – we will never know. The decision-making surrounding American “red line” policy its impact, and the attempt to destroy Assad’s chemical “stash” throughout 2014 is the subject of an informative new book RED LINE: THE UNRAVELING OF SYRIA AND AMERICA’S RACE TO DESTROY THE MOST DANGEROUS ARSENAL IN THE WORLD by Pulitzer Prize winning Washington Post reporter Joby Warrick which takes a microscope to American decision-making and the diplomatic and military policies pursued to try and obviate the horrors that the Assad regime was perpetrating.

Warrick’s effort is more than a narrative history of events sprinkled with keen analysis of the players and policies involved, but more a true to life thriller with a cast of characters that includes world leaders, physicians, weapons hunters, spies, and a number of heroes and villains. Warrick’s account begins with the introduction of a CIA spy whose nomenclature was Ayman, “the chemist,” a Syrian scientist who informed his handlers that Damascus had constructed an efficient manufacturing center with a network of laboratories that had produced 1300-1500 tons of binary sarin, VX, and mustard gas. Warrick lays out the issue of nerve agents produced by Syria and its implication for US policy makers. The author’s approach is methodical as he examines all areas that impacted the Syrian weapons cache and what the US should and could do to mitigate the problem. Once Assad employed nerve agents dropping three canisters on the city of Sarageb held by rebels who fought for overthrowing the Syrian regime on April 29, 2013, President Obama response had done little to deter Damascus.

By 2012 Syria had become the most dangerous place on earth and after the April 2013 attack the US and the UN began to work on providing evidence for Assad’s WMD crimes. Warrick introduces a series of important characters into the narrative who are pivotal to his story. UN Team Leader Ake Sellstrom, who had experience hunting WMD in Iraq in the 1990s was sent to Syria and found evidence that military grade sarin gas had been used. The list includes Andrew C. Weber, the Pentagon’s Assistant Secretary for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs who feared that should Assad be overthrown his 1300 nerve agents could fall into the hands of the al Nusra Front and its ally al-Qaeda in Iraq (which would soon morph into the Islamic State). Timothy Blades, an ingenious individual who headed the US Civilian Chemical Biological Application and Risk Reduction team developed a process referred to as “hydrolysis” and the machinery to carry out the task of breaking down and making Assad’s nerve agents inert should the US come into possession of them. Dr. Houssam Alnahhas, also known as “Chemical Hazem,” as he prepared areas of Syria for possible chemical attacks and worked to save victims of those attacks. Samantha Powers, the US Ambassador to the United Nations who worked tirelessly to hold Assad responsible for the atrocities he ordered but she was up against Russian and Chinese vetoes, but her work cannot be ignored as she was able to create the Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) under the auspices of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical weapons headquartered in the Hague. By 2017 JIM’s work continued as it investigated another Syrian nerve strike against the town of Khan Sheikhoun. Lastly, Brett McGurk, the special presidential envoy for the global coalition to counter ISIS. McGurk was the last American official to witness the Syrian conflict in its entirety,” from the earliest pro-democracy uprisings through the rise of ISIS; from the regime’s first experimental use of sarin to the dramatic; if incomplete, mission to destroy Syria’s stockpile; from the hopeful declaration that ‘Assad must go’ to the despairing reality of an entrenched Syrian dictatorship propped up by Russian and Iranian protector’s intent on reshaping the region in their own image.” (303) There are many other important players in the narrative, many of which must be given credit for the eventual destruction of much of Assad’s nerve WMD, and those who were a hinderance and supported Assad outright.

Warrick description of a UN investigation led by Sellstrom and Scott Cairns his Canadian Deputy reflected Syrian obstructionism. However, while in Damascus their group witnessed the results of a chemical attack that killed at least 1400 in the Ghouta suburbs. Warrick’s connections and knowledge allowed him to describe in detail the components of the WMD, its impact on the civilian population, Syrian governments obfuscation, and what the world was prepared to do about what was occurring in Syria. Everyone points to the Obama administration for its almost “feckless” response to Assad’s actions. Warrick correctly points out that the Obama administration in part placed itself in a bind in its response. Obama, keen to avoid a major military commitment in the Middle East decided that he needed Congressional approval for any military response. After the events in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 there was little or no support in Congress. Further, Germany’s Angela Merkel warned Obama that the US should not act and wait until the UN investigation had run its course. In England, Prime Minister David Cameron could not convince Parliament to support military action, and lastly many feared what could happen to the UN team still in Syria. Facing congressional humiliation Obama was saved in part by the Russians who agreed to force Assad to turn over his nerve agents to UN authorities.

(UN chemical weapons experts will use a battery of analytical techniques)

Warrick clearly explains how the deal came about and its implications for the future. The Russians would go along with practically everything assuming that Blades’ “Margarita Machine” was a fantasy that could only fail thereby embarrassing the US. Warrick’s account of how the “Blades’ Machine” was built, tested, and deployed is well conceived and easy to understand. He follows the politics behind the strategy, the actual obstacles overcome particularly those set by the Syrians, and its ultimate deployment. This section of the book is perhaps the most important for the reader as Warrick builds the tension as if writing a novel that in the end would produce a mission at sea where the machines were bolted to the decks of the ship Cape Ray, deployed to the Mediterranean Sea to receive the nerve agents from the Syrian port of Latakia, run the nerve agents through Blades’ process, and then deliver the waste to cooperating countries. Warrick employs a reporter’s eye to describe the political difficulties, delays, and roadblocks on the ground as the UN Mission tried to secure the nerve agents and even after the mission was a success one wonders how it was achieved. For Blades and others, it came down to ingenuity, sheer guts, and a great deal of luck.

The entire process became a race to keep the nerve agents out of Islamist hands. This became an even greater problem when on July 14, 2014, the day the ship sailed into the Mediterranean, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi announced from Mosul the creation of the Islamic Caliphate that stretched from Raqqa its capital in Central Syria deep into Iraq. ISIS would miss out on Assad’s nerve agents, but began a developing a process of their own, particularly when Assad set the example by dropping barrel bombs loaded with chlorine gas which is less toxic than sarin on his subjects.

Samantha Power during Barack Obama’s first presidential election campaign, in 2008. Photograph: Hirolo Masuike/New York Times — (US UN Ambassador Samantha Power)

Graeme Wood is dead on when he writes in the February 19, 2021 edition of the Washington Post: “Overwhelmingly, Warrick’s emphasis is where it should be, on Assad, for whom chemical weapons were a highly developed and strategic program of terror. “Syrians died every day from bullets, blast wounds, and shrapnel injuries,” Warrick writes, “but to exterminate human beings with chemicals, as though they were fleas and cockroaches” — this was “a different order of savagery.” Lacking any legitimate military purpose, Assad’s chemical weapons existed to terrorize civilian populations by killing as indiscriminately as possible. Eliminating his arsenal was therefore a top international priority.”

It is clear today that the Syrian Civil War continues to torture millions of Syrians in Syria and in refugee camps in the Middle East and Turkey. While the US concentrated on ISIS for the next two years its policies would allow Russia and Hezbollah, Syria’s Iranian ally to route many of the rebels and keep Assad in power. According to Warrick Assad would engage in over 300 chemical attacks over the next four years. It does not take a serious imagination to believe that Assad, who turned over tons of nerve agents to the UN kept a secret stash somewhere. Once the Trump administration came aboard and abruptly ended aid to the rebels and abandoned our Kurdish allies to be destroyed by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğanit it was obvious that Putin had won and Iran’s goal of a “land bridge” across the Levant was in reach – Assad had won.

Brett H. McGurk (2).jpg — (US Special Envoy Brett McGuirk)

Warrick is to be commended for his research, clear and thoughtful writing, and describing for all to see what the truth is concerning Assad’s nerve gas war on his own people. Perhaps someday he and his enablers will be held accountable by the world community – but I doubt it.

President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, pictured in December. His office said he would isolate at home with his wife for two weeks. — (Syrian President Bashir Assad)

MURDER IN OLD BOMBAY by Nev March

March 22, 2021szfreiberger Historical Fiction Leave a comment

Bombay, India, late 19th century — (Late 19th century Bombay, India)

When a new historical mystery earns the “First Crime Novel Award” by the Mystery Writers of America it will always spark my interest. This was the case with Nev March’s first novel, MURDER IN OLD BOMBAY. Set in India in 1892 during the height of British rule, the book centers around the death of two women who at first seemed to have committed suicide, but after careful examination the cause of death does not make sense. The chief protagonist who comes to that conclusion is Captain Jim Agnihorti, a recently retired soldier whose cultural background is half English and half Indian. Agnihorti is a fascinating character as he evolves from a soldier with twelve years of experience, Dragoons, and Bombay Regiments to either a journalist or a detective. He was injured in the line of duty in Karachi in 1890 and nominated for the Victoria Cross, but since he was not a full blooded Englishman, he earned the Indian Order of Merit.

At the outset Agnihorti is lying in a hospital bed in the Poona Military facility recovering from a wound suffered in a skirmish on the wild northern frontier. While resting he read a newspaper article from which he learned about a supposed double suicide where two women fell from a university clock tower in broad daylight. For Agnihorti the case did not add up especially when three men charged with the crime were acquitted. After his release from the hospital the retired soldier contacted the husband and brother of the two victims, Mr. Adi Framji. Looking to his future Agnihorti obtained a job as a journalist at the Bombay Chronicle. But when Framji hired him to investigate the death his career as a journalist ended, and his new avocation as a detective began.

March’s first novel is more than a murder mystery but a thoughtful beautifully written examination of the Indian caste system, the intense poverty that existed in the Raj, the virulent racism and condescension by the British, and the dangers of tribal and frontier fighting in India and Afghanistan. Since Agnihorti is of mixed blood, at times he is a victim of British self-righteousness and the Indian upper caste. March provides the reader with the texture of Bombay as it appeared at the end of the 19^th century. The street urchins, the enslaving of young girls for sex, and the extreme wealth of the Franjis and other families are on full display.

Painting of Sepoy Mutiny, 1857 — (Sepoy Rebellion, 1857)

Of course, in any novel there must be a love interest and March does not let the reader down. Agnihorti falls for Diana Framji, Adi’s sister but since he is of mixed blood, and does not fit into the Indian caste system his hope for a lasting relationship seems destined to fail. Burjor, Diana’s father warns Agnihorti that he would not be an acceptable husband even though the family thinks highly of him particularly since his investigation is designed to protect the family. In addition, Burjor is trying to arrange a marriage for Diana to a person of the proper caste. There is a great deal of drama within the family with the murders, but also it appears that they are hiding something and Agnihorti has to pull information out of them very carefully.

There is also a political component to the story as two characters emerge. Rani, the Queen of Ranjpoot and her nephew Nur Suleiman especially when Suleiman is caught burglarizing the Framji mansion by Agnihorti. It is also possible that Suleiman is Akbar, one of the men acquitted of the murders. If Agnihorti identifies Prince Suleiman who was next in line to become regent of Ranjpoot the British could use it to take over the princedom along with hundreds of estates. It appears that the murders are a pawn in a political power struggle between the British Raj and the Rani for control of Ranjpoot. When Agnihorti is attacked it is evidence he is a threat to Suleiman and his family interests.

March does not shy away from exploring the poverty that is endemic to 19^th century India. An excellent example are the scenes depicted as Agnihorti disguised as a tribal fighter travels from Bombay to Lahore to investigate a possible link to Kasim who used to live and work for the Framji family and his investigation. Along the way Agnihorti buys a young girl, Chutzki out of slavery and as they travel together, they are joined by three young boys and a baby who are refugees from the tribal warfare. Agnihorti brings them to Simla where the Franjis are spending the summer. Soon the children are left behind as Agnihorti is pressured by a British commander to pursue a mission to Lahore while his investigation continues. It is an extremely dangerous undertaking but Agnihorti takes Raza, one of the boys with him who knows the frontier region along with a British escort, Subaltern Ranbir Singh.

March possesses an excellent command of the history of the British Raj in 19^th century India. Her integration of the 1857 Sepoy Rebellion against British rule is spot on as is her approach of weaving the uprising into the overall flow of the novel. As the story comes to a head the Framji family history during the rebellion becomes a bone of contention that becomes a major threat and helps explain March’s plot that she develops over hundreds of pages.**

March effectively builds tension as the novel unfolds particularly as Agnihorti departs the British base and tries to carry out his military mission and find evidence against the killer he seeks. Throughout the novel an overall concern is that Agnihorti suffers from PTSD with the attendant nightmares, flashbacks, headaches, fears because of what happened in Karachi in 1890. As he pursues his missions his guilt about the past continues to resurface and he must learn to overcome them to continue.

Agnihorti is a devotee of Sherlock Holmes and throughout the novel there are constant references to Conan Doyle’s hero’s techniques. Agnihorti himself is a fascinating character. A bastard who did not know his father, a personal bridge between British and Indian culture, and a sense of honor and pride that carries him forward. March has done a magnificent job in introducing the Captain James Agnihorti character and it is clear that she is a superb storyteller and I look forward to her next literary effort.

** For further information regarding the Sepoy Rebellion see THE GREAT MUTINY INDIA 1857 by Christopher Hibbert and THE GREAT MUTINY by Richard Collier.

THE BORGIAS: THE HIDDEN HISTORY by G. J. Meyer

March 14, 2021March 14, 2021szfreiberger Biography, European History, Rennaisance Leave a comment

One of the most fascinating families in history are the Borjas/Borgias; a family that produced a series of controversial characters from Pope Alexander VI, Cesare, and Lucrezia. The story that encompasses the Spanish family that would dominate the Italian Renaissance is said to involve barbarity, rape, misinformation, political and religious machinations, and possibly incest. The questions surrounding the family have baffled historians for centuries and it appears that much of their reputation can fall into the category of myths. Historian, G. J. Meyer has taken on the task of unraveling these myths in his family biography, THE BORGIAS: THE HIDDEN HISTORY as he argues that the Borgia problem began in the early 16^th century as Reformation propagandists depicted the papacy in less than positive terms and blamed the Borgias for every conceivable crime. Meyer’s approach is to ask, “long neglected questions” and a refusal to accept judgements that appear to have little basis in fact, and when evidence is missing not to accept the “ugliest hypothetical explanation of a puzzling event.” The author’s goal is clear, to try and “lift the Borgia story out of the realm of fable and turning it into history.”

The book is more than a family biography but more so a history of the Papacy focusing on the Holy See dating back to the 13^th century and its development into a powerful pseudo monarchy and the opposition it wrought, i.e., the Babylonian Captivity, Avignon Papacy, Conciliar Movement, through the rise of Savonarola in the late 15^th century. Meyers main protagonist is Rodrigo Borgia as he slowly rose through the Vatican bureaucracy serving four Popes and finally assuming the Holy office as Alexander VI, and later in the narrative Cesare Borgia. Meyer reviews the history of Renaissance Europe and the Papacy for the first quarter of the book pointing out the political dysfunction that existed in the Italian peninsula and its environs that existed before Alexander VI assumed the Papacy. The groundwork for the corruption and power politics of the region is carefully played out focusing on Popes Callixtus III, Pius II, Paul II, Sixtus IV Innocent VIII along with the likes of the della Rovere, Orsini and Colonna families. The use of nepotism, poisoning and other tools make the period known for its culture one of grief and blood.

Meyer does a workmanlike job of intertwining mini-history chapters in the narrative to explain certain issues and individuals in greater depth for the reader. Chapters dealing with the evolution of the role of the College of Cardinals, the creation of the Papacy, the role of condottieri-mercenaries, Cesare Borgia, and the role of Portugal in the Age of Discovery are among the best. Meyer develops a number of important themes throughout the work including the power struggle that existed between the Papacy and the College of Cardinals over limiting Papal power with the Conciliar Movement that was not that far in the rear view mirror for individuals who wanted to create their own power base. Another important theme involves what historian Garret Mattingly refers to as “Renaissance Diplomacy” as the conduct of negotiations, warfare, and settlements is discussed in depth particularly marriage diplomacy, the ever shifting alliances that seemed to change almost on a daily basis in Italy, and the results that were fostered on the battlefield. Particularly important is the role Rodrigo Borgia played in the unification of the Spanish monarchy under Ferdinand and Isabella, the French invasion of Italy led by a rather interesting character, Charles VIII in 1494, and how Florence, Venice, Milan, the Papal States, and Naples tried to repeatedly overturn any existing geo-strategic balance.

Meyer’s writing style is conducive to unraveling all of the machinations just mentioned. He possesses a firm grasp of events and personalities and his narrative and analysis to not fall into the trap of repeating myths that have stood the test of time. One of the areas that Meyer explores are the supposed children of Alexander VI, Cesare, Juan, Lucrezia, and Jorge. After delving deeply coming dynastic history, previous historical writings etc. Meyer concludes they were not Alexander’s children, but nephews and nieces. According to Meyer their father was Alexander’s own nephew Guillen Ramon Lanzol de Borja.

Meyer’s writing is effective as he focuses on the dynastic issues surrounding Naples which centers around Spanish, French, and other claims to the kingdom. Meyer spends a great deal of time describing Charles VIII invasion of Italy whose main goal was the Neapolitan throne and removing Alexander VI concludes that the French monarch’s great adventure changed nothing and everything as Naples remained in possession of the House of Aragon and under the protection of Spain. Florence remained a client of France. Alexander was not deposed, and a council of the church was not convened. Another strength of the narrative focuses on Friar Girolamo Savonarola who would eventually fail due to his narcissism and ego but until he did, he helped bring about the end of de Medici rule in Florence and was seen as a grave threat to Alexander VI.

lucrezia borgia — (Portrait of a Woman by Bartolomeo Veneto, traditionally assumed to be Lucrezia Borgia)

Meyer’s depiction of the shifting European/Italian balance of power is of major importance to the narrative as the Italian City-States, Spain, France and the Ottoman Empire all have their own agendas that affect each other either dynastically or the need for “raw power.” The sections that deal with the Turkish threat to Italy and Europe in general are key. Popes and monarchs called for crusades against Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II who threatened Venice, Milan and other areas of Italy and are treated carefully and enrich the story Meyer is trying to tell.

Meyer’s recapitulation of the succession to the French throne following the death Charles VIII is an important example that highlights dynastic dysfunction during the period. It involves the assumption of the throne by Louis XII and the marriage diplomacy involving Louis XII who needed a divorce from Alexander so he could remarry and that of Cesare Borgia who had his eyes on a French princess and a group of properties who sought to exploit. In the end Louis XII got his wish, but Cesare had to settle for a lesser woman!

It takes Meyer until the last fifty pages of the book to focus on Lucrezia Borgia and the rumors surrounding her reputation following her marriage annulment to Giovanni Sforza. The rumors about her private proclivities be they sex, power, or corruption may or not be true according to Meyer which is emblematic of his approach to the many myths he tackles. First, he states in no uncertain terms that a certain myth is false, presents arguments and material to support his view, then seems to back track and accept that it is hard to tell if the myth is false or not. A useful example involves Alexander VI’s goal of marrying Lucrezia to the son of Duke Ercoled d’este of Ferrara.

Meyer ends his narrative by describing the final down fall of Cesare Borgia. After spending chapters recounting how he became a dominant figure in Italian power politics and gaining substantial wealth and influence he recounts that the death of Alexander VI, his benefactor in 1503 signals the beginning of his downfall. Once Alexander is gone it becomes a feeding frenzy by Cesare’s enemies to take back properties and states he has stolen and acquire his wealth. He will eventually become a fugitive from his many enemies and will finally die in battle which Meyer argues was somewhat of a suicide as he realizes that he would have to spend the reminder of his life as a prisoner, particularly as Cardinal della Rovere who hated the Borgias finally assumed the Papacy as Julius II.

There is so much in the narrative in terms of dynasties and personalities the book requires a careful read and it would assist the reader if they had some knowledge of the period. But taken as a whole is a useful effort, that is surprisingly readable, particularly for those who have watched the Showtime cable series, “The Borgias” which when compared to Meyer’s depiction does not hold a great deal of historical truth. Meyer’s claims to have written the hidden history of the Borgias, but in reality, one must ask; has he changed much of what has been written before?

Portrait of Cesare Borgia “Le Duc Valentin” kept at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC, formerly thought to be after a painting by Correggio, now often attributed to Dosso Dossi, 1517-1519.:

(Cesare Borgia)

THADDEUS STEVENS: CIVIL REVOLUTIONARY, FIGHTER FOR RACIAL JUSTICE by Bruce Levine

March 8, 2021szfreiberger American Civil War, Biography Leave a comment

Today we find ourselves living in an America where the Republican Party seems to stand for voter suppression (see Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Georgia state legislature just to name a few) as they try and place as many obstacles in the path of African-Americans who would like to exercise their franchise. The strategy is clear – they fear they cannot win elections without making it difficult for minorities to vote and reminds this writer of the Jim Crow era and harkens back to the post-Civil War period, particularly after the election of 1876 as southern politicians began to reassert control of their region and try and undo the gains brought forth by the 13^th, 14^th, and 15^th amendments for African-Americans. The post-Civil War southern leaders worked to undo the life’s work of Pennsylvania Congressman Thaddeus Stevens who fought against slavery and tried to uplift the lives of those freed from bondage. Stevens, an athame to the south is the subject of a new biography by Bruce Levine, THADDEUS STEVENS: CIVIL REVOLUTIONARY, FIGHTER FOR RACIAL JUSTICE.

At a time when the Black Lives Matter movement is confronted by white supremacy and voter suppression it is important to examine the life of Thaddeus Stevens whose ideals and hopes for racial harmony and justice have still not come to fruition almost 150 years later. Many historians and films have denigrated Stevens as a vindictive persecutor of the helpless and defeated south. It took the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and a new generation of historians and film makers to reconsider Stevens’ role following the Civil War and Reconstruction. Levine stresses Stevens’ vision for an egalitarian radical revolution following the war – confiscating the estates of large southern landholders and divide them among former slaves. Further he would come to despise President Andrew Johnson who tried to assist the southern elite to recoup their political power and once again place former slaves under the thumb of the previous system where they were supplicants to a southern system that could not function without them.

Left to right: Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens; an African-American soldier in the Union Army; abolitionist Frederick Douglass

(Left to right: Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens; an African-American soldier in the Union Army; abolitionist Frederick Douglass)

Levine focuses on Stevens’ role as a public figure, his fight against chattel slavery and racial discrimination, the key part he played influencing union actions during the Civil War, and his important role in the post-war struggle to produce racial democracy for the nation at large. Stevens was raised in Vermont in a strict Baptist home though he would later have little use for religion. Despite this he was knowledgeable when it came to scripture and he viewed secession and war as “predetermined” and inevitable. This went along with his dark view of human nature and can be seen in his commentary throughout his life and the relationships he engendered.

Stevens was a firm believer in industrial development as an engine of human progress and that the government must actively and deliberately stimulate the development of capitalism, especially its commercial and manufacturing sectors as a strong supporter of Henry Clay’s American System. Second, he believed that the government must take positive steps to ensure that all had an equal chance to partake in prosperity as part of system that rested on “free labor.”

Levine’s narrative is less a biography of Stevens’ complete life, but more of an intellectual journey that reflected the evolution of his ideas and positions taken in regard to slavery, tariffs, and other issues of the day. The narrative presents Stevens’ life in the context of the world in which he thrived. Apart from Stevens’ life, Levine’s analysis mirrors many historians who have written about the history of the period. Nothing is really new, events and movements do not change, nor the actions of certain important individuals. What is important is Levine’s portrayal of Stevens’ life as he integrates and relied on his subject’s own words and attitudes in speeches before the Pennsylvania state legislature, the House of Representatives, and the memories of those who he conversed with. His intellectual evolution regarding slavery is a key component of the book as in his younger years he may have been “soft” on abolitionism. However, following Texas’ application for statehood and the results of the Mexican War Stevens realized as did others who would become Radical Republicans that if the south could not expand slavery into new territories then the erosion of its soil would foster the end of what Kenneth Stamp called the “peculiar institution.” The key was to prevent any new territories acquired from Mexico from becoming slave states which would harden people’s positions regarding slavery.

New 8x10 Photo: Last Photo of President Abraham Lincoln — (Abraham Lincoln)

Levine takes the reader through all the major events that led to the Civil War, the war itself, and the post-war period. Levine leads the reader through the rise of the Whig Party, his early participation in the antislavery movement, his part in the founding of the Republican Party, with its opposition to slavery. He also tracks the machinations of wartime rivalries and the struggle to enact legislation after the war, in addition to the role he played in the impeachment process against Andrew Johnson. Since the book itself is not overly long I would have hoped the author would have delved more into these areas focusing on analysis of great events as he perceived them, particularly Stevens’ relationship with President James Buchanan. Once the war broke out Levine is correct that Stevens did not see the war as a short one, but a bloody one that would drag on for years. For Stevens success in war also included a frontal attack on slavery and a major alteration of southern society and economy. He was the first to favor the confiscation of slaves, demanded legal freedom for those confiscated, called for a wide emancipation for all slaves living in the rebellious states, and the abolition of slavery throughout the United States. This would mean a radical transformation of southern society, in effect, as Eric Foner states, a second American Revolution.

According to Levine Stevens success was based on his iron will, great courage both moral and physical, his refusal to bend to the opposition even in the face of physical threats, his mastery of the parliamentary system, his shrewdness, quick wit, and sharp tongue. Stevens was a believer in the ideas put forth in the Declaration of Independence and despite what the founders wrote into the Constitution regarding slavery he was adamant in his support of the document. He shaped the 14^th amendment as his life ended which provided due process and equal protection under the law for all. It is a shame that the legislative victories he achieved would quickly fall by the wayside following his death.

Historian Fergus M. Bordewich argues that Levine has written a concise and powerful biography of a man the author truly admires as Stevens sought to create an America free of prejudice, which was based on merit in which blacks and whites together would be freed of oppression, inequality, and degradation. Stevens’ reputation has improved since the 1960s and reflects that even John F. Kennedy’s praise for Andrew Johnson and his description of Stevens as “the crippled fanatical personification of the extremes of the Radical Republican Movement” in his book co-authored with Theodore Sorenson, PROFILES IN COURAGE was totally wrong. Stevens pushed for Reconstruction as hard as he could and if others had not grown tired of it and reverted to previous attitudes perhaps, we would not suffer from the racial bifurcation that infects American society today.

Thaddeus Stevens (April 4, 1792 - August 11, 1868) — (Thaddeus Stevens April 4, 1792 – August 11, 1868)

GERMANIA by Harald Gilbers

March 3, 2021March 3, 2021szfreiberger Mystery/Thrillers, Nazi Germany Leave a comment

With the untimely passing of Philip Kerr that ended his wonderful Bernie Gunther series I have been searching for a replacement that deals with police investigations within Nazi Germany apart from a total focus on the Holocaust. I have explored Volker Kutscher’s Gereon Rath mysteries whose focus is at the end of the Weimar era as the Nazis are about to come to power. The series is very satisfying as is Harald Gilbers novel, GERMANIA, the first to be translated from the German with two to follow. Gilbers’ protagonist is a Jewish investigator named Richard Oppenheimer who had been fired long before the case that the author introduces. The book was first published in Germany in 2013 and received the Friedrich Glausner Prize for best crime fiction debut.

The novel begins in bombed out Berlin in May 1944 where people gear up on a nightly basis for allied bombing. Oppenheimer and his wife Lisa, an Aryan are huddled together in the Jewish house where they live with other families in very crowded conditions. One evening the SS shows up at the house and they transport Oppenheimer to a murder scene. Since he has been let go as a detective years before Oppenheimer is at a loss as to why the SS is interested in his opinion. The employment of Oppenheimer is the brainchild of Hauptsturmfuhrer Volger of the SS who believes that Oppenheimer’s past experience with a serial killer would be valuable with his investigation. As Oppenheimer becomes involved in the case it seems that the murder of Inge Friedrichsen is only the first as two other women, Julie Dufour and Christina Gerdeler have also been victims within the last year.

The Lebensborn program was created by the SS in late 1935 in order to promote the growth of Germany’s healthy “Aryan” population. The term Lebensborn itself means “Fount of Life.” The program was designed to be the wellspring of future generations descended from those whom Nazi authorities deemed “racially valuable.” It originally focused on encouraging SS men to have large families and discouraging unmarried, pregnant “Aryan” women from seeking illegal abortions.

Front cover of a Lebensborn program brochure — (the symbol of the Nazi Lebensborn program)

Gilbers does an excellent job creating the ambiance of Berlin in May 1944 as the Nazi capital has become an obstacle course ridden with rubble from allied bombing. Gilbers’ command of the history of the period is quite extensive as Albert Speer and Hitler’s grand architectural plans for the new city of Germania (to replace Berlin) are neatly integrated into the story. Gilbers development of the Hildegard von Strachwitz’s character (Hilde) brings forth Kristallnacht as she begins her close friendship with Oppenheimer as she rescued him from an SA mob during the evening’s destruction. Hilde, a rabid anti-Nazi and physician has done a great deal of work in psychiatry and become Oppenheimer’s alter ego as he tries to solve the murders.

Gilbers’ dive into Nazi history focuses on the distrust and deadly competition within the SS as Volger and Oppenheimer deal with their investigation that could involve the Nazi Lebensborn program. Nazi racial theory called for pure blooded Germans and with the cost of Hitler’s war effort millions of German males would be needed to fight for the Fuhrer, so the program was ratcheted up. It seems that Inge Friedrichsen had been a secretary at Klosterhide, one of the many Lebensborn sites the Nazis created, in addition her son Horst was part of the program.

It is clear to Volger that Oppenheimer is an excellent investigator, and he accepts the pressure from SS hire ups that he is working with a Jew. The interaction between characters is one of the strengths of the novel. The Volger-Oppenheimer dynamic is important as is the Hilde-Oppenheimer relationship. For Oppenheimer he is in a quandary. Should he assist in tracking down the killer or take advantage of an opportunity to get his wife and himself out of the country as Gilbers describes the plight of Jews in the east.

The story line unfolds very slowly, and the reader does not become aware of the murder of Dufour and Gerdeler until about a third of the book has passed. Gilbers picks up the pace about halfway through the novel as the Nazi shadow begins to dominate. To Gilbers’ credit he incorporates little known aspects of life under the Nazis as a few thousand German Jews were still living in Berlin because like Oppenheimer they were married to a Christian woman. In addition, he refers to Oppenheimer’s use of Pervitin, a stimulant to get through the day, as well as its pervasive use by German troops, particularly tankers on the eastern front.

Gilbers does a nice job allowing the reader to project into the recesses of the killer’s mind as he describes the methods the killer used to eliminate his victims, the staging of the murders, and disposing of their bodies. Certain aspects of the crime lead one to believe that the killer is a member of the SS which adds to the level of horror as Gilbers’ novel unfolds but its conclusion takes on a much different path.

For a debut novel GERMANIA is a success and it makes me want to read the next installment of Richard Oppenheimer’s adventures. Hopefully, the English translation will appear soon as he has left the reader wondering what the fate of Oppenhiemer and his wife Lisa is.

The area extending north beyond the Brandenburg Gate was later controlled by Soviets for almost 40 year. Note the portrait of Stalin in the center. — (Berlin at the end of WWII)

STRONGMEN: MUSSOLINI TO THE PRESENT by Ruth Ben-Ghiat

March 1, 2021March 1, 2021szfreiberger Biography Leave a comment

Recently I read Anne Applebaum’s book THE TWILIGHT OF DEMOCRACY which laid out where the United States stood in a world that seems to trend toward autocratic rule. To say the least her thesis which depicts how American democracy has gone so terribly wrong is scary and alarming. It appears that there is a “strongman playbook” that these autocratic wannabes follow which is the main focus of Ruth Ben-Ghiat’s new work, STRONGMEN: MUSSOLINI TO THE PRESENT published before the attack on the capitol on January 6, 2021. The books appearance is a further warning of what might occur as Donald Trump continues to stir the pot about his election loss and the dangers should he return to the White House in 2024. Ben-Ghiat has spent her career ruminating about how authoritarians manipulate the truth to gain power and her book is very troubling as she lays out the “strongmen’s playbook” highlighting strategies and techniques employed by the likes of Benito Mussolini, Muammar Gaddafi, Augusto Pinochet, Mobutu Sese Sebo, and Vladimir Putin, among others to seize power for as long as they desired.

Last November the American people overcame the misinformation, lies, and conspiracy theories put forth by Donald Trump and his followers to seemingly reject someone who consistently tried to employ the “playbook” but the failure of the Republicans to support truth allowed Trump to escape an impeachment conviction. The result is that the American people must confront and cope with a somewhat resurgent Trump who threatens to run again for president in 2024 and if it comes to pass reach down into his toolbox of the authoritarian playbook to regain the White House. This proposition may make the Republican base happy, but it presents an ongoing existential threat to the overwhelming majority of the American people.

In her important narrative Ben-Ghiat recounts the acts of bravery, solidarity and dignity that resulted in the removal of strongmen over the last century and she makes it clear by delving into numerous historical examples what signs to look for as these men try and seize power and what strategies are needed to stop them. For Ben-Ghiat the key to understanding today’s authoritarianism and its allies, we must pursue a historical perspective.

Benito Mussolini emerges as the “godfather” of authoritarianism as his approach puts forth a role model for other strongmen wannabes to emulate. From Mussolini to Putin the personalist reign is their mantra concentrating power in one individual whose own financial and political interests prevail over national ones in shaping domestic and foreign policy. Loyalty to him and his allies rather than expertise is the main qualification for serving in government, as is participation in his corruption schemes. They rule by employing patronage and fear to maintain loyalty and support. The book divides the strongmen era into three parts; 1919-1945, the fascist era; 1950-1990, the age of military coups; and 1990-present as the new authoritarian age and the author present clear examples and analysis as she examines individual strongmen, their compatibility and similarities with each other.

What is striking from the outset is the role of virility and how it is combined with other tactics. The autocrat’s display of “machismo and his kinship with other male leaders are not just bluster, but a way of exercising power at home and conducting foreign policy.” It translates into targeting women, LGBTQ+ populations, immigrants, people of color, and the press. Mussolini prepared the script used by today’s authoritarians that casts the leader as a victim of domestic enemies and an international system that has cheated his country. Mussolini partnered with conservatives in his rise to power and he created a template for Silvio Berlusconi, Donald Trump, Augusto Pinochet, and Vladimir Putin to name just a few. The key for these men according to the author is that the rhetoric of crisis and emergency they rely on, and the comfort of knowing who to blame for the nation’s troubles and how only they know how to fix them, i.e.; Trump’s commentary during the 2016 campaign, in reference to Washington’s problems is that “only I know how to fix it.”

Augusto Pinochet listens to a military band playing before his residence in Santiago on Sept. 11, 1997. — (Augusto Pinochet)

It is interesting how elites cling to authoritarians. Afraid of losing their class, gender, or racial privileges they support insurgents as they strive for power. Once ensconced in office elites strike an “authoritarian bargain” that allows them to pursue their agenda. A useful example is how Senator Mitch McConnel and his Senate minions have gone along with Trump to achieve judicial appointments, tax cuts for the wealthy, and voter suppression in order to maintain white political control. When Trump descended the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015 the Republican Party was already an extremist organization and it could use the reality TV star to achieve its goals. Trump and his minions, the likes of Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, and Roger Stone, all right wing extremists and white supremacists have been supporting strongmen all around the globe for years so the events of the last four years should not have come as a surprise.

If one looks for a Trumpian role model apart from Mussolini it is easy to apply the tactics and image creation of Silvio Berlusconi, an Italian media tycoon and politician who served as Prime Minister of Italy in four governments from 1994 to 1995, 2001 to 2006 and 2008 to 2011. Berlusconi came to power by election after the Cold War ended through voter suppression and rigging elections. He would shape public opinion through the television stations he owned. He stressed Italy’s need to return to “national greatness,” his ability to fix Italy’s problems, particularly those caused by the left, and flaunt the image of virility as he worked to keep out foreigners and immigrants. He even had parliament pass laws to protect him from prosecution. Immigrants were his favorite target as he practiced his xenophobic rule stressing the fear of white replacement and the low Italian birthrate, all echoing Mussolini, and a template for Donald Trump. It is no accident that Berlusconi developed a strong relationship with Vladimir Putin and Ben-Ghiat’s observations about the two men and the “bromance” appear to be dead on.

gaddafi jacob zuma — (Muammar Gaddafi attends the inauguration ceremony of Jacob Zuma on May 9, 2009 in Pretoria, South Africa)

The theme of national greatness permeates the rhetoric of strongmen. Francisco Franco recalled the glories of the Spanish Empire; Mussolini longed for Italia Irredenta and the Roman Empire; for Putin it is Imperial Russia and the Soviet Empire; and for Racip Tayyip Erdogan it is the Ottoman Empire and ethnically cleansing the Kurds in Syria. These rulers’ obsessions have turned into policy i.e., Gaddafi cleansed Libya of Italians, Hitler cleansed Germany of Jews, Putin pursues Eurasian domination and reshaping Russian culture partnering with the Russian Orthodox Church. Trump wanted to build his border wall to keep out immigrants with detention camps, family separation, and politically has the support of white evangelicals. Further the Trump administration worked to undo decades of advances for women, people of color, and LGBTQ+ communities. He was obsessed with nostalgia for a white America dominated by males, along with his crusade to nullify Barack Obama’s legacy. He redefined civil rights, traditionally linking the struggle of African Americans for legal equality, as the protection of Christian “freedom of religion and expression.” Even his Attorney-General, William Barr stated we are waging “unrelenting, never-ending fight against criminal predators in our society,” who of course are black and brown people.

While Ben-Ghiat discusses different strongmen and compares them with Trump she tends to lump many of them together without creating a conceptual framework to work with. I agree with Francis Fukuyama’s review in the New York Times, November 17, 2020, “Authoritarians From Mussolini to Trump” when he writes, [she] gives us “very little insight into Donald Trump beyond what is already widely known. What we get instead is an endless series of historical anecdotes about a heterogeneous collection of bad leaders ranging from democratically elected nationalists like Modi to genocidal fanatics like Hitler. What sense does it make to put Silvio Berlusconi in the same category as Muammar Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein? Berlusconi may have been sleazy, manipulative and corrupt, but he didn’t murder political opponents or support terrorism abroad, and he stepped down after losing an election. Ben-Ghiat notes that many strongmen came to power in the 1960s and ’70s through military coups, but that today they are much more likely to be elected. Wouldn’t it be nice to know why coups have largely vanished?

Fukuyama further argues accurately that Trump really does deserve more careful comparison with other leaders. There are indeed certain parallels between him and contemporary populists like Hungary’s Orban, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Poland’s Jaroslaw Kaczynski, insofar as they all rely on a similar rural social base for their support. On the other hand, there are unexplained differences: Orban, Duterte and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, for example, used the Covid pandemic to vastly expand executive authority, while Trump did the opposite, abdicating responsibility and shifting authority to the governors. Most strongmen are ruthlessly efficient and Machiavellian; Trump demonstrated incredible incompetence in failing to build his border wall, repeal Obamacare or expand his voter base. And, of course, he failed to win re-election to a second term. Revelations in The New York Times of Trump’s tax returns suggest he ran for president not out of a mad desire for power, but simply to avoid bankruptcy in his failed hotel business. And yet, despite myriad revelations, he exerted a magnetic pull on his core followers. Why? Perhaps it might be more useful to understand the ways that Trump is sui generis, and how he could set a pattern for strongmen of the future, rather than reprising familiar precedents from the past.”

Russia's President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with his Kazakh counterpart Nursultan Nazarbayev at Bocharov Ruchei residence. — (Vladimir Putin)

This is not, however, merely another addition to the annals of Trumpology. Beginning with the rise of Mussolini and concluding with the present era, Ben-Ghiat attempts to portray the ways democracies die in the arms of authoritarians, and the common traits that enable these downfalls. This is, no doubt, an admirable goal, and the author finds many points of authentic insight into the characters of strongmen and their followers along the way. Her prose manages the difficult maneuver of being both rigorously sourced and quite readable, with luminous, hard-won conclusions studding the text. In describing the torturers and flunkies who surround strongmen, she writes, “The special psychological climate that strongmen create among their people — the thrill of transgression mixed with the comfort of submitting to his power — endows life with energy, purpose, and drama.” It’s an observation that distills so much of the public life of the United States over the past half-decade — and resounds throughout an increasingly antidemocratic world.”

Talia Lavin writing in the Washington Post, December 24, 2020, “Corruption, Violence and Toxic Masculinity: What strongmen like Trump have in Common” is less critical than Fukuyama as she states that Ben-Ghiat “makes a convincing argument for including Trump in these less-than-august ranks, most of all when laying out the specifics of his corruption. For the reader inured by the drip-drip-drip of stories of brazen corruption over the course of years, it is bracing to see a half-decade’s worth of reporting so carefully distilled and to recall that it is in fact aberrant to see a son-in-law enriching himself at taxpayer expense, or to watch the Trump Organization’s coffers fill, golf outing by golf outing, with the aid of the Secret Service. As Ben-Ghiat shows, such self-enrichment is more in line with a Gaddafi or a Mussolini than a transparent or accountable democratic leader. Trump’s violence, too, is laid out chillingly: “In the tradition of the fascists, Trump uses his rallies to train his followers to see violence in a positive light,” she writes of his frequent exhortations to violence and demonization of immigrants at these spectacles.

Ben-Ghiat offers a series of chapters outlining how strongmen attain and retain power. Chapters on the use of various forms of violence, including intimidation and assassination; propaganda; corruption; virility emphasizing sexual enslavement, lies and misinformation; torture, and raping their countries natural resources and wealth are disconcerting and at times horrifying. Ben-Ghiat creates a portrait of depravity that has gained the support of millions worldwide in part because of fear or accepting a belief system that abhors fact and relies on misinformation and outright lies offered by authoritarians. These techniques are used across the board whether we are speaking of demented individuals or sociopaths who have altered the course of history. As an American it is very troubling to realize how the former president fit the pattern set by the Pinochet’s, Putin’s, and numerous others as he rose to power through denigration and rejecting truth.

In the end Ben-Ghiat’s book is a worthy contributor to the works of Masha Gessen, Timothy Snyder, Steven Levitsky, Daniel Zimblat, and Jason Stanley who warned us about Trump’s propensity toward authoritarianism and we can only hope that out of office he will not continue to foment the trends and beliefs in American politics that have burgeoned over the last decade, though that hope is not necessarily a realistic assumption.