La caída de Bagdad

by Jon Lee Anderson, Jaime Zulaika (Translator)

Una obra maestra del reportaje literario sobre la experiencia de iraquíes normales que viven el epílogo del régimen de Sadam Husein. Se trata de un tema ardientemente politizado y, por ello, una espesa niebla de propaganda, tanto de los partidarios de la guerra como de sus adversarios, ha oscurecido la realidad de lo que el pueblo iraquí ha soportado y está soportando. Jon Lee Anderson crea un asombroso retrato de la humanidad en situaciones extremas, una obra de gran sagacidad, empatía y claridad moral. El autor sigue a un grupo notable y variado de iraquíes a lo largo de esta época extraordinaria: desde el miedo omnipresente bajo la bota brutal y orwelliana de Saddam y la atmósfera surrealista de Bagdad antes de la invasión, pasando por el estallido de la guerra, hasta llegar a la desastrosa y mal planificada asunción del poder y sus frutos por parte del ejército norteamericano.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, War, Middle East, Military Fiction, Journalism

504 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Jon Lee Anderson has been a staff writer for The New Yorker since 1998. He has covered numerous conflicts in the Middle East and Africa, reported frequently from Latin America and the Caribbean, and written profiles of Augusto Pinochet, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez, and Gabriel García Márquez. He is the author of several books, including The Lion’s Grave: Dispatches from Afghanistan, Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life, Guerillas: Journeys in the Insurgent World, and The Fall of Baghdad.

Reviews

[Szplug · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book in a similar vein to that of Dexter Filkins' The Forever War, in that the author, immersed within the Iraqi capital city in those incredibly tense, strained, and ominous days prior to the unleashing of Shock and Awe—and how the newspapers loved to see that phrase so crisp and stark upon the printed page—quietly, thoughtfully, and non-partisanly provides a running account of the effect of this expectant state-of-affairs, and the subsequent ruinous aftermath of billowing smoke, cratered terrain, and shattered structures, upon an interesting and complex assemblage of the inter-riverine populace. Even with the privation caused by international sanctions and the iron-rule of the Baathist despot, the citizenry of this well-functioning city went about their lives with a stoic determination that one cannot help but admire. Not all of them hated Saddam, not all those who did wished to see him replaced by an American occupying force, and, most certainly, few of those who would soon be killed anticipated their shortened existence or might have considered it a fair price in exchange for the opportunity to build a functioning democratic nation. Anderson lets their stories—and his amidst them—unfold with a natural rhythm that stands out sharply against the synthetic energy of the the violent storms building and swirling their ravenous way towards this city in the crosshairs. Haunting, dolorous, and packed with a bounty of beautiful imagery and poignant unfolding, The Fall of Baghdad has to be considered a must-read amongst the dozens of books written about this post-millennial conflagration.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great book. I went for it because I'd read his "Guerillas" and noticed the top-shelf plaudits from everywhere, bringing up the usual hyperbolic comparisons with Orwell, etc.

It's not that Anderson's book isn't excellent. It's really, REALLY great. I just get picky when people start throwing around the greats every time they like something. Probably because I have a tendency to do so, too.

Anyway- Anderson writes extremely well: lucidly and evenly paced, with that slight tinge of English restraint and understatement. The prose is open, simple, sparklingly clear without flourish or exaggeration. It melts off the page. You read it quickly, but in a really good way.

Interesting:
He describes all the people he encounters with minimal physical description (and with repeating the exact same adjectives for each person, which gets annoying) but somehow you get a fuller picture of them as people through their language and phrasing and the way they walk and what they're actually doing as Anderson follows them around. Somehow he's able to make you feel that you've met them, you care about their well-being (and when the subject is Iraq, you're going to be in for some heartache) and are happy to see them re-appear pages later. As I write this it strikes me that this is a pretty huge literary accomplishment.

Politically: it's no nonsense- he doesn't take sides (I have no idea what his opinion was or is on the war, pro or con, though he does seem vaguely left leaning) and pretty much gently critizes the extremes on either side.

What he focuses on is the story of ordinary Iraqi people living through the build up and shortly after the invasion.
This approach isn't exactly unheard of but it's so valuable because most of the books one's going to read about Iraq in America are likely to be of the "How Bush Failed", "Twilight Of The West" variety....which is all the good, but still. Anybody remember the Iraqi people? Or even try to?

And they come out as, well, fellow human beings. One of the best profiles is of one of Saddam's portrait artists, a former doctor, someone whom Saddam apparently had deep respect for who wasn't political or a sycophant. They would walk together in the palace garden and ask each other questions, as anyone would. Saddam told his goons to lay off of his family and the artist held his nose and did some tacky portraiture at Saddam's behest. He ducks the question of "how could you be friends with a dictator" because of having actually known Saddam as an actual person. He mumbles something vapid and heartwarmingly evasive about everyone having a good side and a bad side. Very interesting to have heard this story which I'm doing no justice to whatsoever. Point is, he's still a monster but someone saw him as a human kind of monster. Which is-sort of- what we read books to experience, right?

Interestingly, as much as there's the expected Saddam hatred many people do seem to have a certain dazed fondness for him. It's more of a the devil you know being better than the devil you don't. I once heard that millions came out for Stalin's funeral (which could very well have been at gunpoint or exaggerated or something) and if any part of that is true then the subsequent sad insight into human nature is displayed again here.

Ultimately, the reader gets the feeling that the Iraqi people aren't exactly sure what to make of the whole thing- which means they're like 90% of reasonable humans everywhere. It's a mess. A tragic, desperate, veritiginous situation on both the local and global scale. Moving, complex, tragic and endlessly interesting.

Anderson takes the measure of things, and we are very much in his debt. If you're looking for a good Iraq book and want to avoid any kind of polemic, just stroll around the desert for a while and watch war slowly creep in, this book will fit beautifully.

[David P · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a significant book, recommended to anyone who tries to puzzle out the second Gulf War, which as of this month--December 2004--still goes on. It suggests no clear-cut solutions, but then again, no one at the present time has any. What you get is an eyewitness account by a reporter who covered Baghdad on the eve of the war and who stayed at his post throughout the take-over and its aftermath.

It is quite a story, a view of the war from the Iraqi side. True, most people the author interacted with were a select group, educated and open to westerners. Some were government functionaries, and the reader senses how ambiguous was their support of Saddam, how much a function of the web of fear and informers on which the regime subsisted (one is tempted to compare here with Soviet Russia). Others were doctors and intellectuals, or represented special interests, or tried to stay close to the American correspondent to help ensure the survival of their own households. But one also gets glimpses of the rest of Iraq society--of the great uneducated underemployed underclass and its religious fanatics, at a time when wild rumors replaced solid information. No wonder the future of Iraq sees so dismal.

All of these stand on one side of a great divide, the less familiar side, while on the other are Americans with their arms, dollars and cell phones, a great military power which crushed Iraq into a state of disorder, then allowed the disorder to persist and worsen. It seems remarkable how many informal ties did the author forge with Iraqis of diverse backgrounds--and at the same time, it seems no less remarkable (considering the great US effort invested in the war) how few such ties seemed to have been created between Iraqis and their military conquerors.

The price for that lapse is still being paid. Few now question that a great military achievement was undone by the social upheaval that followed--by the failure to replace an old corrupt regime with, at the very least, an effective temporary order. Instead came a brief pause, during which people like Jon Lee Anderson freely roamed around the country, gathered impressions and talked to people, while the regular economy stagnated and while factions organized, gathering supporters, arms and explosives. In hindsight it seems now that even retaining the old army, police and government (except for its top leadership) may have been a better policy.

The book leads its reader through that dark confused transition, a mood which the author conveys very well. By now this deterioration is far gone, and maybe nothing can prevent a full-scale civil war, possibly followed by another oppressive dictatorship. There are lessons to be learned here, and while it may be too late to apply them to Iraq, they may still guide us in other erupting trouble spots, in the Moslem world, in Africa and Asia, maybe even parts of Latin America. Lessons about the importance of maintaining a civic framework, of the instability brought by the wide availability of weapons and explosives, especially in poor overpopulated societies, at times when marginal livelihoods are disrupted by fighting. Unfortunately, those very same ingredients already exist in too many other places!

And yet, as the book shows, the author also found in Iraq well-educated, well-motivated, creative and sincere people. It may be a sign of worse things to follow, but as the book ends, in the middle of 2004, many have given up and have fled the country.

[Pablo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Un relato interesante, pero excesivamente largo, no tanto sobre la caída de Bagdag como sugiere el título, sino sobre la experiencia y el trabajo de un periodista de un periodista de guerra. No es un libro para quien espere un relato histórico o divulgatico de aquella guerra. Lo más fascinante me ha resultado la ambigua figura de Ala Bashir, el artista y médico personal de Hussein.

[Mateo Toledo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Buen periodismo.

[Esther · Rating 3 out of 5]

this book was complicated but well written. sadly it was the most recent in our school library on Irag

[Charlene · Rating 4 out of 5]

i definitely recommend this one. another viewpoint into the "shock and awe" bs, written be somone who was there. and had been there to be able to describe the before and after.

[Gerald · Rating 5 out of 5]

Spectacular, eye-witness account of the Iraq War as told by a correspondent on the ground during the bombing and conflict. The people he meets are unforgettable.

[Hanif Abdullah Pollinaire · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was good — I read it inside 24 hours. I wanted to know less about the military history of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 from the perspective of the U.S., and more about people living in Iraq. I was about ten years old when the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, so I never really understood what it was about. But in the end, this book felt like a video-game that promised to be open-world, but ended up having clear boundaries where your character simply can't go.

The author said as much near the end of the book (paraphrasing here): 'In the following weeks [after the invasion] I had been to so many new parts of the city that I finally realized how circumscribed my view of the city was.' Before this, he was routinely assigned 'minders' by the Ministry of Information (yes) who took him around, translated for him, made sure he went where 'Saddam' wanted him to go. It felt a lot like documentary films of North Korea: limited access, Potemkin-style tours, lies, and more lies.

Nothing was said of the previous decades of Iraq's history as impacted by U.S.-led sanctions. Only but briefly, and only when the author was deriding the efforts of activists and treating them as naïve kids. Whenever he addressed activists or 'peaceniks' as he called him, there was a tone shift to — I don't know — contempt, pity, maybe even anger? However, it was safe to review the events of the early 20th century because, well, the author wasn't around then and he wasn't British. The author did take some time to tell us about the British involvement in Iraq in the early 20th century and included a rather pointless visit to some folks who claimed to have killed Gerard Leachman; and touring a museum of Iraq's (read: Saddam's) greatest artifacts.

It's easy to judge something when you know the outcome (this book was written in 2002, while I'm reading this almost 20 years later). But when visiting an area that reportedly had been polluted with depleted uranium munitions (which were used in 1991 and later in 2003-2005), the author was incredulous, and the evidence of one farmer living there growing produce was enough to dispel the entire idea that such munitions were used, or that they were harmful. This entire line of thought just reeked of New Yorker pomposity, I actually got angry at the author. We now know that depleted uranium munitions caused an excess of cancer and cancer deaths in Iraq, even the U.S. NIH reports on this. The author treated these stories as 'Saddam good, U.S. bad' sob stories, which they were not, they were real and serious.

I never got the sense that the author was in a neutral position, as some have said. He treated activists and people who traveled to Iraq with a purpose (i.e. not journalists) with a tinge of contempt and seemed emotionally/intellectually vacant when people asked him (more than once) 'How could U.S. democracy allow war if no one in the U.S. wants war?' He had no answer for this, because saying anything critical of the U.S., he seemed to think, would put him on the side of Saddam, and saying anything critical of Saddam would get him thrown out of Iraq or worse. This was an illusion the author created for himself that he tried to maintain throughout the book. The entire time I got this feeling the author was intentionally trying to take a detached — or objective — view of the events. This resulted in a stultifying, stunted view of Iraq in the years he was there.

Having spent time in Iraq, the author didn't (it seems) even try to learn Arabic, which led to several instances (which he had to record) of miscommunication with people. No surprises there. I get that it's a level 5 language for native English speakers, and I'm sure he knew a few words, but it just gave off a bad feeling, like he was a tourist and people were supposed to perform for him in English else be forgotten. He repeatedly made snide remarks about Iraqis' English when it's likely their 2nd or 3rd language...

This book shouldn't have called itself a story of the Fall of Baghdad, it didn't pull enough in to cover this event. It didn't include anything wide-ranging and informative about the overall picture of Iraq or of Baghdad as a whole. It would more aptly be called 'How I spent a few weeks in Baghdad that happened to coincide with the invasion.' Because honestly, the author made friends with some people in Saddam's administration and repeatedly visited/interviewed them and got little out of them, until a few here and there would reveal to him they thought Saddam's dictatorship was just that and they wished it to be over.

[Thaddeus Bradley · Rating 3 out of 5]

I started Fall of Baghdad immediately after finishing Steve Coll's The Achilles Trap. In Achilles Trap, Coll disentangles the relationship between Saddam Hussein and the 4 United States administrations he interacted with from his rise to power in the late 1970's through his capture by US forces in 2003.

Fall of Baghdad was a perfect follow up, because it took me from a thousand foot view down onto the streets of Baghdad leading up to and throughout the collapse of Sadddam's regime. Anderson does an excellent job of providing readers with a glimpse into the perspective of many different Iraqis living in Baghdad during the invasion.

This was a painful read. Both during Saddam's reign and throughout the invasion, those bearing the brunt of suffering were Iraqi civilians. In America we're taught that we liberated Iraq, unfortunately the truth is far messier: by removing the existing power structure, Saddam, without having a viable replacement, we sent Iraq into a rapid spiral of chaos.

[Franco Bernasconi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Me entretuve bastante con las historias de lo que ocurría en Irak en esa época y me sorprendió la valentía del autor para estar en situaciones de ese nivel de peligro. Eso sí, en algunas partes del libro me perdí un poco respecto a los personajes de los que habla, o quedé medio colgado en algunas situaciones que no se explicaron del todo bien (especialmente en el epílogo).

Creo también son interesantes los paralelos que se pueden hacer entre el Irak post llegada del ejército estadounidense y situaciones que hemos vivido en Chile: en ambos casos existió un contexto en el cual se perdieron las normas sociales y aumentó la violencia después de un período de relativo orden (claramente en grados diferentes). Finalmente, fue interesante observar los cambios de opinión y del clima político en general antes y después de la caída de Sadam Hussein.

[Leonardo Previti · Rating 4 out of 5]

Um livro de guerra recheado de situações inusitadas e, acima de tudo, personagens fascinantes: há, por exemplo, o médico pessoal de Saddam, que, por acaso, também era um dos artistas oficiais do governo, o Ministro de Relações Exteriores, um sofisticado embaixador cujo irmão foi morto pelo regime de Saddam e que, em seguida, converteu-se em um ogro militarista, dentre tantos outros. O diário de um desastre.

[Sergio Garrido García · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jon Lee Anderson nunca falla. Un libro para devorar que no pierde el interés en ninguna de las páginas. Consigue que uno no pierda el hilo y entienda lo que fue aquello desde la primera persona.

[Lucy Urwin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great start, but became a bit samey samey

[Mubeen Irfan · Rating 5 out of 5]

We have all heard of the Iraq war and how it has proved to be the mother of all modern terror in world. Their are numerous books which debate this thesis, this book isn't one of them.

Jon Lee is a veteran journalist who has done something different than debating the pros and cons of American invasion of Iraq. He has written a memoir about the city itself, the city of Baghdad, which is also the birthplace of human civilization. The writer was in and out of Baghdad before, during and after the invasion of Iraq and has written down a memoir of what the city went through as the shadows of war were looming large on the city and when those dark clouds actually descended on the city.

I am sure we all know about WMDs that weren't there. Again, the writer doesn't talk about those WMDS because that would have meant arguing the merits of this was which he is shying away from, rightly so. His time in Baghdad was with an average Baghdadi resident who hated Saddam due to torture inflicted on him or his family by Saddam and as part of his job he also sat in the drawing rooms of people close to regime, the Baath party members and ministers. He saw war from their perspective. Reading the book you feel how a superpower like USA could be so naive to think that ordinary Iraqis would stand up to welcome them for giving them freedom. It almost felt like that there was no groundwork to war.

If I were to put it in a nutshell: Iraqis wanted Saddam out but they didn't want the Americans in. Someone should have put on the drawing board how to achieve that but that's an ideal world and we aren't living in one.

This is an absolutely amazing book and one which I came across by chance. Full 5 stars.

[S. · Rating 3 out of 5]

not bad, not stunningly brilliant. a few evocative images / characterizations of Baghdad on the eve of battle. Anderson gets points for his topic / staying on through the fall of Baghdad, but he is not an absolute stunner in style or characterization.

actually the thing is, of course, in a few decades everyone will agree that the 2003 invasion was inevitabl. what they'll criticize is the west's non-involvement in the congo war , or the millions' dead "great war of africa." that is called THE IRONY OF HISTORY

(ironic because most liberals/leftists criticize bush's war; nobody is currently calling for greater intervention in africa)



big controversial prediction:

history's verdict will be that the 2003 invasion was a premonitory harbinger of the death of secularism.



mankind's faith in the secular, multicultural republic is being replaced by an increasing focus on religion and supernatural explanations for our irrational world. the highpoint of rationality was 1991.



but then... rationality was never really the point.

[Megha · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have read many books on the Iraq occupation, but one book that gave accounts without bias, reporting incidents as seen, was this book by Jon Lee Anderson. Though Anderson is an American, not once in the book his perspective seems biased.

One thing that sets the book apart from others is the fact that when the war broke, while hundreds of journalist either moved out or were forcefully pulled out of Iraq, Anderson, due to last moment complication, had to stay back in war zone. While America was bombing, he walked around the streets freely, safely, something he says was not possible post American occupation.

Another good thing about this book is, Anderson had friends and acquaintance from all sections of society, politicians, doctors, artists, rich, poor, US returned Shia politition, even Mukhabarat, the secret police of Saddam. He doesnt not crack poor jokes at the Iraqi situation, not judge the people, nor point fingers or preach, something I have seen in other books.

There is one thing that I felt could have deemed the book whole- An account from Muqtada Al Sadr/Mahdi Army. But otherwise this book is best I have read on the subject.

[Jake · Rating 4 out of 5]

I suppose the one silver lining to the inexplicable laziness of U.S. journalism in the run up to the Iraq War is that a wealth of critical and poignant reporting came out of the war itself. This book is joined by Assassin's Gate, Imperial Life in the Emerald City, The Forever War, The Good Soldiers, and Night Draws Near in the canon of American "Iraq books" that seem likely to endure. Anderson's book is unique among the group in that Anderson was living in Baghdad before, and concludes his book shortly after, the American invasion in 2003. Anderson is a courageous reporter, and the fact that I read this book ten years after it was published did not in any way diminish its portentousness.

[Aaron Shields · Rating 4 out of 5]

War is awful. All involved people are impacted drastically. Anderson's portrayal was powerful, and harrowing. I get his political bent as well, but it still got old that the majority of his portrayals of American troops involved them either being cruel, saying stupid stuff, or a combination of both. I'm sure he encountered American troops who did their job well, and weren't terrorizing Iraqi citizens while doing it. But I must have missed those depictions. Or maybe they didn't happen when he was in Iraq?

Either way, solid book. Author has stones for reporting from the front lines.

[Casae · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wanna know about the wars we're fighting, but all the info seems too messy and opaque. Try this book, has an easy nonfiction novel reading style. A quick read and you'll realize that you now know more about the Iraq War than you thought you'd ever be able to get from one book.

[Anh Ducharme]

Such a well written book. Lee intersperses compelling portraits of Iraqi citizens, Iraqi history and adeptly portrays the build up and ensuing conflict in Baghdad. It is a thoughtful and touching book. I would highly recommend it.

[Elizabeth Holland · Rating 2 out of 5]

A strong start and then it lagged, and was dogged by the author's obsession with a Saddam insider he befriended and the author's own questionable behavior as he put himself and his Iraqi fixers in precarious positions.

[Lori · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good, intimate intro into just how ugly all sides of this war have been.

[Paz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Muy buena descripción de Irak ante y durante la guerra del Golfo, pero a ratos ya daba demasiados detalles de cosas insignificantes