Skip to main content

Judith Miller's memoir

George H. W. Bush, President of the United States, 1989 official portrait (cropped 2).jpg

It's been four years since publication,so I'm late to the fair. I'm only now looking at Judith Miller's book, THE STORY (Simon & Schuster)-- chiefly a memoir of her years with The New York Times. That covers a lot of years. The Times hired her in 1977, and she was forced out in 2005.

In all the controversy about the supposedly hidden "weapons of mass destruction" in Saddam Hussein's hands in the run up to the Iraq War, Miller is for me the most fascinating single character. I am happy to report that the book doesn't make her seem less so.

A terminological point: she doesn't use the phrases "first Gulf War" and "second Gulf War." She refers to the war of 1990-91 as the Gulf War -- there is only one -- and the war of 2003 as the Iraq War.

Today, I'll quote a bit of what she wrote about the Gulf War, the war associated with George H.W. Bush, portrayed above. The Times' coverage was coordinated by Johnny Apple, and she wasn't part of that team. She was in Saudi Arabia, and she covered how the war affected that country and its politics. This proved interesting.

It appeared that King Fahd would be forced to make a choice: open Saudi society to western influence, or crack down on such opening as had occurred? But he chose to do both, "striking a balance between liberals and conservatives." By "liberals" here she means technocrats, the sort of person for whom openness to the west means first openness to various sorts of technical expertise, second openness to the idea of greater public participation in or at least greater transparency of government than traditional monarchies favor  and thirdly, if only as a corollary, openness to the cultural baggage that comes with it. To satisfy these young technocrats, Miller writes, "the King created a majlis al shura, or consultative council, a baby step toward greater public participation and accountability, but hugely important in a country that had tolerated neither. Many Saudis still credit the Gulf War with having introduced 'modern' politics to the Kingdom."

On the other hand, Fahd worked to placate "the politically indispensable  religious establishment, increasing the budget of their virtue police, the mutawa, who did things like hectoring women on the streets who weren't adequately covered up."

Fahd's opening to the traditionally pious also involved being at least polite to a young man named Osama bin Laden, who was wandering the corridors of power in the months before and during this war "with maps and flowcharts to demonstrate how the Kingdom could defend itself without infidel forces." This was the capacity in which Miller first encountered bin Laden. Her sources appear to have been on the westernizing side of the divide the King was straddling, and they saw bin Laden as at least mildly amusing.

"The Saudi prince who told me about young bin Laden's meetings had mocked his presentations."

In this whole passage, Miller paints an intriguing picture.

I expect to say something more about this book next week and, perhaps, again the week after that.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak