| List Price: | |
| Price: | $23.99 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details... |
| You Save: | $0.00(0.00%) |
| Binding: | Kindle Edition |
| EAN: | |
| Feature: | |
| Label: | Scribner |
| Publisher: | Scribner |
| Studio: | Scribner |
| Tags: |
Editorial Reviews
With all the pace and drama of a political thriller, Dirty Diplomacy is a riveting account of a young, fast-living ambassador's battle against a ruthless dictatorship in Central Asia and the craven political expediency in Washington and London that eventually cost him his job.
Craig Murray is no ordinary diplomat. He enjoys a drink or three, and if it's in the company of a pretty girl, so much the better. Murray's scant regard for the rules of the game also extends to his job. When, in the first few weeks of his posting to the little-known Central Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, he comes across photographs of a political dissident who has literally been boiled to death, he ignores diplomatic nicety and calls it for what it is: torture of the cruelest sort.
Murray soon discovers that this is no one-off incident: fierce abuse of those opposing the government is rife. It's not long before he is tearing around the country in his embassy Land Rover, shaking off Uzbek police tails and crashing through roadblocks to meet with dissidents and expose their persecutors. He even confronts the despotic president, Islom Karimov, face-to-face.
But Murray's bosses in London's Foreign Office, ever mindful of their senior partners in Washington, don't want to upset the applecart. Karimov is an ally in the newly announced Global War on Terror. His country is host to a big American air base. The last thing they need is a battling young diplomat stirring things up. In Craig Murray, that's exactly what they've got...
Related Reviews
Fascinating book and character
First a clarification: I read "Murder in Samarkand" the British version of this book. It is an excellent, engaging and fast read. Murray details in a way I have not seen before the inner workings and nitty gritty politics of diplomacy during the "war on terror". It is a tale that should be of great interest to American readers as a different perspective on a seemingly forgotten part of the war. The book is split roughly between three topic areas which are intertwined and reported on as a first person narrative. It moves quickly and jumps between what he is doing as the British ambassador in Uzbekistan especially on human rights issues, the internal politics of the British Foreign Service as they try to restrain then fire their gonzo swashbuckling ambassador, and his description of a boozy, skirt chasing and not very discrete personal life as ambassador. In the end it is a story of a man with a strong sense of justice who exhibits exceptional courage and uses his position to stand up against horrific human rights abuses. Murray clearly has a strong sense of honor and justice and the capacity for wit, style, and resourcefulness under pressure. It is also a tragicomedy of sorts as captured by the US book title and as evidenced by the fact that he lost his career but got the belly dancer.
Uzbekistan was an important sideshow in the post 9/11 "war on terror" in Afghanistan and its story has not been well covered by US media. As part of the war on the Taliban, the US sought and got cooperation from the Uzbek government to establish a major air base within spitting distance of Afghanistan and made its deal with the devil in order to do so. The Brits, or at least Tony Blair's government, had little active role in that but did support the US. Murray, as the new ambassador, quickly fell out of step with the Blair government and the book is largely focused on the efforts of the now rogue ambassador to expose and limit the ghastly human rights abuses being carried out by the Uzbek government under the guise of supporting the war on terror. The government of Uzbekistan is kleptocracy and a police state throwback to Stalinist times. Craig Murray was one of a very few (and clearly the leading) western diplomats who accurately pointed out this inconvenient fact and its consequences. The toady US ambassadors at the time failed to take a stand and actively worked to undermine Murray. The book describes events occurring before the 2005 massacre of hundreds of protesters in Andejan which finally caused the US to back away from supporting the Ubek government.
This is not a simple history or rant against a totalitarian regime. It is a first person documentary of issues that both the US and British governments were trying to sweep under the rug. Murray's decision to incorporate some mundane details of diplomatic life actually works very well by creating a context for what is going on and by making an otherwise very political topic much more than just a polemic. His single handed quixotic struggle to expose the harm caused by the US/Uzbek marriage of convenience and the clearly horrific abuses of human rights and democracy in the region would become wearisome and dry without the spice of booze, belly dancers, and clandestine meetings. The book at times seems to deal almost as much with his unambassadorial lifestyle as it does with politics but frankly it makes a much better read because of that. Murray's memory for detail is remarkable and appears to be quite accurate according to friends who attended some of the events he describes. Having worked myself in Tashkent during the time Murray is writing about I'd add that he really doesn't exaggerate in describing Uzbekistan or the difficult lives and fears of the average citizen.
Murray could well have titled the book "Fear and Loathing in Tashkent" and tried to list Hunter Thompson as a coauthor. Hollywood would (?will) certainly not need to spice this story up for the big screen. I don't know if Murray is naturally as open as he comes across in the book or whether he has painted his self portrait (as described in the US title) simply because he thought it best to put everything on the table himself rather than let his enemies snipe at him over lifestyle issues. Murray obviously did take his job, as he defined it, very seriously and in the end did sacrifice his career rather than bend on his principles. Although he addresses some of his own foibles as part and parcel of his boozy adventures, this is not an autobiography. His marriage ends halfway through the book but he never lets on about any trouble at home (though it is hard to imagine any spouse putting up with his antics). We don't hear about the break up of his family other than noting that the final straw was his obsession and open courting of a beautiful belly dancer half his age. (I told you Hollywood would not need to spice this story up...too bad Jack Nicholson is too old to play the lead).
The book is really a combination expose, polemic and titillating confession that just works as a great read. His writing is lucid, sharp and he never drones when making political points. One cannot help but admire his willingness to risk and destroy his diplomatic career in the service of a greater good. He was right and I suspect history will be kind to him. As best I can tell he is currently an itinerant writer living in London. One comes away from this book admiring him and hoping that he will bounce back into some human rights leadership role again. And, if he doesn't, I hope at least he finds peace and happiness with his belly dancer.
Uzbekistan was an important sideshow in the post 9/11 "war on terror" in Afghanistan and its story has not been well covered by US media. As part of the war on the Taliban, the US sought and got cooperation from the Uzbek government to establish a major air base within spitting distance of Afghanistan and made its deal with the devil in order to do so. The Brits, or at least Tony Blair's government, had little active role in that but did support the US. Murray, as the new ambassador, quickly fell out of step with the Blair government and the book is largely focused on the efforts of the now rogue ambassador to expose and limit the ghastly human rights abuses being carried out by the Uzbek government under the guise of supporting the war on terror. The government of Uzbekistan is kleptocracy and a police state throwback to Stalinist times. Craig Murray was one of a very few (and clearly the leading) western diplomats who accurately pointed out this inconvenient fact and its consequences. The toady US ambassadors at the time failed to take a stand and actively worked to undermine Murray. The book describes events occurring before the 2005 massacre of hundreds of protesters in Andejan which finally caused the US to back away from supporting the Ubek government.
This is not a simple history or rant against a totalitarian regime. It is a first person documentary of issues that both the US and British governments were trying to sweep under the rug. Murray's decision to incorporate some mundane details of diplomatic life actually works very well by creating a context for what is going on and by making an otherwise very political topic much more than just a polemic. His single handed quixotic struggle to expose the harm caused by the US/Uzbek marriage of convenience and the clearly horrific abuses of human rights and democracy in the region would become wearisome and dry without the spice of booze, belly dancers, and clandestine meetings. The book at times seems to deal almost as much with his unambassadorial lifestyle as it does with politics but frankly it makes a much better read because of that. Murray's memory for detail is remarkable and appears to be quite accurate according to friends who attended some of the events he describes. Having worked myself in Tashkent during the time Murray is writing about I'd add that he really doesn't exaggerate in describing Uzbekistan or the difficult lives and fears of the average citizen.
Murray could well have titled the book "Fear and Loathing in Tashkent" and tried to list Hunter Thompson as a coauthor. Hollywood would (?will) certainly not need to spice this story up for the big screen. I don't know if Murray is naturally as open as he comes across in the book or whether he has painted his self portrait (as described in the US title) simply because he thought it best to put everything on the table himself rather than let his enemies snipe at him over lifestyle issues. Murray obviously did take his job, as he defined it, very seriously and in the end did sacrifice his career rather than bend on his principles. Although he addresses some of his own foibles as part and parcel of his boozy adventures, this is not an autobiography. His marriage ends halfway through the book but he never lets on about any trouble at home (though it is hard to imagine any spouse putting up with his antics). We don't hear about the break up of his family other than noting that the final straw was his obsession and open courting of a beautiful belly dancer half his age. (I told you Hollywood would not need to spice this story up...too bad Jack Nicholson is too old to play the lead).
The book is really a combination expose, polemic and titillating confession that just works as a great read. His writing is lucid, sharp and he never drones when making political points. One cannot help but admire his willingness to risk and destroy his diplomatic career in the service of a greater good. He was right and I suspect history will be kind to him. As best I can tell he is currently an itinerant writer living in London. One comes away from this book admiring him and hoping that he will bounce back into some human rights leadership role again. And, if he doesn't, I hope at least he finds peace and happiness with his belly dancer.
an eye-opening book on the diplomatic world
I read Mr. Murray's memoir of his service in Uzbekistan with great interest because I lived in Uzbekistan at the same time he was there. Living and working in Uzbekistan meant living in a blinding fog of misinformation and government propaganda. After reading 'Dirty Diplomacy' I can understand now to what extent the Uzbek government, as well as my own American government, justified torture and corruption in the name of its 'war against terror'. Mr. Murray's book is also enlightening about the dealings of the diplomatic world. A very informative read.
Anyone Who Tells the Truth Is Bound to Be Found Out Sooner or Later
Craig Murray is a very brave man. He is also exceptionally tough, resourceful, intelligent and hardworking. He is a full tilt kind of guy personally as well as professionally and some of the content I found upsetting. But the real importance of this book is what it reveals about New Labour.
What this book reveals to me is how the culture of spin, which is annoying when you read Mandelson's latest doubletalk in the Guardian, is devastating and Kafkaesque in the field. Murray shows how Labour's truthectomy has led vast numbers of them and the civil servants they order about, to be aghast when someone demonstrates some attachment for the truth. Blair's most damaging legacy may prove to be his astonishing ability to act with 'sincerity' while being several miles down the toilet in his own lies, and the effect this brilliant propoganda has had on the culture of this country.
On a recent Youtube of evidence Murray gave to some parliamentary committee, Murray points out that Thatcher forbade any truck with evidence derived from torture. This week on Channel 4 news I have seen young fresh-faced David Miliband, Labour's hope for the future waxing indignant with Jon Snow because Snow is alleging MI6 coverups about our current duplicity in this area.
To get back to the book, it shows how the UK while ostensibly campaigning against corruption and torture, together with the US forcibly prevented Murray from pursuing human rights issues in Uzbekistan despite Murray's persistent courage and success in doing so. Murray points out that most people in the Foreign Office knew what was going on but saw no need to do anything about it.
Murray quotes Oscar Wilde: 'Anyone who tells the truth...'
PS By the way, read his other book. Its the best book on contemporary African politics I have read.
What this book reveals to me is how the culture of spin, which is annoying when you read Mandelson's latest doubletalk in the Guardian, is devastating and Kafkaesque in the field. Murray shows how Labour's truthectomy has led vast numbers of them and the civil servants they order about, to be aghast when someone demonstrates some attachment for the truth. Blair's most damaging legacy may prove to be his astonishing ability to act with 'sincerity' while being several miles down the toilet in his own lies, and the effect this brilliant propoganda has had on the culture of this country.
On a recent Youtube of evidence Murray gave to some parliamentary committee, Murray points out that Thatcher forbade any truck with evidence derived from torture. This week on Channel 4 news I have seen young fresh-faced David Miliband, Labour's hope for the future waxing indignant with Jon Snow because Snow is alleging MI6 coverups about our current duplicity in this area.
To get back to the book, it shows how the UK while ostensibly campaigning against corruption and torture, together with the US forcibly prevented Murray from pursuing human rights issues in Uzbekistan despite Murray's persistent courage and success in doing so. Murray points out that most people in the Foreign Office knew what was going on but saw no need to do anything about it.
Murray quotes Oscar Wilde: 'Anyone who tells the truth...'
PS By the way, read his other book. Its the best book on contemporary African politics I have read.
Don't Let the title Mislead You or Put You Off
Despite the juvenility of the title and Ambassador Murray's obession with what seems like most of the women he encounters, this is serious, well-documented work about serious issues between the developed and developing world. Some of the revelations will shock you (that a modern government would boil its dissidents to death) but some will fit in with what you already know about authoritarian systems (e.g. Russia, China,etc). Where it will add to your understanding is in just how far beyond decency most western powers will go and how much that is supposedly alien to their social, political, cultural and religious philosophies they will tolerate if it meets what they determine is the national interest. Some readers will sense a real struggle between fighting fire with fire (torture the torturers) and what they may feel guilty is a naive approach to dealing with depravity and inhumanity (e.g "we can't engage in inhuman behavior just because THEY do"). There is just enough travelogue to give the reader a feel for Uzbekistan without losing the primary focus: folks, here is what is REALLY happening in our world whether you care to accept it or not. I must warn you, the book will challenge any notions the reader may have that man is basically good, there are just a few bad actors out there. If you still cling to that notion after reading this and other books about authoritarian governments, I'm sorry, but you are just not paying attention. H1N1 may be widespread, but what Ambassador Murray describes in this book is the one REALLY frightening pandemic in our world.
Eye opening account how some tricky diplomacy occurs from a view from former British ambassador to Uzbekistan. The book reveals the social injustice that occurs in this part of the world. Very interesting read.
I finished reading this book just one day before my visit to Uzbekistan two weeks ago. I travelled for 10 days and interacted with a cross section of people, and I am glad that I read the book.
First of all, it is a police state. In many ways it was a much harsher experience than my visit to Leningrad in 1985. There is police everywhere, with their florescent red baton and they carry out extensive checks. Crossing from one province to another, is like going through a border crossing, which becomes painful when you are travelling through 6 provinces during a single day. The ordinary people are scared of the police. All the policemen that I saw without exception were fat!!! College students and government workers get drafted in during cotton picking. I saw some minors also working in the cotton fields. Nobody can own property. They can lease it from the state but the state can take it back whenever they want. USD can be changed into the local currency but not the other way around.(Almost impossible)Big black market flourishes. If local people wish to visit Tashkent for more than 72 hours they have to register with the police.
We as tourists had to get a detailed form filled showing expensive goods (camera, gold earnings etc) and currency being bought in, and that document is almost as valuable as your passport. You have to show it to customs when you are going through customs on your exit from the country and you can be in serious trouble if you lose that document. The other thing is you need to register with the local authorities each time you stay in a new hotel. The hotel does that for you, but you have to have those slips of paper with you all the time. Between my mother and me I had 14 such slips. Again you are in serious trouble if you lose these slips.
In the airports we were asked for passports even for internal flights. Once while crossing a province our passports were checked and once we were asked for the hotel registration slips. I was given a warning once for taking a photo of a government building in Fergana. It was not an important building (Like Home ministry / defence). However the policeman was very polite and did not ask me to delete the photo or ask for a bribe. I was scared as I was alone in the evening and the policeman could not speak English. Also in the airport a police official was very insistent that I carry a parcel for him to India and I refused, but it was scary.
However by and large there is one system for tourists and another for locals. We as tourists got waved through most of the time. However we could see the ordinary people being checked. Also long lines for gas( CNG) for the car. Very surprising since the country produces its own gas in abundance.
About the rape cases, here I got a different impression from Mr Murray. It happens rarely and normally to prostitutes. However I was there only for 10 days, and Mr Murray was there for 2 years. You would be very foolish to go to a house of ill repute as I heard of stories of tourists being exhorted for money by the prostitute / police for over 1000's of dollars.
There are so many such countries with function a police state, so I don't think that Uzbekistan is any eyesore. Democracy flourished in India because the British had elections in India several times before the partition. The people were used to the idea.
Now let me review the book. If Mr Murray was from the Human Rights watch I would have said that he would have done a fantastic job. However he was the ambassador of UK, and it was not his job to address rallies of opposition. No former colonized country likes a European (former colonizer) person to dictate anything to them. It is due to the generous nature of the Uzbek government that Mr Murray, was not asked to leave by them.
Secondly, as an ambassador, you are representing your country. You might call me conservative, but I don't think that it portrays a good impression of your country if you are in a bar during the wee hours of the morning, picking up girls. Uzbekistan despite its floating population of prostitutes is a very very conservative society. Mr Murray gives credence to people who call the west as "The decadent west. "as he is an example of that. You represent the best in your country, and you should behave accordingly.
Thirdly militancy is a problem in Uzbekistan. It is a society in transition. Most people are Muslims, but many have not read the Koran. However they ALL want to know more. Who is going to teach them and fill the gap ??? The Wahhabis from Saudi Arabia, the Taliban ??? or some moderate group. There is a certain stability in Uzbekistan and that is due the governments efforts. You need to give them credit that it is not a Muslim state but a secular state. People are happy that the country is stable.
I got different versions of the Andajain massacre when I was there and also I don't agree with Mr Murray that the government carried out the bomb attacks on its own. Its like wild stories of the US government carrying out the 9/11 attacks and putting explosives in the WTC buildings. Absolute rubbish.
Mr Murray comes as over emotional several times during the book. I think a certain bias is there because of relationship with Nadira. Probably many of the stories that she has told him he has presumed to be factual.
Interesting read all the same. Very honest but it gives a poor impression of Mr. Murray character.
Well those of you who wish to visit Uzbekistan, despite it being a police state, horrible hotels, airports where you almost have to load your luggage into the aircraft, old aircrafts which are not listed in "Our fleet " and with no emergency exit (marked In case of emergency CUT HERE) its a beautiful place. The people are so nice, and there is so much to see and learn, and the cities are clean and really beautiful.
My mother who is 70 loved it and we would go back anytime again.
First of all, it is a police state. In many ways it was a much harsher experience than my visit to Leningrad in 1985. There is police everywhere, with their florescent red baton and they carry out extensive checks. Crossing from one province to another, is like going through a border crossing, which becomes painful when you are travelling through 6 provinces during a single day. The ordinary people are scared of the police. All the policemen that I saw without exception were fat!!! College students and government workers get drafted in during cotton picking. I saw some minors also working in the cotton fields. Nobody can own property. They can lease it from the state but the state can take it back whenever they want. USD can be changed into the local currency but not the other way around.(Almost impossible)Big black market flourishes. If local people wish to visit Tashkent for more than 72 hours they have to register with the police.
We as tourists had to get a detailed form filled showing expensive goods (camera, gold earnings etc) and currency being bought in, and that document is almost as valuable as your passport. You have to show it to customs when you are going through customs on your exit from the country and you can be in serious trouble if you lose that document. The other thing is you need to register with the local authorities each time you stay in a new hotel. The hotel does that for you, but you have to have those slips of paper with you all the time. Between my mother and me I had 14 such slips. Again you are in serious trouble if you lose these slips.
In the airports we were asked for passports even for internal flights. Once while crossing a province our passports were checked and once we were asked for the hotel registration slips. I was given a warning once for taking a photo of a government building in Fergana. It was not an important building (Like Home ministry / defence). However the policeman was very polite and did not ask me to delete the photo or ask for a bribe. I was scared as I was alone in the evening and the policeman could not speak English. Also in the airport a police official was very insistent that I carry a parcel for him to India and I refused, but it was scary.
However by and large there is one system for tourists and another for locals. We as tourists got waved through most of the time. However we could see the ordinary people being checked. Also long lines for gas( CNG) for the car. Very surprising since the country produces its own gas in abundance.
About the rape cases, here I got a different impression from Mr Murray. It happens rarely and normally to prostitutes. However I was there only for 10 days, and Mr Murray was there for 2 years. You would be very foolish to go to a house of ill repute as I heard of stories of tourists being exhorted for money by the prostitute / police for over 1000's of dollars.
There are so many such countries with function a police state, so I don't think that Uzbekistan is any eyesore. Democracy flourished in India because the British had elections in India several times before the partition. The people were used to the idea.
Now let me review the book. If Mr Murray was from the Human Rights watch I would have said that he would have done a fantastic job. However he was the ambassador of UK, and it was not his job to address rallies of opposition. No former colonized country likes a European (former colonizer) person to dictate anything to them. It is due to the generous nature of the Uzbek government that Mr Murray, was not asked to leave by them.
Secondly, as an ambassador, you are representing your country. You might call me conservative, but I don't think that it portrays a good impression of your country if you are in a bar during the wee hours of the morning, picking up girls. Uzbekistan despite its floating population of prostitutes is a very very conservative society. Mr Murray gives credence to people who call the west as "The decadent west. "as he is an example of that. You represent the best in your country, and you should behave accordingly.
Thirdly militancy is a problem in Uzbekistan. It is a society in transition. Most people are Muslims, but many have not read the Koran. However they ALL want to know more. Who is going to teach them and fill the gap ??? The Wahhabis from Saudi Arabia, the Taliban ??? or some moderate group. There is a certain stability in Uzbekistan and that is due the governments efforts. You need to give them credit that it is not a Muslim state but a secular state. People are happy that the country is stable.
I got different versions of the Andajain massacre when I was there and also I don't agree with Mr Murray that the government carried out the bomb attacks on its own. Its like wild stories of the US government carrying out the 9/11 attacks and putting explosives in the WTC buildings. Absolute rubbish.
Mr Murray comes as over emotional several times during the book. I think a certain bias is there because of relationship with Nadira. Probably many of the stories that she has told him he has presumed to be factual.
Interesting read all the same. Very honest but it gives a poor impression of Mr. Murray character.
Well those of you who wish to visit Uzbekistan, despite it being a police state, horrible hotels, airports where you almost have to load your luggage into the aircraft, old aircrafts which are not listed in "Our fleet " and with no emergency exit (marked In case of emergency CUT HERE) its a beautiful place. The people are so nice, and there is so much to see and learn, and the cities are clean and really beautiful.
My mother who is 70 loved it and we would go back anytime again.
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
Create your own review
His subsequent attempt to stand up against a regime that enjoyed boiling people alive, executing real or perceived enemies of the state in extra-judicial killings, etc. subsequently got Mr. Murray into trouble with the Blair administration since he was stirring the pot with one of their erstwhile allies in the "War on Terror". However, as Mr. Murray so eloquently lays out, it is precisely this type of tyrannical regime that leads to the rise of fundamentalist, extremist groups in the first place.
Mr. Murray went to extraordinary lengths to represent British interests in Uzbekistan and traveled the whole nation to get to know it better. Along the way, he tried his best to encourage Democracy and Rule of Law, a novelty in Uzbekistan. Some of his more dangerous and coloful confrontations included standing up to various local government officials, thugs, etc. and are recounted in gripping detail. It is evident that Mr. Murray risked considerable harm to himself.
Like most other diplomats in Uzbekistan, Mr. Murray could have simply looked the other way, just as the British government instructed him to when he reported human rights abuses and other issues with the regime that the Blair and Bush administrations wanted to cozy up to. That is not to say that he is a knight in shining armor, but he seems to be pretty honest about his personal flaws.
When one of his internal Memos to the Foreign Office decrying the human rights abuses in Uzbekistan was leaked to the press, the British government took extraordinary steps to kick him out of the Foreign Service. With his departure, the British Foreign Service lost one of their more courageous and competent ambassadors, though perhaps he was a bit too honest and outspoken for the diplomatic club.
This book was originally published under the title "Murder in Samarkand" in Britain. This version names more names regarding the folk working behind the scenes to kick Mr. Murray out of the Foreign Service, thanks to US freedom of speech laws. The British paperback version has more pictures, however. It's a very interesting read, and I highly recommend it.