Author: Robert J McMahon
The massive disorder and economic ruin following the Second World War inevitably predetermined the scope and intensity of the Cold War. But why did it last so long? And what impact did it have on the United States, the Soviet Union, Europe, and the Third World? Finally, how did it affect the broader history of the second half of the twentieth century--what were the human and financial costs? This Very Short Introduction provides a clear and stimulating interpretive overview of the Cold War, one that will both invite debate and encourage deeper investigation.
Table of Contents:
|List of illustrations|
|List of maps|
|1||World War II and the destruction of the old order||1|
|2||The origins of the Cold War in Europe, 1945-50||16|
|3||Towards 'Hot War' in Asia, 1945-50||35|
|4||A global Cold War, 1950-8||56|
|5||From confrontation to detente, 1958-68||78|
|6||Cold wars at home||105|
|7||The rise and fall of superpower detente, 1968-79||122|
|8||The final phase, 1980-90||143|
Interesting textbook: New Holland Professional or Down That Aisle in Style
The Challenge: Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and the Fight over Presidential Power
Author: Jonathan Mahler
An inspiring legal thriller set against the backdrop of the war on terror, The Challenge tells the inside story of a historic Supreme Court showdown. At its center are a Navy JAG and a young constitutional law professor who, in the aftermath of 9/11, find themselves defending their nation in the unlikeliest of ways: by suing the president of the United States on behalf of an accused terrorist in order to prevent the American government from breaking the law and violating the Constitution.
Jonathan Mahler traces the journey of their client, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, from the Yemeni mosque where he was first recruited for jihad in 1998, through his years working as a driver for Osama bin Laden, to his capture in Afghanistan in November 2001 and his subsequent transfer to Guantanamo Bay. It was there that Hamdan was designated by President Bush to be tried before a special military tribunal and assigned a military lawyer to represent him, a thirty-five-year-old graduate student of the Naval Academy, Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift.
No one expected Swift to mount much of a defense. Not only were the rules of the tribunals, America’s first in more than fifty years, stacked against him, his superiors at the Pentagon were pressuring him to persuade Hamdan to plead guilty. But Swift didn’t believe that the tribunals were either legal or fair, so he enlisted a young Georgetown law professor named Neal Katyal to help him sue the Bush administration over their legality. In the spring of 2006, Katyal, who had almost no trial experience,took the case to the Supreme Court and won. The landmark ruling has been called the Court’s most important decision ever on presidential power and the rule of law.
Written with the cooperation of Swift and Katyal, The Challenge follows the braided stories of Swift’s intense, precarious relationship with Hamdan and the unprecedented legal case itself. Combining rich character portraits and courtroom drama reminiscent of Jonathan Harr’s A Civil Action with sophisticated yet accessible legal analysis, The Challenge is a riveting narrative that illuminates some of the most pressing constitutional questions of the post-9/11 era.
The New York Times - Jonathan Turley
With an engaging writing style and eye to detail, Mr. Mahler…takes the reader through Mr. Hamdan's evolution from a street urchin to one of a handful of "high value" enemy combatants…The Challenge is not just a very readable account of an important case. It is also an intimate account of the lawyers who overcame personal conflicts, animus and flaws to produce a decision for the ages. It is an intriguing tale of how a unique convergence of personalities propelled an unlikely dabab driver from Yemen to international prominence.
In this account of the momentous Supreme Court case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Mahler (Ladies and Gentlemen, the Bronx Is Burning) profiles key figures of the defense: JAG lawyer Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, constitutional law professor Neal Katyal and the defendant, Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's former driver. The book chronicles this legal odd couple-Swift, the gregarious blowhard, and Katyal, the diligent straight man-as they struggle to keep their client alive in Guantánamo Bay and craft a case challenging the legality of President George W. Bush's military tribunals. The author narrates their burgeoning relationship with each other and their client-in one endearing passage, Swift seeks counseling for his relationship with Hamden at the same time that he seeks therapy to save his marriage. While Mahler skillfully humanizes the characters and institutions at the heart of the case, the book sags under detailed forays into arcane aspects of the American justice system and irrelevant personal vignettes that feel forced and slow the pace. For whatever dramatic tension the book lacks, Mahler amply conveys the heroism of his protagonists. (Aug. 13)Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Bob Nardini - Library Journal
In the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld(2006), the Supreme Court ruled that military tribunals established by the U.S. government to try its Guantánamo Bay detainees were unconstitutional. Mahler (New York Times magazine; Ladies and Gentlemen, The Bronx Is Burning) bases this book largely on interviews with the two principal defense attorneys, Neal Katyal, a Georgetown University constitutional law professor, and Charles Swift, of the U.S. Navy's Judge Advocate General's Corps. Mahler does an excellent job of presenting the complex legal issues surrounding the case in a highly readable manner, but at the book's heart are his characterizations of Katyal and Swift and their relationship with each another, with their families, with the military, and with their client, Salim Hamdan, a Yemeni man captured in 2001, as they worked passionately, and against high odds, to win the case. While the book is a great read, its impact may be diluted because the further fate of the military tribunals, and of Hamdan himself, remains unclear, matters of decision in subsequent litigation. Highly recommended for all law, public, and academic libraries. [See Prepub Alert, LJ4/15/08.]
Near-exhaustive account of what some Supreme Court watchers consider "the most important decision on presidential power ever."Three days after 9/11, George Bush set in motion a program to try suspected terrorists as war criminals, not civilians, through military tribunals. The tribunals would be convened abroad, not just for security reasons but also to keep strict control over what information could leave the courtroom. An air base in Germany was considered and rejected, lest the Germans "try to exert a degree of authority over the facility," as New York Times Magazine contributor Mahler (Ladies and Gentlemen, the Bronx Is Burning, 2005) notes. The Marshall Islands and other Pacific outposts lacked sufficient infrastructure. But Guantanamo Bay served well-it was remote from the press, yet accessible to the mainland. Up early for trial was a Yemeni jihadist named Salim Hamdan, initially recruited to go to Tajikistan and join an Islamic insurgency against the Russian-backed government. Instead, he fell in with Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and worked as his bodyguard and driver. Captured in the American invasion, Hamdan was transferred to Cuba in December 2003. He made an ideal, low-hanging-fruit kind of defendant, since, among other things, he hadn't been rendered to a third country for interrogation, "which would open the door for his defense attorney to raise questions about his treatment." His defense attorney was a troubled naval officer who both belonged to the ACLU and recognized that he was committing career suicide, and who drew on a wide network of legal allies to press a constitutional case that argued, at its basis, that the president was overstepping the bounds of hisauthority. The argument made for strange allies (Ken Starr, anyone?) and an impressive array of foes, but it worked, convincing even a conservative Supreme Court. Naturally, the military and administration are working to get around the Court's decision, but for a brief moment, Mahler concludes, "the system worked."Though sometimes bogged down in legal minutia, quite understandably, Mahler's fluent account of events is essential reading for students of constitutional law-and anyone concerned with civil rights.