In ancient Egypt where the sun shines bright, The Embalmer was in for a terrible fright. To embalm a Pharaoh was a mighty honour, If he got it wrong he would be a goner! But first he must cross the river Nile, And avoid the humungous crocodile…
By: Cat Barker
*Available directly from our distributors, click the Available On tab below
Christopher Phillips contends that many analyses of Syria's civil war overlook the integral role played by foreign nations, arguing that international factors were fundamental from the war's onset in 2011. He emphasizes the impact of a perceived decline in U.S. influence in the Middle East, leading to a power vacuum and a competitive dynamic among six external actors—the United States, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar. Through original interviews, Phillips offers a fresh perspective, highlighting the complex interplay of these nations in Syria's ongoing conflict and shedding light on key factors influencing its intensity and duration, including the West's approach to ISIS. The author concludes with reflections on Syria's future and the broader regional implications. In the intricate analysis presented by Christopher Phillips in "The Battle for Syria," the author delves deeply into the external dynamics that have intricately woven themselves into the fabric of the Syrian Civil War. The narrative meticulously navigates through the multifaceted roles played by international state-level actors, each driven by their diverse interests and aspirations for attaining hegemonic influence in the region. Phillips, in his exposition, challenges the prevailing perspective that attributes the primary impetus for the conflict to internal factors, epitomized by Bashar Al-Assad's authoritative regime. Instead, he advocates for a paradigm shift, positioning his book not only as a chronicle of events but as an instructive guide for a Western audience seeking a nuanced understanding of the conflict. His core argument revolves around the proposition that comprehending and resolving the Syrian conflict necessitates transcending the narrow focus on internal dynamics and directing attention to the external forces that have been instrumental in fueling the flames of war. The stage for the Syrian conflict, as meticulously outlined by Phillips, was not solely set by internal grievances but rather by a confluence of international factors. These include, but are not limited to, power shifts among regional competitors, the prevalence of super-state ideologies, and the ease of access to arms. Furthermore, a myriad of international players, ranging from sovereign states to non-state entities, sought to influence the trajectory of the conflict, thereby intensifying its complexities. Phillips argues convincingly that an exclusive focus on domestic aspects falls short of capturing the comprehensive nature of the conflict. He contends that a thorough examination requires scrutinizing how great powers and regional players in the Middle East actively encouraged the civil war for their respective gains, taking advantage of prevalent power vacuums. Additionally, the U.S.'s policies of limited intervention and its reluctance to dissuade allies from intervening in Syria further emboldened multiple regional players. The lens through which Phillips examines the Syrian Civil War encompasses America's declining hegemonic influence in the Middle East. He posits that the polarity of the region is undergoing a transition where the U.S. remains a potent player, yet multipolarity is increasingly becoming the norm in power politics. Traditional power brokers such as Egypt, Iraq, and Syria have witnessed a decline in relative strength, with Syria, in particular, undergoing a profound transformation from a regional actor seeking power to a contested asset over which international powers vie for control. A crucial aspect of Phillips' analysis revolves around the decline of American hegemonic dominance over the Middle East, a factor he sees as contributing to the protracted nature of the conflict. The unipolarity that defined America's position at the end of the Cold War is no longer guaranteed, with the Obama Administration adopting a policy of limited intervention. While Saudi Arabia and Iran emerge as potential regional hegemons, the multipolarity of the region, exacerbated by the presence of failed states, has provided fertile ground for non-state actors like the Kurdish Worker’s Party and Al Qaeda. Despite this, Phillips sees America's limited intervention as a deliberate choice, emphasizing that the U.S.'s absolute strength, especially militarily, remains unparalleled, potentially allowing it to exert control over regional players. Phillips does not solely attribute the complexities of the Syrian conflict to U.S. actions. He contends that the U.S. continues to wield a legacy of hegemony, influencing the decision-making of regional players who anticipate U.S. intervention. As implied by the book's title, Phillips underscores the role of key powers beyond America. Throughout his comprehensive examination, he introduces the concept of balanced intervention, where both sides of the conflict receive support from multiple international actors, leading to a violent stalemate. The involvement of six main state-level actors—Iran, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United States—further contributes to the delicate equilibrium within Syria. On the domestic level, Phillips scrutinizes the miscalculations made by opposition activists in Syria, assuming they would receive physical support from the United States. In contrast, Bashar al-Assad secured strategic support from a great power, with Russian military intervention making the regime safer from competing forces. Despite these interventions, Phillips argues that none of the major actors gained a net benefit from their contributions to the Syrian Civil War. Turkey, according to Phillips, emerges as the actor benefiting the least from the conflict. The nation now grapples with managing a large refugee population, and its conflict with Kurdish radicals has intensified. Qatar, a significant investor in Syrian rebels, finds itself in a geopolitically secure position but has suffered a decline in international prestige due to scandals related to alleged ties with extremist groups like Al Qaeda. Saudi Arabia, despite endorsing the Syrian opposition, saw few clear benefits, especially with the challenges posed by low oil prices and its strategic involvement in the Yemeni civil war. The 2015 nuclear deal between the United States and Iran further complicated Saudi Arabia's position. While Russia experienced marginal benefits by flexing its muscle in the Middle East, Phillips warns of potential drawbacks. Moscow's intervention on behalf of Assad could make Russia a more attractive target for Islamist extremists. Iran, on the other hand, seemingly maintained its strategic agenda. Empowering Hezbollah, sustaining Damascus while other Syrian cities faced sieges, and ensuring the survival of the Assad regime were among its accomplishments. However, Phillips notes that Iran's firm alliance with Assad may have alienated a significant portion of the Arab world, hindering relationships Iran sought to cultivate. Despite Russia and Iran potentially securing the survival of Assad's regime, the benefits for these two countries are not unequivocal. Syria, even in the best-case scenario of regime survival, remains a fractured and divided country. Both Russia and Iran may find themselves committed to providing aid and assistance to Syria for years to come, an investment laden with risk given the uncertain future of the nation. For the United States, the Syrian conflict presented challenges under the Obama Administration's policy of limited intervention. Focused on maintaining strategic interests without committing boots on the ground, the U.S. found itself grappling with the rise of the Islamic State. Air-strike campaigns in various countries, including Syria, became a less costly alternative to ground invasions. Phillips concludes that the primary antagonists and extenders of the Syrian conflict are these six major nation-states. Despite the U.S. retaining its role as a global superpower, Phillips argues that its limited involvement in the Near East has created multipolar dynamics at the regional level. He accuses the U.S. of being a hegemon in decline and criticizes the Obama Administration for reducing its involvement in the Middle East without adequately preparing the region for a post-American order. The mixed messages sent by the U.S., demanding Assad's departure while reducing intervention, created misconceptions among Syria's neighboring states, leading to risky interventions. The major intervening states, expecting varying degrees of U.S. involvement, miscalculated Assad's regime's resilience. In response to these failed strategies, Phillips offers a hindsight policy recommendation: the United States should have done more to prevent civil war by actively restraining its allies from involvement. This lesson, though retrospective, holds implications for other war-torn countries, such as Libya and Yemen, where a second Great Game in failing states could be avoided. Acknowledging the inevitability of multipolar influence in the Middle East, Phillips suggests avoiding a scenario where multipolarity manifests violently. Russia, using forceful involvement in Syria, aims to solidify its influence, while Iran gains military experience through foreign engagements. The Middle East witnesses a growing presence of violent and radical non-state actors, including Hezbollah and Al Qaeda. Despite the intricate complexities dissected throughout the book, Phillips remains optimistic about peace. Reviewer: Abdul Manan The reviewer is a student of political science and international relations.
Christopher Phillips contends that many analyses of Syria's civil war overlook the integral role played by foreign nations, arguing that international factors were fundamental from the war's onset in 2011. He emphasizes the impact of a perceived decline in U.S. influence in the Middle East, leading to a power vacuum and a competitive dynamic among six external actors—the United States, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar. Through original interviews, Phillips offers a fresh perspective, highlighting the complex interplay of these nations in Syria's ongoing conflict and shedding light on key factors influencing its intensity and duration, including the West's approach to ISIS. The author concludes with reflections on Syria's future and the broader regional implications. In the intricate analysis presented by Christopher Phillips in "The Battle for Syria," the author delves deeply into the external dynamics that have intricately woven themselves into the fabric of the Syrian Civil War. The narrative meticulously navigates through the multifaceted roles played by international state-level actors, each driven by their diverse interests and aspirations for attaining hegemonic influence in the region. Phillips, in his exposition, challenges the prevailing perspective that attributes the primary impetus for the conflict to internal factors, epitomized by Bashar Al-Assad's authoritative regime. Instead, he advocates for a paradigm shift, positioning his book not only as a chronicle of events but as an instructive guide for a Western audience seeking a nuanced understanding of the conflict. His core argument revolves around the proposition that comprehending and resolving the Syrian conflict necessitates transcending the narrow focus on internal dynamics and directing attention to the external forces that have been instrumental in fueling the flames of war. The stage for the Syrian conflict, as meticulously outlined by Phillips, was not solely set by internal grievances but rather by a confluence of international factors. These include, but are not limited to, power shifts among regional competitors, the prevalence of super-state ideologies, and the ease of access to arms. Furthermore, a myriad of international players, ranging from sovereign states to non-state entities, sought to influence the trajectory of the conflict, thereby intensifying its complexities. Phillips argues convincingly that an exclusive focus on domestic aspects falls short of capturing the comprehensive nature of the conflict. He contends that a thorough examination requires scrutinizing how great powers and regional players in the Middle East actively encouraged the civil war for their respective gains, taking advantage of prevalent power vacuums. Additionally, the U.S.'s policies of limited intervention and its reluctance to dissuade allies from intervening in Syria further emboldened multiple regional players. The lens through which Phillips examines the Syrian Civil War encompasses America's declining hegemonic influence in the Middle East. He posits that the polarity of the region is undergoing a transition where the U.S. remains a potent player, yet multipolarity is increasingly becoming the norm in power politics. Traditional power brokers such as Egypt, Iraq, and Syria have witnessed a decline in relative strength, with Syria, in particular, undergoing a profound transformation from a regional actor seeking power to a contested asset over which international powers vie for control. A crucial aspect of Phillips' analysis revolves around the decline of American hegemonic dominance over the Middle East, a factor he sees as contributing to the protracted nature of the conflict. The unipolarity that defined America's position at the end of the Cold War is no longer guaranteed, with the Obama Administration adopting a policy of limited intervention. While Saudi Arabia and Iran emerge as potential regional hegemons, the multipolarity of the region, exacerbated by the presence of failed states, has provided fertile ground for non-state actors like the Kurdish Worker’s Party and Al Qaeda. Despite this, Phillips sees America's limited intervention as a deliberate choice, emphasizing that the U.S.'s absolute strength, especially militarily, remains unparalleled, potentially allowing it to exert control over regional players. Phillips does not solely attribute the complexities of the Syrian conflict to U.S. actions. He contends that the U.S. continues to wield a legacy of hegemony, influencing the decision-making of regional players who anticipate U.S. intervention. As implied by the book's title, Phillips underscores the role of key powers beyond America. Throughout his comprehensive examination, he introduces the concept of balanced intervention, where both sides of the conflict receive support from multiple international actors, leading to a violent stalemate. The involvement of six main state-level actors—Iran, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United States—further contributes to the delicate equilibrium within Syria. On the domestic level, Phillips scrutinizes the miscalculations made by opposition activists in Syria, assuming they would receive physical support from the United States. In contrast, Bashar al-Assad secured strategic support from a great power, with Russian military intervention making the regime safer from competing forces. Despite these interventions, Phillips argues that none of the major actors gained a net benefit from their contributions to the Syrian Civil War. Turkey, according to Phillips, emerges as the actor benefiting the least from the conflict. The nation now grapples with managing a large refugee population, and its conflict with Kurdish radicals has intensified. Qatar, a significant investor in Syrian rebels, finds itself in a geopolitically secure position but has suffered a decline in international prestige due to scandals related to alleged ties with extremist groups like Al Qaeda. Saudi Arabia, despite endorsing the Syrian opposition, saw few clear benefits, especially with the challenges posed by low oil prices and its strategic involvement in the Yemeni civil war. The 2015 nuclear deal between the United States and Iran further complicated Saudi Arabia's position. While Russia experienced marginal benefits by flexing its muscle in the Middle East, Phillips warns of potential drawbacks. Moscow's intervention on behalf of Assad could make Russia a more attractive target for Islamist extremists. Iran, on the other hand, seemingly maintained its strategic agenda. Empowering Hezbollah, sustaining Damascus while other Syrian cities faced sieges, and ensuring the survival of the Assad regime were among its accomplishments. However, Phillips notes that Iran's firm alliance with Assad may have alienated a significant portion of the Arab world, hindering relationships Iran sought to cultivate. Despite Russia and Iran potentially securing the survival of Assad's regime, the benefits for these two countries are not unequivocal. Syria, even in the best-case scenario of regime survival, remains a fractured and divided country. Both Russia and Iran may find themselves committed to providing aid and assistance to Syria for years to come, an investment laden with risk given the uncertain future of the nation. For the United States, the Syrian conflict presented challenges under the Obama Administration's policy of limited intervention. Focused on maintaining strategic interests without committing boots on the ground, the U.S. found itself grappling with the rise of the Islamic State. Air-strike campaigns in various countries, including Syria, became a less costly alternative to ground invasions. Phillips concludes that the primary antagonists and extenders of the Syrian conflict are these six major nation-states. Despite the U.S. retaining its role as a global superpower, Phillips argues that its limited involvement in the Near East has created multipolar dynamics at the regional level. He accuses the U.S. of being a hegemon in decline and criticizes the Obama Administration for reducing its involvement in the Middle East without adequately preparing the region for a post-American order. The mixed messages sent by the U.S., demanding Assad's departure while reducing intervention, created misconceptions among Syria's neighboring states, leading to risky interventions. The major intervening states, expecting varying degrees of U.S. involvement, miscalculated Assad's regime's resilience. In response to these failed strategies, Phillips offers a hindsight policy recommendation: the United States should have done more to prevent civil war by actively restraining its allies from involvement. This lesson, though retrospective, holds implications for other war-torn countries, such as Libya and Yemen, where a second Great Game in failing states could be avoided. Acknowledging the inevitability of multipolar influence in the Middle East, Phillips suggests avoiding a scenario where multipolarity manifests violently. Russia, using forceful involvement in Syria, aims to solidify its influence, while Iran gains military experience through foreign engagements. The Middle East witnesses a growing presence of violent and radical non-state actors, including Hezbollah and Al Qaeda. Despite the intricate complexities dissected throughout the book, Phillips remains optimistic about peace. Reviewer: Abdul Manan The reviewer is a student of political science and international relations.
Awesome book really funny
Such a fun book for kids
Fantastic book- highly recommend
This is a clever book set against the backdrop of Ancient Egypt. Not only do you get an engaging story with bright, bold illustrations, but this book also showcases key learning objectives contained in the English curriculum. A rich and inspiring resource for children aged 5 to 9.
A fun, educational story poem that introduces children to a lot of the vocabulary needed when studying Egypt! Some lovely repeating rhymes that the kids loved shouting out!
Our children loved it. Highly engaging, rhyming story, perfect for children in Y3 who have studied Ancient Egypt.
Fantastic book- highly recommend
A fantastic picture book for any child who is interested in Egypt (or who just likes a good story)! A really fun take on learning about Ancient Egypt! Would absolutely recommend this book to any teacher looking to engage children.
This gorgeously illustrated narrative poem is a delight. It is a fun story-poem for children (5-9) with all the ingredients that children enjoy: rhyme, repetition, and a mischievous crocodile and it targets 2/3/4 literacy objectives. Whilst having a fun read, children will learn about speech marks, time connectives, the possessive apostrophe as well as tucking into some good vocabulary/ thesaurus work. And, as Ancient Egypt is a history topic that has to be covered in these year groups, the poem introduces some of the jobs that people would have had as introducing the embalming process. We need more children's books like this!
A complete hit!
I bought this book for my son (year 4) who is dyslexic and does not enjoy reading. Finding books that he wants to read can be difficult. Egypt’s Best Embalmer has been a total hit; the theme and characters have kept him engaged and the rhythm and repetition help him feel confident with his reading. This is already a book that we keep on picking up. We love it!
