Military Review English Edition November-December 2013 | Page 105

BOOK REVIEWS
own, including the use of sieges vice frontal attacks,
extensive sandbagging to secure terrain gained, and
effective use of armored bulldozers and long-range
flamethrowers. This was knock-down, drag-out
combat at its most vicious.
The authors are particularly effective in describing the inter-service rivalry between the Marines
and the Army, as exacerbated by the 1st Marine
Division commander. This not only affected the
conduct of the fight on Peleliu; it perhaps unnecessarily prolonged it. Another strength of Blair and
DeCioccio is their description of the fight from the
Japanese perspective. Indeed, the reader develops
empathy for a desperate enemy employing vicious
tactics that would foreshadow even greater human
suffering on Iwo Jima and Okinawa.
It is the tragedy of Peleliu that the fruits of victory
were never used in the Allies’ subsequent drives
leading to Japan’s defeat in World War II. For its
part, the 81st was disbanded shortly after the war
while on occupation duty in Japan, its tale largely
untold. Victory at Peleliu succeeds in plugging this
gap and giving the division its rightful due. Written
in Spartan style, Blair and DiCioccio effectively
and without fanfare pay homage to the 81st without
ever denigrating the role of the Marines on Peleliu.
Incorporating extensive interviews and first-person
accounts, the book makes a significant contribution
to our understanding of the role of Army units in
this critical theater during the Second World War.
Mark Montesclaros, Fort Gordon, Georgia

KOREAN UNIFICATION
Inevitable Challenges,
Jacques L. Fuqua Jr, Potomac Books
Dulles, VA, 2011, 220 pages, $29.95

I

N KOREAN UNIFICATION: Inevitable Challenges, author Jacques L. Fuqua analyzes the
challenges brought on by the assumed reunification
of North and South Korea, within the existing South
Korean economic and governing system. The first
part of his book places the current Korean situation
into historical context. The second part addresses
the obstacles faced in repatriating and assimilating
MILITARY REVIEW ? November-December 2013

the North with the South. Fuqua’s primary focus is
on addressing the obstacles facing the repatriation
and assimilation of what has become two countries
with distinctly different peoples and cultures. In
order to integrate the North with the South, he
believes the North Korean people will need to be
“re-made.”
Fuqua provides a broad historical overview of the
rich history of the Korean Peninsula, clearly demonstrating that its diverse peoples lacked unification.
Unfortunately, other than identifying this hurdle to
unification the historical summary provides little
substantive value in addressing his thesis. This is a
bit perplexing when considering the amount of time
committed to providing this perspective.
In addressing the obstacles of integration, the
author provides a litany of general data detailing
the growing cultural, social, political, economic,
educational, and mental/physical health divergence,
between the North and South that has taken place
over the last 60 years. Through this holistic perspective, he notes that the North Korean domestic
situation is increasingly dire while South Koreans
continue to flourish. He asserts that these differences make unification even more difficult.
Fuqua further highlights these challenges
through a few anecdotal cases of North Koreans
defecting South and the obstacles they faced in
assimilating—ranging from language dialect differences to the lack of relevant work skills and
discrimination issues. He cites a source believing
individual assimilation takes at least three years.
Between the assessment and the underdeveloped
or poorly maintained infrastructure of the North,
the author offers a $5 trillion price tag for the
cost of unification—arguably an insurmountable
impediment.
The author’s research is informative and
adequate in addressing his general thesis; it unfortunately does so in an unimaginative and very
“vanilla-like” way. In other words, it reads too
much like a CIA or military foreign area specialist’s background report than substantive scholarly
analysis. This, coupled with some superfluous
and somewhat distracting information provided
and questionable research assumptions, such as
the need to remake and infuse the North with the
South, adds a significant note of caution to the
validity of the author’s conclusions.
103