Palestine Inside Out: A Review

This is a review of Palestine Inside Out: An Everyday Occupation by Saree Makdisi. W. W. Norton. 2008.

Saree Makdisi is a Palestinian-American academic. What makes this UCLA professor stand out right away is the fact that he is the nephew of Edward Said.

Makdisi was raised in a Christian home in Washington D.C and Beirut. Conservative pundits such as Rob Shapiro have long urged UCLA to blacklist Makdisi, who is disliked for launching pro-Palestinian discourse on campus.

The book suggests that Makdisi is very much like his uncle. Read More »

1948: A Review

This is a review of 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War by Benny Morris. Yale University Press. 2008.

In 1980’s, a group of Israeli historians including Tom Segev of Haaretz (a daily Israeli newspaper), Avi Shlaim of Oxford University, and Ilan Pappe of University of Exeter opened up the debate regarding mainstream interpretation of the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Major arguments from the new historians included:

That the British government tried to stop the establishment of an independent Palestinian State
That the refugees were forced to leave their homes
That Zionists had both greater manpower and more weapons
That Arabs were divided as to whether they should work to eradicate the Jewish state
And that Israel should be held responsible for the failure of peace talks

Among the prominent new historians is Benny Morris of the Ben-Gurion University in Negev. He has been the most controversial member of the camp, due to his justifying the expulsion of Arabs during the war in 1948.

Benny Morris

If Morris’ latest book represents a political position, it is right to suggest that he is no longer aligned to the left. One of the examples of Morris’s sympathy for the right is his justification of Deir Yassir massacre. The massacre, he believes, was necessary for accelerating the exodus of Palestinians in order to give space to the Jewish state.

Still, the book brings good insights. The most surprising discovery would be the Czech support for the just-born Jewish state. The Czech republic, in an ironic twist, shipped the guns and bullets left over from the Nazis to Tel Aviv and Haifa.

Morris is right to claim that Christian Arabs were unlike their Muslim neighbors in resisting the establishment of the Jewish state. His point is confirmed by the Maronite alliance with Israel during Lebanon’s civil war. The collaboration is both aided and complicated by the Maronites’ belief on the re-establishment of the Jewish state as the realization of Biblical prophecy.

The title may focuses on the year 1948, but the content goes beyond this. I was intrigued by the books description of the negative image the United Nations has among many Israelis. While it is widely argued that the hatred of the United Nations came about as the result of the United Nations equating Zionism to racism in 1974, Morris adds a new dimension to the situation.

The major cause behind the animosity, he claims, is more detailed. The unfinished business of Greater Israel and the UN’S reluctance in supporting the partition have also played a role.

The book also talks about possibly the most explosive issue arising from the war: Jewish refugees from Arab states. Here, Morris appears at his most pessimistic. He claims that the return of Palestinian refugees will also raise the question of the return of Jewish refugees who fled their homes during the war, reducing the chance of success of the peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine to zero for as long as the Palestinian Authority demands that Israel absorb people who left in 1948.

With this book, Morris has firmly established himself in the mainstream of historic thought and analysis. This may be a disappointment to some, and welcome news to others.

1948 cover

A Possible Peace Between Israel and Palestine: A Review

This is a review of A Possible Peace Between Israel and Palestine: An Insider’s Account of the Geneva Initiative by Menachem Klein, translated by Haim Watzman. Columbia University Press. 2007.

We are being driven to accept the two-state solution as the only way to solve the conflict between Israel and Palestine. The logic is simple:

Israel remains a Jewish state; Palestine is going to be independent.

The book, written by an Israeli academic who used to serve as an adviser of Ehud Barak, calls for a deeper re-thinking of the peace settlement. His vision of the future between Israel and Palestine is idealistic, but also, I believe, pragmatic. Instead of seeing peace deals with Palestinians as grace-giving measures, he urges for Israelis to treat Palestinians as equals.

Rather than dismantling all Israeli settlements, which, he argues, is impossible due to the political influence of settlers and heavy costs, he advocates the maintenance of large settlement blocs. Turning to Jerusalem, Klein believes that the division of the city should be based on the historical positions of individual religious sites, while East Jerusalem should be drawn into different districts to ensure villages close to Ramallah will be under direct governance of the future Palestinian state. Villages between Ramallah and the Old City can have their public and social services provided by third parties, for the sake of stability.

Klein portrays the failure of American involvement, which is blindly pro-Israel, as well as the danger of unilateral movement, which inevitably leaves one side bitter. He is deeply invested in the emotional aspects of the conflict, arguing that Jerusalem in particular has tremendous meaning for all parties involved. He discusses Zionism, the abandonment of Palestinian right of return, and the price both sides have had to pay in the ongoing struggle.

I recommend this book to anyone seeking an alternative voice in discussions surrounding the two-state solution.

I Don’t Freaking Care

Just as I was beginning to sketch out this column, commissioned as it was by Global Comment, I hit a minor snag: I had no clue what I was talking about. Apparently, the whole situation in the Middle-East has become so depressing that I’ve managed to block it out entirely. I had to go to Wikipedia to make sure Olmert was still the Israeli PM. Then again, given the recent reliability issues with Wiki, I could be entirely wrong on that count. Not that I care.

Without having read anything about Israel in the past two years, I can still make the following statements with absolute certainty: within the last couple weeks, some Palestinian person did something violent, probably involving explosives, in which Israeli Jews were killed. The IDF responded by assassinating the person(s) involved and/or bulldozing their houses. There was considerable collateral damage. Read More »

Finkelstein-ed Academia and the Truth about Palestine

The long bitter saga of DePaul University’s scandalous decision to deny tenure to one of its most prolific and internationally renowned public intellectuals, Professor Norman Finkelstein, is officially over; but not before bringing to light what some consider the most dangerous trend stifling intellectual freedom in the American academia, and other circles of influence.

The most famous among the trend-setters are Alan Dershowitz with his legal bullying tactics, and Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz with their infamous Campus Watch. Their apparent target is any and all voice of influence, particularly in academia, that challenges the blind consensus on the Israel issue and/or questions whether Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people is fair or predicated solely upon self-defense. Read More »