 |
|
Title: Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents
ISBN: 0312437366
Author:
Charles D. Smith
Publicate Date: 2006-12-06
Publish: 2006-12-06
List Price: $41.48
Average Customer Rating: 4.0
Format: Paperback
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest New Price: $41.48
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $37.00
Amazon Merchant Price: $46.57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: Op Ed
I have not finished the book yet. Yet, I felt encouraged to answer Mr ML/NJ and throw some comments on his review. I would like to start by saying that finally we see a book that depcits the truth. A book that does not call the owners of the lands terorrists. A book that understands how it might feel to live in a peice of land for 1,400 years, then by a Belford declaration, you are expelled. We have always read many books that were completely biased towards the Israeli side. There has always been the double standard, not only in politics, but even in book pages and what is supposed to be free speach. Now, I am happy to see that the sitiuation is changing. I would really recommend the book for whoever wants to hear the OTHER side of the story.
|
2: Smith Is Currently My History Professor
I assure you that this book is nowhere near as dry as Smith's lectures, and I also assure you that he is extremely (almost insanely) knowledgable on this topic. His lectures are unbiased and I find it hilarious that a lot of reviewers said that this book was biased against Israel. After reading this textbook, I think that only biased people would say that this book is biased (against their own side, of course) because Smith isn't afraid to point the finger at all sides. He clearly shows that the road to peace (or the lack thereof) is a two-way street.
I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to get into the nitty gritty of this topic (details are PLENTY in this text), as long as you're willing to consider that America (as well as others) hasn't exactly been an angel in the past.
|
3: Good with excellent primary sources
The Arab-Israeli conflict is one that touches on so many painful emotions and biases that no book will be deemed fair or unbiased by all concerned. However, Smith's book does a very good job of attempting to be as close to unbiased as possible. It is often used as a textbook in upper-level modern Middle East history courses for just that reason. It is good choice for someone who is new to the subject (other than the inescapable news coverage) and really wants to understand some of the issues invovled throughout the history of the conflict.
One of the strongest things about Smith's book is the inclusion of a number of primary sources. Other than disputing the translations, no one can deny that primary sources are as close to an honest look at history as we can get. Documents are included from many sides of the issues involved and no side comes out either squeekly clean nor as pure evil.
Another strength I found, to differ with another reviewers opinion, is that the book starts quite far back in the history of the conflict. As the mythologizing of the roots of Israel as a nation has been worked into the official stance of all sides, each for their own purposes, understanding what happened at the beginning is of utmost importance if you really want to grasp the subject. This is a good book that does it's best with a difficult subject and goes into some depth in addition to excellent primary source material.
|
4: Read with care and caution
Like some other reviewers, I too bought this book for a college course and I too find it overly biased toward the Arab point of view. The author has the right to draw his own conclusions, but like any non-fiction book, readers must use their own judgement to evaluate those conclusions carefully. I don't know if there is an author without bias on this topic due to its sensitivity.
It is also horribly dry in my opinion. I know it's supposed to be, but certain sections just drag on and on, it seems, uneccessarily.
Read critically, not literally. If you have a choice (i.e. don't have to buy this particular book for a course or something) choose a more balanced author, if you can find one.
|
5: A Good Historical Overview But More Recent Events are Biased
The book is a fairly concise and accurate overview of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It covers ancient Jewish history, the beginnings of Zionism, the emergence of Israel, the Arab Wars and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Most of the coverage is well researched and documented.
The closing chapters of the book are undoubtedly biased towards the Palestinian account. One example is the coverage of the Barak-Arafat-Clinton negotiations in 2000. Smith portrays Barak as a man whose intentions were not to conduct honest negotiations but rather "carefully calculated, intended to appear more amenable to the United States." Smith writes that "there was never an Israeli offer." Further, Smith asserts that Barak was manipulating the media in order to force them to present a positive account of Israeli negotiations. Arafat's refusal to make any counter offer, or contribute to the negotiations -- as asserted by President Clinton and the U.S. chief negotiater -- are not mentioned. Smith also does not fault Palestinian terrorism -- the systematic, often daily suicide bombings experienced by Israel -- for turning Israeli public opinion against further peace talks. According to Smith, the blame lies solely on Sharon and his visit to the Temple Mount and Palestinian frustration.
Smith's discussion of the Intifada speaks in terms of Israeli attacks and Palestinian "armed response." In fact, Israel had been initially very reserved in its replies to suicide bombings. Israeli interests do not lie in a military occupation of the Palestinian territories, unless necessary to alleviate security risk.
Admittedly, I have an opinion about whose fault the failure of the Camp David II was. It is acceptable for the author to take an opposite view. However, in a book that claims to be a non-biased textbook for college use, the topic should be presented with acknowledgement of differing opinions. Especially, when the book presents an account that is largely a contrast to the established narrative (a narrative that there is no reason to believe is inaccurate).
My rating is still positive because the book is a valuable resource in its coverage of earlier time periods. However, this book should be used with other materials for balance.
|
|
|
|
|
