The Ester Republic

the national rag of the people's republic of independent ester

book review, Volume 4 number 4, May 2002
other
book reviews

The Question of Palestine
© 2002 by
David A. James

"Why is it right for a Jew born in Chicago to immigrate to Israel, whereas a Palestinian born in Jaffa is a refugee?"

—Edward W. Said

This spring, as Israeli tanks rolled into Palestinian villages throughout the West Bank, I was by chance reading The Question of Palestine by the prominent Palestinian academic Edward W. Said (pronounced sigh-eed). First published in 1979 in response to the Camp David Accords, the book was revised in 1992. A new edition will be published by The Nation Books this spring.

The book is less a history of the conflict (though it covers this aspect fairly well) than it is a call for justice and for the recognition of Palestinian identity. As Said documents, the Palestinian people have a history as a distinct group since at least the seventh century. Yet in the late nineteenth century, when the Zionist movement focused its attention on restoring a homeland for Jews in the historic region of Israel, its leaders all but denied that any peoples were living in what was then known as Palestine. Documents from Zionist leaders of the era called for the removal of those inhabiting the region, a course which the nation of Israel has perpetuated. The dream of a Jewish state, as Said shows, was incompatible with the reality on the ground. And so that reality had to be changed.

And changed it was, often by force. Palestinians have been driven off their lands, their orchards and homes have been razed, their livelihoods destroyed, and their lands handed over to Jewish settlers. As Said notes, this is not far removed from the treatment Jews endured for centuries in Europe.

The Holocaust further complicated the conflict, for it placed the Jews in the unique historical position of being victims of the greatest crime ever committed against a people. This has led to a number of results, some good, some bad. Said credits Jewish people with leading the global battle for human rights, yet notes that many of the most prominent Jewish human rights voices fall silent at best, if not turning outright defensive, when confronted with the ongoing crimes of the government of Israel.

The seizure of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip following the 1967 Arab-Israeli War has become the major flashpoint in the conflict. Israel had the opportunity to use these lands as bargaining chips for peace with her neighbors, but instead pursued a course of violent occupation and colonization of the tiny region that constitutes the Palestinian people’s best hope for a state of their own. Palestinians living in this area have no citizenship and no rights. In a situation comparable to apartheid-era South Africa, they are confined to impoverished villages, their movements tightly controlled. Meanwhile, any Jew can immigrate to Israel, immediately become a citizen, and with heavy government subsidies, build a home on these historically Palestinian lands.

In the minds of the Palestinians, as Said shows, the Jews are viewed not as people who belong in the area, but as an aggressive European colonial power. Palestine, which was long held by the Ottoman Empire and briefly administered by Britain between the two world wars, was once again (in Palestinian thinking) colonized at precisely the same time that the rest of the colonial world was throwing off the European powers and establishing independence.

Said does not limit his criticism to Israel. He condemns Arab governments throughout the Middle East for their own abuse of the Palestinians, and for their manipulation of the conflict to perpetuate horrifically oppressive regimes. He refers to terrorist acts conducted by Palestinians as "stupid" (though he nonetheless praises Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Liberation Organization which are heavily tied to these acts). And he attacks America for its one-sided favoritism of Israel. He rejects the notion popular among Arabs that Zionism is racist, instead seeing the movement as coldly indifferent to the plight of the Palestinian people.

Much has changed since Said first published this book. The two-state solution which he proposed at the time is now widely accepted as the only workable settlement. Even George W. Bush has joined the chorus for achieving this goal (although he has thus far taken absolutely no steps toward making it happen). One can nowadays openly sympathize with the Palestinians without automatically being labeled anti-Semitic. Many Jews in Israel and the West now call for a fair and equitable solution.

Unfortunately, after a period of opening up, Israel has again swung hard against the indigenous people it continues to oppress. Internal politics of its own making (the colonization of Palestinian lands) has led to a situation where Israel seems unlikely to resolve the problem on its own, particularly with the neo-fascist Ariel Sharon at the nation’s helm. Meanwhile, poverty and hopelessness are creating a generation of Palestinian youths willing to blow themselves up, killing dozens in the process, in a failing effort to further the Palestinian cause. The American media continues to highlight these attacks, while downplaying the fact that far more Palestinians have fallen victim to state-sponsored Israeli terrorism.

The Question of Palestine is a classic work on Middle Eastern politics. Though in some ways dated, it remains vital to anyone wishing to fully understand the region’s conflicts. Its reissue this spring couldn’t be more timely.

 

Readers of this column may recall a book I reviewed last year called Arming America, by Michael Bellesiles. The Emory University historian claimed that gun ownership in colonial and early American times was actually quite limited. I noted at the time that his reading of the Second Amendment seemed dubious, but felt he had presented extensive documentation for his contention that there weren’t many guns in this country until the 1850s. Several prominent historians have since gone a long way toward proving him wrong, and Bellesiles has now admitted that his research was flawed. Individual readers can make up their own minds, but I can’t recommend the book at this point.


home
Republic welcome
Library News & Book Reviews
David A. James

irregulars
archives