The Question of Palestine

In this book Edward Said presents an argument for the right of Palestinians to the land known as Palestine. Since the 7th century Palestine had been predominantly Arab. For example a 1922 census showed that 78% of the population was Arab. With the creation of Israel in 1948 by the UN, these Arabs were dispersed quite often by force. Ironically 1948 is the same year that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declared that everyone has the right to return to his own country. The right of the Palestinians has been ignored or denied. Not even a plebiscite represents their point of view.His argument is compeling. Edward Said writes logically and with insight. If finally the reader does not agree with him, the reader will surely think long and hard about it.

I had this book for quite a while, but I only started to read it lately and finished it in a week. The reason why I wasn't very enthusiastic about reading it is the fact that the book was written in the 70's and I though that whatever applied back then did not apply now. A lot of stuff has happened in the last thirty years, but all that does not make this book less useful, valuable and insightful. It is astonishing how a thing hasn't changed for Palestinians, how the pending issues and agonies then are the same now.Said present his book from one side, the forgotten side. He states that very clearly in almost every chapter in his book. He doesn't however neglect or eliminate the other side, as has much of the western media attempted to do with regards to Palestinians in the last 50 years. He is one of the first intellectuals who has talked about this sensitive issue in the west and has spend most of his adult life attending to his goal, the PalestiniansHis views and analysis of the political issues in that time, specifically with regards to Camp David is remarkable and from my point of view truthful. He stands as a witness to the political struggle between different Arabic countries, Israel and the United states in those troubled and critical years in the history of the Middle East.But still after more than 50 years to the question of Palestine, there are still no answers.

Does the fact that I am an Israeli Jew living in Israel mean that I should reject this book ? Does the fact that I think the book is crucially important mean that I am "taking sides" ?I believe otherwise. I found this book to be very important, as it is an account of a Palestinian - an admittedly interested party in the conflict. Said knows about the Jews and Zionism much more than most Israeli Jews know about the Palestinians. But of course - Said is never "objective" - he himself is a refugee, who describes the side of Zionism as he and many others like him experienced.Said shows surprising understanding of Zionism - he even says that one cannot compare the situation in Israel to that which existed in South Africa. He says that things here are more complicated. Said acknowledges the achievements of Zionism as far as Jews are concerned, another surprise.I felt a deep passion for peace and compromise in this book - I believe that the author accepts the reality of a Jewish state in Israel. However, Said points out that no such peace can be achieved as long as Palestinian dreams are constantly shattered or ignored. There are two sides to this story - I am on one and Said is on the other. Still, this book is important because it acknowledges the existance of two sides, and thus provides a road to conciliation that is so important to all of us.I think every Jew and every Paelstinian should read this book, and so should evreybody with a serious interest in our troubled piece of land.

The cover of my book has a quote from the NY Times that says books like this one need to be "read in the hope that understanding will provide a better chance of survival." That quote couldn't be more accurate. The Question of Palestine is a cry for understanding of Arab culture and history, and subsequently a more balanced view of the conflict today (or 1979, when it was published. But that doesn't matter because it is still applicable today). The Q of Palestine is divided into two main sections, the history of the ignorance of Araba culture and the true nature of Zionism, and how the Palestinians are mobilizing today. Said describes Zionism as both a colonial adventure with little regard for the Arab natives, and the subsequent effort to create facts to make it more acceptable. Said does a remarkable job of describing how the U.S., Israel and the rest of the western world have misperceived the entire conflict because we see the conflict through a western lens. Through this lens, the Arabs are for the most part, innocently ignored. His attempt, then, is to try and give a view that is NOT through this western lens. He shows that yes, contrary to popular opinion, the Arabs DO have a history and culture that have both been destroyed by Zionists. He shows that no, contrary to popular opinion, they will not just get up and leave after being hit on the head enough times. They have a very strong nationalistic pride, and it will only get stronger. I highly recommend this book. It is definately not aimed at filling the niche of "historically objective, comprehensive history of the conflict" (for that see Benny Morris's "Righteous Victims"). So if you are new to the subject, probably start with something else. But it does fill a necessary roll of a look into the existence and the understanding of a distinct Palestinian pride and culture. Only when enough people start recognizing some of the things Said talks about will the leaders of Israel and the PLO ever find some common ground on which to move toward peace. Essential Reading!

This book is a very considered and informative guide to Palestine and its colonisation. For me, though, this book perhaps spends too much time on the ideology of Zionism rather than spelling out some of the basic facts of dispossession and oppression. Still, it is salutary to be reminded of Zionisms ideological origins in European Romantic nationalism, with its notions of "People" and "Homeland" (which very much took root of course in Germany - the crucible of much Zionism). It is useful too to be reminded how the rhetoric of Zionism is uncannily similiar to other colonialist rhetoric, in particular the notion of the "land without a people". That is to say, as Said points out, colonial powers have ALWAYS attempted to justify their settlements, their forcible dispossession of indigeneous peoples by insisting that the target land was barren or underdeveloped, that the people currently residing there were in no fit state to look after the land - and so on and so on. We can see from Said's book that Zionism, far from being some unique self-expression of "Jewish Destiny" is wholly consistent with and emerges out of this larger intellectual tradition. Ultimately, the Zionists who settled in Palestine were European nationalists. What is also very illuminating here, is that Said reveals just how candid Zionist polititians and military leaders/ agitators were about their aims and objectives and about the dispossession of the native Palestinian population. Figures such as MOshe Dyan, the book shows, were perfectly upfront about this being an Arab country which they - the Zionists - were taking over. Said quotes Dayan as follows: "We came to this country which was already populated by Arabs, and we are establishing a Hebrew, that is Jewish state here.. There is not one place built in this country that did not have aformer Arab population." American supporters of Israel will I think be shocked reading amny passages of this book, and will find that many cherished beliefs are in fact convenient myths reproduced by the American Zionist doctrinal system.