Scan barcode
arationalvein's review
4.0
There's good history in here, but the bias against the Palestinians is very clear. Read with a critical mind.
agraubart's review
2.0
While the argument presented by Morris at first appears slightly warped, it gradually devolves into a denial of Palestinian statehood rooted in unfair, even racist assumptions.
I appreciated the first chapter of this book, which presents the revival of binationalism as a possible solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and critiques its practical shortcomings. However, the second chapter of this book depicts the history of one-state and two-state proposals in a bit of a distorted manner. Morris conveys that the Israelis consistently conceded and compromised in the name of peace only to meet objection from seemingly stubborn, insincere Palestinian leaders. He emphasizes rhetoric and violence on the part of Palestinian leaders while downplaying Israeli expansion of settlements and limitations on freedom of movement. I expected a more fair and balanced assessment of the history, acknowledging merits and faults on both sides.
However, the third chapter really deterred me as a reader. Morris relies on demographic and racial assumptions to make his case against a two-state solution and Palestinian autonomy. Of note, he writes, "Arabs, to put it simply, proportionally commit far more crimes (and not only ones connected to property) and commit far more lethal traffic violations than do Jews. In large measure this is a function of different value systems (such as the respect accorded to human life and the rule of law)" (187). Claiming that Palestinian statehood is not viable because Arabs as a people are more violent and less likely to appreciate human life is prejudiced and unhelpful in constructing mutual understanding and empathy. These types of assertions make it hard to understand his argument as purely rational and made to propose a just peace to this conflict.
Even in the final pages, Morris makes a proposal for solving the conflict that downplays Palestinian objections. He acknowledges and quickly dismisses as many shortcomings to his proposal as he noted in other vetoed resolutions, making the argument unconvincing. Due to its aforementioned faults, this book is definitely not a reliable primer on the history of this conflict/possible solutions and hardly serves as a viable premise for lasting peace, equity, and justice between the Israelis and Palestinians.
I appreciated the first chapter of this book, which presents the revival of binationalism as a possible solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and critiques its practical shortcomings. However, the second chapter of this book depicts the history of one-state and two-state proposals in a bit of a distorted manner. Morris conveys that the Israelis consistently conceded and compromised in the name of peace only to meet objection from seemingly stubborn, insincere Palestinian leaders. He emphasizes rhetoric and violence on the part of Palestinian leaders while downplaying Israeli expansion of settlements and limitations on freedom of movement. I expected a more fair and balanced assessment of the history, acknowledging merits and faults on both sides.
However, the third chapter really deterred me as a reader. Morris relies on demographic and racial assumptions to make his case against a two-state solution and Palestinian autonomy. Of note, he writes, "Arabs, to put it simply, proportionally commit far more crimes (and not only ones connected to property) and commit far more lethal traffic violations than do Jews. In large measure this is a function of different value systems (such as the respect accorded to human life and the rule of law)" (187). Claiming that Palestinian statehood is not viable because Arabs as a people are more violent and less likely to appreciate human life is prejudiced and unhelpful in constructing mutual understanding and empathy. These types of assertions make it hard to understand his argument as purely rational and made to propose a just peace to this conflict.
Even in the final pages, Morris makes a proposal for solving the conflict that downplays Palestinian objections. He acknowledges and quickly dismisses as many shortcomings to his proposal as he noted in other vetoed resolutions, making the argument unconvincing. Due to its aforementioned faults, this book is definitely not a reliable primer on the history of this conflict/possible solutions and hardly serves as a viable premise for lasting peace, equity, and justice between the Israelis and Palestinians.
More...