Rating: 
Summary: A Book for the current times, unfortunately....
Review: How do you rate Righteous Victims? It is a difficult question, and not an easy thing to do. So much of what people have written here is true. This book is everything that has been written here.
The book is highly readable. The book is as up to date as possible. It goes to the election of Ariel Sharon. The book has so much information it can be exhaustive at times. And yes, the book at times seems very sympathetic to the Palestinians and the Arabs. There are many examples of the author leaning a bit in that direction. HOwever, the author does make it clear in many places as well that the Palestinians and many of the Arab nations and extremists other than Egypt and Jordan have been against the peace proccess and are very anti-event the very existance of Israel.
so is the book pro-palestinian? at times yes, but i think it is part of a bigger picture and goal of showing all sides and angles of the situation.
The bottom line about this book or any history book is whether or not you learn new things by reading it. This book is not perfect. I do not agree with everything in this book, but this book taught be a lot about the situation, this book made me think, and this book exposed me to some point of views and historical facts i was not aware of.
Ultimately, this book taught me a lot about what is going on in the Middle East and that fact alone made it a good read.
Rating: 
Summary: Comprehensive, but ponderous
Review: I read Avi Shlaim's _Iron Wall_ shortly after finishing this comprehensive history and Morris seems ponderous by comparison. I had to renew his book from the library six times to finish it. Morris upfront about telling readers that he writes from an Israeli perspective, because he has more access to Israeli sources. An interesting review of the book in the March 13, 2000 issue of _The Jerusalem Report_ says this is no excuse. Morris could have sought the help of Arabic speakers to read Arab sources. I was a little taken aback by his casual references to the Israeli attacks on the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967 and on the U.N. headquarters at Kafr Kana in 1995 as regrettable accidents, without mentioning there is considerable interational controversy over whether these attacks were accidental. Still, the book covers a large swathe of history and helps the reader to put the Israeli-Palestinian conflict within a largely demythologized framework.
Rating: 
Summary: WELL WORTH YOUR TIME
Review: I recently finished my master's thesis, writing about the debate between Israel's "New historians" and the traditional accepted version of the events surrounding the establishment of the State of Israel. I've read a lot of books in the past year (from both sides of the argument) but I think that Morris's "Righteous Victims" did the best job of examining ALL the evidence--even the parts that were hard to accept--and writing a conclusion that was well thought out and highly accurate. This book is easy to read and provides a solid background from Herzl through the events of last year. It is the most comprehensive of the new historians' works, and probably also the most tame. I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to understand the background of the conflict in the Middle East.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Survey
Review: If anything, Morris' book, far from supporting a negative evaluation of Israel and Zionism, strengthens the position of those who support Israel far more than any Zionist tract. Morris does not pretend Zionism or Zionists were perfect, but overall his work supports a positive evaluation of Israel and its policies. For if, as Morris shows, the pre-state Palestinian Jewish community (the Yishuv), the post-state Israeli public, and any number of Jewish politicans held less than politically correct positions and/or took bad decisions, the faults of the Israelis pale in comparison to the consistent hatred, bad faith, and incoherent organization he shows among the Palestinian population and wider Arab leadership. For instance, one of his most controversial arguments is that early Zionists, including Ben-Gurion and Dayan, wanted to "transfer" the Arab population out of Palestine. Modern defenders of Zionism, aware that such ideas look a lot like "ethnic cleansing" are keen to deny that the creators of Israel ever held such views. I am not entirely convinced by his arguments: the documents he cites could support the interpretation that such views represented idle fancies rather than a coherent policy, but Morris position *is* supportable. Either way, it is clear that the violent racialist language and fantasies of the Arab leadership and population towards Jews were much more explicit, vulgar, and widespread. After reading Morris book, I think any previously neutral reader would conclude that neither side was or is perfect, but that at almost any given moment pre-state Zionists and later Israel itself have consistently had the moral advantage over an overwhelmingly corrupt and hate-filled Palestinian opposition. In the long run, this kind of honest history does Israel more good than one-sided ideological constructions. One final point. Morris as an Israeli can see problems with his own society, and freely criticize it. As he himself points out, Arab intellectuals, whether due to political pressure or simple inability, have been completely unable to break out of ideologically driven analyses. Honestly, which type of society would you rather live in?
Rating:
Summary: Excellent history, objective and critical of both sides
Review: In the opening pages of Benny Morris' Righteous Victims, one notices two unique aspects of this author's history, the short poem by W. H. Auden, "I and the public know/what all schoolchildren learn, those to whom evil is done/do evil in return" and the subtitle of the book as "Zionist-Arab Conflict" rather than the more widely used "Arab-Israeli Conflict." As an Israeli Jew one would assume Morris to have an Israeli slant and point the finger at Arab terrorism and hostility as the source of the conflict. However, Morris, a "new historian," is part of the cultural civil war within Israel between the post-Zionists or "new-historians" and the more traditional Zionist Israelis (Wurmser). Limor Livnat, a member of Israeli Knesset, describes post-Zionism as those left-wing Israelis who "do not oppose the idea of the state of Israel, but rather (believe) that the task has been completed; they suggest that the idea of a Jewish state is inherently racist, and that Israel should be a state for all its citizens" (Livnat). These individuals are tired of war and violence and are critical of Israel's Zionist past and present policies.
In Righteous Victims Morris writes an objective history of what he sees as the "Zionist-Arab Conflict." He succeeds in constructing a comprehensive account of the conflict, one that is critical of Zionism and Israel as well as the Palestinians and Arab states. He provides a timely analysis of the causes of the Palestinian refugee crisis and an in-depth look at the present Intifada and its historical context.
In his opening discussion of beginnings of the Israeli state and the formation of the Yishuv, or Jewish community, Morris exposes the inevitability of the conflict through diary entries and memoirs of the important players such as Herzl and Churchill and their opinions regarding Zionism and the native Arab population. It is in this section of Righteous Victims where Morris is most critical of Zionism. In 1903 Herzl argued that "poor Arab [tenant] farmers should not be driven off their land," however in his diary in 1895 Morris finds the quote: Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly (21). Morris explains the Zionist motives behind these transfers citing several reasons. In many ways Arabs were seen as Russians in the Jews eyes; any form of hostility or protest that could be deemed anti-Semitic were associated as "pogroms." In Morris' view this simplified the problem, demonized the Arabs, and "comforted the Jews by obviating the need to admit that what they faced was a rival national movement, rather than Arabic-speaking Cossacks and street ruffians" (136). Also Morris holds that there was a refusal among many Zionists to agree to the complexity of Arab antagonism (61). Incoming Jews were seen as Europeans and the rightful owners of Palestine, while Arabs were merely "insignificant natives and usurpers" (76). Morris' explanation of the psyches of both sides proves his argument of inevitability, best illustrated by the HaShomer guard "In blood and fire Judea fell; in blood and fire shall Judea rise" (53).
Later in the history Morris turns to Palestinian refugee crisis, the issue that brought him fame. Again Morris is critical of Zionist policy especially during the war in 1949 and the 1967 War. Morris negates both views that Arabs voluntarily fled Israeli occupied territory and that Israel systematically expelled the refugees. Morris holds the refugee problem as an inevitability given the history of antagonism and the geographic intermixing (253). After the Deir Yassin massacre, Israeli documents emphasize "a psychosis of flight" and an "atrocity factor" as means to displace Arabs. Despite theses findings, Morris shows that there was no systematic expulsion policy, and the Arabs left as a result of a cumulative process. Clearly in this analysis, Morris is critical of the IDF and Zionist leaders while maintaining his consistent level of objectivity.
Amongst the remaining narrative perhaps the most relevant discussion is Morris' explanation of the Palestinian Intifada that continues today. Morris' analysis is one of political and economic factors. He views the Intifada or "war for independence from Israel" as a "political struggle, started as a mass protest against unbearable economic conditions, which in turn were largely a result of political realities" (561). Palestinians often cite the brutality and oppressiveness of the Israeli occupation, but Morris holds that it is not as restrictive as the Palestinians propound. The Israelis allowed establishment of sectors of self-rule and political resistance and also new universities. In the early 1980s annual per capita income in the Gaza Strip and West Bank almost tripled. Roads were vastly improved, most homes were linked to Israel's electricity grid, and health care was vastly improved. However this prosperity led to overcrowding, especially in the Gaza Strip, where the changes failed to erase the political frustration of the Arabs. They were still perceived as second-class citizens, unequal to their Jewish neighbors. Despite the increase in standard of living, "large pockets of abject poverty continued to exist and grow" (565).
The Iran-Iraq War precipitated discontent as well. Many Arab's depended on their income from work abroad and in the Persian Gulf. Once the war broke out, they were unable to earn the much-needed "petrodollars" for their families. During the same period, the fall of the Soviet Union saw an influx of hundreds of thousands of Russian Jews further complicating the overcrowding and unemployment. Arabs found it difficult to survive in an economy with policies they felt "intent to dispossess and drive them out and to replace them with Jews" (567).
Morris' "new historian/post-Zionism" account of the Arab-Israeli conflict successfully achieves his objectives, by creating a fair account critical of Zionist policies and showing the inevitability of the struggle in the face of the historical mindsets. His analysis of the refugee problem and the Intifada has and will undoubtedly awaken Israelis, students, and other historians to a critical approach to Zionist policy.
Rating:
Summary: Well Done
Review: Morris manages to synthesize a vast quantity of information in this evenhanded and very readable history. He concentrates on military and diplomatic events, making the book a bit repetitive and depressing. He treats the founders of the Jewish State as humans and not the supermen they have been portayed as in many Israeli histories to date. He makes the very important point that the Jews, although technically outnumbered in the War for Independence, were better organized, trained and motivated (and later on, even better armed) than their Arab adversaries. On the whole though, it's a fast read considering it's almost 700 pages long. I would recommend this book for those with an interest in the Israeli-Palestinian struggle.
Rating:
Summary: Well Done
Review: Morris manages to synthesize a vast quantity of information in this evenhanded and very readable history. He concentrates on military and diplomatic events, making the book a bit repetitive and depressing. He treats the founders of the Jewish State as humans and not the supermen they have been portayed as in many Israeli histories to date. He makes the very important point that the Jews, although technically outnumbered in the War for Independence, were better organized, trained and motivated (and later on, even better armed) than their Arab adversaries. On the whole though, it's a fast read considering it's almost 700 pages long. I would recommend this book for those with an interest in the Israeli-Palestinian struggle.
Rating: 
Summary: Better sources available
Review: Morris' review is coloured in his attempt to provide equity between Palestinians and Israelis. Historically, the bottom line is that Israel absorbed almost 1 million Arab and Perisan Jews, while the Arabs failed to absorb less than half a million displaced Arabs from the creation of Israel. (Population transfer was the original mandate for Israel, see League of Nations Mandates of 1917, which also created mandates for independent states such as Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt, and were affirmed in the first paragraph of the UN Charter) If you're looking for historically documented facts, I suggest Joan Peters' 'From Time Immemorial'. She is a journalist who set out to write a pro-Palestinian book and ended up finding (in almost exclusively Arab sources) a strong history which debunks current Arab claims about refugees and the right of Israel to exist in all of the land west of the Jordan river. For instance, it is interesting that even the UN claims that only 20% of the Arab refugees were landowners (and that the other 80% were migrant workers from other Arab lands and not indigenous to Israel at all), and that these displaced persons were included in the refugee rolls because Arab countries refused to take them back [and they needed shelter and food, which UNRWA could provide). We find from Peters' multiple Arab sources that Arabs openly stated repeatedly that they would use these non-refugees politically (and so far successfully) in attempts to destroy nascent Israel. Morris also completely ignored the facts that 1) until 1981, most Palestinian refugees held Jordanian citizenship, and 2) that Jordanian law, based on the Mandate from 1917, carries a clause which stipulated [until 1981] that all non-Jewish Palestians have a 'right of return' to Jordan. Peters' book is completely annotated, and as I mentioned earlier, her sources are almost exclusively Arab, which lends her book a lot of validity and debunks the most basic premises' of revisionist histories of the conflict.
Rating:
Summary: Better sources available
Review: Morris' review is coloured in his attempt to provide equity between Palestinians and Israelis. Historically, the bottom line is that Israel absorbed almost 1 million Arab and Perisan Jews, while the Arabs failed to absorb less than half a million displaced Arabs from the creation of Israel. (Population transfer was the original mandate for Israel, see League of Nations Mandates of 1917, which also created mandates for independent states such as Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt, and were affirmed in the first paragraph of the UN Charter) If you're looking for historically documented facts, I suggest Joan Peters' 'From Time Immemorial'. She is a journalist who set out to write a pro-Palestinian book and ended up finding (in almost exclusively Arab sources) a strong history which debunks current Arab claims about refugees and the right of Israel to exist in all of the land west of the Jordan river. For instance, it is interesting that even the UN claims that only 20% of the Arab refugees were landowners (and that the other 80% were migrant workers from other Arab lands and not indigenous to Israel at all), and that these displaced persons were included in the refugee rolls because Arab countries refused to take them back [and they needed shelter and food, which UNRWA could provide). We find from Peters' multiple Arab sources that Arabs openly stated repeatedly that they would use these non-refugees politically (and so far successfully) in attempts to destroy nascent Israel. Morris also completely ignored the facts that 1) until 1981, most Palestinian refugees held Jordanian citizenship, and 2) that Jordanian law, based on the Mandate from 1917, carries a clause which stipulated [until 1981] that all non-Jewish Palestians have a 'right of return' to Jordan. Peters' book is completely annotated, and as I mentioned earlier, her sources are almost exclusively Arab, which lends her book a lot of validity and debunks the most basic premises' of revisionist histories of the conflict.
Rating:
Summary: Exceptional narrative history
Review: Much of what Americans read and hear about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is polemical in nature, designed not to enlighten us but to covince us of the utter rightness of one side and the absolute depravity of the other. For the most part, American commentatators woleheartedly side with Israel. Ocasionally, we encounter a pro-Palestinian voice. What we lack is dispassionate historical analysis that attempts to explain the origins of the conflict rather than manipulate the reader. Benny Morris's "Righteous Victims" fills this void exceptionally well. Unfortunately and inaccurately, Morris is often portrayed pro-Palestinian propagandist. Morris simply refuses to view this long complex conflict as a cartoon of good vs. evil, as Israel's apologists have always insisted it is. For Morris, the struggle over Palestine is a fairly normal historical event. From reading "Righteous Victims" one gets the impression of two entitities muddling their way through history as nations often do, often missing opportunities to ease tensions and create a lasting peace. Morris's world consists not of heroic peace-loving Israelis confronting Palestinian genocidal maniacs (the standard portrayal in the American media) but of relatively normal human beings in a difficult situation. Morris also offends Israel's apologists by emphasizing the fact that this conflict has always been marked by extreme inequality. From the beginning of the Zionist project, the Jewish emigres have commanded superior political and economic resources. By 1948, they also possessed superior military resources. His work contradicts the image of plucky little Israel bravely overcoming the amassed forces of the Arab world. Morris correctly emphasizes the pitiful political, social and military organization of both the Arab states and the Palestinian nation. Having stripped away these comorting fantasies, Morris honestly confronts the essence of the current situation and appears to come away a pessimist. The Palestinians are defeated people, impoverished, humiliated and alienated. Some of the wounds are self-inflicted while others are the product of Israeli policy. Without a vast improvement in their daily conditions, political negotiations are doomed to failure.
|
