Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents

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.

Professor Charles D. Smith's textbook (now in its 10th edition) has been the gold standard of university level textbook/General textbook on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. The 10th edition includes new material all the way up to mid-January of 2020. As with his previous editions, the book is filled with balanced, accurate information with each chapter ending with primary documents for the period. The information is sufficient for the reader to get a good sense of the issues. Readers interested in a more in-depth treatment of certain time periods and particular issues within the conflict can consult his notes and bibliography.One important note to make is (and this is not the fault of the author but rather the editor and publisher) is on p. 477, the map for Camp David in 2000 is incorrect. The map shown is actually a darker photocopy of the Taba map of early 2001. I already contacted the author and he will notify the editor and publisher of the mistake. This is at least in my copy of the book. I was able to fix it by cutting the Camp David 2000 map from the 7th edition and pasted it on to the newer edition page.

Charles Smith’s “Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict” is harshly biased against Jews. Here’s the evidence:1. Smith ignores the legal authorization for ZionismThe book portrays the Balfour Declaration, San Remo Resolution and British Mandate for Palestine as a British power play to control Palestine for imperialistic reasons (pp. 49-68). In fact, the diplomatic arrangement was approved by the entire League of Nations membership, not just Great Britain. The League unanimously guaranteed a Jewish right of self-determination under binding international law to reconstitute the “Jewish National Home” in Palestine. Any ancillary benefit to the British Empire did not affect the legal import of the League’s decision.2. Smith pretends Palestine was historically an Arab nationFrom 1517 to World War I, the Turkish Ottoman Empire ruled a region that included a small, undefined crossroads known to Christians as “Palestine.” The term Palestine was derived from a Roman word invented to erase the record of Jewish governance in the place Jews called “the Land of Israel.” After the War, the defeated Turks surrendered their imperial holdings to the Principle Allied Powers, not to any Arab entity. Most of Palestine was state land, not properties privately owned by Arabs.Despite this history, the book misleadingly refers to Palestine as “Arab land” (pp. 36, 77, 400), “Palestinian land” (pp. 21, 399), the Palestinians’ “first” nation before Israel (p. 181), a “Palestinian nation [that] should be reborn in what was then Israel” (p. 336), and an Arab entity called “former Palestine” (pp. 410, 489). The Jews are the only surviving indigenous people throughout the territory of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Many other ethnic groups including Arabs have invaded that terrain but never held it as a state.3. Smith normalizes Arab terrorismThe book normalizes the century-long history of Arab terrorist attacks on their Jewish neighbors. Routinely, the author references the countless shootings, bombings, and stabbings as “resistance” (pp. 137, 408, 525), “armed resistance” (pp. 129, 497) “resistance to Zionism” (pp. 131,180), a “struggle to liberate Palestine” (p. 307), or “an expression of frustration at ongoing occupation and settlement expansion” (p. 484). He thus assumes the terrorism is politically rational or justified, even though it is the political nature of terrorism that makes it so gravely abhorrent.Nowhere does the author disclose that the hateful political agenda is grounded in religious dogma. For example, the Hamas Covenant states that “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it.” Palestinian clergy commonly preach that Jews evolved from “apes and pigs.” The Palestinian public glorifies its deceased terrorists as “martyrs.” Without this context the reader cannot understand how Palestinian terrorism fuels the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or where the violence fits in the global trend of Islamic extremism.Smith’s other euphemisms for “terrorism” don’t even hint at the resulting bloodshed. He calls the murders “unrest” (pp. 103, 449), “disturbances” (p. 103), “assaults” (pp. 115, 226, 483), “interactions” (p. 219), “border transgressions” (p. 226), and “actions” (p. 525). That’s a shameful cover-up.4. Smith mischaracterizes Zionism as a terrorist movementAfter excusing Palestinian terrorism, Smith excoriates its victims for the same sin. He persistently characterizes Zionism as a “terrorist” movement, even though the ratio of Zionist terrorists to Arab terrorists is infinitesimally small.Specifically, Smith throws around undocumented generalizations like “Jewish terrorism” (p. 171), “Zionist terror” (pp. 162-63), “Zionist terrorism” (p. 183), “the logic of Zionist terrorism” (p. 184), “militant Zionism” (pp. 32, 457), “militant Jews” (p. 103), “American Zionist militants” (p. 185), “Likud militancy” (p. 464), and “Israeli expansionist goals” (p. 400). He even accuses unnamed “ultra-Orthodox rabbis” of “provoking charges that they were justifying a religiously sanctioned (halachic) sentence of death for the Israeli leaders” (p. 446). Please.It is fair to blame an individual Jew or splinter group of Jews for committing acts of terror, but insulting to suggest these scattered aberrations make Zionism a terrorist movement. If only Smith had acknowledged the many Zionist sacrifices made for peaceful co-existence with Arabs.Smith’s most farfetched remark on Zionist militancy states: “Scholarly debate over the flight of Palestinians no longer questions the fact that Zionist/Israeli forces forcibly expelled the majority of the refugees” (p. 196). Not true. The most authoritative scholars on the subject (Benny Morris, Mark Tessler, and Howard Sachar) agree most Arab Palestinians fled Palestine unilaterally to escape the war, and the few Jewish expulsions of Arabs were done to defend against the Arab invasion, not to fulfill some ideological decree.5. Smith promotes the myth of the international Jewish conspiracyThe most disturbing parts of the book are those that perpetuate the stereotype of the “international Jewish conspiracy.”In 1931, Smith says, the British prime minister reaffirmed his country’s commitment to Zionism in part as a “capitulation” to “the threat of Jewish pressure on the U.S. government to bring economic sanctions against Great Britain” (p. 128). The tiny Jewish American population, beset by discrimination, had no such political power.Elsewhere in Smith’s story, Zionist development projects are “aided by Rothchild funding” (p. 23), Truman favors Zionism due primarily to “organized Jewish pressure” (p. 179), “Jewish millionaires” buy weapons for the Zionists in Palestine (p.181-82), Jewish refugees of WWII flock to Palestine after “lobbying by the Jewish Agency” (p. 181), and the U.S. supports Israel because “American Jews were mobilized, both monetarily and politically, as never before” (p. 300). The author’s outlook is filled with rich Jews manipulating world affairs.With college textbooks like this, it’s no wonder many students hate Israel.

great summary and detail of the conflict. it has a great timeline in the back and there are images through out the book that help you understand the conflict/ occupation. it is good for essay writing and giving a brief history of the region!

Comprehensive and well-written account of the background for much of the animosity in the Middle East towards (what used to be) the world powers....

In my preparation for a class on the U.S. Involvement in theMiddle East, I found this book to be very helpful.

For beginners, or self-proclaimed experts, this book is a must have. Buy it if you'd like to learn more. First hand documents available at the end of every chapter.

Excellent companion to The History of Palestine .

This book is not what you want. You get more sense from using wikipedia. I bought this book originally to gain more knowledge regarding the history of the arab-israeli conflict and that did not happen with this book. Go on to wikipedia type in 'Palestine Occupied Territories" and you'll get more from that than you will from this book. I'm not one to leave reviews all the time but i felt like i had to in this case.