Very good. It blows through the orientalist accounts of transhistorical sectarianism while not falling back into an equally transhistorical notion of coexistance. The exploitation of minority politics by European powers for colonial purposes in late 19th century Ottoman Empire propelled a wave of sectarian strife, but also lead to the formulation of an alternative ideological framework, that he labels the ecumenical frame. This frame is based on the creation of a civic and political community based on secular equality. One key theme that comes up thoughout the book is how both of these competing frameworks were neither mere Western imports nor completely indigenous developments. They were produced by Arabs operating under the constraints of Western imperial domination and falling Ottoman sovereignity. In the words of Said, "we can better understand the persistence and the durability of saturating hegemonic systems like culture when we realize that their internal constraints upon writers and thinkers were productive, not unilaterally inhibiting."
These internal constraints persisted into the mandate era, when European powers openly used sectarian politics to pursue their interests. The French exploited the maronite christian community in Lebanon, the British separated the Druze and Alawite parts of Syria from the rest. As one French official remarked at the Permanent Mandates Commission in Geneva, their intention was to create “a certain number of small states” to stifle the “aggressive tendencies” of larger states. As colonial conditions varied, responses to these strategies also varied. In Lebanon, the ecumenical frame manifested as the ossification of sectarian divisions by creating a system of sectarian quotas. In Iraq, it manifested as the invisibilization of all sectarian dentities.
One prominent anti-ecumenical movement covered in the book is Zionism. I appreciated the framing: it is clear that exclusivism was written in the DNA of Zionism. A more in depth coverage of Zionist literature could have illustrated this more clearly. Also, the anti-Zionist responses by Palestinian Jews fit very well under the ecumenical frame, but were not mentioned at all. This chapter is at its best regarding the effect of the Zionist triumph on ecumenical ideas, both in Palestine and outside.
Finally, coverage of Arab nationalism, the military dictatorships of the second half of the 20th century, and political Islam is limited to the epilogue. The epilogue is much less analytical than the rest of the book, and reads more like a succession of broad trends that took place since 1948 and how they affected the ecumenical frame. The overall picture seems to be that the dictatorial character of these regimes prevented the solidification of ecumenical ideas, and it was only a matter of time until these regimes transitioned to somewhat anti-ecumenical positions to cement their power. This part of the book seems lazier than the rest.
Overall, the book is very good. Most of its value lies in the framing, as opposed to the specific evidence, which is uncommon.