The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict

by Walter Laqueur (editor), Barry Rubin (Editor)

A historical overview of the continuing crisis in the Middle East traces the course of the Israel-Arab conflict from its earliest origins, through the various wars, skirmishes, and peace efforts, to the Israel-PLO and Israel-Jordan peace accords, in a collection of articles, speeches, letters, and reports dealing with all aspects of the subject. Original.

Genres: History, Middle East, Israel, Nonfiction, Politics, Historical, World History

580 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1969

About the author

Walter Ze'ev Laqueur was an American historian, journalist and political commentator. Laqueur was born in Breslau, Lower Silesia, Prussia (modern Wrocław, Poland), into a Jewish family. In 1938, he left Germany for the British Mandate of Palestine. His parents, who were unable to leave, became victims of the Holocaust.

Laqueur lived in Israel from 1938 to 1953. After one year at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, he joined a Kibbutz and worked as an agricultural laborer from 1939 to 1944. In 1944, he moved to Jerusalem, where he worked as a journalist until 1953, covering Palestine and other countries in the Middle East.

Since 1955 Laqueur has lived in London. He was founder and editor, with George Mosse, of the Journal of Contemporary History and of Survey from 1956 to 1964. He was also founding editor of The Washington Papers. He was Director of the Institute of Contemporary History and the Wiener Library in London from 1965 to 1994. From 1969 he was a member, and later Chairman (until 2000), of the International Research Council of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington. He was Professor of the History of Ideas at Brandeis University from 1968 to 1972, and University Professor at Georgetown University from 1976 to 1988. He has also been a visiting professor of history and government at Harvard, the University of Chicago, Tel Aviv University and Johns Hopkins University.

Laqueur's main works deal with European history in the 19th and 20th centuries, especially Russian history and German history, as well as the history of the Middle East. The topics he has written about include the German Youth Movement, Zionism, Israeli history, the cultural history of the Weimar Republic and Russia, Communism, the Holocaust, fascism, and the diplomatic history of the Cold War. His books have been translated into many languages, and he was one of the founders of the study of political violence, guerrilla warfare and terrorism. His comments on international affairs have appeared in many American and European newspapers and periodicals.

(Wikipedia)

Reviews

[Cathy · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an excellent resource for anyone who wants to become familiar with the background to the Israel/Palestine conflict. However, it is NOT completely balanced. Not one of the dozens of UN resolutions condemning Israel's continued occupation of and settlements in the West Bank and Gaza is included in this otherwise comprehensive tome. The authors have been honest that they have been trying to keep the size of the book to a reasonable length: it's now over 600 pages, however, including just one of these UN resolutions with a note about how many similar ones have been passed would go a long way to amending this omission and making it clear to any reader to what degree Israel has been a rogue state for over 40 years. However, it is a source of many gems to use in discussions of the issue: both Abdul Nasser and Menachim Begin take credit for starting the '67 war, presently each side blames the other for beginning the conflict; Ben Gurion called Begin a "Hitlerite", now those who accuse Israel of Nazi-like behavior are called anti-Semites.

[Fred Kohn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is truly an excellent resource on the Israel-Arab conflict and I intend to add it to my library … someday. (So many other books to add first!) The book claims to present a balanced, unbiased view. I think this is correct in the main, but it seems to me that the early chapters seemed to favor the Arabs. Statements by Arabs, so it seemed to me, were overly represented. However, this was not true of later sections of the book.

I was for the most part familiar with the early history of the conflict, up until the Yom Kippur war. I was not familiar with Negib Azouri. According to Wikipedia, Azoury envisaged “that Zionist and Arab nationalist aspirations were likely to come seriously into conflict,”[8] writing that "two important phenomena are emerging at this moment in Asiatic Turkey. They are the awakening of the Arab Nation and the latent effort by Jews to reconstitute on a very large scale the ancient Kingdom of Israel They are destined to fight each other continually until one of them wins."[9].

I found this quote interesting: "For the initial claim, often submitted by the Zionist representatives, that they have a 'right' to Palestine, based on an occupation of two thousand years ago, can hardly be seriously considered."—The King-Crane Commission (appointed by President Wilson) Recommendations August 28, 1919. Later presidents, especially Reagan, heartily disagreed with this assessment. I disagree with Reagan and agree with the King Crane Commission. This quote is apropos: "The Arabs of Palestine are descendants of the indigenous inhabitants of the country, who have been in occupation of it since the beginning of history; they cannot agree that it is right to subject an indigenous population against its will to alien immigrants, whose claim is based upon a historical connection which ceased effectively many centuries ago."—The Arab Office, March 1946. The evidence seems to be that the Arabs of Palestine and the Jews of Palestine both arose from indigenous Canaanites. The biblical myth that the Jews arose from invading armies led by Joshua is just that: a myth.

I have a friend who claims that Arafat said that after they killed all the Jews, they would come for the infidels. I can find no evidence of this. Arafat is quoted as saying, "[Our revolution's] target has never been the Jew, as a person, but racist Zionism and undisguised aggression."—Yasir Arafat, Address to the U.N. General Assembly (November 13, 1974). Google says when Arafat used the term "infidel", he was primarily referring to Jews.

Arafat was an interesting character. I did not know that he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (along with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres), which is ironic for sure! The PLO sponsored several terrorist actions. "Key incidents included the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre, the 1985 *Achille Lauro* cruise ship hijacking, the 1974 Ma'alot school massacre, hijacking airliners, and various attacks during the Second Intifada (Google AI)."

Arafat may not have called for the massacre of all infidels, but other Arab leaders were not as reticent. For example, Acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council Ahmad Bahr, said America and Israel will be annihilated, God willing (April 13, 2007). In 2012, he delivered a televised sermon in which he prayed for Allah to kill "the Jews and their supporters... [and] the Americans and their supporters... without leaving a single one" (Wikipedia). In a September 23, 2011, Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that Palestinians said their state would be Jew free. It turns out that some Palestinians did say this, although the Hamas charter said they would allow Jews and Christian’s in their state, but in submission to Muslims (as I understand it this is in accord with Islamic law). However Muslim Brotherhood Guide Muhammad Badie said that Muslims are sons of Abraham, rather than Jews and Christians (this is contrary to what the Qur'an says).

This book includes declarations, charters, accords, newspaper articles, U.N. resolutions and agreements, and, notably, speeches, including some by U.S. presidents. I especially enjoyed the speech given by Barack Obama on June 4, 2009. I agree with what George W. Bush said: "I call on the Palestinian people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terrorism (June 24, 2002)." Sadly, it hasn’t happened so far. Hamas is worse than the Palestinian Authority.

I don’t have much sympathy for Israel, but this book left me without much sympathy for the Arabs, either. Erdogan said in July 2014 that in the 2014 Gaza War what Israel did to Palestine surpassed what Hitler did. This is really a silly attitude. You can be against Israel's genocide without making ridiculous comparisons.

I learned a lot from this book. I realized that I need to learn more about the 1982 Israel/Lebanon war. With that aim I have added two books to my to-read list: * Under Siege: P.L.O. Decisionmaking During the 1982 War*, by Rashid Khalidi; and *The Tragedy Of Lebanon*, by Jonathan C. Randal.

[Walt · Rating 3 out of 5]

This collection of documents may help readers further understand the conflict between Israel and neighboring states; but as a stand alone resource it is a mess. Laqueur does provide (not always) a very bare bones introduction to each document. His introductions are good because he usually describes the author; but for readers not intimate with the material, Laqueur's comments do not go far enough in creating a background for each document.

As a collection of documents, it is...large. It seems incomplete because Laqueur offers so little narrative until his closing remarks. The documents also align most heavily with the Six-Day War. A solid third of the book centers around this conflict. None actually mention what happened. There is even less material about the action of the 1948 and 1956 wars. Readers will see a lot of Arab posturing and then, poof! They lost and the books moves to another document.

Readers will need to decide for themselves if Laqueur displays bias towards one side in the conflict. He does not defend his decision for including some documents and excluding others. The documents that are present do not try to identify middle ground or entertain serious peace proposals. A slight exception are the British Mandate documents where the British appear to have been trying to satisfy everyone, and satisfied none. The authors are mostly on the more radical side of the debate. Even the opinion pieces appear to be heavily skewed one way or the other. The most curious document of all, I believe, is the strange piece written by Bernard Lewis who concludes that the conflict is clearly attributable to the Soviet Union because the Soviets disliked Jews. Lewis' essay was the only document in the collection that actually angered me due to poor logic and lack of evidence.

After slogging through 600 pages of documents I did learn some things. I read some fascinating analogies. Why do the Palestinians suffer for the sins of Germany and Russia? Should the Palestinians be allowed to return to claim their property - if not, what allows Jews in Israel to return to Germany and reclaim property? Would Palestinians object to Jews if Israel was settled in Uganda? The Jewish response to these talking points have validity; but the simplicity of such ideas stand out in an otherwise onerous and repetitive monograph.

The ultimate conclusions Laqueur identifies are that posturing and saber-rattling ("chauvinism") by both sides is the most culpable factor in the conflict. Secondary to that are three clear sub-causes: One, lack of development (educational, social, cultural, technological) in the Arab countries that made them unable to compete against the Jews at seemingly any level; Two, Israel exploiting these advantages to the fullest and not showing any remorse or empathy, especially when they themselves had been victimized in much the same way; and finally, Arab leaders in neighboring states maintaining the Palestinians in squalor for political reasons.

A lot has changed since 1967. There was another war. Most Arab nations recognize Israel. There has been peace for the better part of 40 years. Israel continues to develop much faster than her neighbors. It is unclear if any benefits have passed over the borders. As Laqueur predicted, Jordan was the first Arab state to recognize Israel and make peace. However, the economic advantages that Laqueur had championed do not appear to have materialized. The three sub-causes to the wars remain in place. The chauvinism and saber-rattling has decreased (until President Trump recognized Jerusalem as the rightful capital of Israel). Overall, I cannot recommend this book due to the omission of historical events or anything to connect the various documents.

[Brandon · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a fantastic tool and should be added to the library of any serious student of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. It contains many of the most important documents in the ever-unfolding crisis.

[sologdin · Rating 2 out of 5]

polygynous household with improper asset distribution spawns ethno-theological conflict for hundreds of years.

[Elisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of our current hot-button issues that I needed to understand, and this compendium of speeches and historical documents and treaties blew the conflict wide open for me.

It's amazing and all too human how both sides dig in and fight from their trenches with such ferocity and blindness. Though it's hard not to point the finger at the English-speaking superpowers that put their nose, foot, and mouth into today's most intractable conflict (thus basically creating it).

In light of recent events in Jerusalem, it's mind-boggling to continue considering the United States as an objective mediator between Palestinian Arabs and Jews.

This book lays it all out, as is, and it's up to the reader to come up with a conclusion. That's what I like most about it. But it's only for serious students of this unfortunate fight.

[Sam · Rating 4 out of 5]

not bad as a supplement for history reading. you won’t learn any new facts with this, so you really need to read other books to understand the context.

it’s really invaluable for understanding the evolution of the rhetoric in this conflict. you can see Palestinian national consciousness emerge, or you can see how the tone changes once radical Islam becomes a factor.

it is, however, a little heavy on the laws, which are the least interesting part. there’s not a lot to be learned from 6 pages of a UN resolution, and you are presented with quite a few of those. I wish there was a volume more focused on the writings and less about the laws.

[Covey Mcallister · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a collection of documents, speeches, letters, and articles relating to the creation of Israel and their resulting conflicts with Palestine until the 1980s. I found it thrilling and ended up watching hours of documentaries as a supplement on events that I knew little about. I liked the lack of commentary by the editors, would like to see a sequel through current times!

[Pol Artola · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting as a framework / on a conceptual basis, but it lacks a ton of contextualization and interpretation.

[Cara Lynn]

Read for school

[Ben Peters · Rating 2 out of 5]

For the serious student of the Middle East, a useful, almost essential compendium of defining documents, sources, speeches, letters, reports, timelines, and other inscribed moments stretching across more than the one hundred and twenty years of conflict. Of course, many of the documents themselves are second-hand or (in the case of ghost writers) third-hand accounts of the conflict. Of course, the volume is almost useless for the novice reader on the topic. Of course, it doesn't make sense of this part of the world. If anything, it shows the reader exactly how the lines of conflict never have been drawn clearly or uncontestedly.

The book helps circumvent the potent minefield that is second-hand news political and historical analysis, letting the documents speak for themselves. The seventh edition begins with the Zionist documents of the Russian Bilu group and Theodore Herzl in the 1890s and stretches through the second Bush administration. The list of voices--many of them world leaders and global organizations, the British Empire, US and Soviet Presidents, the UN are mixed in with all the regional leaders from Palestine, Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and others--suggest how the history of conflict in this part of the world is also a history of modern politics.

[Michael Griswold · Rating 4 out of 5]

Depending on who you are, this is either one of the greatest books you've ever slogged through or the absolute cure for your rampet insomnia problem. When it says documentry history, it means it in the truest sense of the world as the book contains 620+ pages of every major document concearning the Arab-Israeli problem. You hear from multiple U.S. presidents, various leaders of Israel and representitives of the Palestinian people, and others on the longest conflict known to modern mankind. It does not take the reader long to understand how no one has really been able to solve this thing with any lasting results (Israel-Egypt peace excepted)This is not a book for the faint of heart though as many of the documents are written in governmentese and labourous to get through, but it provides the clearest snapshot of the conflict i've heard.

[Simcha · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a must read for the serious student of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There are lots of books out there offering competing narratives, opinions, solutions, etc. The benefit of a documentary history book is reading opinions and decisions straight from the horse's mouth of the players involved; it's helpful to understand their motivations and seeing how we got to our modern day situation.

Despite the length, I believe the editors should have included a little bit more context to some of the passages. Otherwise, you will need to read this concurrently with a history book (which I did despite already having background on the subject.)

[Lucas · Rating 5 out of 5]

A finely curated collection of documents on the conflict that launched a thousand headlines. Once confronted with the shocking way Arabs speak of their opponents, very little remains to be said in their favor. It is, in fact, far more devastating to the Arab cause to hear them give their own opinions on the conflict, than to hear from their many apologists in the West. Arab sympathizers must be the only cheerleaders in the world who try to drown out their own team's voice.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

This has been an eye-opening book with a simple format...... a presentation of many original documents, speeches, etc., from all sides of the Arab/Israeli conflict beginning with the earliest proposals for the establishment of Israel from the late 19th century all the way through the Reagan years. It definitely gives one an appreciation for the tremendous complexity of the whole situation.

[Heather · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not actually a book, per se, but a reference manual with all the collected documents (speeches, UN resolutions, letters, etc) relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, starting with the announcement by Britain of its intention to found a state for the Jewish people during WWI. Interesting, but required some additional background info to fill in the gaps.

[Mariya]

NO

[Craig Bolton]

The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict: Seventh Revised and Updated E by Walter Laqueur (2008)

[Rflutist · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great reference book but a bit choppy for a straight read through. It will be a book that needs to be updated again in a few years based upon how current events unfold.

[Foxglove · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent resource for any journalist or writer, makes my life so much easier to have primary sources in one place. Yes there is google but I like books!