Electronic Intifada, the now longstanding website dedicated to Palestinian human rights, recently reviewed my first book, The Palestine-Israel Conflict: A Basic Introduction. The reviewer, Asa Winstanley, does his readers a disservice.
Seemingly, Winstanley's approach was to flip through the book, quickly determine that it wasn't a fist-in-the-air work of revolutionary zeal, and then dismiss it based on the "deal-breaker" of my "woefully inadequate" treatment of the tragedies of the 1947-48 period. For example, my use of historian Benny Morris's scholarship is called into question.
Morris is the leading authority on the subject of Israel's precipitation of the Palestinian refugee problem, having done the original archival research that revolutionized academic and journalistic discussion of the 1947-48 experience. Despite his expertise, Morris also happens to be an apologist for Israel's policies, past and present. However, Winstanley fails to differentiate use of Morris's findings with defense of Morris's conclusions - a distinction I mention in the book. I highlight this issue by quoting Morris (and Theodor Herzl and David Ben-Gurion) against himself as a means of rendering questionable Morris's verdict that the refugee problem was not the product of a "master-plan of expulsion." Singling out my not using a certain book or the phrase "ethnic cleansing" is Winstanley making certain he found "fundamental flaws."
There are terminological concerns - "giveaways" - raised in the review such as my supposedly inaccurate use of the term al-Naqba, which Winstanley quotes out of context. There is also my labeling of the 1956 Suez Canal Crisis as the "Suez Canal Crisis" and my "euphemistic" use of the term "acquisition" to describe Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, which is also taken out of context.
All in all, if the book's account of 1947-48 is indeed woefully inadequate, Winstanley came up with a woefully thin list of reasons - erroneous and/or feeble as they are - to substantiate his claim.
Winstanley also seems to have missed the import of the book's secondary title. And if he wanted to criticize the text for being overly balanced, he might have adopted the approach of Afghan-Palestinian sociologist Lisa Taraki (Birzeit University), who wrote a similar but dignified review of the book's first edition in the September 2006 issue of Contemporary Sociology. One of her concerns was the book's location within the "conflict paradigm" - suggesting I was too "evenhanded" - a reasonable point that she makes in a reasonable review.
Electronic Intifada's critique is a shame. I say this not because the book is mine, but because their article endeavors to steer people away from a title that offers a useful survey of the conflict's history. Winstanley does describe the book's earlier chapters as "fairly solid," but as mentioned, gets hung up at 1948, where I strongly suspect he more or less stopped reading. He briefly (and flimsily) mentions my discussion of the Second Intifada, but basically gives the second half of the book a wide berth.
Electronic Intifada oftentimes does good work. I have read it since its establishment (and EI founder Ali Abunimah's Bitter Pill blog before that), and even suggest EI in the back of my book as an informative resource. Its goal since day one has been educational work on the Palestine issue, and of that it has provided a ton. I can't say I always agree with their interpretations and positions, but our fundamental objectives are the same.
In this instance, however, the writer mistook his own dissident enthusiasm for clarity and judgment (not an EI first, by any means), and all his readers got was misdirection, ideological conceit, and "wicked investigative reporting." Winstanley's agenda is apparent; for had the article been serious, he would have found more than a few words he didn't like. And his talk of deal-breakers and giveaways is puerile and embarrassing. The review therefore speaks for itself. On the plus side, Winstanley's struggle in giving substance to his underlying motives makes the article, to a certain extent, a rather positive one. But given the human suffering that is ultimately at stake, like I said, it's a shame.
http://electronicintifada.net/content/balance-prevents-beginners-guide-reaching-nub-palestine-conflict/11668
