2. the ISRAELI/PALESTINE QUESTION Edited by Ilan Pappã
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
2. THE ISRAELI/PALESTINE QUESTION Edited by Ilan Pappé London and New York: Routledge (1999), pp.278 Reviewed by Jamil Hilal* Ilan Pappe, who edits this reader written by Israeli and Palestinian historians and social scientists, is one of the more radical of the new Israeli historians. In his introduction to the reader, Pappe explains that the collection consists of the most recent developments in the historiography of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, with an eye on current scholarly interest. The reader claims to be informed by a "double-edged wish" of an interdisciplinary methodology and a more skeptical view towards historical narratives influenced by nationalist elites and ideologies. One is at a loss, however, as to why they are considered "new historians" since they use methodologies common among historians, including social historians. Perhaps the adjective "critical" is more apt than "new" or "revisionist" since what distinguishes these Israeli writers is their critical view of Zionist-Israeli historical narrative, a view that remains not critical enough from the perspective of most Palestinians historians and sociologists. It is this critical view that is a source of strength of this reader, particularly since it lacks a unity of theme or subject. The book is divided into six parts. Part one has two articles. The first, written by Beshara Doumani, is entitled "Rediscovering Ottoman Palestine: Writing Palestinians into History." The second article, by Butrus Abu-Manneh is interested in the status of Jerusalem in the late nineteenth century. Thus both articles deal with Ottoman Palestine. Doumani's article is concerned with the effect of ideology on the writing of history, and uncovers the operation of ideology on the historiography of Ottoman Palestine. He arrives at the need for writing the indigenous population of Palestine into the history of Ottoman Palestine, not simply for academic considerations, but also because "it is a prerequisite for a fuller understanding of present realities and a necessary element of empowerment through knowledge" (p. 30). One agrees with the author on the need to rewrite Palestinians in Ottoman history after so much neglect under the influence of Zionist, Orientalist, and orthodox pan-Arab nationalist perspectives, yet it is not easy to see how this enlightenment can change the present realities of the Palestinians. Abu- Manneh's article describes how in the course of the four to five decades that preceded World War I, the city of Jerusalem emerged as an administrative and political center, similar to Damascus and Beirut. Although the writer points out to the primacy of Jerusalem over Nablus and Acre (or Haifa) he does not explain why these other centers did not take the lead from Jerusalem. Part two consists of two articles that investigate the relationship between Zionism and colonialism. Uri Ram's article on the colonial perspective in Israeli sociology uncovers the ideological underpinnings, conscious and unconscious, of social science, and the pertinence of perceiving historical narratives within the context of the sociology of * Jamil Hilal, a Palestinian sociologist living in the West Bank, has written extensively on Palestinian society and history. knowledge. This reinforces the theme of Doumani's article on the perceptions of Ottoman Palestine, and illustrates the relationship between knowledge (or more accurately ignor- ance) and power. Ram finds that only recently has a post-colonial perspective emerged in the analysis of Israeli society, and that it is just beginning to be realized as an agenda (p. 68). It is worthwhile mentioning here that Palestinian and Arab sociologists have been using such a perspective for decades. Gershon Shafir looks at Zionism as a colonial phenomenon, and does not limit this characteristic, as have many Israeli academics, to the period that followed the 1967 war. He advances the thesis that Jewish settlements, although adapting to political and other changes, were colonial right from the start. He, therefore, rejects the framework used by many Israeli left-wing writers to divide the history of Israeli society into two separate periods; the pre- and post-1967 eras. Shafir insists on a single colonial perspective. Yet, for Palestinians, it is difficult to acknowledge his conclusion, that Israeli society is undergoing, even if partially, the process of decolonization (p. 95). Zachary Lockman's article in part three has, as its subject, the relations that exited between Jewish and Palestinian railway workers in the 1920s. Zionist trade unions, despite their proclaimed "socialist" ideology, stood strongly against organized forms of solidarity between Jewish and Palestinian workers. Lockman makes the point that many of the institutions and practices that were considered the most distinctive features of the Yishuv and of Israeli society (such as the Histadrut, the kibbutz, the role of the military) can only be understood directly or indirectly as "the product of the Zionist project's interaction with the Arabs and Arab society on the ground in Palestine'' (p.121). However, what requires emphasis is not merely the interaction as such, but the fact that it took place in a double colonial situation. Swedenburg's article attempts to sketch the role of the peasant in the 1936 revolt. Like the previous article it focuses on "history from below" and uses a colonialist framework to analyze Zionism. The author argues that the use of a vertical cleavages model to analyze Palestinian society at the time is ideological in that it reflects a strategy of the Palestinian ruling class. Instead he proposes to highlight peasants' traditions of resistance that were manifested in the 1936-revolt (p. 157). However, one should be mindful of reading class-consciousness and class solidarity when other forms of solidarities were present; solidarities based on nationalism, religion, kinship, locality as well as antagonisms against landlord and merchant and effendi. Part four has three articles on the 1948 war; two by Israeli historians, and one by a Palestinian historian. Avi Shlaim's article reviews the key issues in the Israeli debate between those named "new" (or "revisionist") and those named "old" Israeli historians. He employs his extensive historical knowledge to uncover the mythological nature of Israel's ideas about itself. He demonstrates as ill-founded the charge made against British policy that it was antagonist to the establishment of a Jewish state in 1948. He shows that the military balance of power in 1948 was in favor of the Zionist-Israeli forces. He also highlights the role of Israel in creating the Palestinian refugee problem, and the understanding between King Abdullah and the Jewish Agency in 1947-49 on the division of Palestine. Lastly he argues that postwar Israel was more intransigent than the Arab states. Benny Morris's article in this part of the reader deals with the causes and character of "the Arab exodus" in Palestine. He advances the thesis for which he became known .