Discussions and Reviews Time for reorientation: a review of recent research on the Arab-Israeli conflict Ania Francos, Les Palestiniens Paris: Julliard, 1968. Pp. 318. Fr. 20.70. Yehoshafat Harkabi, Fedayeen Action and Arab Strategy London: Institute for Strategic Studies (Adelphi Paper No. 53), 1969. Pp. 43. 5s (75¢). To Make War or Make Peace (New Outlook Symposium) Proceedings of the International Symposium on Inevitable War or Initiatives for Peace. Tel-Aviv: New Outlook, 1969. Pp. 288. I.L. 8.00 ($2.50). Hisham Sharabi, Palestine and Israel: The Lethal Dilemma New York: Pegasus, 1969. Pp. 224. $6.95. Nadav Safran, From War to War: The Arab-Israeli Confrontation, 1948-1967 New York: Pegasus, 1969. Pp. 464. $10.00. JOSEPH D. BEN-DAK Center for Research on Conflict Resolution. Universitv of Michigan Voltaire’s somewhat facetious criticism of extension of traditional work on the Middle certain Biblical texts, &dquo;dans un livre saint un East. Orientalists, staunch adherents of the peu d’exactitude ne nuirait pas,&dquo; can be ap- historical-philological approach, wrote dic- plied to current writings on the Arab-Israeli tionaries and grammars alike, &dquo;through a conflict. A good amount of the work is an very considerable amount of additions and ~ ~ z translations of texts, to histories of wider or 1The author wishes to acknowledge his indebted- narrower scope&dquo; (van Nieuwenhuijze, 1965, ness to Ziva Reuveni and Rosalind without Daly, p. 1). The taste of a wider public was served whose this review would have been help impos- which into sible. Daniel Heradstveit and Johan Galtung (Oslo) by travelogues gradually expanded have been instrumental in suggesting the type of general descriptions of regions or countries: approach argued for in this review. descriptions in which a preoccupation with 102 politics in the Western sense of the term has (in the sense of possible generalization be- tended to increase and in which palatability yond language or culture area, etc.), and to the Western lay public has often but not quantitative in orientation. always been matched by accuracy or verifica- The main problem with this criterion, how- tion on the spot (ibid.). ever, is that in the service of peace one must also try to find value in any contributions l. Current Work on the Conflict: that deal with the Israeli-Arab conflict, inas- Some Lugubrious Thoughts much as the works can offer innovative redef- inition of the issues involved, strategies for The most typical and predictable trend in &dquo;defreezing&dquo; the situation, and perhaps more work on the conflict has been the present balanced understanding of the factors in- of a literature which over- growth polemical volved. The works under review make little emphasizes background dimensions, substan- progress in any of these directions, though: tive matters, and the value of social justice all of them are redundant to an extent and while buttressing the case for one party or only the last one has some qualities of the another. This has been particularly and pain- kind of work we envisage on the Arab-Israeli fully true for efforts entitled with supposedly conflict. However, each one of them carries &dquo;scientific&dquo; labels and originating from &dquo;re- with it certain advantages over earlier work, search&dquo; centers (e.g. Kadi, 1966; al-Khalidi, and I will attempt to extract a few of these 1958; Sayegh, 1961, 1965). The three wars points and interrelate them to a suggested and accelerated (1948, 1956, especially 1967) frame of reference for further research. Be- the rate of of in West- publications &dquo;quickies&dquo; fore doing this, I will briefly review each of ern countries and the Middle East. of Many the works within what we consider to be their the books which have been published since sociopolitical context. the 1967 war in the US, while not easily lend- ing themselves to the categories of research 2. A European Work in Search articulated above, have been more sophisti- of Social Justice catedly biased, the case being made more often than not for Israel (e.g., Love, 1969; Francos’ book is typical of the anti-Israel Prittie, 1968; Kimche and Bawly, 1969). left in France. Behind her entire argument Such streams of publications are not likely runs a thread of personal history. Quite often to dry up in the foreseeable future. Yet some in the case of Jews it is related to the Holo- gradual change has already been coming caust, and nearly always a resemblance is about in the broad picture of Middle Eastern found between US-dominated Vietnam and studies through the introduction of such dis- Israel. Francos is a Jew whose parents had ciplinary approaches as modern sociology as emigrated to Palestine in the 1920s only to well as some honest attempts to cope with return to Europe, disillusioned, several years questions of cultural relativity-typified by later. They were both killed at Auschwitz. Her the works of Berger and van Neiuwenhuijze immediate experiences before spending three (1962 and 1965). Thus one kind of difficulty years with the Fedayeen’ (in Syria and Jor- in our job is relating the five works in review to certain needs of inquiry in the field of con- 2I shall use Fedayeen interchangeably with Palestinians. The name Fedayeen (i.e., in Arabic, flict management, reduction, or resolution. "those who sacrifice themselves") was introduced It should be obvious that we are referring to the Israeli-Arab conflict by Egyptian authori- more interdis- essentially to even advanced ties in 1955 as the official label for irregulars dis- ciplinary approaches, comparative in nature patched into Israel on subversive missions. In this 103 dan) were in Algeria and Cuba. Hence her obtain a deeper insight into a much less psychological need to articulate the oppres- studied dimension, namely, the Palestinian sion of the Palestinians is understandable. interaction with the various host societies. Her position reminds one of Rodinson’s inter- A second important focus in Francos’ re- pretation of the Arab-Israeli conflict as &dquo;the search is on events shaping the history of struggle of an indigenous population against the Fedayeen, particularly the Karameh af- the occupation of part of its national terri- fair (in March 1968), suggesting implicitly tory by foreigners&dquo; (Rodinson, 1969). The that the steady increase of the Fedayeen de- book is a personal account with considerable pends at least partially on opportunities to frankness. It is valuable in that it captures the stand out, brave and able, against the Israelis. way that Palestinians think, and especially Galle (1968) dismisses Francos’ study as a their reality. She does not attempt to analyze &dquo;propaganda tract.&dquo; In my opinion he does the situation beyond suggesting that the Pal- so because of his preference for balanced pre- estinians have a case. It is precisely because sentations (see Galle, 1968 and 1969). Ob- of her bias that some of Francos’ criticisms viously, one cannot compare Francos’ work are valuable. For instance, she attacks some to Rouleu et al. (1967), a dialogue between Palestinian leaders for the luxuries they en- two much more informed journalists guided joy and evaluates Shukeiry’s tactics-notably by an experienced moderator (see Kapeliuk, through an examination of his Palestinian 1969). Francos’ book is more in the style and Liberation Organization and its manipulation the mood of Givet (1968), where questions of by Arab governments to control the Pales- anti-Israeli attitude are further expressed only tinian problem. Her revealing analysis of the to demonstrate the confusion as well as the friction between Arab bourgeoisie and Pales- difficulty in relating the complex Israeli-Arab tinian refugees, as well as tensions she de- relationship to Jewish consciousness in the scribes in Arab establishments vis-a-vis the European left. growing strength and salience of the Fedayeen -all of these discussions may help to clarify 3. An Israeli Strategical Perspective certain moods and strategies chosen by the If one takes Francos to be total emotional- Fedayeen. ity, Harkabi (1969) is nothing but rationality. There are nuclear points in Francos’ anal- Harkabi was the Israeli chief of military in- ysis that deserve more articulation and lend telligence from 1955 to 1959. Since then he themselves to more An il- systematic study. has been concerned with the lustration is her conclusion that Palestinians academically Arab-Israeli conflict. His doctoral disserta- have been developing ideological predisposi- tion (1968) is the most lucid, systematic study tions and social organizations different from of Arab ideology in the conflict. Western those of the populations and countries in readers, however, had already been presented which they reside. Beyond the simple proposi- with fragments of his analysis of the Arab tion that there are Nasserites in Egypt, Baath- collapse in the Six Day War (Harkabi, 1967) ists in Syria, etc., it appears that, concomitant and a general brief summary of the confronta- with the process of communicative &dquo;unifica- tion (Harkabi, 1965). More than anyone else, tion&dquo; Palestinians, one also needs to among Alter (1968) succeeded in putting both the background and the motivation of Harkabi’s discussion we do not deal with Palestinian refugees work in a nutshell. (actually the majority) who are not associated with the organizations currently active against Israel and There is an enormous lack of symmetry in the Zionism. positions of the two antagonists. The Israeli posi- 104 tion on the Arabs over the years has on occasion that criticize the chosen path of guerrilla war- been stupid, blundering, unfeeling, but it has also fare, and spell out the differences between showed aspects of common sense, even humanity, Palestine and Algeria (or other revolutionary especially since June, 1967, and, by and large, one wars)-an exercise not prevalent at all in can say that its guiding principle has been en- Arab for an lightened self-interest.