Reading Jeffrey Goldberg’s review of Benny Morris’ One State, Two States is a welcome relief considering the anti-Israel bias of the majority of books and reviewers published in NYTBR.
Muhammad Dahlan’s statement about Fatah’s refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state is one of the few occasions where this matter is brought before NYT’s reading public. And as Goldberg points out, it substantiates Morris’ argument in One State, Two States that Arab rejectionism is the cause for continued strife between Israel and her neighbors.
The turning point for Morris that allowed him to reach this conclusion was Yasir Arafat’s rejection of Ehud Barak’s offer of a state in December 1999.
One problem is outstanding in this review, and it comes from the reviewer when he pushes to hard to find fault with Morris’ narrative. The author, argues Goldberg, “ignores the possibility that recent Israeli mistakes have marginalized” moderate Palestinians. The mistake Goldberg has in mind is Ariel Sharon’s unilateral withdrawal of 2005.
Apparently, the reviewer subscribes to the myth that Israel's Gaza withdrawal was a missed opportunity for coordination with the Palestinian Authority. This is a myth, as Goldberg ought to know, because the PA can never be seen as coming to an interim agreement with Israel. Only a final status agreement can be had. That is why it rebuffed Sharon's offers for coordination.
That Goldberg suggests otherwise weakens the review and this reader’s opinion of the reviewer. After all, the best part of the piece is the opening, which demonstrates that rejectionism is part of the PA – the supposedly moderate peace partner – but the ending undermines the opening, as it resuscitates the notion that the PA wants to peacefully end the Conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment