Reviews: Shlaim, Israel and Palestine

Avi Shlaim. Israel and Palestine: Reappraisals, Revisions, Refutations. London / Brooklyn, NY: Verso, 2009.

9781844676569-frontcover

Reviews

  • Robert Fisk, “Lessons in Justice and Fairness from a No-Nonsense Historian.” The Independent, July 25, 2009.
  • Stephen Sizer, “Review.” Stephen Sizer (blog), July 2009.
  • Michael Rubner, Middle East Policy 17,1 (2010): 157-160.
  • Rafael Behr, “Review.” The Guardian, October 2, 2010.
  • Hisham Khatib. “Review.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 38.2 (2011): 283-4.
  • James L. Gelvin. “Review.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 45.1 (2013): 191-193.

Cite: Lavie, Mizrahi Feminism and Palestine

Lavie, Smadar. “Mizrahi Feminism and the Question of Palestine.” Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies 7.2 (2011): 56-88.

 

URL: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_middle_east_womens_studies/summary/v007/7.2.lavie.html

 

Abstract

This paper analyzes the failure of Israel’s Ashkenazi (Jewish, of European, Yiddish-speaking origin) feminist peace movement to work within the context of Middle East demographics, cultures, and histories and, alternately, the inabilities of the Mizrahi (Oriental) feminist movement to weave itself into the feminist fabric of the Arab world. Although Ashkenazi elite feminists in Israel are known for their peace activism and human rights work, from the Mizrahi perspective their critique and activism are limited, if not counterproductive. The Ashkenazi feminists have strategically chosen to focus on what Edward Said called the Question of Palestine—a well funded agenda that enables them to avoid addressing the community-based concerns of the disenfranchised Mizrahim. Mizrahi communities, however, silence their own feminists as these activists attempt to challenge the regime or engage in discourse on the Question of Palestine. Despite historical changes, the Ashkenazi-Mizrahi distinction is a racialized formation so resilient it manages to sustain itself through challenges rather than remain a frozen dichotomy.

Cite: Spanos, Edward W. Said and Zionism

——–

Spanos, William V. "Edward W. Said and Zionism: Rethinking the Exodus Story." Boundary 2 37,1 (2010): 127-166.

——–

Abstract

In The Question of Palestine and elsewhere, Edward Said locates the "justificatory regime" that Zionism has developed to interpose between its Palestinian victims and itself in the discourse of nineteenth-century British imperialism, by which he means the representation of the land occupied by empire as "terra nullius." This essay retrieves Said’s "Canaanite" reading of Michael Waltzer’s Exodus and Revolution, in which the latter invokes, above all, the English Puritan revolution to demonstrate the emancipatory politics of the Old Testament story and reconstellates it into the American context, in which, according to Sacvan Bercovitch in The American Jeremiad, the Puritan founders’ figural reenactment of the Exodus story is, in fact, one of conquest and occupation rather than emancipation. Such a retrieval and reconstellation will show that Said’s genealogy of the Zionist justificatory regime undergoes a significant modification when, in the 1950s, the United States takes over the sponsorship of the Israeli state from the Old World empires. It will show, specifically, the imperial ideology of the Old World that was the original model of the Zionist justificatory regime vis-à-vis Palestine was displaced by the far more politically "effective" exceptionalist jeremiadic ideology of the "pioneering" New World.

——–

URL: http://boundary2.dukejournals.org/cgi/content/short/37/1/127

—–

Keywords: Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Zionism: Criticism, Edward Said, Michael Walzer, אדוארד סעיד, מיכאל וולצר