The End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After

by Edward W. Said

     Soon after the Oslo accords were signed in September 1993 by Israel and Palestinian Liberation Organization, Edward Said predicted that they could not lead to real peace.  In these essays, most written for Arab and European newspapers, Said uncovers the political mechanism that advertises reconciliation in the Middle East while keeping peace out of the picture.

     Said argues that the imbalance in power that forces Palestinians and Arab states to accept the concessions of the United States and Israel prohibits real negotiations and promotes the second-class treatment of Palestinians.  He documents what has really gone on in the occupied territories since the signing.  He reports worsening conditions for the Palestinians critiques Yasir Arafat's self-interested and oppressive leadership, denounces Israel's refusal to recognize Palestine's past, and—in essays new to this edition—addresses the resulting unrest.  

   In this unflinching cry for civic justice and self-determination, Said promotes not a political agenda but a transcendent the peaceful coexistence of Arabs and Jews enjoying equal rights and shared citizenship.

Genres: History, Politics, Middle East, Nonfiction, Israel, Philosophy, Essays

411 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

About the author

(Arabic Profile إدوارد سعيد)
Edward Wadie Said was a professor of literature at Columbia University, a public intellectual, and a founder of the academic field of postcolonial studies. A Palestinian American born in Mandatory Palestine, he was a citizen of the United States by way of his father, a U.S. Army veteran.

Educated in the Western canon, at British and American schools, Said applied his education and bi-cultural perspective to illuminating the gaps of cultural and political understanding between the Western world and the Eastern world, especially about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Middle East; his principal influences were Antonio Gramsci, Frantz Fanon, Aimé Césaire, Michel Foucault, and Theodor Adorno.

As a cultural critic, Said is known for the book Orientalism (1978), a critique of the cultural representations that are the bases of Orientalism—how the Western world perceives the Orient. Said’s model of textual analysis transformed the academic discourse of researchers in literary theory, literary criticism, and Middle-Eastern studies—how academics examine, describe, and define the cultures being studied. As a foundational text, Orientalism was controversial among the scholars of Oriental Studies, philosophy, and literature.

As a public intellectual, Said was a controversial member of the Palestinian National Council, because he publicly criticized Israel and the Arab countries, especially the political and cultural policies of Muslim régimes who acted against the national interests of their peoples. Said advocated the establishment of a Palestinian state to ensure equal political and human rights for the Palestinians in Israel, including the right of return to the homeland. He defined his oppositional relation with the status quo as the remit of the public intellectual who has “to sift, to judge, to criticize, to choose, so that choice and agency return to the individual” man and woman.

In 1999, with his friend Daniel Barenboim, Said co-founded the West–Eastern Divan Orchestra, based in Seville, which comprises young Israeli, Palestinian, and Arab musicians. Besides being an academic, Said also was an accomplished pianist, and, with Barenboim, co-authored the book Parallels and Paradoxes: Explorations in Music and Society (2002), a compilation of their conversations about music. Edward Said died of leukemia on 25 September 2003.

Reviews

[Nubar · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my favorite book I have read this year so far. I was already in agreement with Edward Said's points before, especially when I read "Orientalism", but this book was also very special and an even better place to read about Said's perspectives on different, more political issues. Especially because the topics he is writing on are connected deeply to his own identity as a Palestinian, I believe that his texts are very valuable. They are very well-researched, well-supported with anecdotal and factual information, as well as extremely nuanced.

This book is actually a compilation of Said's articles for many different Arab and Western journals and newspapers, which makes it a book that shows a great variety of opinions and touches on a vast pool of ideas/issues/problems revolving around not only the Oslo Accords, but Palestine, Israel, Zionism, occupation and a loss of identity in general.

The book has so many different messages to me. Sometimes it sounds like a sound analysis of the Palestinian situation from the diaspora. Sometimes, Said reads as someone who has personal stakes and personal connections to the topic in a way that he can immerse you in the lives and sufferings of Palestinians. Sometimes it is a very somber look on Palestinian authority and harsh criticism of their faults. Sometimes it is a call for action, as Said uses phrases as "the time is now" many times. But the general feel of the book for me was quite depressive.

On the other hand, another thing I really liked about Said's representation of the topic is how he represents a strictly anti-zionist position whilst never being anti-semitic and always staunchly standing against xenophobia. He makes sound points about how Israel is the oppressor whilst also not neglecting the long history of Jewish suffering. His approach that is both emotional and logical at the same time is truly amazing to me.

In conclusion, this book/collection of articles was very easy to read and gave me a lot of new knowledge on the issue of Israel-Palestine. It is packed with historical information and very good analyses/discussions. No matter what opinions a person holds on the conflict, I think everyone can find something to like or find plausible in this writing.

[Frumenty · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is only the second of Said’s books that I’ve read. The other was Orientalism, which is a book with not a little of a whiff of the academy about it. The End of the Peace Process speaks in a voice which I think will be much more accessible to the ordinary reader. And what a powerful cogent voice it is.

The book is a collection of newspaper articles, in English translation, from the period 1995-2002, which for the most part appeared first in the Arabic language press in London and Cairo. One wonders what difference might have been made to American perceptions of the situation in Palestine if such material (in English) had been widely circulated month after month in the US press. Very uncomfortable for Israel! The main fault which readers may find with this book is that there is a lot of repetition which, given that it is a collection of self-contained opinion pieces written over a number of years, is I think, inevitable. My tip is to read it slowly, no more than 1 article per day, at which rate there is enough for a couple of months of reading. I slowed down my reading toward the end because I was reluctant to put it aside for the last time; Said died of leukemia in 2003, so finishing it felt a little like saying goodbye.

Said is liberal, secular, and humane; his tone is measured and reasonable, but he denounces without fear or favour US administrations, Israel and its leaders past and contemporaneous, Arab governments, the Palestinian Authority and its then leader Yasir Arafat, and any number of Israel’s apologists. He tells an anecdote about finding himself, on a plane, in a seat behind then Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Benjamin Netanyahu; when Netanyahu realised who was seated behind him, he asked for and got a different seat. That’s the sort of uneasiness he inspired in a gung-ho Israeli spokesman not known for his susceptibility to shame. I’m tempted to think of Said as an Old Testament prophet, but a secular one, proclaiming the truth in a clarion voice and condemning the corruption of the times.

The so-called “two-state solution” is a fraud. Oslo did not achieve sovereignty for Palestine, only a very limited degree of ‘self-rule’, which is to say that the corrupt and compliant Palestinian Authority was to be allowed, in the name of the Palestinian people, to police (on behalf of Israel) a patchwork of ghettos, travel between which is controlled by Israel; Arafat himself could not move around in Palestine without a permit from Israel. I cannot but liken the Palestinian Authority to the Vichy Government of Maréchel Pétain, governing on behalf of Hitler in the name of France.

In the later essays Said makes various proposals vis-à-vis what can be done, but they’re none of them easy; he is a realist. He emphasises the importance of keeping to the moral high ground, and of being consistent and persistent. I’m not sorry that he didn’t have to live through the machinations of Donald Trump and Jared Kushner. That might have driven even him to despair.

[Abu Jihad · Rating 4 out of 5]

الكتاب عبارة عن مقالات للمفكر إدوارد سعيد كتبها في السنوات 1995-2001
يتكلم عن منظوره لحل القضية الفلسطينية من خلال دولة ثنائية القومية بدل فكرة حل الدولتين التي لا تمنح الشعب الفلسطيني أبسط حقوقه بالسيادة و تقرير المصير ..و يناقش الكاتب في مقالته الصهيوينية الامريكية و كيفية هيمنتها على القرار و الاعلام الامريكي و كيف أن حرية الرأي بالنسبة للرواية الفلسطينية بالصحف الامريكية معدومة تقريبا نتيجة النفوذ الصهيوني

هناك انتقاد جدير بالملاحظة لدى الكاتب هو موضوع التطبيع و تعريفه فهو يدعو للانفتاح الثقافي و المعرفي على الاسرائيليين و يندد بالجهل بحجة ( التحدي ) فدعا الكاتب الى ابتداع أفكار لمقاومة الاحتلال الاستيطاني في ظل استحالة انقلاب ميزان القوة لصالحنا من خلال التوجه الى الرأي العام الاسرائيلي و لكن بذكاء بدل التعويل على حزب العمل (كما تفعل السطلة الفلسطينية دائما ) يدعو الى العمل مع مجموعات أخر مثل المفكرين الذين يعتبرهم منصفين (اسرائيل شاحاك و غيره..) و اليهود الافارقة ومجموعات رفض الخدمة الالزامية

[Bassam Ahmed · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب "نهاية عملية السلام أوسلو ومابعدها" يحوي مجموعة مقالات إدوارد سعيد المفكر والبروفيسور في جامعة كولومبيا الأمريكية وأحد أبرز الرموز الثقافية على الساحة الفلسطينية والعربية، ما بين ١٩٩٥ و ٢٠٠١ في جريدة الحياة، والذي جاء محتواها متسقا مع فكره ورؤيته للقضية الفلسطينية مستقبل الصراع الفلسطيني(العربي) / الإسرائيلي.

ما قدمه إدوارد سعيد (الفلسطيني المولد والأمريكي الجنسية) من مقاربة لتاريخ الصراع وآلية مواجهة الاحتلال الإسرائيلي لأراضي فلسطين ١٩٦٧ وسياسات الفصل العنصري ضد عرب ١٩٤٨ (الذين يعدون مواطنين درجة ثالثة في دولة تمنح الحقوق كاملة لمواطينها اليهود فقط) إضافة إلى حملات الإلغاء لقضية اللاجئين الفلسطينين الذين تم إرهابهم وقتلهم ضمن حملات منظمة للتطهير العرقي وتهجير من بقي منهم حيا في أربعينيات وخمسينيات القرن الماضي إلى اليوم -الذين تفوق أعدادهم الأربعة ملايين- ومحو تاريخهم الممنهج يأتي في اطار إلغاء أي مسؤولية تاريخية تجاه عرب فلسطين ممن تعرضوا لأفظع أنواع الجرائم والانتهاكات، مع ابراز المفارقة في أن إسرائيل "الدولة التي لم لا حدود لها و الدائمة التوسع" لازالت تتلقى وتطالب من حكومات ألمانيا المتعاقبة دفع التعويضات للجرائم التي أرتكبها النازيون في الحرب العالمية الثانية ضد عرقيات وقوميات وفئات عدة كانت اليهودية من ضمن أبرزها!

تم التدليل في هذه المقالات ايضا على الحركات التحررية من الكولونيالية الأنجح في القرن العشرين كالنموذج التحرري الهندي ونهجه في كسب الاستقلال عن المحتل البريطاني والنموذج الأبرز -من حيث تأثر الكاتب به- لجنوب أفريقيا ورمزه مانديلا في مواجهة نظام الحكم القأىم على الفصل العنصري من خلال مقاومة ثقافية إعلامية منظمة بالدرجة الأولى موجهة لشرائح شعوب الدول الغربية الداعمة لنظام الفصل العنصري ذاته وغيرها، وكسب إيمان الرأي العام الغربي والعالمي بقضيتهم وحقيقة علوها الأخلاقي، الأمر الذي قلب الكفة رغم تفوق النظام العنصري في جنوب أفريقيا آنذاك من الناحية العسكرية واللوجستية، دون أن يغفل في ذات الوقت خصوصية الوضع الفلسطيني الإسرائيلي المتمثل بتاريخ اوروبا في اضطهاد اليهود وتغلل النفوذ الإسرائيلي الصهيوني الناجح والمؤثر في صياغة سياسات الدول الغربية وخصوصا الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية التي تقدم إدارتها وسياسييها الواحدة تلو الأخرى الدعم المالي واللوجستي والعسكري والسياسي والاستخباراتي اللامحدود لابقاء اسرائيل بعيدة عن أي مسائلة دولية أو محلية عن ما ارتكبته أو ترتكبه من جرائم حرب وسياسات الفصل العنصري - إستخدت أمريكا حق الفيتو ٤٣ مرة من مجموع ٨١ لمنع إدانة إسرائيل في مجلس الأمن والأمم المتحدة- وفي موقع تفوق تقني وعسكري شاسع على مجموع جيرانها العرب، والتأكيد على إستدامة هذا التفوق والتبرير لهذا الدعم من خلال تصوير العرب من خلال مؤسسات الإعلام والعلاقات العامة الصهيونية الضخمة على أنهم جهلة وإرهابيون ودخلاء وأن دولة إسرائيل الممثلة الحصرية لليهود (الذين تعرضوا للتطهير العرقي من قبل النازيين والمعاملة العنصرية في أوروبا اللاسامية لقرون) يتم تهديد ديمقراطيتهم الفريدة بالإبادة من قبل ذلك الإرهاب الاسلامي العربي اللاعقلاني !! مثل هذا الهراء يتم ترويجه ليل نهار لمتلقي أمريكي غير مكترث في الغالب ومشبع بالدعاية الصهيونية وكليشيهات الإعلام الأمريكي تجاه العرب في غياب تام لأي محتوى معرفي تاريخي واقعي أو حقيقي بديل لطبيعة الصراع في الشرق الأوسط.

في المقابل تدين مقالات سعيد ذلك التذلل المهين للقيادات العربية أمام زعماء وسياسي الولايات المتحدة واسرائيل والتذلل لكيانات الضغط الصهيونية في أمريكا "كأيباك" وغيرهم من الجهات المعتنقة للمشروع الصهيوني لإستجداء إعتراف أو دعم وشكل من أشكال السلام الذليل -فيما يخص القضية الفلسطينية - حيث تتنازل القيادة الفلسطينية عن كل شيء عن التاريخ والحاضر والمستقبل وكل حق أصيل مقابل وعود اسرائيلية فارغة وآمال لا أرضية واقعية لها، وعدم تنازل إسرائيل عن أي شيء بل مضيها الغير قانوني والمدان دوليا في قضم الأراضي الفلسطينية وبناء المستوطنات، الحل الذي روجت له جميع الأنظمة العربية منذ إتفاقية أوسلو في سنة ١٩٩٣ ولازالت دون أي نتيجة تذكر والذي وصل الإحتقار والتعالي عليها (على الأنظمة والشعوب العربية) ذروته في يومنا هذا -بعد وفاة إدوارد سعيد بما يقارب ال ١٥ سنة وهو ما حذر منه- مع مجيء كل من نتنياهو العنصري الفج كرئيس وزراء لإسرائيل والمعتوه دونالد ترامب إلى البيت الأبيض مع أجندة تقتضي إبتزاز الدول العربية الغنية وتصفية القضية الفلسطينية لضمان أمن إسرائيل وتضمنت التصفية : الإعتراف بالقدس موحدة عاصمة لاسرائيل بنقل السفارة الأمريكية اليها (وهو ما تم في ٢٠١٨)، تصفية قضية اللاجئين واسقاطها وايقاف جميع المعونات التي التزمت الولايات المتحدة بدفعها، اسقاط حل الدولتين - دون ان يكون هناك بديل - وفرض طرح إقتصادي يقوم على توطين الفلسطينين في أراضي عربية خارج فلسطين (الأردن، مصر ) وتوفير فرص عمل لهم ضمن سياسة ا��تهجير والتوطين وعزل باقي الفلسطينيين في محميات أشبه بالسجون محاطة بأسوار الجيش الإسرائيلي وعتاده العسكري (فيما بات يعرف اليوم إعلاميا بصفقة القرن وقد كلف جيرارد كوشنير صهر الرئيس الأمريكي ذو الميول الصهيونية بتولي هذا الملف)، وتقدم مقالات إدوارد سعيد للشعوب العربية حلا آخر يكمن في التحرر من سياسات النظم القمعية العربية العقيمة وتنظيم مقاومة ثقافية مؤسساتية واسعة النطاق يشارك فيها المثقفون والناشطون داخل فلسطين والأقطار العربية وأولئك في الشتات ممن يقطونون دول أوروبا والأمريكتين وغيرها، مقاومة موجهة بالدرجة الأولى لعموم الشعب الأمريكي والاوروبي وتيارات من الإسرائيليين الممكن استمالتهم فكريا لتأييد مشروع سلام عادل وللإعتراف بالجرائم التي إرتكبت بحق الفلسطينيين - وقد أثبتت حركة المقاطعة وسحب الاستثمارات وفرض العقوبات BDS غير الحكومية ضد اسرائيل والتي أطلقت سنة ٢٠٠٥ فاعلية في الاضرار بالمصالح الاسرائيلية وصورتها في الاعلام الغربي على نحو غير مسبوق- وهذه المقاومة تقتضي الإطلاع على تاريخ الآخر وتفهمه إبتداءا لإبراز التفوق الأخلاقي لقضية الشعب الفلسطيني وبعدها الإنساني والثبوت بإرادة صلبة على عدم التنازل عن فكرة السلام العادل والمطالبة بالمساوة الكاملة والانسحاب العسكري من كامل الأراضي المحتلة سنة ١٩٦٧.
قد يكون إدوار سعيد قد رحل لكن أفكاره باقية وهي برأيي ورأي الكثيرن تشكل بداية الحل لوضع طال تأزمه.

وصلة فيلم وثائقي للراحل إدوارد سعيد أنتجته قناة البي بي سي البريطانية سنة ١٩٩٨ يوثق فيه معاناة الشعب الفلسطيني مع استضافة شخصيات من الطرفين لإبراز البعد التاريخي والثقافي والانساني لذلك الصراع

https://vimeo.com/184213685

[Pablo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tesis: Los Acuerdos de Oslo se presentan a veces como uno de los momentos donde la paz basada en una solución de dos estados estuvo más cerca (la famosa foto). Para Said, los acuerdos no constituyeron una oportunidad real de paz, sino una estrategia asimétrica para legitimar la ocupación israelí bajo una apariencia de reconciliación. Oslo consolidó una lógica de anexión territorial, dominación simbólica y desposesión política. El liderazgo palestino aceptó un marco colonial disfrazado de autonomía donde la cuestión palestina quedaba limitada a la gestión de partes Gaza y Cisjordania. El acuerdo mantenía el control israelí sobre el espacio, la economía y la seguridad. La división territorial de Cisjordania en zonas A, B y C consagró la discontinuidad geográfica como principio de ordenamiento, impidiendo toda forma de soberanía efectiva. Israel se reservó el control de fronteras, del espacio aéreo, de los recursos naturales y de la movilidad interior. Mientras tanto, Israel utilizó el acuerdo para vaciar de contenido las demandas centrales del pueblo palestino —el derecho al retorno, la retirada total de los territorios ocupados, Jerusalén Este como capital— mientras ganaba tiempo para avanzar en el terreno: más asentamientos, más carreteras para colonos, más puestos de control. Estados Unidos avaló este proceso, presentándolo como neutralidad diplomática cuando en realidad operaba como garante del desequilibrio, bloqueando cualquier presión efectiva sobre Israel.

Sharon, Barak y Netanyahu como actores de una misma doctrina

Sharon: lo califica sin ambigüedad como criminal de guerra por su responsabilidad directa en las masacres de Sabra y Chatila, así como su papel en las campañas militares de 1971 y 1982. Rehabilitado política y moralmente por la comunidad internacional, hasta convertirse en primer ministro. Sharon no tiene otro plan que “destruir todo lo que tenga que ver con Palestina y los palestinos”, y lo presenta como la encarnación de una violencia racista y colonial que no distingue entre combatientes y civiles.

Barak: el rostro liberal y tecnocrático del mismo proyecto. Said desmonta la imagen del “soldado ilustrado” que Barak cultivó ante el público occidental, señalando que su retórica de paz fue simultánea a una intensificación de los asentamientos y a una política sistemática de fragmentación territorial. Le acusa de encubrir con lenguaje moderado una expansión colonial ininterrumpida. Para Said, Barak representa el ejemplo paradigmático de la perversión del lenguaje político: alguien que habla de concesiones mientras fortalece el control israelí sobre la vida palestina, todo bajo el aval diplomático de Washington.

Netanyahu: opera con una retórica más explícitamente nacionalista y religiosa, pero Said advierte que sus políticas no difieren sustancialmente de las de sus antecesores. Una misma doctrina: producir hechos consumados sobre el terreno mientras se simula voluntad de diálogo. Todas parten del principio de que la soberanía palestina es inaceptable, y que la negociación solo puede concebirse como la administración de una rendición. La paz como una narrativa funcional que permite profundizar la ocupación bajo la cobertura de la legalidad y el lenguaje de seguridad. La comunidad internacional, al aceptar estos términos, se convierte en cómplice de un régimen supremacista.

EEUU como garante del desequilibro
Durante las presidencias de Clinton y Bush hijo, se impuso una visión del conflicto centrada en la seguridad de Israel y la demonización del pueblo palestino. EL 11S consolidó esta narrativa: toda acción palestina pasó a leerse como terrorismo, y cualquier represión israelí como autodefensa. Este discurso bloqueó la posibilidad misma de nombrar los crímenes de 1948, la ocupación, el exilio y la humillación cotidiana.

La continuidad de la ocupación y la violencia

Said documenta el uso de armamento pesado contra civiles, el asedio prolongado a ciudades como Ramallah o Jenin, y los castigos colectivos como parte de una estrategia de desintegración del tejido civil palestino. Denuncia la demolición de hogares, la destrucción de infraestructuras básicas, los toques de queda y la humillación diaria como parte de un régimen de ocupación altamente tecnificado.

Said describe un sistema de apartheid en el que el Estado israelí se define como judío —y no como un Estado de todos sus ciudadanos— y reserva el acceso a la tierra, el agua y los derechos básicos para los judíos. Los palestinos no solo carecen de soberanía: están sujetos a un entramado legal que los excluye sistemáticamente. La desconexión territorial creada por los asentamientos, los checkpoints y las carreteras exclusivas para colonos imposibilita una vida autónoma. El objetivo no es convivir, sino gobernar a distancia y fragmentar la resistencia.

El avance de los asentamientos durante Oslo: Said señala que mientras se firmaban acuerdos, se construían nuevas colonias y carreteras de acceso, financiadas en buena parte con fondos estadounidenses. Cuando se firmaron los acuerdos de Oslo había 33k viviendas en los asentamientos. Desde la firma de dichos acuerdos a 2002 se construyeron 20k nuevas viviendas (+60%). Lo que Oslo encubrió fue un proceso continuo de anexión, basado en hechos consumados que destruyera el horizonte de un Estado palestino.

[Luqman Tarmizi · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the third installation, if I may say, of Edward Said's collection of essays on the larger issue of Palestinian conflict, and specifically on the US-sponsored peace process between Israel and Palestine.

Chronologically, the list goes more or less like this:

i. The Politics of Dispossession: The Struggle for Palestinian Self-Determination, 1969-1994 (1994)
ii. Peace and Its Discontents: Essays on Palestine in the Middle East Peace Process (1995)
iii. The End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After (2000)
iv. From Oslo to Iraq and the Road Map (Posthumously published in 2004, two years after his passing)

There are numerous chapters really worth reading for their deep insights and crisp precision i.e 'On Visiting Wadie' (detailing his visit to his son in Palestine), 'Isaiah Berlin: An Afterthought', 'The Challenge of Israel: Fifty Years On' and 'Truth and Reconciliation.' This latter piece is probably his most oft-referenced essay regarding his view on the need for a paradigm shift and peaceful coexistence as the only viable solution to the Palestinian conflict.

I find this collection of essays quite repetitive. His critique of the PLO leadership has always centered around this issue of authoritarianism and corruption of the Arafat regime, and he had made it clear on his opposition against the so-called peace process right from the start.

But rather than a critique on Said's repetitiveness and style, I think it is more of an indictment of the Palestinian liberation movement for their failures and shortcomings, and a lamentation of the sorrows of the Palestinian people as a whole.

After more than 100 years of dispossession and grave injustice, after such a hopeful moment of a lasting peace; things are far worse now. After years of negotiations, negations, pleadings and bargainings before, during and after the Oslo Accords, Palestinians are still far from getting a state of their own. The Palestinian Authority are still ruling their own people with an iron fist, acting as a subcontractor of the occupation on behalf of Israel. Democracy is a facade.

The supposedly representatives of the Palestinians led by the corrupt and incompetent Yaser Arafat repeatedly surrendered the very rights and overlooked the very issues that define the Palestinian cause: rights of return and repatriation for millions of refugees, ending the illegal settlements and land confiscations, and putting a stop to the military rule. In exchange for fanciful positions and privileges, the ruling elites disowned their own people, rendering the hope for a true, independent state a utopia.

Sadly, from 1993 to 2002, nothing really change. Thus, perhaps Edward Said felt that nothing new is needed to spoken about, other than reiterating the solution that he had stressed upon from the beginning: forget Oslo Accords, forget the "instrument of capitulation" that was designed to prolong, rather than ending the occupation. Stop begging from the "American friends in the White House" from their help, but rather rekindle ties with our true allies from Asia and Africa whom we had so much in common.

Instead, the people must unite at the grassroots level, and the intellectuals and the activists must galvanize their efforts to take up the leadership mantle from the illegitimate and morally bankrupt PLO. For Said, "self-liberation and self-decolonization" must come first, and only then the Israeli question can be properly addressed.

The situation is bleak, yes. There seems to be no hope. More lands are stolen, more lives are taken and more rights are stripped. But as Gramsci put it, we must continue to possess the "pessimism of the intelligence, and the optimism of the will." Said repeatedly stressed that "we need to ask what it is that we can do, and then by an act of collective will we must do it. The rest is simply a waste of time."

[Elisa]

Oslo c'è stato perché Israele non ha raggiunto i suoi obiettivi con la guerra.
Stato unico. Condanna Hamas.

[Bill · Rating 2 out of 5]

Dr. Said has an amazing way with words. You can feel his anger, hope and power behind his writings and that carries the book. Unfortunately, Dr. Said does not have a firm understanding of the entire situation.

Dr. Said has a narrative and a dream that one day the land of Palestine will take its place in the world as a cultural, academic and social utopia. He dreams of democracy, of high academic standards, of Palestinians leading the way forward through new research and change. This optimism shines through the book like a beacon. Dr. Said is also very aware of the problems that currently afflict the region, including corruption, radicalism, and ethnic fighting. And he never quite bridges the two strains. Instead, he implies that Israel and the West are to blame for the problems and the solution is.......something. He is never forthcoming with any solutions for these problems, other than to say we need more dialogue. This is the significant drawback of the book, the lack of solutions.

This book is made up of a series of essays that Dr. Said published in the 1990s. The weight of all his essays is astounding, but it also clearly shows his lack of solutions. Even when he is calling out people for pointing this out, his rebuttals are less than convincing and come down to "we need more hope or dialogue or less Arafat". This leads me to the end, where Dr. Said comes to the closest to an actual solution. Unfortunately, his solution is a single state where Israelis and Palestinians can live together like in post-Apartheid South Africa. I say unfortunately, because this idea is illogical, even from his own perspective. Given the rest of the book, where Dr. Said discusses the corruption of the current Palestinian regime (Arafat and Abbas are really the same) and the problems with the past Israeli regimes. So how can he, in good faith, demand that those people remain in charge of a future binational state? And what of the Jews currently living in the region? Does Dr. Said believe that they would be okay living under Palestinian rule? Looking at history, Jews don't do well under current Arabic rule. It was only sixty years or so ago that nearly every Arabic Muslim country expelled their Jews, leading to massive ethnic cleansing and an influx of Sephardic Jews to Israel. Dr. Said spends plenty of time on Western Christian anti-Semitism in the form of the Holocaust. Why does he focus on the Western Holocaust, but not the ethnic cleansing committed by Arabic Muslims against Jews? Simply, it doesn't fit his narrative.

Overall, I would recommend this book as an incredible discourse on how diaspora Palestinians (those living outside the region) view the conflict. It is crucial in understanding the conflict to see from both sides. However, this book fails beyond an opinion essay. And the conclusion shows Dr. Said's fundamental misunderstanding of the conflict to such a degree as to render the rest of his book as useless. Dr. Said wants too many things at once. He wants a democratic and secular Palestine, but does not know which he wants first.

2 out of 5 stars.

[Libby Green · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite a dense read, and often I found myself zoning out at times while reading. However, super informative in regards to a portion of the history between Palestine and Israel, and just the struggles that Palestinians have been facing for a long time. Also, I feel like it’s important to mention that this was published in 2000 and it’s 2024 now. Reading what Said wrote in 2000 and looking at Palestine now is just … I’m left with no words honestly. Really Important read!!

[Cappy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Said doesn’t get everything right, but his central claim about the unworkability of a two-state “peace process” and the need for an inclusive definition of citizenship, rights, and civil society in Israel-Palestine really does stand the test of the 25 years since he penned this essay.

[leticia · Rating 5 out of 5]

necesario, incluso más ahora (20 años más tarde)

[Francisco Cruz · Rating 5 out of 5]

So good.

[Gail Kennon · Rating 4 out of 5]

hard to read so many words on this terrible history of a people who are in such a horrifying stage of genocide at this moment but so articulate and thoughtful it's well worth doing.

[Yasmeen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading books about politics isn't really my thing-- no matter how much I care about the subject. Said's book is no exception: I didn't enjoy reading it. That's entirely besides the point though- the book does a really good job doing what it's supposed to do. There's a lot of justified anger towards the attitudes on both sides, but it's as nuanced as one needs to be with such a subject (which, y'know, is quite a lot).

I don't think that anyone is totally unbiased on the issue, and the fact that Said's views tend to often coincide with mine most likely impacted the way I read it. But I really do think that anyone who cares about the conflict at all can benefit from Said's overall message.

[Bettina · Rating 5 out of 5]

A true intellectual was Edward Said. This is a series of articles published in the 1990s covering his opinions on the Oslo accords, the Wye agreement, Palestinian government and comments on conversations with diverse Palestinians (intellectuals and thinkers, living in Palestine and Israel) and some Israeli thinkers. Very depressing that so little in terms of peace and dialogue and true state development for the Palestinians has happened since then. Required reading.

[Joséphine · Rating 4 out of 5]

merci monsieur Saïd

[M · Rating 4 out of 5]

Forget everything the news media said.

[Mar · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am a huge fan of Said, and this is a nice collection of essays on the Middle East Peace Process. But, I think I prefer Said's musings on refugees or Orientalism.

[Lexi · Rating 2 out of 5]

I just couldn't get into this collection of Said's essays on the Peace Process. Too dense for me these days. Mebbe will try again later.

[Jennifer Abdo]

Found at my used bookstore! It's Said; had to get it.

[Muhammad M. Alaraby]

Genial

[Amyem]

in library

[Sam · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Must Read when it comes to understanding the Palestine view of the so called Peace Process.

[Kristen · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant, passionate exploration of the ongoing struggle for Palestinian liberation.

[Corey Rowe · Rating 5 out of 5]

the peace process needs edward said back. not what you would expect.