Customer Reviews

Greater Syria: The History of an Ambition

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

Excellent and complete analysis of the greater Syria ideology. In this book, Daniel Pipes shows how attractive such ideology must have been in the past on many in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, and even Iraq. To those not familiar with the concepts of pan-Syrianism or the "Fertile Crescent", he clarifies such notions as opposed to pan-Arabism. In doing so, he demonstrates how hard it is to eradicate existing borders, regardless of the extent of their alleged artificial character. The author demonstrates clearly the obsolete aspect of the Greater Syria ideology which dates back to the thirties and has failed to evolve with time. For instance, it overlooks the legitimacy these states have acquired over three quarters of a century, the patriotic feelings of the majority of their citizens, and the fact that they developed and evolved each in its own way. The analysis is exhaustive, and the book full of quotations and relevant historical events. Today's Middle East is one of the world's most unstable regions. Reading this book is a must to those seeking to understand the complexities of the interacting politics between the states that compose today's Middle East from the eastern Mediterranean all the way to Mesopotamia.

This is a must read book for those that are interested in the history and evolution of the Greater Syria ideology that claims that the many peoples of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq are one " Syrian People ". This book takes you into an excellently detailed history of the ideology and the various groups that have embraced the ideology and their various reasons for doing so. The latter part of the book details the rise of the Alawites in Syria and their embracing of Greater Syria and its consequences on the region.

Daniel Pipes claims that pan-Syrianism has not received the scholarly attention it deserves because most Middle East scholars focus on pan-Arabism. Pan-Syrianism is defined as the goal of uniting lesser Syria (current borders), Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan (and sometimes Iraq) into what is called Greater Syria. Approximately half of the book is quotations from politicians, writers, clerics, from Syria, other Arab countries, and Europe. The citations have one goal - to show that pan-Syrianism has been a significant ideology in influencing players in Syria and neighboring countries before and after colonialism. The rest of the book consists of a narrative of the British/French/Arab/Maronite/Alawite participation in creating the borders of Syria, the Baath party and other political groups, relations between the minorities in Syria and the Sunni Muslim majority, relations between Syria and its neighboring countries (especially Lebanon), and the coups in Syria. The sheer number of quotes can get in the way after awhile, but the side benefit is extensive endnotes of primary and secondary sources on the history of modern Syria.
By the way, it did not contain too much about Israel, except the claim that minority status of the ruling 'Alawi minority would probably have been indifferent to Israel except for their desire to avoid the charge from the Sunni Muslim majority of been pro-Zionist; and a few quotes from Israelis about pan-Syrianism. I saw nothing that could be construed as anti-Arab or pro-Israel.
Whether one agrees or not with his thesis about pan-Syrianism's importance in shaping the political history of the region, the book was a good introduction to modern Syria's political history.

For anyone studying the Levant or the Middle East this book is a must have. Pipes explains the Syrian ambition to have a Greater Syria which would include Lebanon, the Turkish province of Hatay/Alexandretta, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and the State of Israel. Daniel Pipes shows that Pan-Syrianism was not just some extreme idea with a small grouping of followers, for some time it rivaled Pan-Arabism. The book does an excellent job at interpreting the ideals and the undertaking of a "Greater Syria" from the Arab revolt of Sherif Hussein to Hafez Asad. In addition Pipes outlines in great detail the Pan Syrian ideals outlined by Antun Saada of the Syrian Ba'ath party and SSNP (Syrian Socialist National Party). Pipes does an excellent job in showing how Pan-Syrian ideals (whether carried out by King Hussein, Salah Jadid, or Hafez Asad) have led to countless wars (Lebanese Crisis of 1958, Lebanese Civil War of 1975-1990, the Syrian invasion of Jordan in 1970, and the countless wars with Israel [especially the Israeli War of Independence in 1948]). One finds that after reading this book you can't help but question what future effect on Middle Eastern politics Pan-Syrianism will have.

The book is highly recommendable. Its only flaw is that it does not expose the nazi ideological dogma of A Saadee or his party.

Daniel Pipes, the head of Campus Watch, is not an author to be trusted on any topics related to the Middle East. Because of the author's extreme anti-Arab, pro-Zionist stand, this book is further proof that Syria is greatly misunderstood in the West. This book is only worth reading to understand some of the neo-con illusions on the region.

This wonderful study of modern syrian politics unmasks the ambitions of Syrias leadership from King Faisal to Hafiz Asad and beyond. An eminent study by an eminent scholar, a must read for anyone interested in Syria, Ba'athism and the like.

It's just hard to take this author seriously any more.

Daniel Pipes aspiration for academic legitimacy is hardly helped by this book. Pipes is not an `Orientalist' in the common sense. He does not view Syria, for example, from the point of view of Cromer and Balfour and their latter day cultists. He does so, from the point of view of the Paul Johnson's of the world. Those who attempt through unabashed distortions (the overwhelming number is truly overwhelming) and short-changing the reader (by half truths already debunked by a number of Israeli historians), to relive the golden age of conquest, of colonialism.

The world today is, thankfully, different. Pipes' singing in the academic colonnade sounds more like a visiting swan than a piece of objective delivery of research results.

An utter scholastic failure. Pipes lets his unfettered love for Israel get in the way.