View From the Fence: The Arab-Israeli conflict from the present to its roots [Paperback]

Neill Lochery (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0826482708 | ISBN-13: 978-0826482709 | Publication Date: December 27, 2006 | Edition: Rev Upd

Dr Neill Lochery has worked as an advisor to Middle Eastern politicians on both sides of the political divide as well as elsewhere in the Middle East and is a leading specialist in the politics and history of the area. As neither an Arab nor a Jew he is able to go beyond the traditional narratives employed by partisan writers who dominate much of the current literature on the Middle East. Lochery's ability to see all sides drives the argument in this book about the possibilities for peace in the future. The Arab-Israeli conflict has for too long been seen as a simple tale of right versus wrong, good versus evil or, since the 1967 War, the strong versus the weak. This original account from an author outside the fray shows that the conflict ranges beyond Jew versus Arab, and shatters a series of myths surrounding the conflict itself. These include assumptions about how the assassination of the Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, affected later events to the notion that the Palestinian Authority president, Yasir Arafat, alone rejected a peace agreement with Israel in 2000 that would have ended the conflict. Viewing this intractable dilemma from only one perspective simply generates further propaganda for whichever side. This book provides a full grasp of the issues which drive the conflict, including the attempts by the United States to broker a settlement.

Editorial Reviews

Review

'... takes a broadly Israelo-centric view' (Harvey Morris Financial Times )

(mentioned in Chronicle of Higher Education April 2006 )

'In this clearly written, provocative and well-balanced study of the Arab Israeli conflict, Lochery (as the title implies) sets as his starting point the Israeli security fence...In sum, readers will find the book of more than passing interest due to Lochery's strong opinions...' -The Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2007

'Clearly written, provocative and well-balanced study of the Arab-Israeli conflict...

...Lochery is not afraid to state his opinions some of which are outside the consensus of Middle East scholars...

... Readers will find the book of more than passing interest.'

Middle East Quarterly Winter 2007

(Robert O. Freedman, Baltimore Hebrew University )

'Neil Lochery's View from the Fence: The Arab-Israeli Conflict from the Present to Its Roots (Continuum) attempts something very rare - an even-handed analysis of the history of the Middle East - and dissects the failure of recent peace efforts. It reminds us that, although the conflict is steeped in religious argument, most of the protagonists are secular or only moderately religious. They choose to use religious symbols because of their huge resonance with their followers, not because the dispute is, today, innately religious. Lochery provides valuable insights for those seeking peace.'
~ Judges review, from the Wingate book awards, 2006

"Lochery has written a concise and highly readable history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict."

Reviewed by Muhammed Khan in Muslim News, 2008

(, )

'In this clearly written, provocative and well-balanced study of the Arab Israeli conflict, Lochery (as the title implies) sets as his starting point the Israeli security fence...In sum, readers will find the book of more than passing interest due to Lochery’s strong opinions…’ -The Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2007

'Clearly written, provocative and well-balanced study of the Arab-Israeli conflict...

...Lochery is not afraid to state his opinions some of which are outside the consensus of Middle East scholars...

... Readers will find the book of more than passing interest.'

Middle East Quarterly Winter 2007

(, )

'Neil Lochery’s View from the Fence: The Arab-Israeli Conflict from the Present to Its Roots (Continuum) attempts something very rare - an even-handed analysis of the history of the Middle East - and dissects the failure of recent peace efforts. It reminds us that, although the conflict is steeped in religious argument, most of the protagonists are secular or only moderately religious. They choose to use religious symbols because of their huge resonance with their followers, not because the dispute is, today, innately religious. Lochery provides valuable insights for those seeking peace.’
~ Judges review, from the Wingate book awards, 2006

About the Author

Dr. Neill Lochery holds the Catherine Lewis Lectureship in Modern Israeli Politics and is director of the Centre for Israeli Studies at University College London. A leading specialist in the politics and history of the Middle East , he has written four other books.

Product Details

• Paperback: 272 pages
• Publisher: Continuum; Rev Upd edition (December 27, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0826482708
• ISBN-13: 978-0826482709
• Product Dimensions: 7.5 x 5 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 10.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,954,599 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

2 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A mediocre book, February 5, 2006

By 

Jill Malter ([e-mail]) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The View from the Fence: The Arab-Israeli Conflict from the Present to Its Roots (Hardcover)

Neill Lochery has written about Israel before (you may want to read my basically positive review of his book "Why Blame Israel," which came out last year). Well, let's see what insights he has to offer this time.

Lochery examines the need for a separation fence. He explains the immediate reason: suicide bombers were killing Israelis. He should also have discussed the extent to which the suicide bombings had affected day-to-day life in Israel. In addition, I think he should have mentioned the fact that to attack Israel with a fence in place would be more difficult, and might require such sophisticated planning that a major military response by Israel would be appropriate. Without a fence, it's just too easy for an attack to look spontaneous. Lochery ought to have talked a little bit more about what other nations do in such situations.

The author talks about possible demographic issues in Israel. However, he never explains why demography ought to be so important. After all, it may be obvious to everyone that if the Arabs do become a majority in Israel, they'll probably vote to get rid of human rights for Jews there. But it is far from obvious that this is a reasonable thing for a majority to do. Nor is it obvious that Israel's Jews ought to tamely submit to a bunch of thugs who demand all this, especially when Israel is already so land-poor. Once again, I think Lochery ought to ask what other nations would do in such a situation.

Lochery has a good discussion of the Balfour Declaration. But he fails to point out that it certainly did not promise the Levant to both the Jews and the Arabs. It merely promised to support a Jewish homeland, not a Jewish nation. And it did not support an Arab nation in the Levant either. It promised very little to anyone.

The immorality and impact of the 1939 British White Paper is underemphasized in this book. In fact, Lochery is probably right that it was part of an attempt to appease Arabs, although even this may be somewhat misleading. And Lochery does not discuss how perfidious this White Paper was, nor how many hundreds of thousands of deaths it caused. Nor does he mention another direct result of the White Paper, namely the reversal of Zionist policy on the issue of statehood: as I see it, the White Paper caused the establishment of Israel.

The author does mention the assassination of Count Bernadotte. I feel that this murder was unjustified. But I recognize that Bernadotte was indeed very dangerous to Israel, and I think that Israel profited from his death, just as the United States almost surely profited from the killing of Yamamoto in World War Two. Lochery does not agree with me at all, saying that Israel was hurt by Bernadotte's death.

There is a big discussion of peace efforts. Once again, Lochery and I disagree about most of the fundamentals. I feel that the war is over human rights, and that the main Arab demand is to win the Right to Oppress Jews and other minorities. Land is a very peripheral issue. I think resources aren't much of an issue either: there's probably more than enough water to go around, and the price of desalinated water is getting low enough to make that a possible solution.

In addition, I think that too much emphasis is placed on people being willing to say they will agree to what is called peace. This is even called "historic." And far too much time is wasted discussing the supposed opportunities Israel may have squandered in search of peace. The Oslo process was a disaster: it surely did not help Jews, Arabs, or anyone else. Lochery was readier to admit this in his previous book than he is in this one.

I also feel that some folks may be misled by the propaganda about Levantine Arabs merely wanting some rights and some land. If they truly wanted such things, they would accept them when they were offered them, and they would also ask for land not just from Israel but from other nations as well. That's why I think the "peace process" was doomed from the start: it did not offer anything either side wanted. The Israelis wanted peace, but the "peace process" never really offered it that.

Lochery says that when the fence comes down, it will be a good sign that true peace is in the works. That's fair. But I think it is a little like cheering when a tourniquet finally can be removed. And if either a tourniquet or a fence is simply removed prematurely, that's not good news at all.

I'm giving this book three stars. But I had trouble finding anything interesting in it that I agreed with. Many times, I felt that the topics that were discussed were not very relevant to the Arab-Israeli conflict. I don't recommend this book.