The Case Against Israel's Enemies: Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand in the Way of Peace (Hardcover)

by Alan Dershowitz (Author)
Key Phrases: boycott motion, academic boycott, civilian population centers, United States, Amnesty International, South Africa (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
The explicit intent of this confrontational book is to intellectually engage prominent enemies of Israel in the open marketplace of ideas. Harvard law professor Dershowitz (The Case for Israel) begins with a vehement denunciation of his onetime friend Jimmy Carter, and he concludes with an appendix that systematically refutes many claims advanced in Carter's book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid. Though the former president receives Dershowitz's most thorough criticism, the author also identifies and scrutinizes many other enemies, from Noam Chomsky and Patrick Buchanan to Hezbollah and the Iranian government. Dershowitz assumes the posture of a litigator, but his deep convictions and previous history with many of the book's subjects lend a more personal tone to his critiques, as Dershowitz himself admits. Chapters on terrorism and Iran, which are less targeted at specific individuals, take a more effective philosophical and historical approach. Despite its stated goal of eliciting further debate on the Israel-Palestine conflict, this provocative book will likely appeal to sympathizers and alienate readers less disposed to its author's positions. (Oct.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Review
The explicit intent of this confrontational book is to intellectually engage prominent “enemies of Israel” in “the open marketplace of ideas.” Harvard law professor Dershowitz (The Case for Israel) begins with a vehement denunciation of his onetime friend Jimmy Carter, and he concludes with an appendix that systematically refutes many claims advanced in Carter’s book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid. Though the former president receives Dershowitz’s most thorough criticism, the author also identifies and scrutinizes many other “enemies,” from Noam Chomsky and Patrick Buchanan to Hezbollah and the Iranian government. Dershowitz assumes the posture of a litigator, but his deep convictions and previous history with many of the book’s subjects lend a more personal tone to his critiques, as Dershowitz himself admits. Chapters on terrorism and Iran, which are less targeted at specific individuals, take a more effective philosophical and historical approach. Despite its stated goal of eliciting further debate on the Israel-Palestine conflict, this provocative book will likely appeal to sympathizers and alienate readers less disposed to its author’s positions. (Oct.) (Publishers Weekly, August 25, 2008)

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 304 pages
• Publisher: Wiley (September 29, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0470379928
• ISBN-13: 978-0470379929
• Product Dimensions: 9.4 x 6.1 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars See all reviews (21 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #157,406 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

35 of 49 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Defense Counsel's Summation and Rebuttal of the Plaintiffs' Cases, December 30, 2008

By	Professor Donald Mitchell "Jesus Makes Me a P... (Boston) - See all my reviews (TOP 10 REVIEWER)

Before commenting on the book, let me mention that I studied Law and Medicine under Professor Dershowitz many years ago at Harvard Law School. The course was conducted as a running debate between the M.D. professor and Professor Dershowitz. Much could be learned by listening to both sides.

When it comes to Israel and Palestine (and its supporters in and out of the Arab world), there aren't very many debates. Instead, supporters of one side or the other make claims about the other side being at fault. The history is so involved and complicated that few people know enough about it to assess the assertions without doing a lot of research (something that is beyond the interest of most uninvolved observers).

Professor Dershowitz offers to debate critics of Israel, but they don't often take up the challenge. As a result, books like this one are important for helping to get a balanced view of the historical perspective and the current issues (as we all watch with horror as rockets are launched at Israel and Israel attacks those who launch them . . . often in civilian dominated areas).

Let me summarize the book's key points:

1. Former President Jimmy Carter got it wrong in his book, Peace, Not Apartheid. Professor Dershowitz clearly distinguishes what South Africa did to its African and "colored" populations from what Israel does to Palestinians. Carter's book seems filled with obvious errors which are detailed pretty thoroughly in an appendix. Yet Carter stands by the book being without error.

2. Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt mischaracterized the history of Palestinian-Israeli relations in a way that is either incompetent or corrupt. The fact-checking makes the two professors look pretty bad.

3. Those who want to boycott Israeli academics and divest from Israeli businesses are acting as though stifling free debate will help create peace, on the one hand, and that Israel is a rogue nation, on the other hand. Professor Dershowitz shows that the academic community doesn't support the boycotts and that the divestiture movement isn't based on a sound factual evaluation.

4. Those who oppose Israel's activities with regard to the Palestinians from either the hard left or hard right seem to be taking positions that are racist because they don't criticize regimes that are actually engaged in genocide or severe forms of racial discrimination. Many are also quoted as having made anti-Semitic statements.

5. Those who favor suicide bombers aren't interested in peace but are rather acting on religious beliefs that require that Israel be destroyed and eliminated, and he provides many quotes to support that view.

6. The Iranian atomic program is a danger to Israel and the United States because the current leadership is committed to destroying Israel and any nation that opposes what Muslims want to do. He provides many quotes to support these views from the mouths of the appropriate leaders.

In conclusion, he argues that

1. Israel has always been willing to trade land for peace, but Palestinians haven't.

2. Israel has the right under international law to take a proportionate response to attacks on its territory and citizenry.

3. Muslims, Arabs, and Christians have more rights in Israel than they do in Muslim countries.

4. Palestinian opposition to the Jewish presence in what is now Israel dates back to the Nazi era and includes collaboration in the Holocaust.

5. Most of the current social problems that Palestinians experience are a result of Arab nations not wanting to accept them in their countries rather than mistreatment by Israelis.

After having read the book, I wanted to understand why so many people are making such preposterous statements.

In thinking about how all these falsehoods could have occurred, I realized that it was a lot like watching two football fans argue about which fan's team was the better. Each fan is convinced of its team's superiority and isn't very aware of or sympathetic to the other side. And they really don't care if they get it wrong in making their arguments. Why? Their loyalty to the team is more important than the truth. It's about emotions . . . not about facts.

If someone is outraged to see Palestinians suffer from Israeli bombs, they will see the Israelis as guilty. If someone is outraged to see Israeli civilians blown up by Palestinian suicide bombers or Hamas rockets, they will see at least some Palestinians as guilty.

When football is involved, the leagues supply independent officials to sort it all out. In the case of Israel and the Palestinians, no one is playing that role of independent officials any more. And I have to assume that few would want to be inserted into what could be hundreds of years of warfare.

It seems like a situation that will only escalate, until one side or the other has to give up because the cost of "victory" is too high. That's hardly a civilized or desirable resolution.

What's the answer? Well, if every nation is going to be at risk of these angry parties lobbing atomic weapons at one another, perhaps the time has come for the international community to realize that it had better supply those objective officials or bear a horrible price.

Who will step forward? I don't know, but I pray someone will.

5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Well-articulated partisan account, April 7, 2009

By	Z. Eigen "student_fast_shipper" (Chicago, IL) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Dershowitz offers clear, well-articulated evidence in support of his position. He argues persuasively. I would encourage everyone to read as much stuff as they can on BOTH sides of the issues in order to get the fullest picture possible. Try to understand how Israelis view the situation and how Palestinians do. Before laying blame, try to read non-partisan historical and political accounts of the region. Lastly, I urge everyone to come to this issue with less of a "who wins the argument" mentality, and more of a problem-solving mentality. Put yourself in the other side's shoes. Think productively and constructively. This is how a solution will be reached, not by winning fictitious points by arguing with rhetoric, but by positive, constructive dialogue.

5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Good Case Against Israel, March 26, 2009

By	Zachariah D. Watkins - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Professor Dershowitz does a wonderful job exposing those academics (like Professor Chomsky from MIT), the Iranian President, President Jimmy Carter, and other's that stand in the way of a peaceful Middle East. Professor Dershowitz proves that academia, some members of the "elite" media, and many organizations are systematically working against Israel.

In my opinion, Dershowitz's best point is about the "human rights" organizations and they hypocrisy of the whole industry. Dershowitz cites many examples of double-standards that apply to Israel's actions and that of other real "genocidal" countries. He cities: China, South Africa, Sudan, Iran, and many other places that are ignored by these "do-gooders."

I give the book 5 stars because I believe it's well researched and written. I found it very educational; I learned many things about people like Jimmy Carter, Pat Buchanan (who I agree with on a lot of things), and many others, that are disappointing to me. Chapter 1, "The Case Against Jimmy Carter," really knocked my sox off because I was ignorant of many things he did. Being 23, he (Jimmy Carter) was before my time and I was not all that familiar with his actions and "leadership" in the world.

I'd recommend this book to anybody who "hates" Israel or at least thanks they do. It's ironic, as Dershowitz points out, Israel is the only free country in the Middle East and people hate it.


If you have any question's about the book, my email is [e-mail],


Get the book!


Zach Watkins