Arafat : In the Eyes of the Beholder

Rating:
Summary: Good book
Review: Although a bit dated, the book gives a good synopsis about Arafat's life as well as the history of the PLO. Learned quite about Araft. The list of people they interviewed is quite impressive; those people they did interview make the book what it is. Very easy to read and engrossing as well.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting, not the best biography
Review: First off their is nothing 'misunderstood' about Mr. Arafat as this book contends. The authors think somehow that just because someone murders children is no reason to condemn him or even critique him. To begin with the bias does not help this book. ALthought he authors ahd much access to Arafats people they seem to have been taken in by some of his propoganda, something the PLO is expert at.

Their are only a few books on Arafat. "Arafat terrorist or peacemaker' by Hart is the most biased towards arafat. 'Arfat: defender to dictator' by ABurish is one of the more ciritcla ones. two new biographies of Arafat have recently been released one is biased and the other one is more nuetral. I would have to say this book is the worst of all of them. THis volume doesnt uncover much new evidence and yet it also fails to give a critical history of the PLO. The PLO was invovled in almost taking over and destroying two countries, Jordan and Lebanon. The PLO was thrown out of Syria and Egypt for these very reasons. Arafat himself, despite his success at survival, is not a lovable character, certainly not as lovable as the authors make him out to be. Harts volume is more insightful while Aburish's is more palistinian oriented.

The saga of Arafat is not over and we will need to wait for a full appraisal of his life. The recent resignation of Abbas does not bode well For Arafats leadership and neither does the rise of Hamas. This book is dated and its not thats special.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting, not the best biography
Review: First off their is nothing 'misunderstood' about Mr. Arafat as this book contends. The authors think somehow that just because someone murders children is no reason to condemn him or even critique him. To begin with the bias does not help this book. ALthought he authors ahd much access to Arafats people they seem to have been taken in by some of his propoganda, something the PLO is expert at.

Their are only a few books on Arafat. "Arafat terrorist or peacemaker' by Hart is the most biased towards arafat. 'Arfat: defender to dictator' by ABurish is one of the more ciritcla ones. two new biographies of Arafat have recently been released one is biased and the other one is more nuetral. I would have to say this book is the worst of all of them. THis volume doesnt uncover much new evidence and yet it also fails to give a critical history of the PLO. The PLO was invovled in almost taking over and destroying two countries, Jordan and Lebanon. The PLO was thrown out of Syria and Egypt for these very reasons. Arafat himself, despite his success at survival, is not a lovable character, certainly not as lovable as the authors make him out to be. Harts volume is more insightful while Aburish's is more palistinian oriented.

The saga of Arafat is not over and we will need to wait for a full appraisal of his life. The recent resignation of Abbas does not bode well For Arafats leadership and neither does the rise of Hamas. This book is dated and its not thats special.

Rating:
Summary: A Decent Review of Arafat's Life
Review: I recommend this book to anyone seeking to gain a deeper understanding of Yasser Arafat's life and role in both the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the internal politics of the Arab world. Based on an series of interviews conducted by the authors as well as primary documents (many of which are provided in translation at the end of the book, a useful bonus), this book chronicles the life of Arafat from his early days in Cairo and Jerusalem up to about 1990, and throws in a basic history of the Arab-Israeli conflict to boot. This book is at its best and most readable when it relays the personal reminscences of Arafat, his aides, and his rivals in the Arab world, who provide a perspective upon the major events of the Arab-Israeli conflict that you cannot find elsewhere. Also to its credit, as other reviewers have mentioned, this book provides a great amount of information on the various Palestinian factions comprising and outside of the PLO, and the characters behind each one of them (although it manages to largely ignore certain major players, such as Abu Nidal).

This book does, however, have several major flaws which relegate to secondary status in a library of books on the Middle East. Firstly, the book is a bit too biased towards Arafat, much like Patrick Seale's "Assad", which fawns upon the late Syrian dictator. One can excuse the affection they display for Arafat, however, as it was probably necessary in order to gain such impressive access to the Chairman and his inner circle. Still, one would have liked to see the comments of Arafat and his associates treated with greater critical analysis and balance. Furthermore, the authors' prose and organization leaves much to be desired. They lack the compelling narrative voice of a Thomas Friedman, Edward Said, or Bernard Lewis, resulting in a text that often comes across as very dry and stilted, particularly in historical background passages. They organize the book episodically rather than chronologically, which could result in great confusion regarding the timeline of events for someone not already very familiar with modern Middle Eastern history. Finally, this book tries to do far too much in a single volume. It begins as a very personal account of Arafat's life, yet at times abandons the story of Arafat entirely and becomes a generic history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is as though the authors wrote several separate books, took a few chapters from each, and threws the pages together. The result is a disjointed, often haphazard history of the Arab-Israeli conflict with slightly more emphasis on Yasser Arafat than is usual in such works.

In sum, this book has merit and provides certain insights and primary information not to be found elsewhere. It is not suitable as an introduction to the Arab-Israeli conflict, but should be read only after one has already acquired a basic familiarity with the subject matter. It is otherwise a useful addition to the library of the serious student of Middle Eastern history.

Rating:
Summary: A Decent Review of Arafat's Life
Review: I recommend this book to anyone seeking to gain a deeper understanding of Yasser Arafat's life and role in both the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the internal politics of the Arab world. Based on an series of interviews conducted by the authors as well as primary documents (many of which are provided in translation at the end of the book, a useful bonus), this book chronicles the life of Arafat from his early days in Cairo and Jerusalem up to about 1990, and throws in a basic history of the Arab-Israeli conflict to boot. This book is at its best and most readable when it relays the personal reminscences of Arafat, his aides, and his rivals in the Arab world, who provide a perspective upon the major events of the Arab-Israeli conflict that you cannot find elsewhere. Also to its credit, as other reviewers have mentioned, this book provides a great amount of information on the various Palestinian factions comprising and outside of the PLO, and the characters behind each one of them (although it manages to largely ignore certain major players, such as Abu Nidal).

This book does, however, have several major flaws which relegate to secondary status in a library of books on the Middle East. Firstly, the book is a bit too biased towards Arafat, much like Patrick Seale's "Assad", which fawns upon the late Syrian dictator. One can excuse the affection they display for Arafat, however, as it was probably necessary in order to gain such impressive access to the Chairman and his inner circle. Still, one would have liked to see the comments of Arafat and his associates treated with greater critical analysis and balance. Furthermore, the authors' prose and organization leaves much to be desired. They lack the compelling narrative voice of a Thomas Friedman, Edward Said, or Bernard Lewis, resulting in a text that often comes across as very dry and stilted, particularly in historical background passages. They organize the book episodically rather than chronologically, which could result in great confusion regarding the timeline of events for someone not already very familiar with modern Middle Eastern history. Finally, this book tries to do far too much in a single volume. It begins as a very personal account of Arafat's life, yet at times abandons the story of Arafat entirely and becomes a generic history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is as though the authors wrote several separate books, took a few chapters from each, and threws the pages together. The result is a disjointed, often haphazard history of the Arab-Israeli conflict with slightly more emphasis on Yasser Arafat than is usual in such works.

In sum, this book has merit and provides certain insights and primary information not to be found elsewhere. It is not suitable as an introduction to the Arab-Israeli conflict, but should be read only after one has already acquired a basic familiarity with the subject matter. It is otherwise a useful addition to the library of the serious student of Middle Eastern history.

Rating:
Summary: An amazing book about a difficult and misunderstood man
Review: The Wallach's have done a wonderful job in describing the life and works of Yasser Arafat, perhaps the most misunderstood person of the 1900s. In order to understand the present situation in Palestine/Israel, one has to read this book. It gives incredible insight into the workings of the PLO, the backstabbing of the USA, and the bind that the Palestinians are in. The Wallachs do an amazing job of giving an even-handed account of Arafat, portraying him as a powerful, competent leader, but not shying away from his weaknesses and mistakes.

Rating:
Summary: Arafat + History of the PLO
Review: This book was a great book. Not only does it serve as a biography of Arafat, it also serves great as a general history of Fatah, the PLO, and the struggle for Palestinian liberation. So what if it calls legitimate attacks against Israel terrorist attacks? It is a small matter in this case since everything else is pretty unbiased. Even as someone who has a pretty good knowledge of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, one thing I appreciate is having it spelled out to me that the PLO is an UMBRELLA organization that comprises Fatah, PFLP, DFLP, Saiqa etc... And that Arafat the leader of the Fatah faction and for a time not the leader of PLO soon became that leader in 69. Hence we now have his association with PLO/Fatah faction. For the longest time my mind was just a muddle until I was able to order these various liberation organization in time and space. I also have alot more respect for Arafat as a person devoted to the Palestinian cause. I have been a bit more on the extreme side previously and currently, however, I can see the definite advantages of a political solution. I liked this book and found it highly informative. I learned alot. If you want to learn about Fatah, the PLO, and Yasir Arafat, definately get this book.

My only problem with the book is the last chaper from "Oslo to Hebron". It should have been broken up into several better written pieces. However, I appreciate the addition of this chapter in the 97 print. The story is still unfolding.

Rating:
Summary: Yasir Arafat = Pure Evil
Review: This is short and to the point: Arafat is a murderer! He is a full Terrorist.

What more is there to say?

The only thing more disgusting that Arafat are those who defend him.

How can Americans defend him when he admittedly ordered the deaths of Americans?

Rating:
Summary: Yasir Arafat = Pure Evil
Review: This is short and to the point: Arafat is a murderer! He is a full Terrorist.

What more is there to say?

The only thing more disgusting that Arafat are those who defend him.

How can Americans defend him when he admittedly ordered the deaths of Americans?