Thomas Friedman is one of the authors who intrigues me the most. I have the majority of his books. His perspective on the Middle East, International Politics and Globalization has brought me to consider an extensive number of topics, what I believe and know about them, and caused me to form a level of knowledge that I’ve yearned for. I’ve spoken about his book, The World is Flat, which is more of a conceptual piece.
From Beirut to Jerusalem was the last book of his that I have read. It captures his experience as a New York Times correspondent in Beirut, Lebanon, and Jerusalem, Israel. Having lived there from the mid 70s to the later 80s, he experienced a lot of the unrest and conflict in these countries. Combined with a Jewish background, and gift for history, Friedman captures the society and culture from many levels and ties them into a concise and straightforward presentation. His writing is topical in nature and can be a bit hard to follow from chapter to chapter, but ultimately it makes sense as the book progresses.
I recommend this book to anyone interested in the Middle East and desiring to learn of about more recent history. Friedman had seemingly unparalleled access to leaders during the time and recounts a number of interactions from a first person standpoint. While reading, I’ve taken to underlining or noting specific ideas, concepts, historic accounts or other items Iwant to go back and reference. Below are those references with my thoughts/commentary on them.
page 119, “The distinction between words and deeds was often lost in Beirut. It was a display culture, a city of amusement-park mirrors, which made short people look tall, fat people look thin, and insignificant people look important. Men loved to pose there–revolutionaries by day, merchants and gamblers by night. Life did not imitate art in Beirut; it was art….Just by putting up one check-point manned by two teenage thugs on a busy highway in Beirut, you could turn yourself into a four-star general, a political party, a tax collector–hell, you could be a whole liberation movement if you wanted. The law of Lebanese politics was: I have a check-point, therefore I exist.”
This paragraph is very telling about the Middle Eastern society, and something that we still see to a certain extent today. There is a general lack of definition. For many years the area was ruled by tribes. There were specific boundaries and rules were enforced by the strongest, best, largest tribe. Instead of government defining the country, definition was in the eye of tribe or clansman. If you wonder why democracy and peace are so difficult, there is a certain historic aspect that must be considered.
Additionally, you look at his characterization of it as a display culture. People wanted to seem larger than they were, and more powerful. How would a casual traveler know that the roadblock in one place was or was not connected to the one 20 miles down the road. Without a common value system, action taken is at the discretion of the enforcer.
page 144, “But what made Begin even more dangerous was this his fantasies about power were combined with a self-perception of being a victim. Someone who sees himself as a victim will almost never morally evaluate himself or put limits on his own actions. Why should he? He is the victim.”
Personally, I do not know if there is a better characterization of a large portion of society today, than this. You see it evident in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Both think they are being victimized. Both want to act in a manner, largely, independent of the other. Both take actions that a person with normal values would call unjust, wrong, and over the line.
Yet, we see the same thing happening today in government. Special interest groups, whether cultural, economic, ethnic, gender-based or related to sexual orientation see themselves as victims. They say they just want equal rights, but really they want special rights. They feel they are the victim and are entitled to certain things because of how they are different. There is a lack of values and morals, there is little consistency and individuals are allowed to interpret life and actions on what they want or feel is right. We are quickly seeing the danger in that.
Luckily as of yet the actions taken have been as violent and devastating as Israel and Palestine. But I might argue the damage to society in America is quickly mounting when you look at a general degradation of morals.
page 234, “Show me someone involved in the distribution of goods and services in Lebanon today and I will show you a militiaman, the brother of a militiaman, the cousin of a militiaman, or the friend of a militiaman.” Friedman closed a short piece with this quote after discussing how any action whether the movement of resources, the approval of construction or the operation of business was subject to a mafia-like mentality.
The anarchy that reigned in Beirut seems to be characteristic of much of the Middle East, and if we look closely, maybe much of the world. In the Middle East, Israel/Palestine; Iraq; Lebanon; Syria, and Iran (that’s all I can recollect) have a number of different nations contained within. That is groups formed from cultural, religious, ethnic backgrounds. However, there are many fewer states, the political arm controlling them. There is still, though a tribal feeling of, he who has the most guns or power wins, throughout the area.
In the United States, it is very much akin. We have “Chinatown”, “Little Italy” and other blatant designations for where “nations” have gathered in the United States. In bigger cities you become quickly aware where other cultures have emigrated to. I think there is a basic feeling of safety and camaraderie that is garnered from this closeness. Luckily, America has a semblance of common sense, decency and relatively uncorrupt government to keep things in check, but like the Middle East there does not often seem to be a true unity. [The noted exception is major events like 9/11 which draw people together].
I liked this quote for consideration from page 264, “In other words, why worry about consequences? If our cause could overcome objective reality once in our history, went the argument, then it can do it always, as long as we keep the faith. The minute you lose faith in the full myth, the minute you make even the smallest compromise with reality, everything is lost.” Oh, that folks would see the reality of government and stop believing the myth that it is the answer.
The next two quotes are just for consideration.
page 270, “A consensus, said Eban, means that ‘everyone agrees to say collectively what no one believes individually.”
page 320, “Judaism was never supposed to turn into some sort of faith. It was always meant to be a way of life fore a people. It was always a stepping-stone to today, not to another world.” This is a quote from David Hartman, founder and director of the Shalom Hartman Institute for Advanced Judaic Studies who sees Judaism not as a religion, but a lifestyle and comprises one of the major cultural/national groups in Israel.
Finally, page 361, “Precisely because this twilight war involved two entire communities, two peoples, two tribes, two nations, fighting each other without a frontline, neither one really made any distinction between civilians and soldiers. Each side viewed the members of the other community as the potential enemy, and hence as potential soldiers in the enemy army. Relations between Israelis and Palestinians become so thoroughly politicized that after a while there was no such thing as a crime between them, and there was no such thing as an accident between them–there were only acts of war.”
Having read what I have by Friedman and learned about the Middle East, this very situation is what makes the interactions between Israelis and Palestinians so dangerous. There has been a level of de-humanization that has occurred. When we stop seeing lives as precious, and are willing to make choices that affect those lives without thought to the huge impact we reach a point where we encourage children to carry bombs in suicide attacks.
I enjoyed this book by Friedman because it served as more of a first person narrative than anything else. It was historical, he recounted events he witnessed and lived through. I would recommend it to folks interested in the Middle East 25 years ago.
They say that we should learn from history or else we are doomed to repeat it. Consider the interactions that the Israelis and Palestinians had 25 years ago, consider our country, examine how you approach things, and ask yourself what you can learn, what we as a country can learn and how we can move forward and ensure that the past is not repeated to the detriment of all involved.
Thank goodness I finally finished this! Almost 1500 words later 
