I did not finish reading this title, at the time it was not the type of book I was in the right headspace to read. It seemed like an interesting topic, but other books seemed more interesting.

<i> The Olive Branch from Palestine: The Palestinian Declaration of Independence and the Path Out of the Current Impasse</i> lays out the history between the two countries, then presents various solutions to a two-state system with Israel and Palestine. The author is an American Jew, and while he is not as pro-Israel as most U.S. articles about the country are, I would be interested in hearing the thoughts of someone who is actually from Palestine rather than an outsider. I did learn more about the history of Palestine and the Palestinians since Europe decided to give their country back to the Jews. However, be aware that this book is not coming from a neutral viewpoint.

Many thanks to NetGalley for providing me an audio ARC of this book.

In a change of style from my previous readings, this essay on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the failed Palestinian independence process, caught my eye. I knew that this is a delicate and multi-faceted issue, in which time passign by, only worsens the conditions for negotiation between the two political actors. I expected to develop a deeper view into this subject with a historical perspective. Nevertheless, I came across a much more personal book, detailing Palestine's attempt at independence from the author's point of view, as one of the mediator in this process. Therefore, the book provides a totally personal point of view of the conflict, in which the author is neither independent nor academic.

What did I enjoy from The Olive Branch from Palestine?

Starting with the obvious, the audiobook is narrated by Matthew Lloyd Davies, which turns the book into a lecture. It feels similar to attending a seminar full of listeners, in which a lecturer takes the floor to tell his first-hand experience.
Continuing in this line, Jerome Segal offers a point of view of the conflict to which we normally do not have access. It's always interesting to find the testimony of those who participate as mediators in a conflict of this magnitude. Essays on politics tend to focus on the most theoretical part of a historical event, with the intention of eliminating any personal beliefs that may distort the context. This is not that kind of book, there's a significant personal point of view.

What would I improve in The Olive Branch from Palestine?

When I started the book, it was a bit difficult to follow the author's plot thread. At the beginning, he focuses on reviewing the historical facts since the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 1988. Instead of a traditional time line from 1988 to the present or, even, parallel time lines through the consequences of the Declaration of Independence; the author navigates between the historical facts and the consequences, without a fixed time line, closer to an anecdotal story, than to an attempt to bring new data to light about the conflict. It reminded me of those café conversations with my grandfather, in which he jumps from one memory to another, not too concerned about where to direct the conversation, but enjoying the conversation itself. Unlike the conversations with my grandfather, the author lacks the necessary emotion for such a chaotic story.
Despite the fact that it's the story of a people towards their independence, in conditions that limit their ability to negotiate, Segal puts the responsibility of creating an optimal environment for negotiation in Palestine. He criticizes the deviation towards the option of armed resistance as a mistake and the reason that other international actors don't recognize Palestine as a state; ignoring that the current conditions of the Palestinian population and the Israeli colonization campaigns in the Palestinian territory in the last decades, seem to leave no other way out. After years of bilateral and collective negotiations, the living conditions of the Palestinian people continue to worsen, so their trust in institutions weakens and gives way to anger as the only valid political sentiment.

On the other hand, Segal doens't address Israel's responsibility in the current political context between the two peoples. He just declares that waiting for the collaboration of the Israeli government, in the acceptance of Palestine as a state, is delusional. Opening a negotiation with a state that refuses to negotiate is nothing more than the repetition of an internal speech in the air. So, for the author, the only possibility for Palestine's indepence depends upon convincing the US of its good intentions and that it won't become a terrorist state.

As Segal presents it, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict resembles school bullying, where the teachers prefer to ignore the acts of bullying and focus on suppressing the victim reactions, before someone else discovers the real situation and asks why no action was taken earlier. Someone aware of their mistake that doesn't take responsibility for the consequences, is unlikely to adopt a different role in the resolution of a conflict.

With all this in mind, the option that Segal proposes (resuming negotiations based on the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 1988) is practically unfeasible. Getting Israel to sit down to negotiate the creation of Palestine as a state would be a miracle, let alone accept the terms of the Declaration of Independence. What would Israel gain from the negotiation? I cannot see what "positive" outcome can Israel get from this hypothetical negotiation, apart from improving its role on the international stage.

Conclusion

The Olive Branch from Palestine navigates between the anecdote and the need to be controversial and relevant, at a sensitive time in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It doesn't offer an alternative to the current scenario and insists on a dead end, which can only lead to the exhaustion of the Palestinian people. It's the tale of David and Goliath, where David is Palestinian and has no weapons to defend himself with.

Thank you to NetGalley and Deyan Audio for the advance audio copy of this title in exchange for an honest review.

I received this book after it had already been published. It took me a while to get through it. I was hoping that it would provide some education on the history of the “impasse”, as the subtitle refers to the current situation.

Sadly, it did not. It focused on the Palestinian Declaration of Independence, and how it had offered solutions that had chiefly been ignored. It went on to describe peace efforts since the declaration had been written, and the response, or lack of response, to those efforts. It particularly focused on U.S. response. This made sense, as it was written by an American writer. It makes even more sense after one realizes that the writer is attempting to break into politics, and has, in fact, launched a campaign for the 2024 presidential election.

This brings me to the narrator. I wish that the book had been narrated by the author. I believe that might have made it more meaningful. I am sure that the author is a fabulous actor. I was, however, extremely confused as to why he was chosen to narrate this particular book. Hearing a British narrator speak about U.S. politics, and presidential responses to Israel over the past few decades, really sent me off on a tangent as to the purpose of the book. Not to say that I didn’t agree with his comments about the 45th president, but now that I know he aspires to be the 47th president, some of it reads a bit more like a campaign speech, which read in a British accent, just didn’t track for me.

I appreciated the chance to listen to the book. It did give me a lot to think about it (though some of it became redundant after a while). I’m still not sure about the writer’s purpose in creating it or its intended audience.

I think this is extremely idealistic. The I/P war is based on political power, extremism, and religious differences - no document is going to fix it. However, I do think this is extremely well-written and informative. It was interesting to read about the history of previous peace attempts and how the author was involved in them. Despite what some reviewers have said, it's not one-sided nor Pro-Israel. It discusses multiple views and doesn't pin one as right or wrong. It's more of a discussion of how two oppressed groups have been both good and bad through the decades. I wasn't aware that political pettiness from both sides lead to so many issues with peace attempts - and when I say pettiness I mean things like the font and paper used caused issues with political leaders on both sides. The history of it was more interesting to me.

I enjoyed learning more about the historical significance of the trials and tribulations that Palestine has been through throughout several hundred and thousands of years. I think, as Americans, we are pretty tired of the happenings of world events, and we were never taught about foreign countries other than in instances where we've been involved. I feel I've learned the most about the world through my external searches and books that wouldn't be considered appropriate for high school, probably because a lot of what we've learned was likely American propaganda-adjacent.

<strong>Disclaimer:</strong> This audiobook was made available to me as an ARC from the publisher via NetGalley. Also, this being an audiobook, it has not been possible to go back and mark sections for quotations and I might also have missed certain bits as my attention has drifted while listening.

I wanted to dive into this since the occupation of Palestine and the genocide on its people being carries out by Israel is a topic I care a lot about, and I was hoping this book would provide new insights and ideas. I did learn some new things regarding the history of Palestine and its occupation, but only small details. E.g., I really appreciated the interview(s) with some of the Palestinian representatives about some of the happenings surrounding their declaration of independence. The narrator also did an excellent job in bringing the text to life, but ultimately couldn’t detract from the fact that the book is incredibly repetitive with the author repeatedly tooting his own horn, making it quite the drag to listen to.

Speaking of the author tooting his own horn, he talks <em>a lot</em> about what <em>he</em> (a white American Jew with no ties to the Middle East (other than being Jewish) that I could find) thinks Palestine/the Palestinians ought to do and when they don’t do as he suggested at the time or what he thinks they should have done in retrospect and they don’t get the result they were hoping for or wanting, he comes off quite victim blame‐y. E.g., talking about why PLO didn’t just issue currency and <em>smuggle it into Palestine</em>(!!) to grant the declared independent state more legitimacy and says that Israel issued currency basically the day after they declared their independent state, entirely disregarding how Israel is a project created by England and other colonial powers and thus have their support in making these things happen. Israel never had to smuggle any Israeli currency into <a href="https://www.davidrovics.com/songbook/israeli-geography-101/">whatever the Israeli borders are</a>. The author also claims that PLO, who are actually Palestinians and presumably have contact with people inside occupied Palestine, failed to understand what the intifadah was actually about, which just feels infantilising.

He also mentions Palestinian “terrorists” a number of times and puts blame for a number of ills and failed negotiations on them, while not only just mentioning in passing the massively disproportionate amount of terrorism Israel has done and continues to do towards Palestine and Palestinians but I also didn’t note a single point where he acknowledged the amount of terror and injustice imposed on the Palestinian people even prior to Israel being a thing, by British and French soldiers. He even directly says that Israel is not at all a colonial or an imperial-settler state, despite it directly having been brought about by European colonialism and settled by mainly white people of European descend. The whole time it feels like he thinks the conflict started in the 1940’s, and not with the British betrayal of their agreement with the people living in the region in the 1910’s.

There’s also a continual thread of naive optimism that Israel – the state and/or the people – as well as the USA would accept Palestine if only they would do X. The X changes depending on who you ask, but them officially renouncing self‐defense against Israeli violence (or “terrorism”) has been a big one, including <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-palestinian-human-rights-terrorism-b1943743.html">whomever Israel deems to be a terrorist organisation</a> (PLO and Hamas in particular). The author believes that people in Israel only don’t believe in peace because there’s no “partner in peace” (e.g., a political party or other entity to negotiate with), while disregarding the <a href="https://twitter.com/EmpireFiles/status/1393015740291162120">extremely racist and genocidal attitudes of everyday people in Israel</a>, let alone how that also permeates the Israel Occupation Force. He also doesn’t acknowledge that Hamas was created (at least in part) by Israel, that high‐ranking Israeli politicians have repeatedly shown much more interest in <a href="https://mondoweiss.net/2023/01/netanyahus-ministers-aim-to-empty-the-west-bank-of-arabs/">genociding Palestinians</a> than they have shown in making peace, and that the US has continuously and one-sidedly stood on Israel’s side, persistently voting against (and vetoing) UN resolutions that Israel didn’t agree with.

Finally, a small thing but one that really irks me, the <em>writer</em> says that declarations (such as the Israeli and Palestinian declarations for independence) cannot be propaganda, which seems like an extremely limited scope of what propaganda is or can be. Of course they’re propaganda as they advocate for their respective nation states’ independence as well as the narratives surrounding them. This book is propaganda too, though Jerome would likely disagree, and so is this review of the book.

In summary, the book does talk some about history and if you’re interested in the details surrounding the creation of the Palestinian Declaration of Independence you could certainly do worse than read this book, as long as you keep in mind that it’s one long op-ed piece that is extremely favourable towards Zionism even as it claims to be in favour of Palestinians.

This book is not what I originally expected.
The author's perspective is valid. However, I felt he was a bit too concerned to make the reader know he was right. Overall the book didn't really sit with me but I take home a lot of information on this matter that I deem so important., therefore I'll rate it 3 stars

I had originally assumed that this was a history book regarding the Palestinian peace talks and/or a multi-faceted approach to peace. I found it to be more memoir-esque, an odd mix of history, though mostly in context of the author's part in the process. I understand he had first-hand experience, but it was very focused on how the author was right, and needed to prove how he was right all along, and his plan is what will be successful. Just based on the description, I had anticipated something a little more nuanced and hoped for something more generally readable for an introduction to the topic. This perspective would probably be more useful in context with additional texts and readings on the topic, where this provides an additional contextual layer of information from someone who participated in talks from the inside, but it is a very one-sided view of events.

I did appreciate the narrator, Matthew Lloyd Davies for a valiant attempt to keep the information interesting and flowing.

Thank you to Deyan Audio for the arc via Netgalley.

The Olive Branch from Palestine by The Palestinian Declaration of Independence and the Path Out of the Current Impasse by Jerome M Segal Narrated by Matthew Lloyd Davies

Thank you to #Netgalley and University of California Press for the audiobook.

This is an expansive and well written history and political plan to end a very long running and violent conflict. Written by one of the contributors and actors in the earlier attempts at peace The Olive Branch is a good place to start for anyone that is interested in the deeper issues, histories and possible outcomes of the conflict.

With that said, this is written by one of the players, and as such is a political work with a clear and defined agenda. Further, there are moments when the authors personal thoughts and opinions are stated as facts and that will be off putting to many readers. There is also a bit of a hero complex put forth by the author (same as pretty much every work by a politician regarding their work I’ve ever read) where he likes to remind the reader that he is a Jewish person who is in support of a Palestinian state, almost through benevolence. Other reviews have called out what they believe to be anti-Arab or racist statements. I am not familiar enough with the region or the colloquialisms to make any statement on the topic. However, the reader should at a minimum remember that this is not an arm’s length scholarly work.

The production of the audiobook is excellent Davies paces the work well and adds just enough inflection to keep the listener engaged in what feels like a somewhat long work.

No, No, No, No and No. Massive No to the ideologies in this book.

I stopped this Audiobook at chapter 2 because, as an Arab Muslim this book took insulting to a whole new level of gaslighting.
I originally decided to listen to this audiobook not because I knew it would be great, but rather because I am a student of Law and a diverse perspective would do me well. Not to mention my personal interest in the topic of politics.

Nonetheless, I am ordered by religion to be fair, and fair I shall be.
And so, I shall start with mentioning the good traits of this book.
• The Audiobook narrator did a great job at narrating. I was listening to historicaly heavy information, as well as, International Law and Politics without feeling bored. Rather, I was worked up, my blood boiling because I was intently concentrating.
• The author acknowledges that Palestine and Palestinians are treated unjustly and does not paint the US nor "the state of Israel" as the doers of righteousness.
• The author tried his best -though he failed miserably- to lay down historical facts as they were, not as how they are viewed.
• The author though speaking of his own views and opinions was not biased in laying down information.

Now, going on to what I absolutely despised about this book.
• The author talks about the Palestinian's declaration of independence and its effects -how it played a huge part in the establishment of the Palestinian State- yet neglects the basic notion that is 'Why should a state that is more than a 1000 years old need a declaration of independence to be acknowledged by the International community in the first place.
• The author clearly boasts about seeing himself as one of the first contributors to the idea of Palestine having to have a declaration of independence. How he thought that doing so should benefit them.
• The author's idea of peace is the coexistence of both the Palestinian state and "the state of Israel" as two different states, with both having a claim to the land. How can the colonizing apartheid so called country -which mind you hadn't been heard of untill recently and had no place in the old world, no history, no nothing- be acknowledged to have part of the land of the the colonized party. It isn't fair! Nor rational from any aspect.
• Furthermore, he gaslights the actions of the Palestinian state through clear statement that he sees some of the measures taken by the PLO are a mistake.
• But what really had me fuming, and the reason I decided to not continue listening to this audiobook is his very wrong use of wordings in relying historical facts. Calling the past Islamic opening of Palestine as "Conquered". This is a very wrong conception on the matter.

Lastly, I end my review by saying: As an Arab Muslim Woman, We will never acknowledge "the state of Israel". There can only be peace when the colonizers are kicked out and the land returns to its true owners.