Through Different Eyes: Two Leading Americans-A Jew and an Arab-Debate U.S. Policy in the Middle East

Bookbinder, Hyman; Abourezk, James G.

ISBN 10: 0917561392 / ISBN 13: 9780917561399

Published by Adler & Adler Pub, 1987

About this Item

Seller Inventory # 0917561392-3-37034432

Bibliographic Details

• Title: Through Different Eyes: Two Leading Americans-A Jew and an Arab-Debate U.S. Policy in the Middle East
• Publisher: Adler & Adler Pub
• Publication Date: 1987
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 0917561392
• ISBN 13: 9780917561399
• Binding: hardcover
• Condition: Good
• Weight: 22 ounces

About this title

Reviews

Bookbinder is chairman of a coordinating body of Washington representatives of 25 leading Jewish organizations. Former senator James Abourezk is founder-chairman of the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee. In the first section of this provocative and illuminating volume each separately addresses the question, "Is U.S. policy in the Middle East in America's best interest?" This is followed by a rebuttal by each to the other's statement. The final section is an edited transcript of their face-to-face debate. This is a remarkable confrontation between two experts whose views differ drastically. Bookbinder and Abourezk discusswith occasional fireworkssuch issues as the legitimacy of the state of Israel, the rights of the Palestinians, the relevance and nonrelevance of the Holocaust in the debate, the validity or unfairness of the media's presentation of good-guy Israeli and bad-guy Arab, and the influence on Congress of the Jewish lobby.
Copyright 1987 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Using a classical debate format, this book presents arguments from both sides in the Arab-Israeli dispute. Representing Israel is a spokesman from the American Jewish Committee, Hyman Bookbinder, while former U.S. Senator James Abourezk, presently chairman of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, presents the Palestinian Arab view. David Shipler, former Jerusalem correspondent of the New York Times, serves as moderator. The central question debated was whether U.S. policy in the Middle East was in America's best interest. No conclusion is reached; readers may decide for themselves which arguments prevailed. The real value of this document is that it brings together the basic arguments. Well recommended. Sanford R. Silverburg, Political Science Dept., Catawba Coll., Salisbury, N.C.
Copyright 1987 Reed Business Information, Inc.