The Much Too Promised Land: America's Elusive Search for Arab-Israeli Peace Paperback – 30 December 2008

good

I feel that this title is quite appropriate for this work. I found Aaron Miller's book to be a forthright and honest attempt at a historical analysis. What I found so refreshing though was the author's level of honesty. It is hard enough to find books that attempt a balanced view of these issues without adding to it the fact that the writer was very much an active participant in the very history they are attempting to analyze. I felt as if there were no attempt to whitewash or to put a better face on his or the US's role in this history, and so that makes this a very important book. While I may not always agree with his analysis, this disagreement is due to my interpreting the facts differently rather than over how the author has laid out the facts.The book has a colloquial and anecdotal style that I normally cannot stand, but I think Miller did an excellent job mixing the anecdotal with the scholarly. I didn't find that the style detracted from the substance at all which is the usual problem I have with such works. Instead the style gives the reader a greater feel for how diplomacy works. The interviews and anecdotes bring US diplomacy down from the ethereal plains back down to the human level. Readers get the opportunity to see just how difficult these negotiations really are. It isn't this abstract chess board were large pieces are moved, but rather it is on the personal level where participants thrash out differences face to face. One gets to see just how much personalities play in diplomacy, and we get to see that this diplomacy is the work of hundreds of people and it evolves over time. Today's failure may be the ground work for tomorrow's breakthrough.I really liked his look into the role of pro-Israel lobbying groups in the US. I think his analysis is very important. These lobbyists are neither all-powerful hands guiding US policy but neither are they completely benign. They are nothing nefarious though. These groups are doing nothing but using the US system to advocate for their policies. This is perfectly legal, and it is essentially the American way of doing politics. My only problem is that I feel these groups have a certain negative impact on US policy in that they have the affect of making the Israeli perspective the default position of US governments. This does affect our balance, and our ability to be honest arbiters in this conflict. This doesn't mean that the US policy can't be affective or that it is forever tilted to the Israelis, but it does mean that more often than not the US is looking at any problems that arise from the Israeli viewpoint rather than from a balanced perspective. The author explains this very well, and also shows how this tilt towards Israel can have benefits as well.My one fundamental disagreement with this author's analysis is on the Camp David summit under Clinton. The author asserts that the US's unpreparedness was not a critical error that ensured the failure of these negotiations. The author explains that there were still huge gaps between the two sides along with big problems with trust between the sides and constituencies in Israel and the Arab world. While all of this is true, and the possibility of getting substantive agreements from both sides was remote, the fact that the US was unprepared and scrambling during these talks ensured that the two sides would fail to bridge the gap. The US gave too much deference to Israeli political constraints and this sullied the US negotiators from the outset. The US team should have come into these talks armed with a working paper that would have had both sides screaming and threatening to walk out, but instead they allowed the Israelis to have a hand in the drafting of the US starting position. In the end these talks were probably doomed to failure before they ever began, but the US team ensured that failure by not being prepared. Both the Israelis and Palestinians needed a tough and robust arbiter at Camp David to push, cajole and extort the two sides into bridging gaps instead they were largely lead by unfolding events.All in all this is a great book that will inform all readers. The author takes a very balanced approach that offers readers a valuable perspective. I highly recommend this work.

L'auteur nous plonge dans les arcanes de la diplomatie américaine au Proche Orient, et révèle le dessous des négociations de Camp David. A lire pour tous ceux qui veulement comprendre la complexité du processus de Paix.

excellent quality and prompt delivery.

I bought the audio cd version of this book, which I heard on a 500 mile drive. The book is a combination of history and insight, with the author's perspective. It was much more personal than detached. He is positive about both Democratic and Republican President for whom he has worked, but not afraid to discuss their shortcomings. He was there, on the front lines, as a negotiator.I enjoyed the books, and would recommend it, but would have bought an abridged edition had it been available.