Scan barcode
A review by heidi_beatrice
The Haj by Leon Uris
4.0
I’m not a huge fan of Uris’ writing style (at times it’s clunky and hard to follow), but as a work of historical fiction this is great. It illustrates to the letter the chaotic political landscape of Palestine and the Arab world surrounding the creation of the Israeli state and it is a brilliant condemnation of how the ordinary Arabs living in Palestine were betrayed by their own leaders. The refugee crisis was largely self-created, and the Arab leaders – especially Saudi and Egypt, the most significant of the lot in terms of wealth and power, simply refused to grant refugees citizenship while ensuring that any who chose to return to Israel were ostracised by their Arab brothers. No return and no resettlement was the order of the day.
Uris really grasps the contemporary Arab mind-set; the utter refusal to negotiate with the Jews, the self-seeking motives of Abdullah, Husain, Nasser and the various other Arab leaders disguised as concern for the refugees; the mistrust, lies and inflammatory rhetoric. Sadly it is a mind-set that has not entirely gone away, so almost sixty years later we have the same problems; Palestinian Arabs exploited by their own people for global and regional influence and personal power struggles.
If I had to take on quote from this book to sum it up, it would be from Effendi Kabir speaking to the Prince of Saudi Arabia during the Zurich Conference: ‘the only thing that unifies us is our hatred of the Jews.’
While some have said the conclusion was disappointing, I thought it was both poignant and pertinent; the Haj struggled for most of the book for more enlightened thinking, compromise and peace. He saw what Arab nations could become, and what they were – at times he was even visionary; yet in the end he was, like all the other refugees, a victim of his society, his prejudices and his leaders.
I did have a couple of issues, however. Uris, whilst not explicitly approving the Irgun and Stern Gang, painted them far whiter than they should have been – they were in actuality horrific terrorist groups. Nothing can justify their existence. Deir Yassin and Plan D weren’t dealt with especially well either; he didn’t touch the idea of ethnic cleansing (which was what Plan Dalet - if it existed - was arguably about) or the idea that the Deir Yassin massacre could have been deliberate. There is no sympathy for the British either, who were in a very difficult position and short of a miracle could not have kept a lid on the Arab-Jewish rivalries and inter-tribal feuds.
But these are just minor quibbles. It is a sad tale of ‘what ifs’ – what if Ibrahim and Maan had won? What if the Arabs had accepted UNRES181? What if Farouk hadn’t been ousted by Nasser? What if Jordan hadn’t been created? What if the wealthy Palestinians hadn’t fled?
A searing portrayal of a culture that refused to change in a changing world.
Uris really grasps the contemporary Arab mind-set; the utter refusal to negotiate with the Jews, the self-seeking motives of Abdullah, Husain, Nasser and the various other Arab leaders disguised as concern for the refugees; the mistrust, lies and inflammatory rhetoric. Sadly it is a mind-set that has not entirely gone away, so almost sixty years later we have the same problems; Palestinian Arabs exploited by their own people for global and regional influence and personal power struggles.
If I had to take on quote from this book to sum it up, it would be from Effendi Kabir speaking to the Prince of Saudi Arabia during the Zurich Conference: ‘the only thing that unifies us is our hatred of the Jews.’
While some have said the conclusion was disappointing, I thought it was both poignant and pertinent; the Haj struggled for most of the book for more enlightened thinking, compromise and peace. He saw what Arab nations could become, and what they were – at times he was even visionary; yet in the end he was, like all the other refugees, a victim of his society, his prejudices and his leaders.
I did have a couple of issues, however. Uris, whilst not explicitly approving the Irgun and Stern Gang, painted them far whiter than they should have been – they were in actuality horrific terrorist groups. Nothing can justify their existence. Deir Yassin and Plan D weren’t dealt with especially well either; he didn’t touch the idea of ethnic cleansing (which was what Plan Dalet - if it existed - was arguably about) or the idea that the Deir Yassin massacre could have been deliberate. There is no sympathy for the British either, who were in a very difficult position and short of a miracle could not have kept a lid on the Arab-Jewish rivalries and inter-tribal feuds.
But these are just minor quibbles. It is a sad tale of ‘what ifs’ – what if Ibrahim and Maan had won? What if the Arabs had accepted UNRES181? What if Farouk hadn’t been ousted by Nasser? What if Jordan hadn’t been created? What if the wealthy Palestinians hadn’t fled?
A searing portrayal of a culture that refused to change in a changing world.