A full length assessment of what went wrong with the Oslo peace process -- a process that began in euphoria and degenerated into disaster.
"The contributions vividly demonstrate current contradictions: the Palestinians hoped that 'structure', i.e. a state, would emerge; the US and Israel appeared interested only in 'process', i.e. the war against terrorism." --"Choice "
"This volume presents a broad range of political perspectives on the Oslo process, from left-wing Israelis to an Islamist Palestinain who describes how the 'very existence of "Israel" is considered illegal' from an 'Islamist point of view'. The book makes for interesting reading, partly because each one of the commentators has a different view of what the Accords required and what the best way is to move forward." --"Michigan Law Review "
The contributions vividly demonstrate current contradictions: the Palestinians hoped that structure, i.e. a state, would emerge; the US and Israel appeared interested only in process, i.e. the war against terrorism. "Choice ""
This volume presents a broad range of political perspectives on the Oslo process, from left-wing Israelis to an Islamist Palestinain who describes how the very existence of Israel is considered illegal from an Islamist point of view . The book makes for interesting reading, partly because each one of the commentators has a different view of what the Accords required and what the best way is to move forward. "Michigan Law Review ""
"The contributions vividly demonstrate current contradictions: the Palestinians hoped that 'structure', i.e. a state, would emerge; the US and Israel appeared interested only in 'process', i.e. the war against terrorism." --Choice
"This volume presents a broad range of political perspectives on the Oslo process, from left-wing Israelis to an Islamist Palestinain who describes how the 'very existence of "Israel" is considered illegal' from an 'Islamist point of view'. The book makes for interesting reading, partly because each one of the commentators has a different view of what the Accords required and what the best way is to move forward." --Michigan Law Review