Review: From Beirut to Jerusalem
Thomas Friedman spent years in the Middle East as a New York Times reporter who deeply absorbed the lay of that land in the 80’s. Beirut is part reporting, part memoir from that time. My impression was that it presents the facts from his solid reporting alongside his opinions, impressions, and feelings about those times. I think there’s considerable value in all of these, but of course, proper calibration is key.
I found his description of the Assad regime’s destruction of Hama and subsequent massacre in 1981 eye-opening. I was alive when it happened, but don’t recall the kind of outcry such events would deserve. For me the massacre is in a crack between history and lived experience, and I completely failed to see it. Beirut was worth it for Friedman’s harrowing chapter on that massacre. I cannot imagine how many Syrian rebels this created and how dedicated they are. When you’ve seen a city’s population literally decimated in retaliation, surrender is very unattractive.
There’s plenty more in here that’s illuminating to understanding the current cauldron boiling there. From the impressions of Arafat to the machinations and political gamesmanship of keeping them relevant to street level-impressions of Jerusalem that form the titular contrast with Beirut bring the area to life. Of course, those are personal impressions, driven by Friedman. He has – and admits – his own biases. To the extent he understands them, of course.
The blend of reporting and impression is essential in understanding the state of play here. Don’t trust all of it.
Strongly recommended.