logo

56 pages 1 hour read

From Beirut to Jerusalem

Nonfiction | Autobiography / Memoir | Adult | Published in 1989

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Chapter 1Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapter 1 Summary: “Prelude: From Minneapolis to Beirut”

Content Warning: This section cites accounts of war violence, as well as criticisms of Arab culture that some readers may find offensive. 

In June 1979, Thomas Friedman and his wife, Ann, flew to Beirut to begin his work as a Middle Eastern correspondent, a major culture shock after his Midwestern upbringing. He grew up outside Minneapolis in a middle-class Jewish family, losing interest in religion but then as a teenager finding inspiration during a trip to visit his older sister in Israel. Leaving the Midwest for the first time, Friedman writes, “[S]omething about Israel and the Middle East grabbed me in both heart and mind. I was totally taken with the place, its peoples and its conflicts. Since that moment, I have never really been interested in anything else” (4).

Upon returning home, his fascination with all things Israel was inexhaustible, and at Brandeis University, he studied Arabic and developed a great appreciation of the Arab people following visits to Egypt. Pursuing graduate studies in Oxford, he learned as much from his fellow students, many of them Arabs and Israelis, as from his professors. It further taught him the diversity among groups within the Middle East, which went far beyond the simple binary of Arab and Jew. Friedman penned his first column on the Middle East for the Des Moines Register in 1976 and, after graduating in 1978, began writing for United Press International. In 1979, he was invited to join the Beirut bureau after his predecessor was nicked by a bullet and quit. Despite nervousness about being a Jew in Beirut, he saw the opportunity as a “moment of truth” after years of study (8), and so he went for it.

Life in war-torn Beirut was an immediate shock, as Friedman and his wife slept through the noise of gunfire their first night. After two years in Beirut, Friedman accepted a job in Manhattan with the New York Times, after which he returned to Lebanon in 1982. Shortly after his return, the Syrian government committed a massacre against its own citizens in the city of Hama, and Israel invaded southern Lebanon. After covering a tumultuous period in Lebanon, Friedman moved to Jerusalem in 1984, a position rarely given to a Jewish reporter. The book documents his experience as a Midwesterner encountering the unfamiliar world of the Middle East and as a Jew learning the complex realities of life in Israel. It also attempts to document the lives of people in both places whose struggles are similar, even as they find themselves on opposing sides.

Friedman then provides some historical background for his experiences. The Maronite Christians had endured as a minority for centuries, and after World War I, asked the French government to set up a state in which they would play the dominant role. They could not, however, dominate the area without access to Beirut, the main city, the fertile Bakaa Valley in the south, and the port cities of Tripoli, Tyre, and Sidon, all of which featured majority Muslim populations. The Muslim community in turn was divided among Sunnis, the majority who regarded succession to the Prophet Muhammad as a matter of communal affirmation, and Shi’a, who believed that it ought to be strictly hereditary. The Sunnis of Lebanon were far more prosperous and powerful than the Shi’a but put their differences aside to form a bloc capable of checking Maronite power, who had a constitutionally guaranteed 6:5 majority in the Parliament.

By the 1970s, Maronites had shrunk considerably as a percentage of the population, and Muslims demanded commensurate representation. Maronites formed private militias to terrorize the Muslims into compliance, prompting the formation of Muslim militias to fight back. Tensions in Lebanon coincided with the flaring up of conflicts between Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs. Starting in the late 19th century, an ideology of Zionism encouraged many Jews to form a new national homeland in their biblical homeland, where many thousands of Arabs already lived. The British assumed control over Palestine after World War I, promising to give Arabs a national homeland while also making similar promises to the Jews.

During and after World War II, as waves of Jewish immigrants fled Nazi persecution to join the Jewish communities in Palestine, tensions came to a boiling point. The British handed over the question of statehood to the United Nations, but upon their withdrawal from the region, the question was instead settled by arms, and an Israeli victory pushed the Arabs into the Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean Sea (under Egyptian control), the West Bank of the Jordan River, and the eastern half of Jerusalem (both under Jordanian control). Israel’s neighbors started hosting Palestinian militants, which Egyptian president Nasser formed into an umbrella group called the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964.

In 1967, fearing a simultaneous attack from Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, Israel instead attacked them, conquering the whole of Palestine along with capturing the Golan Heights from Syria. With Arab states no longer willing to press the fight on their own, PLO militants took matters into their own hands, including a sensational multiple airline hijacking in 1970, landing in Jordan on their own authority. In response, King Hussein of Jordan forcibly expelled the PLO from his country. PLO leader Yasser Arafat then took his forces to Lebanon, where they were welcomed as potential allies of the Muslims in their fight against the Maronites. With the government paralyzed, fighting among the various factions plunged the country into civil war by 1975.

Chapter 1 Analysis

Friedman begins the book with two different kinds of background: personal and historical. The book is primarily a journalistic account of Friedman’s own experiences, not a scholarly history or analysis of regional politics. It is therefore important to establish his own connection to Lebanon and Israel, since this plays a significant role in determining which stories he pursues and how he reports them. For example, Friedman was born in 1953, in the immediate afterglow of Israel’s creation under what seemed like impossible odds. In 1958, the novel Exodus by Leon Uris offered a fictionalized account of Israel’s founding that, as the title implies, considers it a heroic drama worthy of biblical comparisons. The book was a smash hit, later made into a feature film, popularizing pro-Israel sentiment for Jews and non-Jews alike in the United States. Friedman freely admits to being a supporter of this triumphalist narrative, which reached its climax in Israel’s stunning victory in the Six-Day War of June 1967. While he also developed a fondness and respect for Arab culture, which could cause some tensions with his Jewish friends, his love of Israel brought him to a life studying and visiting the Middle East. But once he began that study in earnest at Oxford, and interacted with all kinds of different people with more direct ties to the region than himself, he became “a spectator of their feuds, an outsider,” and so he “managed to stay on friendly terms with all of them” (7). These encounters were Friedman’s first lessons in The Responsibility of a Journalist, who must understand and explain the complexities of the region rather than championing one or another side. Hence, by recounting his personal biography, Friedman is able to draw linkages to his professional history and journalistic standards.

When Friedman turns to a brief background on Lebanon and the Israel-Palestine feud, he provides the first of many lessons on The Fragility of Political Identity. Lebanon was one of many states brought into existence after the end of World War I as part of a Western effort to break up large multinational empires, such as the Ottoman Empire, and create more stable nation-states. The problem that Lebanon and many other states faced was that there was no easy way to match a territory with its inhabitants, especially when the Great Powers promoted certain communities over others for their own interest. This does not mean Lebanon was doomed from the start or that Israel and Palestine could never have accepted the United Nations’ plan for two states. As Friedman goes on to illustrate further in later chapters, however, peoples’ politics tend to be more local and tribal. As a result, building loyalty for a large, abstract concept like a nation-state can be extremely difficult, and even upon being achieved could crumple with sufficient pressure. Drawing on this analysis allows Friedman to situate the book’s topic in terms of a broader, modern-day geopolitical concern: While nation-states may be an intuitive political system to Western powers, they face problems in other regions. This analysis also allows Friedman to contextualize the conflicts in the Middle East; while these conflicts are singular in many respects, Friedman demonstrates that there persist parallels between them and other modern problems characteristic of nation-states.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
Unlock IconUnlock all 56 pages of this Study Guide

Plus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.

Including features:

+ Mobile App
+ Printable PDF
+ Literary AI Tools