Edward W. Said and Palestine

Graffiti of Edward Said on the wall in Ramallah (2004). Photo by Justin McIntosh via Wikimedia Commons. Graffiti of Edward Said on the wall in Ramallah (2004). Photo by Justin McIntosh via Wikimedia Commons.

Edward W. Said and Palestine

By : Mouin Rabbani

[The following reflection on Edward W. Said and Palestine was written by Jadaliyya Co-Editor Mouin Rabbani in late 2003, as part of a series examining different aspects of Said’s life and work commissioned by Asef Bayat, at the time Academic Director of the International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World at the University of Leiden, The Netherlands.]

Edward W. Said played a unique role in the contemporary Palestinian national movement. It is difficult to imagine it being reproduced by another individual Palestinian, a judgement that reflects both Said’s extraordinary qualities and the fundamental transformation of the environment in which he operated during the past three decades.

Said’s involvement with the Palestinian struggle was by his own admission more a matter of coincidence than inevitability. Unlike many of his contemporaries, he was not spurred to a life of activism by the Palestinian nakba (‘catastrophe’) of 1948; born in Jerusalem to an entrepreneurial family with ties to both Egypt and Lebanon – ties that helped it avoid the worst depredations visited upon the Palestinian people by war and dispossession – Said spent the next two decades pursuing his education in Cairo and the United States. On the eve of the 1967 June War, which he would subsequently define as an event of transformative significance, the young Said was a rising and contentedly assimilated star in the English Literature department of New York’s prestigious Columbia University. Retaining only tangential connections with the Arab world (and then largely with the elite, cosmopolitan milieu of his youth beautifully memorialised in his autobiographical Out of Place), his promising academic career appeared to form the limit of his political horizon.

Israel’s overwhelming defeat of the Arab states and occupation of the remaining areas of Palestine in 1967, the overtly triumphalist and crass anti-Arab reception accorded Israel’s victory in the United States, and the rise of the Palestinian nationalist movement shortly thereafter – all against the background of an increasingly turbulent world exemplified by the Vietnam War and the gathering revolt on university campuses – had a profound effect on Said. He actively sought out the emerging Palestinian leadership in a series of visits to Jordan and Lebanon during the late 1960s, and became an increasingly visible and prolific public advocate for the Palestinian struggle for self-determination.

Relentlessly energetic, supremely eloquent, consistently rigorous and witty, always dapper in dress and appearance, Said combined unconcealed moral and political commitment with an indefatigable relish for intellectual and polemical combat, and did so to unparalleled effect. By the late 1970s he had become the leading spokesperson and campaigner for Palestinian rights in the Western world, directly and indirectly responsible for an openness towards the Palestinian narrative among opinion makers, intellectuals, and activists in Europe and North America that would have been inconceivable only a decade earlier. Only PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat and a handful of other Palestinian political leaders maintained greater public recognition outside the Middle East. 

Said and Palestinian Politics


Said’s relationship with the Palestinian leadership was complex and went through various stages. A lifelong independent with a profound distaste for the imposed discipline inherent in political organisation, he never joined a political movement although he served as a member of the PLO’s Palestine National Council between 1977 and 1991, and was on several occasions nominated as a negotiator on its behalf. Along with kindred spirits such as the late Ibrahim Abu-Lughod and the PLO’s Lebanon representative Shafiq al-Hut, emerging leaders such as Azmi Bishara and Mustafa Barghouthi, and international comrades like Eqbal Ahmad and Noam Chomsky, Said promoted strategies that sought to reconcile principle with pragmatism, along with tactics that would maximise their potential by achieving support in the crucial battlegrounds of European and American public opinion.

Reflecting this agenda, Said was during the 1970s a pioneering advocate of a two-state settlement and worked closely with Arafat, whom he – correctly – viewed as the only leader capable of persuading both the PLO and the international community to adopt partition as the basis for a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Question of Palestine (1978), although primarily intended to expose a Western audience to the realities of Palestinian history and the legitimacy of Palestinian national aspirations, remains the most powerful statement produced on behalf of a two-state settlement to this day. It not only led to its author’s vilification by Palestinian radicals, but also unleashed a concerted and increasingly vulgar campaign against his scholarship and character by pro-Israel intellectuals and activists that continues even after his death. For Arab intellectuals seeking approval in Washington’s corridors of power, furthermore, shrill denunciations of Said’s “pernicious influence” became de rigeur. Threats against his life, emanating from both Arab and (primarily) Zionist quarters, became routine but were blithely ignored.

Although Said supported Palestinian participation in the 1991 Madrid Middle East Peace Conference, he was by then increasingly estranged from Arafat and the Tunis-based PLO leadership, and offered a blistering farewell when he resigned from the PNC that same year. According to Said, the Palestinian leadership had squandered too many opportunities, failed to mobilise Palestinian capabilities and resources, neglected the crucial struggle for global (and especially Western) public opinion, limited its energies to a largely futile search for friends in high places, institutionalised malfeasance and mediocrity, and – in the logical culmination of this collection of failures – grievously mismanaged the Palestinian response to Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

The 1993 Oslo Accords ensured that the break became definitive as well as increasingly acrimonious. Said accused Arafat of a grand sell-out – signing a “Versailles” that transformed the PLO into a “Palestinian Vichy” – in order to perpetuate his failed leadership and the political relevance of his organisation. Oslo, he consistently argued, would provide only cosmetic changes to the occupation, and deliver a Middle Eastern version of apartheid rather than self-determination. The Palestinian Authority reciprocated by banning his books and attacking him on its airwaves.

As Israeli settlement expansion continued at an accelerated pace during the 1990s and his predictions about Oslo were realised, Said – no doubt inspired by the new South Africa which he had occasion to visit – concluded that a two-state settlement was no longer feasible, and could only function as a transitional phase towards a unitary, democratic state encompassing Israel and the occupied territories. Unlike most of his predecessors and contemporaries in this respect, his vision was however devoid of crass nationalism. He consistently advocated the need for reconciliation based on equality, whose preconditions he identified as Israeli recognition of its responsibility for the historic injustices committed against the Palestinian people, and Palestinian and Arab understanding of the legacy of Jewish suffering culminating in the Nazi holocaust. The Politics of Dispossession (1994), Peace and its Discontents (1996), and The End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After (2000) collected the passionate and prolific output of commentary and advocacy produced by Said during this period, each instalment additionally forming a direct and successful challenge to an increasingly debilitating disease. Given that he continued writing until his final days, a further compendium is doubtlessly in the making.

Said and the Palestinian Cause


Many have commented on the cosmopolitan and consciously progressive humanism that formed the core of Said’s being and politics – and the contradiction presented by his simultaneous embrace of the nationalist struggle of the Palestinians. It was an irony Said both recognised and rejected, and ultimately resolved by spirited opposition to sectarianism of any sort – most obviously the concept of an exclusivist Jewish state in the 21st century Middle East, but unhesitatingly encompassing public denunciations of growing Palestinian religious extremism and indiscriminate attacks against Israeli civilians as well. Indeed, his unrelenting assault on Israeli and US policies was consistently accompanied by withering criticism of the decrepit state of the contemporary Arab world. 

As an activist for the Palestinian cause Said displayed those same traits that characterised the other aspects of his life: a level of commitment that translated into an extraordinary capacity for hard work; an insatiable determination to acquire and impart knowledge; an openness to and active sponsorship of innovative thought; selfless encouragement and promotion of new talent; and an incurable addiction to travel, people, and gossip. A zest for life, in short, that seemed to be lived beyond its known limitations.  And above this all stood his sheer eloquence and capacity for representation. To many these qualities achieved their zenith in his After the Last Sky: Palestinian Lives (1986), an extended mediation on Palestinian identity and exile that was enhanced while being enriched by the accompanying photography of Jean Mohr. 

For Palestinians who could neither reconcile themselves to the existing realities of the Oslo era, nor embrace the constricting alternatives on offer in the Palestinian and wider Arab worlds, Said and his always dependable output functioned as a moral and political compass. Yet he also had an unforgiving attitude towards criticism, which however slight never passed without response and often resulted in severed relationships. Like Arafat – who by contrast remains largely impervious to insult and condemnation – Said tended to view attacks on his work and person (attacks he needless to say also rejected on their own terms) as overt or concealed political assaults on the Palestinian cause he so visibly represented. He thus felt obliged to always give at least as good as he got, and – entering any number of simultaneous battles others would consider superfluous with unrestrained relish and zeal – typically came out ahead.

Given his extraordinary career and the breadth of his accomplishments, it is perhaps tempting to assess the Palestinian aspect of Said’s life in isolation from his intellectual, scholarly, and broader cultural roles. To do so is however to neglect the organic and vital connections between these seemingly separate personas – connections that not only existed clearly in Said’s own mind (see his Representations of the Intellectual, 1994), but are crucial to understanding the influence of his Palestinian activism. His pioneering role in the development of post-colonial theory, for example, both informed the manner in which he understood and advocated Palestinian self-determination, and immeasurably enhanced his ability to do so. Conversely, his experiences as an Arab at Cairo’s Victoria College and later as a Palestinian in the West doubtlessly contributed to his analysis of the relationship between imperialism, scholarship, and culture – and his insistence that one must first of all unlearn essentialised categories such as East and West.

It would be no exaggeration to observe that national movements produce or recruit individuals of Said’s calibre only once if at all; individuals of independent global standing who personify and express the justice of their cause in multiple environments with moral clarity and political consistency, world citizens whose impact within these varied environments derives from their determination to appeal to a shared humanity and universal values – our fundamental equality as peoples and individual human beings –  rather than to sympathy for a strange people in a foreign land. Although Edward W. Said’s legacy will endure for many years to come, he unfortunately cannot and will not be replaced. 

[This article was originally published in the ISIM Newsletter.]

  • ALSO BY THIS AUTHOR

    • Quick Thoughts: Ongoing Post on the War on Gaza

      Quick Thoughts: Ongoing Post on the War on Gaza

      This is an ongoing post, updated periodically, in which Editor of the Quick Thoughts Series on Jadaliyya provides commentary on the war on Gaza. This commentary may or may not appear elsewhere on the author’s social media.

    • European countries recognition of Palestine: too little too late?

      European countries recognition of Palestine: too little too late?

      Marc Lamont Hill discusses the latest move towards recognising Palestinian statehood with analyst Mouin Rabbani.

    • ICC War Crimes Charges a Milestone but Falls Far Below Expectations

      ICC War Crimes Charges a Milestone but Falls Far Below Expectations

      The ICC Prosecutor’s applications for arrest warrants regarding the Situation in Palestine represent a milestone. But they are of little credit to Prosecutor Karim Khan. It is abundantly clear that Khan has been sitting on this file for years, hoping it would simply disappear. Two matters forced his hand. First, his 2023 indictments of senior Russian officials despite a previous pledge that he would only pursue cases referred to his office by the United Nations Security Council and ignore the rest – particularly the investigations concerning Afghanistan and Palestine that were opposed by the US and UK.

Education in the Time of Virality

Widespread access to the internet has facilitated means of acquiring news and information at rates unseen in earlier eras. As individuals, we have the ability to post and spread political information, social commentary, and other thoughts at will. This has caused an information overload for users of social networking sites. In a fight for views, reposts, and clicks, creators, both corporate and not, have been forced to develop new tactics to inform their audiences. This response to a new mode of information consumption also forces a reconsideration of how we understand knowledge production. Much of the information put forth into the world is absorbed passively, such as through characters’ storylines in books, films, and television - and this information accumulates over a lifetime. What, then, happens when knowledge is actively consumed (as is done when reading, watching, or listening to news stories), but the manner through which the information is presented still conforms to the brevity generally associated with more passive knowledge intake?

Pew Research estimates that over 70% of Americans use their phone to read the news. This is nearly a 25% increase since 2013. The constant barrage of advertisements in online articles does not make consuming news easy to do on a phone, thereby forcing media outlets and their competitors to change and adopt new tactics. Applications such as Flipboard have tried to mitigate these frustrations by simply providing the full article without the ads on their own platform, but many people still turn to sources like The Skimm. In attempting to distill a day’s worth of news coverage on domestic affairs, foreign affairs, pop culture, and sports into a few quips, undeniably both texture and nuance are lost. To compete with these services, CNN, the New York Times, and other mainstream news sources are doing the same and producing articles that give the, “Top 5 News Moments to Start Your Day,” or a, “Daily Brief.” Of course, looking at the language differences between the New York Times daily summary versus The Skimm’s, one can tell which is a more comprehensive news source. Even so, slashing the word count still takes a toll on clearly informing the public. The question then becomes, after quickly skimming through these summaries, are people doing more readings to cover what was lost? Or has “the brief” become the new standard for knowledge production and awareness?

It is more than likely that a significant portion of The Skimm’s subscribers do go on to read the full article linked in the email, but the growing popularity of similarly quick and fast news sources has had an impact on how much information viewers and readers actually understand. Between 2011 and 2014, The Skimm was founded, along with AJ+, Now This, Upworthy, and BuzzFeed News’ more serious journalism section. Undeniably, all of these sources produce and publish very important information, and make this information accessible to a larger audience. However, their production and marketing strategies hinge upon condensing very nuanced topics into videos that are, on average, only seven minutes long, as well as optimizing their materials for social media audiences. Now, it is ridiculous to expect highly textured and complicated issues to be thoroughly represented in these videos or posts. Even research based texts do not touch upon all of the complexities of a topic. The problems arise when looking at how viewers perceive themselves and their level of knowledge after actively searching out the products of, for example, AJ+ and Buzzfeed, for information. Carefully refining their materials to fit the shortened attention span of people scrolling through Facebook, social media news organizations have found their niche audience. Their products provide a simple way to deliver information to those who want gather knowledge on the “hot topics of today,” but do not what to do the leg work to be truly informed. These videos are spread throughout Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms in a manner that says, “Watch this, and you will know what is going on in the world.”

Understanding how information is being pushed out into the world is almost as important as the content of the information. None of these outlets claim to provide comprehensive knowledge, but in being popular sites for information, the question becomes: do they have a responsibility to encourage their viewers to continue to inform themselves about these issues? Having a well-informed society is phenomenal, but if in informing society we are also forever altering how we consume knowledge to favor brevity over nuance, what consequences could come with this change? We must ensure that the consumption of these videos does not become a license for people to see themselves as truly informed and thus appropriate for them to take the microphones at protests and speak over those who have a solid and textured understanding of the issues. Information content is incredibly important, as is spreading knowledge, and AJ+, Now This, and the like have become important role models in showing how issues should be accessible to everyone and not clouted in jargon. But we must simultaneously consider the unintended side effects that these styles of videos have on knowledge production. Ultimately, it is a mutual effort. Just as producers must be watchful of their content and method of dissemination, we as consumers must be mindful of how we digest and understand the news we take in.


[This article was published originally Tadween`s Al-Diwan blog by Diwan`s editor, Mekarem Eljamal.]