Neil Caplan and Yaakov
Sharett, eds.
My Struggle for Peace:
The Diary of Moshe Sharett,
1953–1956, vol. 1, 1953–1954
(
My Struggle for Peace:
The Diary of Moshe Sharett,
1953–1956, vol. 2, 1955
(
My Struggle for Peace:
The Diary of Moshe Sharett,
1953–1956, vol. 3, 1956
(
Review by: Itamar
Rabinovich
Source: Bustan: The
Published by:
The 1978 publication of the eight-volume
personal diary of Moshe Sharett by his son, Yaakov (Kobi) Sharett, was a
milestone in the evolution of the historiography of the State of Israel and
Israeli-Arab relations. Moshe Sharett was
Yet another dimension
of the text was the reflection of Sharett’s complex relationship with
Ben-Gurion. Sharett never disputed Ben-Gurion’s seniority and greatness but
found it impossible to cope with Ben-Gurion’s conduct toward him. Sharett knew
well that Ben-Gurion did not want him as his replacement (he preferred Levi
Eshkol) and was perceptive enough to notice Ben-Gurion’s occasional disrespect.
At the time many readers felt that the text would have benefited from the
omission of numerous details and manifestations of Sharett’s frustration with
Ben-Gurion and with other actors and aspects of the period.
And yet, the wealth of
material enhanced by Sharett’s eloquence and perceptive eye turn the diary into
an indispensable source of Israel’s history in its first decade and for several
aspects of Israeli politics, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and Israel’s
relationship with the international system. Needless to say, access to the
diaries was limited to Hebrew readers.
Kobi Sharett, who
devoted his life to the preservation of his father’s legacy and to the
publication of his political writing, has added a very significant component to
his life project by teaming up with Canadian historian Neil Caplan in order to
produce a shorter, more compact version of the diary in three volumes. The
result is a classic case of “shorter is better.” The editors eliminated many of
the petty details from the diary, enriched the text with a sophisticated
apparatus, and made it accessible to international readership and to the
scholarly community that does not read Hebrew.
The title they chose
for the three volumes (My Struggle for Peace) is somewhat misleading. At
the time, a peace settlement between
In May 1949, when
Moshe Sharett met with
the King opened with a general lecture on the need for peace and on the
preparation of public opinion for this end. I said that we were certainly
interested in peace and that therefore we attach such a great importance to
solving the problems that are still open. We were disappointed by the
suspension of the work of the special committee that should have com-pleted its
inquiry into two questions:
The title chosen by
Caplan and Sharett for the English version of the Sharett diaries reflects the
view held by some students of Israeli politics who regard Moshe Sharett as the
spiritual father or harbinger of the dovish school in Israeli politics and
foreign policy. This is not precise since the issues confronting Israeli
policymakers in the 1950s were fundamentally different from those confronting
it at present. In all likelihood, had Moshe Sharett been alive in and after
1967 he would have supported the notion of “territories for peace,” but
unfortunately he passed away in 1965. As foreign minister under Ben-Gurion and
as prime minister he did not pursue a policy of seeking a feasible settlement
with the Arab World, but he did preach moderation. He objected to the policy of
retaliation against attacks from across the Egyptian and Jordanian borders; he
believed that
An equally important
dimension of the diaries is the rich documentation of Israeli party politics
and parliamentary life: The prominent politicians Left and Right, the politics
of the ruling Mapai Party, and coalition politics. The description is enriched
by Sharett’s talent as a writer. His likes and dislikes are evident and some of
his character descriptions are most valuable. His relationship with Ben-Gurion
remains the book’s main theme. Admiration and a sober view of the great man’s
weaknesses are evident. Occasionally, Sharett stood up to Ben-Gurion and did so
well. Thus when Ben-Gurion came up with the idea that
In sum, the large
community of researchers and lay readers interested in Israeli politics,
Arab-Israeli relations, and Middle Eastern politics should be grateful to Neil
Caplan and Yaakov Sharett for this herculean effort.
Itamar Rabinovich, Tel Aviv
University, itrabi@gmail.com
doi: 10.5325/bustan.11.2.0247
[1] Itamar Rabinovich, The Road Not Taken: Early Arab-Israeli Negotiators (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 58–59.