Explore the vast range of titles available.

The landscapes of the Middle East have captured our imaginations throughout history. Images of endless golden dunes, camel caravans, isolated desert oases, and rivers lined with palm trees have often framed written and visual representations of the region. Embedded in these portrayals is the common belief that the environment, in most places, has been deforested and desertified by centuries of misuse. It is precisely such orientalist environmental imaginaries, increasingly undermined by contemporary ecological data, that the eleven authors in this volume question. This is the first volume to critically examine culturally constructed views of the environmental history of the Middle East and suggest that they have often benefitted elites at the expense of the ecologies and the peoples of the region. The contributors expose many of the questionable policies and practices born of these environmental imaginaries and related histories that have been utilized in the region since the colonial period. They further reveal how power, in the form of development programs, notions of nationalism, and hydrological maps, for instance, relates to environmental knowledge production. Contributors: Samer Alatout, Edmund Burke III, Shaul Cohen, Diana K. Davis, Jennifer L. Derr, Leila M. Harris, Alan Mikhail, Timothy Mitchell, Priya Satia, Jeannie Sowers, and George R. Trumbull IV

From Empire to Orient offers an alternative perspective on Britain's late imperial period by looking at the lives and the writings of the men who chose to defy the conventional social and political attitudes of the British ruling classes towards the Near East. Between the Greek revolt in 1830 and the fall of the Caliphate in 1924 a different kind of voice was heard that was both anti-Imperialist and pro-Islamic. Geoffrey Nash places David Urquhart’s passionate belief in the ideal of municipal government in Turkey, W.S. Blunt’s enthusiasm for the Egyptian reformers of the Azhar and Marmaduke Pickthall’s advocacy of the cause of the Young Turks into their political and historical context and into the context of their writings.

British discourse during the Mandate, with its unremitting convergence on the problematic 'native question', and which rested on racial and cultural theories and presumptions, as well as on certain givens drawn from the British class system, has been taken for granted by historians. The validity of cultural representations as pronounced within official correspondence and colonial laws and regulations, as well as within the private papers of colonial officials, survives more or less intact. There are features of colonialism additional to economic and political power, which are glaring yet have escaped examination, which carried cultural weight and had cultural implications and which negatively transformed native society. This was inevitable. But what is less inevitable is the subsequent collusion of historians in this, a (neo-) colonial dynamic. The continued collusion of modern historians with racial and cultural notions concerning the rationale of European rule in Palestine has postcolonial implications. It drags these old notions into the present where their iniquitous barbarity continues to manifest. This study identifies the symbolism of British officials' discourse and intertwines it with the symbolism and imagery of the natives' own discourse (from oral interviews and private family papers). At all times, it remains allied to those writers, philosophers and chroniclers whose central preoccupation is to agitate and challenge authority. This, then, is a return to the old school, a revisiting of the optimistic, vibrant rhetoric of those radicals who continue to inspire post and anti-colonial thinking. In order to dismantle, and to undo and unwrite, A Discourse on Domination in Mandate Palestine holds a mirror up to the language of the Mandatory by counteracting it with its own integrally oppositional discourse and a provocative rhetoric.

Pres Truman's policy toward the formation of a Jewish state in Palestine during the fall of 1947 is analyzed. It was not a simple case of political opportunism that explains Truman's support for a Jewish state.

The hidden diplomatic story at the heart of the conflict is that while European public opinion was fairly uniformly against the invasion, European governments split almost down the middle, with Aznar's Spain, Berlusconi's Italy, Kwasniewski's Poland and Blair's Britain all siding with President Bush, while Jacques Chirac and Germany's Schroder led European governmental opposition to the war. [...] two scholars from the Heritage Foundation wrote in The Wall Street Journal, \"the Conservative Party's leadership appears increasingly to be following the rise of anti-Americanism in the polls, rather than leading public opinion.\"