One Jewish State gives an argument as to how Israel should go out on its own to do what's best for it and survival by essentially walking away from the two state solution imposed by many factions and solidify itself into one state.

Friedman argues there wheres, whys and how's things in Israel have gotten to the point where it is now and what should be done to solidify its future and that it needs to maintain the United States as an ally. He goes into great detail in presenting his thoughts and feelings both from a political point of view as well as a biblical point of view. All of the aspects culminate into a fascinating take on what Israel needs to do to solve its internal problems and gain respect in the world as a whole.

As Friedman points out, he is not being "careful" and is being political in his book. I thought the book presented a plausible plan for Israel's future, but it was way too political in nature when discussing much of the United States' roles regarding Israel. Through his statements, I found him alienating what is a potentially large segment of the United States' population/voting bloc through not acknowledging that just because someone is a member of a specific political party, it does not mean that he/she agrees with all agendas of that political party.

Even with everything said, One Jewish State is definitely a book worth reading for anyone who wants to know about Israel's past, both its recent past and its entire past as a whole, it's current status, and what could be its future.

I read this book in its entirety. Not only is it a poorly written book, it lacks logical reasoning, accuracy and takes zero accountability. The book reads like a white supremacy manual but from the perspective of an Israeli. A frightening read... frightening because of it's complete lack of self-awareness and lies it espouses.

The content of the book is interesting, and the thesis is well argued. However, the style distracts from message. Repetitive, sometimes word-for-word, sentences appearing multiple times, should have been caught by an editor.

A very insightful work promoting the religious right-wing position towards the I/P conflict

In contrast to other reviewers, I did take the time to read the book before deciding on my rating. It would probably have been a 1.5, simply for the effort I went through in order to be able to review it.

I must preface my review with the following: While I am no expert on the conflict between Israel and many of the States and organisations in the Middle East, I am somewhat knowledgeable. I have no solution for the conflict, at least none that is easy. I only know that it will be a long and difficult road and that both sides will need to make concessions in order to be able to live alongside each other. And that is my last point; I fundamentally disagree with Mr Friedman's proposal of a single-state solution.

In summary, in One Jewish State David Friedman proposes exactly what it says on the tin: giving the entire territory, including Judea and Samaria to Israel and not establishing a Palestinian State. Most of the book is a fragmented history of modern Israel and an analysis of Middle Eastern politics, which often gets misinterpreted and leads to many wrong conclusions. The Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament to Christians, is used as the guiding proof for his thesis.

Friedman was Ambassador to Israel under Trump, whose campaign he was on in 2016. He is the son of a Conservative Rabbi, a lawyer and has extensive knowledge of Israel, the conflict's history and Torah. He was part of the move of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to West Jerusalem, although this was never referred to as West Jerusalem by Trump or the US government. (This is highly problematic for multiple reasons, but more on that later) The foreword was written my Michael R. Pompeo, who is also party to an illuminating anecdote about Trump's non-position towards the Middle East. Pompeo and Friedman worked closely together during their term in office and clearly continue to meddle in US foreign affairs, just for the opposition.

I would give the following content warning to potential reader, who should not read the book if they only have a basic understanding of the I/P conflict and its history, get a stroke if they read something they do not agree with and/or do not want to read about religious extremism from a Jewish perspective. There is a strong bias and it sometimes borders on Anti-Arab racism, so if you cannot stomach someone with a vastly different opinion, this book is not for you! And if you do not want to give this author your money, definitely do not buy this book.

However, if you are a leftist and would like to understand the far-right in Israel, if you want to learn about religious Zionism and its dangers, if you want to uncritically confirm your belief that Israeli Jews are the only people who should exist on Israeli territory or if you want to understand why religious Zionists view the Free Palestine movement as antisemitic, this book is for you. It also, ironically, highlights why a second Trump administration could be detrimental to any prospects of peace in the Middle East.

Personally, I fundamentally disagree with Mr Friedman on what he proposes in this book. There are several fallacies he fails to take into account (or willfully ignores to bolster his point) and they actually make his thesis untenable. This book contradicts itself upon closer inspection. While it was an infuriating read, it was also very enlightening (thus 1.5 stars instead of 1 or 0) as to how the Israeli government and the religious right in Israel could have come to the place they are at today.
While I appreciate his deep understanding of the history of the conflict, he often draws the exact wrong conclusions from the facts he presents.
A non-exhaustive list of his fallacies with regards to the conflict and his proposal includes:
- merging religion and politics, not just in Israel but in the US
- speaking for Palestinians as an American Jew
- refusing Palestinians the same grace he extends to religious extremists in Israel
- letting his personal history with Palestinian terror colour his views
- racism and Anti-Arab bias: unless Arabs are grateful and of lower status than Jews in Israel, they don't deserve to be there
- complete dismissal of secular Zionism, which shaped the country and continues to grow in significance in light of the dangerous religious extremism from the far right
- failure to do the numbers game (this is a tricky one)

Friedman proposes that Palestinians and Palestinian territories (which he, in agreement with the nation-state law from 2018, a very controversial and harmful piece of legislature) be treated by Israel the same way the US treat Puerto Rico. No legal representation, no votes, no taxation, no benefits. A second-class society. Only that Puerto Ricans don't have to share physical territory with Israel, as the Palestinians would, since Friedman is a strong supporter of settlements in the West Bank, which he calls Judea and Samaria.
But let's start at the start. The whole basis for Friedman's single Jewish state solution is the Bible. In secular Zionist and progressive to moderate circles, this is untenable due to the fact that Palestinians exist. But Friedman goes a long way to use the fact that a Palestinian state has never existed as confirmation for his plan to subjugate the Palestinian people to second-class citizenship. He fails to realise that Arab Israelis, Druze and Christians have managed to integrate themselves and shape Israeli society more or less successfully since 1948 and that they today enjoy equal rights.
On the other hand, he describes the terror Israel has been subjected to since day 1 of its existence, when the surrounding nations invaded.
Therefore, his assumption that Israelis would welcome Palestinians of any background (and this would include Hamas members or sympathisers) into their society as One State is utterly naive. He seems to expect Arabs to merely be grateful citizens of the kind that do not participate in government and would not seek to shape their own destinies, accepting Jewish Israeli domination (this is so problematic I have no words). That would, de facto, create just the two-tier society many in Muslim countries and the West are currently accusing Israel of having (in fact, there is an Israeli Arab party and faction in Knesset). He shows no interest in the Arabs in government and has not done the math. If Palestinians were to be naturalised as Israeli citizens, this would have to include the Palestinian refugees dotted around the globe (for example, the Hadid sisters, as the descendants of Palestinians are automatically counted as refugees). The Palestinians would outnumber the Jews, so even if Friedman would not have them have voting rights, they would be in a great position to take them by force, no matter how quickly the Orthodox community in Israel is growing.
The book is littered with biblical references and historical facts, which Friedman uses to bolster his thesis. That he misses to take into account the reality of secular Israeli Jews and the existing conditions in Israel and the Middle East is not surprising. He is fueled by religious zealotry.

Personally, I think it is a shame that even after having lived in Israel as the US Ambassador, he cannot extend grace to Palestinians, with which he worked when the Jerusalem consulate serving the West Bank was merged with the embassy. He presents himself as an academic and critical thinker but fails to realise that the First Amendment he uses to demonstrate how non-religious but devoted to God the United States are, was drafted by Christian extremists who meant Christian denominations and would probably have kicked out any Muslim or Jew from their religiously free country. It is horrifying to see how he fails to recognise his Anti-Arab racism, belittling Palestinians and refusing them the dignity of free will and agency.
Most dangerously, he fails to connect the Islamic Regime in Iran with the terror surrounding Israel today, instead blaming the entirety of the peoples in for it. He tokenises Palestinians, whom he says would prefer to live in Israel and have jobs and financial wealth in exchange for their independence and democratic rights. He mentions Suni and Shia but fails to recognise the inter-Arab conflicts between the two factions and how that means that Westerners can be perfectly happy in Saudi Arabia but not in Iran under the Regime's authoritarian clutch. It is also a shame that he mentions many valid criticisms of Palestinian attempts at sovereignty, such as UNWRA and the corruption but again does not trace them back to Islamic extremism fuelled and funded by the Iranian Regime. And when, towards the end of the book, he does finally mention the Iranian Regime, it is too late. Not for nothing did he keep them out of the picture. Indoctrination would cease to work if there was a true villain or a realistic explanation for the current conflict and Friedman's entire thesis would collapse.

Friedman tries hard to convince you but if, like me, you don't buy his thesis after two chapters, you will be throwing the offer in the bin by the time you reach the middle of the book. He fails to realise that every single one of his points would compound into the very accusations leveraged at Israel today and make them actually true. Israel is not the only country that can bring Palestinians into the new century. If he believes Palestinians would cede their rights for US protections, he has misunderstood the core of the conflict. How dangerous this would be in a second Trump administration, one can only imagine. Separating children from their Palestinian families (sound familiar?) and claiming not to be for apartheid or a two-tier society is simply outrageous and bigoted. Attempts at snappy chapter headings ("What's Law got to do with it?") cannot mask the outdatedness of this book.
While Friedman correctly maps out the history of Palestinian failure to agree to a two-state solution (and repeated territory cessation by Israel), he lets his religious fundamentalism rule out any future prospects of solving the puzzle, even calling it a 'final solution', a term so wrong in this context that it makes you scream.
He blames settler violence on the far left and has phony chapters on loving the stranger and coexistence.
It is simply fascinating (in a horrific, car-crash sort of way) how he can examine all of the historical evidence and come to such a terrible and terrifying conclusion. The only explanation is religious fundamentalism, his unshakeable belief that the Bible is the one and only truth and mandates a modern Israel on the biblical territory. I think we can (almost) all agree that that is impossible, ignores Palestinian culture and heritage, is outdated and should not be pursued.

I will not get into the logistics of how he proposes to realise this single apartheid state. But a "win-win solution" it is not.


Can I recommend this book? Probably not really. But read for yourself.