The Life and Writings of a Long-Time Observer of Israel-Palestine
Yehuda Lukacs’ book, Op-Ed: Musings on War & Peace in the Middle East and Beyond is one of an estimated 3.5 million that were self-published during 2025. The largest categories of self-published are original works of fiction, games and activities, and travel. Lukacs’ book under review represents a different genre: an author compiling his or her already published articles into a single volume for ease of dissemination and as a testament to a life’s work.
Lukacs has certainly lived an interesting life. Born in Budapest, his family escaped communism for the jungles of Brazil. After his father’s death in 1960, he moved to Israel and served in the Israeli Air Force during the Yom Kippur War. Following his service, he left Israel in 1975 for the United States, where he eventually obtained a doctorate from American University, with a dissertation that focused on the sub-rosa ties between Israel and Jordan from 1967 to 1988. From 1993 to 2015, he served as Associate Provost of International Programs and founding director of the Center for Global Education at George Mason University (GMU). During his tenure at GMU, he built an extensive experiential learning program, which took thousands of students to more than 75 countries.
Lukacs relates his biography in a breezily-written 30-page introduction. The remainder of the book includes 51 op-eds and other short pieces that Lukacs authored (or co-authored) between 1984 and 2026, and the reprint of a lengthy essay on Jordan’s foreign policy that Lukacs presented at a November 2000 conference at the Hebrew University. The book also features photos of the author with various notables and with the students whose travel programs he organized.
The op-eds appear in reverse chronological order and without any commentary by the author reflecting on the contemporary relevance of his past musings. Most of the op-eds focus on the conflicts involving Israel and its neighbors. As such, they present a depressing summary of the tragedies that Israelis and Palestinians have experienced amidst the failure of multiple peace-keeping initiatives.
Reading Lukacs’ op-eds serves as a reminder that many of the specific issues that we are grappling with today have been on the table for several decades. Just to take one example, Lukacs writes in 1994:
Israelis are fully appreciative of America’s $64.5 billion assistance since 1949. Reducing American aid should not be interpreted as if Israel is out of favor in American eyes, but rather a testament to the durability of the relationship and the two countries’ ability to adjust to changing circumstances (p. 223).
The same arguments are being made today by Prime Minister Netanyahu, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and many others across the spectrum of views regarding the U.S.-Israel relationship.
Similar to Lukacs, my experience reflects the oscillation between hope and despair. I arrived in Israel-Palestine in 1999 as Director of the U.S. Agency for International Development’s West Bank/Gaza mission. At the time, we were convinced that the parties were on the brink of a long-lasting peace agreement as a fulfillment of the promises made on the White House lawn to mark the signing of the Oslo Accords. Eighteen months later, in October 2000, the Second Intifada erupted and the prospects for peace faded amidst the daily violence.
Since leaving my post in 2004, I have followed with keen interest subsequent attempts to revive a peace process under multiple U.S. administrations and through the initiatives of other interlocutors. Sadly, they have all proved futile. And now Palestinians and Israelis have to grapple with the horrors of October 7 and the 75,000 deaths and physical destruction in Gaza that followed. Still, there are Palestinians and Israelis who remain committed to promoting peace and, like Lukacs, I support their passion and hope that someday the dream of two states living side-by-side in peace will come to fruition.
Given Palestinian Authority (PA) President Abbas’ promise that 2026 will mark a revitalization of Palestinian democracy through elections, I want to draw particular attention to an op-ed that Lukacs and Hillel Schenker (co-editor of this Journal) published in the Jerusalem Post in 1984 under the headline “Call for Elections in the West Bank” (p. 242). They suggested that municipal elections in the West Bank would provide an additional means of encouraging Palestinian participation in the negotiating process, consistent with the formula set forth in the 1978 Camp David Accords (p. 243). Five years later, I elaborated on their proposal in a policy paper for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy entitled Palestinian Elections: Working Out the Modalities, which provided a detailed set of proposals for the conduct of such elections in both the West Bank and Gaza.
The negotiations that led to the Oslo Accords were conducted between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which had been recognized by the international community as the sole representative of the Palestinian people. Under Oslo, the PA was established to govern the West Bank and Gaza, and elections for President and the Palestine Legislative Council (PLC) were held in 1996. When Arafat died in 2004 elections were quickly organized by the newly established Central Election Commission for his successor as President. A year later, Hamas won an overwhelming victory in PLC elections, which ultimately led to a mini-civil war whose outcome resulted in Hamas taking de facto control over Gaza and the PA’s writ limited to the West Bank.
No national elections have been held in the Palestinian Territories since 2006. And yet according to multiple surveys, Palestinians overwhelmingly support such elections. Municipal elections were held in April and Abbas has scheduled direct elections to the Palestinian National Council in both the Palestinian Territories and the diaspora for November 1. Many analysts consider efforts to organize such elections as a fool’s errand, but as was reasoned back in 1980’s the logistical issues can be overcome if the political will is there.
Lukacs closes his book with a short epilogue reporting a 1996 dialogue between Israeli journalists Ron Maiberg and Amos Elon (p. 273). Maiberg asked whether Elon was planning a new edition of his best-selling 1968 book The Israelis: Founders and Sons. Elon replied in the negative and explained his rationale: “Because it does not have a happy ending. It ends badly.”
This negative vibe reflects much of the post-October 7 discourse regarding Israel’s prospects for prospering as a Jewish and democratic state. It is strikingly dissonant with the writings compiled in this book, which suggests Lukacs maintains a much more ambivalent attitude, combining hope and despair.