I can't talk about the first one in detail because I read it way back in college when I was going through this entire Le Carre phase.
Good review hereWriting is more intense than in other books by Le Carre except maybe one. It villainised neither side, or both, though in the latter part of the book, there seemed to be a greater sympathy towards the Palestinians.
The other one is "From Beirut to Jerusalem" from Thomas Friedman.
Friedmann talks about his years as a journalist in war-torn Lebanon and afterwards, Israel. The book is full of both horrifying and humorous anecdotes, both side by side, which makes it a roller-coaster of a read. There are hilarious accounts of Arafat and the PLO living it up in Beirut with Arab money, a crooked wheeler-dealer who could procure you anything you wanted and who also happened to be a very good friend of the author's. Simultaneously there are stories about how an entire generation grows up without any kind of security and the knowledge they could die in the next hour,continuous bomb blasts, yet parties continue in the midst of it all.
The Israel part of the book however has less of the comic and more analyses of the situation, about the divisions of opinions within the Israelis themselves and the main strands of thought. However since it's more of a journalistic rather than an academic work, it remains a very easy, and therefore informative read. The author gives concise summaries of the historical background as as well which are also very useful. There are predictions about the future, advice, but it seems a bit outdated, because it ends after the Oslo Accords but before Rabin's assassination( I think, I am always a bit confused about M.E. History) and on a highly optimistic note.
There are parts where it becomes very obvious that he is writing for a western readership, where he analyses the mistakes the of the Americans during their intervention in Lebanese politcs and in the most telling chapter of the book "Hama Rules". This describes how 'the Syrian Army(under Assad) levelled .... a portion of its own city, Hama, to put down a rebellion by Sunni Muslim fundamentalists there in 1982." Hama rules means no rules at all except destroying before being destroyed, compromise is interpreted as weakness .I think this is a sound analysis of dynamics in regions which are basically tribal in nature, not just the middle east, but Afghanistan as well,it is completely impractical to try to super-impose a political format on a society which has no experience or understanding of it and then complain because it turns into a farce. Amusing is that it is in this chapter that it becomes clearest that he is writing for a Western rather than an Oriental readership, because he goes to great pains to explain this ;), whereas it hardly requires any explanation to an Asian reader. I also found an intersting article by him later on here
This is NOT only a book about war or politics. It's ultimately about human energy and ability to survive , hope and actually enjoy life through it all. A very very good read. I read this from the library six months back. Will definitely pick up a hard copy if I can find it.
A good review here
