Inside Higher Ed reports today that:

In September, the University of Michigan Press faced intense criticism from pro-Israel groups - and questions from some regents - over its distribution of a book called Overcoming Zionism, which argues that the creation of Israel was a mistake and urges adoption of the "one state" solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in which Israelis and Palestinians would form a new country, without a Jewish character.

The U of M Press will no longer be distributing the book or have any ties to the publisher, Pluto Press by the end of this year

Michigan says that this is because of appropriate new rules about the press role in distributing books it hasn't itself vetted. But Pluto sees the new rules as window dressing that gave the university an excuse to satisfy Pluto's critics while avoiding the appearance of doing so.

This isn't the first time the idea of a "one state" has proved controversial. Earlier this month, Politics and Prose revoked, then quickly reinstated their invitation to Saree Makdisi who's book Palestine Inside Out: An Everyday Occupation advocates a one state solution.

The London Times Literary Supplement just ran a review of Mike Marqusee's If I Am Not For Myself: Journey of an anti-Zionist Jew which says:

he should be lauded for this provocative and timely book, which throws up a host of important questions. Why should a Jew who takes umbrage at Israel be labelled a self-hater? If "holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the State of Israel" is one part of the working definition of anti-Semitism for the EUMC (European Union Monitoring Committee on Racism and Xenophobia), then what does this say about claims of "the centrality of Israel in Jewish life" propounded by Britain's United Synagogue?

It will be interesting to see what kind of public reaction his book gets.