Why is Palestine Important?
Posted by The Platform | Posted in Universal Values | Posted on 03-02-2010
18
Reflections by Dr Phyllis Starkey MP
Unfortunately there are many conflicts around the world, but the continuing conflict in Palestine is particularly important because it:
- Is an affront to international law and United Nations resolutions
- Is a source of instability in the Middle East and beyond
- Reinforces the notion of a “conflict of civilisations”
An affront to international law
Israel’s continued occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, its violations of the Geneva Conventions: in continuing to expropriate Palestinian land and settle their own citizens in the occupied territories, to demolish homes, deprive Palestinians of their freedom of movement, visit collective punishment on relatives of militants and on the entire population of Gaza through the continuing siege, arbitrary arrest and imprisonment (including imprisonment of children) and targeted assassinations, not to mention the wholly disproportionate military action against Gaza with its wilful disregard of civilian casualties. Israel’s apparent impunity for these multiple violations, and its failure to comply with UN resolutions, are a threat to international law and the authority of the UN as well as showing a complete disregard for the human rights of the Palestinians.
A source of instability
The occupation and the resistance it provokes maintain a continuing level of violence, death and injury in the Palestinian Territories and to a lesser extent within Israel, which can at any time escalate into full-scale military conflict. Israel’s lack of respect for international law increases anxiety among the region’s governments, as its response to violence is unpredictable and can easily spread to neighbouring countries. The inability or unwillingness of Arab governments to confront Israel’s occupation or protect Palestinian rights inflames public opinion within those countries, undermines those governments and increases political instability.
The constant threat of regional conflict holds back economic development across the region, contributes to the “under-development” documented in the UN Arab Human Development Report and makes it completely impossible for Israel to have “normal” relations with the countries of the region.
Reinforces “conflict of civilisations”
The Israeli government presents the situation as an existentialist conflict between “Western democratic values” and “Muslim fundamentalism”, with Israel the front-line in the struggle. Paradoxically, some jihadist groups subscribe to a mirror image of this analysis; presenting the Palestinian struggle for justice as a “Muslim struggle” against the “Zionist/Crusader alliance”. Both analyses are inaccurate and subordinate the rights of the Palestinians to self-determination to another’s ideological agenda.
Here in Britain, those same distorted analyses attempt to use Palestine as an issue to inflame inter-community tensions, leading to an increase in Islamophobic and anti-Semitic attacks.
Of course many British Muslims feel particularly strongly about the denial of Palestinian rights because the majority of Palestinians are also Muslim. But support for justice for Palestine is widespread in Britain and spreads across all communities; including many within the Jewish community who understand that Israel’s security depends on a just settlement for Palestine. The British Government’s position also recognises the right of the Palestinians to their own state. The Labour Government constantly restates that Israel’s occupation is illegal, that all settlements are illegal and that the conflict can only be solved by a political negotiation; in line with UN resolutions, that leads to a Palestinian State in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.
The whole international community (apart from Israel) is agreed that a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders is the only practical solution. The problem remains how to get from the current situation to that agreed two-state outcome. The Obama administration is making a genuine effort to nudge Israel in the right direction but it is becoming increasingly clear that real progress will probably only occur if the US uses its power to effectively impose a two-state solution.
In the meantime, the British Government and the British people need to be sending a strong signal to the Israeli government that international law will be upheld, that those guilty of war crimes will not be immune from arrest and that illegal settlements and their produce will be boycotted. We should reach out to and support those courageous groups within Israel that are challenging their own government and build the broadest possible alliances here to support the Palestinians in their struggle for justice and statehood.
Ten Years On?
If the US, supported by the rest of the international community, does pressurise the Israeli government into a settlement that delivers “a viable and sovereign Palestinian State alongside a secure Israel”, the Middle East would be transformed, with the real possibility of people power across the Arab world, including Palestine, delivering governments more accountable and more committed to improving the lives of all their people.
But if the international community walks away, then violent resistance in the Occupied Territories will flare up again and civil conflict will spread within Israel and almost certainly destabilise the other countries of the region.
Whichever of these competing scenarios occurs, people in Britain must ensure that our government is on the side of justice and international law, and must work together across communities using the freedoms we have in a democratic society to achieve that. This will obviously be more difficult in the second, violent scenario, but if we in Britain simply import the violence into our own society setting one community against another, instead of uniting behind a common commitment to human rights and justice, we will fail not only ourselves but all those in Palestine and Israel who want a just and prosperous future.
Dr Phyllis Starkey is Labour Member of Parliament for Milton Keynes South West, Chair of the Select Committee for Communities and Local Government and Vice-Chair of Labour Friends of Palestine. She has held numerous notable positions, including Chair of Finance for Oxford City Council, National Chair of the Local Government Information Unit, member of the Modernisation of the House of Commons Select Committee and PPS to Denis MacShane, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Prior to entering Parliament, Dr Starkey qualified as a biochemist and followed a career in medical research, leading her own research group in Oxford.
It really is unbelievable how Isreal seems to get away with the most unbelievable human rights violations. And our government, for all its occasional [forked tongued] rhetoric, does Nothing.
It’s also unbelievable how Dr. Starkley’s article seems to be nothing more than an angry, impassioned rant, as she makes the standard outlandish and harsh accusations based on no facts whatsoever (like the entire section of “an affront to international law”).
It’s also unbelievable how little Dr. Starkley knows about middle east history. You refer to the West Bank and Gaza strip as being “occupied.” That is simply not true. In the 1940s the British broke up the Palestine mandate into two parts: Trans-Jordan and Palestine. When Israel declared independence in 1948 Trans-Jordan captured the West Bank in the Israeli War for Independence (and, fittingly, Trans-Jordan became “Jordan,” as they now had land on both sides of the Jordan River). In 1967 the Arab Nations started a war against Israel known as “the Six Day War.” At the time, the West Bank was part of Jordan.
So when you say “the occupied West Bank,” what you are saying is that Israel is occupying Jordanian territory, as the Palestinian-Muslims never had a state there (or anywhere for that matter). Since Jordan has expressed zero interest in wanting the West Bank back, I would hardly call that an “occupation.”
Regarding Gaza, it was part of Egypt (again, not under Palestinian control) until Israel also captured it 1967. Israel cannot possibly be occupying Gaza because: A) They captured it from Egypt and, like Jordan and the West Bank, Egypt does not want Gaza back. B) Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, and there are currently ZERO Israeli troops in Gaza.
These are all historical facts, not my opinion.
Your post is littered with basic errors and elaborates untruths, Dan. I shall respond to these, but I assume from the outset that my points will probably only confound a comprehension that, shall we say, ‘lacking’. I will quote a part of your response before refuting it.
1- “harsh accusations based on no facts whatsoever (like the entire section of “an affront to international law”)”
If you knew anything about International Law, then you would know that several of the points she renders are relevant. To give a simple yet pertinent example, she says ‘visit collective punishment…on the entire population of Gaza [and]… disproportionate military action ‘. Again, if you knew anything about International Law (rather than just how to ramble about it confusedly) then you would know that both collective punishment and disproprtionate military actions are contraventions of International Law and International Humanitarian Law.
2- “You refer to the West Bank and Gaza strip as being “occupied.””
Yes, that’s because they are. And if you read any UN report or reference to the territory, you will see them clearly referred to as Occupied Palestinian Territories. I’m going to be nice and let you work out why that is– consider it today’s homework
3- “When Israel declared independence in 1948″
Are you referring to the creation of the European colonial settler state that massacred and de-homed and de-possessed over a million Palestinians in total? Are you referring to UN Resolution 194 which declares that the Palestinian refugees are entitled to return to their homeland (’Al-Awda’) but are constantly denied this right by the Zionist state? Of course, that it is only one of countless UN Resolutions that Israel continues to ignore; indeed, Israel has violated more UN Resolutions than any other state in the world. You like to talk about facts and statistics, so that might be some food for thought…
4- “So when you say “the occupied West Bank,” what you are saying is that Israel is occupying Jordanian territory, as the Palestinian-Muslims never had a state there”
Firstly, your ignorance is alarming and hypocritical considering you had a rant about Dr Starkley’s apparent lack of knowledge. Palestine has never been just Muslims, so to reduce the existing and priorly-existed population to Palestinian-Muslims not only reveals your ignorance, but largely manifests your ulterior motives. Palestine is, and always has been, a place for Christians, Muslims and Jews. There are Palestinian Christians suffering in Palestine at the hands of Israel, yet you attempt to erase them for history altogether. That is deplorable.
Secondly, you’re attempting to conflate Jordanians and Palestinians to coerce the now unified entity into your own agenda. It is both foolish and disingenuous. The Palestinians, regardless of whether they had a state or not, have lived on and owned the land (Historic Palestine) for centuries; they cultivated the land and planted the olive trees. This is about more than a state; that is about a history and a home. It is, once again, hypocritical that you accept with alacrity the UN’s partitioning of Palestine yet do not give even an infinitesimal amount of time to the UN Resolutions Israel has broken or the UN’s Fact Finding Mission (’The Goldstone Report’) that accused Israel of War Crimes and possibly Crimes against Humanity. Double standards, thy name is ‘Dan’.
5- “Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005″
Israel maintained control over Gaza’s borders; imposed a crippling, callous, death-spiralling siege; retained control of air space and territorial waters; the population registry; all export and import abilities; and crossings.
So, in sum, your statement should really read ‘Israel transformed Gaza into the world’s biggest open prison’.
And we have seen exactly why they did this during the brutal attack of January last year. Any doubts about the motivations for Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip were consolidated during that attack, as it became clear that they intended to run Gaza into the ground. And they are continuing to on a day-to-day basis. ‘Punish, humiliate and terrorise a civilian population’, to quote the Mission behind the aforementioned Goldstone Report, is what Israel intended to do.
Furthermore, Ariel Sharon was unambiguous at the time that the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005 was to consolidate and expand illegal settlements in the West Bank. It was giving up a little bit of illegal land to gain a lot more illegal land. It was also to try and further legitimise the land-grabbing apartheid wall (almost universally condemned). Read his speeches to members of the Knesset for further evidence, starting with this one:
http://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOeng/archive/speeches/2004/04/speeches7887.htm
Or perhaps read Ben White, who refutes this point particularly well.
Only someone with a desperate desire to distort the truth, such as yourself, would see it in any other way.
And that is an apt way to round off this response. It is becoming alarmingly clear to the vast majority of people what Israel is doing. The others continue to make excuses and believe only what they want to; they reject fact unless it concurs with their own prejudices. These are people of hate rather than people of justice, but they are a growing minority and the irony is that they are ostracised not only from the conflict but from the world itself.
Before I even reached the end of your response Dan, you confirmed everything I always knew about Zionists; namely that the (un)reality they inhabit is characterised by a degree of fantasy rarely witnessed outside of Israel (well maybe in the USA also). Some of your comments were actually so amusing I couldn’t tell if you were being serious;
- ‘You refer to the West Bank and Gaza strip as being “occupied.” That is simply not true.’
- “the occupied West Bank,” what you are saying is that Israel is occupying Jordanian territory’
- Since Jordan has expressed zero interest in wanting the West Bank back, I would hardly call that an “occupation.”
…..
Eh? I suggest you go and read about history properly, and not the regurgitated tripe from the Jerusalem Post. You use the usual historical manipulations so resonant of Zionism that I’ll regrettably condescend to address some of your points. First of all the 1947 UN Partition Plan referred to an ‘Arab Palestinian’ state, and not ‘transjordan’ or an ‘egyptian’ state. (This is sheer irony as the UN apparently enshrines the right to self-determination, yet proceeded to divide up a land without any official approval from the indigenous population). What happened in 1948 is referred to in the English language as ‘annexation’. It has been so extensively documented (and frankly I am embarrased for you that I have to repeat it here) that Israel and Jordan had a secret agreement in place, during 1947-48, to partition Palestine. So yes, Jordan and Israel did both ‘annex’ the land alloted by the UN to Palestine. How you managed to surmise that this annexation suddenly became legitimate is truly beyond me, unless of course you assume that given Palestine was also referred to as ‘cis-jordan’ during this time, it suddenly ‘became’ part of Jordan. Quick obvious note; the prefix ‘cis’ was merely a geographical observation.
I suggest you do some reading. A good start would be the Zionist writer Shlomo Sand, and his book ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’, though of course his book only reiterates what everyone knew anyway. I’ll leave you with some quotes taken during the history of that beloved land of Eretz Israel (though of course that is not a well-defined term considering how Israel has spread like a cancer):
David Ben-Gurion, first PM of Israel said;
”Let us not ignore the truth amongs ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves … The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down.”
(Reference; Flapan, ‘Zionism and the Palestinians’, pp 141-2)
Chaim Weizmann, President of the World Zionist Organistaion, said;
“With regard to the Arab question – the British told me that there are several hundred thousand negroes there but that this matter has no significance”
(Reference; Yosef Heller, ‘Bama’avak Lamdina’, 1985, p.140)
Prime Minister Golda Meir said;
“It is not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.”
(Reference; London Sunday Times, June 15, 1969)
anyone with an ounce of common sense will see the injustice of the state of israel. they basically go into a country, expel its inhabitants and continue to ethnically cleanse its population. furthermore what allows you citizenship is whether you’re racially jewish; stated by israeli minister aylon at a lecture in lse recently. its not even about religion, with many settlers being atheists.
i cannot see the logic behind the creation of the state; if you were born in palestine, surely you should be able to remain there?
as Dr. Starkey says, images of palestine just reinforce a clash of civilisations further causing aggravation for many. Can britain really allow for such breach of international law to continue?
palestine is an issue that we cannot continue to ignore in the next ten years; will the UK stand for justice and what is right? i’m unsure.
As long as the fued between Hamas and Fatah continues, as long as Hamas continues to be seen as a terrorist organisation, as long as Fatah remains incompetent there can be no effective representative of the Palestinians. Long may this continue, as Gaza gets strangled, Palestinians die. Fewer Palestinians. Fewer problems. We just need to figure out ways to kill a few without pulling a trigger. As for the West Bank we’ll let the economy grow just a little, give them some basic comforts while we say we want to discuss peace, they have hopes in Obama but its a good thing our friends have got him in a tangle on health care and the banking regulations. Fortunately we’ve got the billions to be able to sit and wait. With the the rise in anti-semitism we need to be smart, make sure our government don’t give in to those hypocritical international sympathisers. In the meantime we’re going to build a few more houses and take down a few more homes, return ‘our’ people to the Promised Land. It’s always harder removing us than getting us in. As time ticks away, they get weaker and weaker until they finally accept our terms, only our terms….I can’t wait.
Does anyone here not actually believe in a 2 state solution with a Palestinian Republic based on the WB with East Jerusalem as its capital and the settlements removed.
The refugees may have to make do with reparations.
Also, it would be fair for those jews expelled from muslim majority states after the formation of Israel to also receive similar style reparations from those countries.
Surely these kinds of deals have to happen if there is to be a comprehensive peace deal where all concerned get a good portion of what they want????
In short ‘The Common Humanist’ (we have met before, ahem), Israel is beyond the point of no return. The two state solution is virtually impossible to implement. Israel has constructed illegal settlements all over designated Palestinian territory (and does so even now), and the idea of these being removed anytime soon is highly unlikely. The Haredi Jews, staunch advocates of settling anywhere in the land they consider Eretz Israel (which would actually include most of present-day Jordan also) have vast influence over the Knesset and for them, removing any settlement is tantamount to the greatest shame. There is a common refrain in Israel which translates into something along the lines of ‘we are all settlers’, giving an indication of the immense difficulty encountered when attempting to remove even one settlement, let alone the countless others which have proliferated cancer-like all over the land of the indigenous Palestinians.
Ehud Barak said something in the realm of reality (how ironic) this week;
“The simple truth is, if there is one state [including Israel, the West Bank and Gaza] it will have to be either binational or undemocratic … The lack of a solution to the problem of border demarcation within the historic Land of Israel – and not an Iranian bomb – is the most serious threat to Israel’s future.”
To think settlers, the most influential group in Israel would ever accept Palestinians living as equal citizens in the land they apparently claim as ‘God-given’, is well impossible basically. In reality, they don’t answer to the state of Israel, they answer only to their Rabbis (hence why the Israeli Supreme Court is basically pointless). One must identify the problem, which is Israel, and any solution in the future, sad as I am (not) to say it, will see military force deal the hand of justice Israel has escaped for far, far too long.
Dan says “When Israel declared independence”
And that people is the pinnacle of Dan’s Fantasy!!
I feel much of Dan’s argument has been torn apart most eloquently by the above contributors, so will only respond to parts of it.
Dan. You claim the Arab states started the ’67 war. Not quite. It was an unjustified preemptive attack on Israel’s part. And besides, from an international law perspective, irrespective of who the aggressor is, it is illegal to acquire land by means of war. Even if your dreamt up story of the Arabs having started the ’67 war was true, Israel would still have no justification for taking over the West Bank, the Golan Heights, Eastern Jerusalem or the Sinai. (An interesting fact not many people know a is that the Israeli’s were busy planning for huge settlements in the Sinai prior to an American mediated deal made with the Egyptians in the 70’s, handing the land back).
The idea that Israel no longer occupies Gaza is laughable. It has become the world’s largest open air prison. Over 50% of people don’t have jobs. The fishing industry has completely collapsed due to Israeli policy, forcing Palestinian fishermen to remain within 3miles of the Gazan coast line (British gas + Gazan offshore gas deposits = big bucks for Israel). John Hopkins University confirmed that 20% of children in Gaza are either chronically or acutely malnourished. Israel isn’t even allowing concrete in to let the Gazan’s rebuild their broken homes, (concrete of course being a key ingredient to bomb manufacture). With regard to the “Israel withdrew but what did they get in return?” argument; Israel made no concessions in moving its colonies out of Gaza as they were illegal in the first place. Furthermore, the move occurred simultaneously with massive settlement expansion in the West Bank; room was made for an extra 13,000 settlers to be precise, adding to the ~300,000 settlers already in position, illegally.
Common Humanist; those Jews that were expelled
from Arab countries 60 years ago were only expelled as a result of the creation of Israel on the back of ethnic cleansing. Also, what many claim was the forceful expulsion of Jews from Arab countries was in fact voluntary movement; most of those who left Arab nations in fact found a “better life” in what is now Israel. But yes, I won’t deny it; in Egypt and Libya (primarily), many Jews were forcefully removed; unfair, but somewhat understandable considering what was happening in Palestine. It’s no secret that the Arabs were enraged following the handover of large parts of historic Palestine by British Imperialists to the Jewish minority. It is important to remember that before the signing of the Balfour declaration in 1917 and the subsequent creation of Israel in 1948, Jews and Muslims coexisted on the whole peacefully for over a thousand years (although Zionists argue this is a myth, the Geneza documents found in Egypt are testament to the peaceful coexistence argument). Muslims protected the Jewish people during the Crusades, in Moorish Spain, and in various other regions throughout history. Jews in fact fought alongside Muslims against the crusaders to protect Jerusalem.
If I may go off on a tangent, the whole “who was there first” argument many raise is ridiculous. The Jews had left the region 500years before the Muslim’s came to reside in Palestine following a bloodless take over from the Byzantines in 630. It was in fact the Muslim rulers who persuaded the Jews to come back to the region, practice their religion and what not. This was quite a feat at the time. We know what happened when the Jews tried to openly practice their religion under Roman and Byzantine rule (hint; the Western Wall).
Coming back to your points Common Humanist; I realize you argument is far more fair and balanced than Dan’s (I believe you’re a reasonable person), but why should the Palestinians have to make do with reparations? There are now 6million Palestinian refugees living on the outskirts of what was once their homeland. Why is it that Jews are afforded a “right of return” by the state of Israel, yet the Palestinians aren’t? Is it not grossly unfair that Zionists with no historic link to the region are encouraged to move to Israel, with pay packages and housing as enticement, yet those Arabs who remember growing up there have no such opportunity? Barely 10% of Jews living today have any historic link to the region, and even if this figure is larger, or that the twelve tribes story is correct; that was well over two thousand years ago! The Mexicans and Native Americans have more of a right to re claim North America. In fact screw it, we ALL may as well re claim Africa, as scientists believe it is where mankind originated from.
Afloat,
I appreciate your response, I come at this issue as a dispassionate historian and and non believer so tend to avoid over emotive language.
Anyway, to suggest that most of the expulsion of Jews from majority Muslim states in the late 40s and early 50s is rather stretching the reality of events on the ground. Particularly given the atmosphere in the ME ‘47 to ‘56.
A perculier phenomenon is the inability of faith groups to to admit that they, like all other humans, are capable of both beauty and horror in equal measure? Interesting and disturbing but not unique to the islamic world. However, gievn the lack of basic freedoms through much of it that approach is worryingly atypical.
Therefore you can add Iraq, Iran and Tunisia to your list. It should also be noted that fragments of those Jewish populations did remain. But still, the net movements of populations displaced jews outweighs that of Palestinian Arabs by a small amount but that is neither here nor there. Neither crime is justified.
It is not a question of ‘make do’, but what is achievable. Israel (pre 67 borders) isn’t and shouldn’t be going anywhere. That said, the Israelis IMHO should pay for a strong Palestinian State based on the WB and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital. For that both the Israeli and Palestinian Rights (as typified by the equally childish Likud and Hamas parties) have to grow up and do a deal that gets most of what each other wants.
This is how human cultures have co-existed for millennia and neither muslims or jews are special and can’t escape that basic reality.
Time for some adulthood perhaps? So no more settlements in the WB? Agreed? No more silly rocket attacks into Israel proper? Agreed? No more Greater Israel or Hamas Charter perchance???
And then we can all progress and the Levant can stop holding the rest of the world at five to midnight on the armageddon clock!
In terms of Right of Return – Israel affords this because it is the historical jewish homeland and after the holocaust this had added impetus. The Palestinian Arabs who left in 48 have little such power because of the fractured post ottoman potitical situation between arab polities (common islamic heritage having very little to do with it, as is ever the case in the fertile crescent, competing elites will always compete (To which can be added the UKs caving to French Colonial demands and the siding of the Palestinian Arab elite with the Axis in WW2 with the net result is that the Palestinian Arabs were always onto a loser).
Ironically the UN offered land division post WW2, had it been taken up by said Arab elite, would have results today in a very wealthy and powerful Levant made up of Israel, the Palestinian Republic and Lebanon.
Immature polities on both sides prevented that from happening and prevent it still, nigh on 65 years later.
A quick note on this quite ridiculous assertion: “In terms of Right of Return – Israel affords this because it is the historical jewish homeland and after the holocaust this had added impetus. ”
We might as well give back England to the Ancient Romans.
And, Europe had no right to alleviate its guilt at the expense of thousands and thousands of people.
Right of return is all good and jolly, but there are peaceful ways of co-habiting without creating an apartheid state with jewish-only state, roads and settlements. Something went seriously wrong right from the establishment of Israel, (perhaps the notion that you can forcefully remove a bunch of people and draw a couple of borders) – as such, peace is an unachievable cry today.
“So no more settlements in the WB? Agreed? No more silly rocket attacks into Israel ”
It’s not a little game of tit for tat, and certainly not a proportionate game. You might as well be comparing the tragedy of Haiti with Michael Jackson’s death. Your perception of levels of proportion, blame, and the Palestinian situation are seriously skewed.
Bejewelled,
My view is skewed because I look at the situation from a position of – ‘we are where we are?’ Hardly.
Israel isn’t going anywhere. Deal with it.
To Israel supporters – give the Palestinians the justice they deserve. They aren’t going away either.
That’s my position.
BTW Israel isn’t a Jewish Only State. 25% of its citizens are Arab Muslims and Christians. Unlike say, Saudi Arabia, which is a racist state through its banning of people of the Jewish faith from its territory.
Anyways, back to I/P, comprehensive deals are going to have to be done sooner or later – probably along the lines of the one I outlined earlier.
And then the rest of the world can relax somewhat.
Having just read this post of yours, I regret going in to hyper mode in the below post. Hah.
You were far more reasonable here; although I disagree with the second half. The Saudi’s are racist, but they’re nothing compared to the Israelis.
The Saudi state wasn’t created on the back of genocide or ethnic cleansing. The Saudi’s haven’t started anywhere near the number of wars with their neighbours of a different faith.
The only reason there are a significant number of Arab Muslims in Israel is that a small minority managed to remain following the mass expulsion in 1948. Members of the Israeli Knesset regularly express their regrets regarding the Zionists not having expelled the remaining Arabs earlier (Arabs reproduce like rabbits- not good for Israeli demographics).
The two Arab political parties that had limited activity have also recently been banned from taking part in elections. All in the name of Democracy.
Common Humanist..
My approach thus far has been entirely political and not religious. I find it impossible to have a “dispassionate” approach when people are facing oppression, regardless of their faith. You’ll find me writing with the same passion when it comes to every crisis; from US exploitation of the Haitians, to the Belgian exploitation of the Congolese. You’ll also find me writing with the same passion when it comes to the vile regimes in the Islamic world; from the Saudi’s to the Pakistani’s.
Having read your comments before, I didn’t expect you to pull out the old holocaust line; as Bejwelled highlighted earlier, it’s an entirely spurious argument. Just because one community suffered immensely, that it should be given damages at the expense of another, is ridiculous. What did the Arabs of Palestine have to do with the Holocaust?
As I explained earlier, the whole “historical Jewish land” argument is also ridiculous. North America is the historic Native American land. Greater Australia is the historic Aboriginal land. If the Book of Joshua is to believed, then it means that justification for a Jewish homeland is based on land taken by war 3,300 years ago and lost by war 2600 years ago. You don’t have a point here. Furthermore you completely ignored large chunks of my earlier response;
“Barely 10% of Jews living today have any historic link to the region, and even if this figure is larger, or that the twelve tribes story is correct; that was well over two thousand years ago! The Mexicans and Native Americans have more of a right to re claim North America. In fact screw it, we ALL may as well re claim Africa, as scientists believe it is where mankind originated from.”
If I may add to this; according to the writings of H.G. Wells and MANY others, the majority of Jews living today are the descendents of a Turkish tribe referred to as the Khazars, who converted to Judaism between 620-740AD, with no genetic connection to the land whatsoever. Today, the majority (some figures are put this high as 95%) of Jews are of the Ashkenazi tribe, descendents of the Khazars.
Furthermore, let me repeat; the Jews left Palestine 500 years BEFORE the Muslims took over. And they only began to return because the Muslims INVITED them.
Going by your argument of historical links… there is ample evidence to suggest non- Jewish semites lived in the region for centuries (it’s acknowledged in the Bible for a start). Would their descendents, whoever they are, have a valid argument if they wished to reclaim Israel?
Moving on to your calling Likud & Hamas equally childish. It’s not Hamas that continually breaks ceasefires. Hamas is the democratically elected government of Gaza. After its election, Israel, the EU and the US saw to it that it that Gaza was economically strangled; collective punishment for the people’s voting for the wrong party. Hamas’s rockets have killed fewer than 10 people in the past 10years. Contrast this to Israel’s doings; having killed over 7,000 Palestinians in the same time period, with all manner of weaponry; laser guided missiles, F16’s, helicopter gunships and bombs. The Palestinians have a right to armed struggle.
Although there are valid arguments for and against violent resistance, the often childishness of Hamas cannot be compared to that of Likud. During Olmerts stay in power, the Fatah government engaged in over 200 talks with the Israelis. The outcome was zilch. Illegal settlements expanded, more territory was annexed, more Palestinian families were evicted from their homes, more prisoners were held without charge in Israeli dungeons, and so on. Ironically, the only negotiations on whose results people regularly wait eagerly, are those Hamas has with Israel; prisoner exchanges and so on. There is a very famous saying that you will hear the Palestinians, especially the Gazans, use a lot: “its better to die standing than to live on your knees”.
Your assertion that the Palestinians “left” Palestine in 1948 is, again, ridiculous. The only link their being expelled from the region has to the Ottoman Empire, is that with the Empires collapse, Muslims weren’t in a position to fight Western Imperial powers. The Palestinians were ethnically cleansed; this is admitted by the top most Israeli scholars on the issue, i.e. Zionists such as Benny Morris, and former Israeli foreign minister Shlomo Benami. I advise you to read “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”, by Ilan Pappe, an Israeli professor who teaches at Exeter University.
Coming back to the expulsion of Jews from some Arab lands; it was the direct result of the creation of the Zionist state. In modern day terms, we had a situation similar to what we saw in the former Rhodesia, South Africa and Yugoslavia; whenever there is one ethnic minority ruling over a majority of another ethnicity, hostilities regularly ensue. Although often, the blame lies with both sides, we must ask who the initial aggressor was.
Here are a few excerpts from the findings of a British Royal commission chaired by Lord William Peel in 1936, alongside a prior inquiry headed by Sir Thomas Haycraft; both aimed to ascertain the causes of the turmoil in the region;
“the root of the trouble… was the Arab fear of a steady increase of Jewish immigration, which would ultimately tend to their political and economic subjection.”
“There can be no doubt that racial animosity on the part of the Arabs, consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspoirations and fear for their economic future, was the fundamental cause”.
Referring to Arab-Jewish hostilities, the commission’s report stated they were a result of “first, the desire of Arab for national independence; secondly, their antagonism to the establishment of the Jewish “national home” in Palestine, quickened by their fear of Jewish domination”.
More importantly, it went on to state;
“Nor is the conflict in its essence an interracial conflict, arising from any old instinctive antipathy of Arabs towards Jews. There was little or no friction… between Arab and Jew in the rest of the Aarab world until the strife in Palestine engenderd it. And there has been precisely the same political trouble in Iraq, Syria and Egypt- agitation, rebellion and bloodshed- where there are no “National Homes”….. “THAT IS WHY IT IS DIFFICULT TO BE AN ARAB PATRIOT AND NOT TO HATE THE JEWS”.
Just to prevent any childishness on part of any other contributors; these aren’t my words. Look up the above stated sources for yourself. And besides, I don’t hate the Jews. Far from it, I hate Zionists
In summary, Common Humanist; I think you’re doing what too many pseudo historians do. You’re trying far too hard to come across as neutral. Although I think you’re trying to be fair; you’ve erred in convincing yourself that both sides are equally to blame when it simply isn’t the case. I’ll finish in the words of the late Howard Zinn; “you can’t be neutral on a moving train”.
Afloat,
I never asserted the Palestinians left Palestine in 1948.
Also, Hamas does indeed regularly break ceasefires. As do the Israelis.
I am overall neutral on this issue (in that I am on no-ones side, not that I don’t care) – yes I see the justice of a fair settlement for the Palestinians and why that is absolutely necessary. But also the anti jewish, anti semitic discourse and language that forms much of the debate over I/P sickens me. It is also the approach of much of the Palestinian body politic that is counter productive over the years. Non violent protest in the form of the US Civil Rights Movement would have, in the 70s and 80s brought far more progress but I realise that developments on the ground (that damned wall for one) make that difficult these days.
Hamas may well have been elected but I don’t see another set of elections looming (one man one vote once?) but they are a bunch of far right religious thugs – much like Hezbollah infact.
Having said that I don’t think the Israeli Govt has played fair at all – ref settlements and the near lack of progress through negotiations to date – as you point out so vividly.
So where do you see things going and what would you like to happen?
Apologies for the grammar in the second and third paragraphs of the above post.
It is late and my mint tea is wearing off (addiction picked up in Morocco – my garden smells fantastic!!)
TCH
[...] (UN-HABITAT) said that the housing project would be financed through the Saudi Committee for the …Why is Palestine Important? | The PlatformUnfortunately there are many conflicts around the world, but the continuing conflict in Palestine is [...]