May 08, 2008
For a New Hatikvah: Israel At 60
Caelum Moffatt reflects on this the 60th anniversary of Israeli independence/the Palestinian Nakba,
in MIFTAH:
Following the Second World War, the holocaust and the termination of the British Mandate, UNCSOP passed Resolution 181 in November 1947 which called for a partition of the British Mandate into two bilateral states – Israel and Palestine. Even with a quarter of a decade of immigration and colonization, Jews still only comprised 30% of the population and owned just 7% of the land. Despite these facts, the state of Israel would be granted 55% of the former British Mandate. A war ensued firstly between Palestinians and Jews, then later between Arabs and Israelis after Israel had claimed independence on May 14, 1948.
The Arabs were defeated and by the time the armistice lines were drawn in July 1949, Israel had extended its territory to 78% of historic Palestine. 800,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes, 530 villages were destroyed and 86% of the Palestinians who now fell within the 1949 armistice lines were displaced. Of the 14% that remained, 70% of their land was confiscated or made inaccessible to them.
According to UNRWA estimates, there are presently 5.5 million refugees spread across 58 camps in the occupied Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
These have been replaced by some 5.5 million Jews living in Israel flourishing in freedom, prosperity and international acceptance in what can only be described as obstinate blindness and pure disregard for the brutality they employed and still adopt today in order to sustain their existence. They maintain that their actions are justified after being subject to worldwide contempt, suffering years of persecution and anti-Semitism. It is as if their unwavering resolve to achieve their goal supersedes Palestinian claims and relegates them to the unfortunate byproduct or obstacle standing in the way of their destiny.
Posted by Robin Varghese at 11:41 AM | Permalink
Comments
Is this posting a trap to have people tell the rest of the world about what they think of Goliath Israel?
I am a student of history, and I believe on the cycles of nature.
Perhaps Santayana was right.
Meanwhile: Happy Birthday Israel!
Enjoy!
Posted by: Felix E F Larocca MD | May 8, 2008 1:36:50 PM
The war began first with the Palestinians? and then they were joined by 5 Arab nations? Nah. The 5 nations invaded all on the same day as Israel declared statehood. And let's count, too, the 750 thousand Jews booted out of Arab countries if we are to discuss displacement of peoples.
In sum: this is a post that is not celebrating but berating...using the birthday as an excuse to badmouth. And how many later invasions of this fledgling state by the Arab neighbors?
Posted by: fred lapides | May 8, 2008 6:57:02 PM
Another call for the extermination of Israel and the Jews, another load of Nazi vomit in the name of humanitarian values, from the same people who sided with Hitler in the 1930s. Even while the "Palestinians" slowly but surely disintegrate into warring camps, they are being promoted as the best way of getting rid of the irksome Jews, and even those treaties and obligations that "Palestinians" themselves have signed are torn up for use as kindling in their next arson attempt.
There are other refugees not mentioned here: while the Arab Muslim nation of which the "Palestinians" are a part controls 22 states with an area larger than the USA, tens of millions of Arab economic refugees flood Europe. Who is responsible for this mass exodus?
Posted by: aguy109 | May 8, 2008 8:05:06 PM
"the 750 thousand Jews booted out of Arab countries if we are to discuss displacement of peoples."
That's one of those exaggerations that irreflexive defenders of Israel embrace when confronted with the ugly truth. I still don't see how it justifies uprooting close to 800,000 Palestinians from their lands. As for the other guy, with his use of quotation marks when mentioning the Palestinians, he doesn't deserve an answer.
Posted by: Pepito | May 9, 2008 7:22:45 AM
It may well be true that many jews choose to come to Israel after the state was declared; it may also well be true that many Arabs fled the new state rather than were forced out. But there were Jews forced out of arab lands:
http://www.forgottenrefugees.org/links.php
http://www.netanyahu.org/whattheydont.html
this from Wikipeduia if read well demonstrates the wrong done by both parties and strikes me as balanced. It is plain untrue to suggest that 750 thousand Arabs werze all thrown out of what was to become Israel without (1) orders from Arab nations, (2) choosing to leave.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus
Posted by: fred lapides | May 9, 2008 9:46:26 AM
A plague o' both your houses!
Posted by: Jared | May 9, 2008 10:07:59 AM
Pepito,
If you're sure the Palestinians didn't leave voluntarily, then how can you be so sure the Arab Jews left voluntarily?
What's also ignored here is that in 1948, plenty of Jews were forced off land as well. It's not like the Israeli forces carried all before them and won every battle. Every Jew in the West Bank and the Old City of Jerusalem was expelled or killed, including from the Jewish quarter, which by any reasonable definition is "Jewish land".
The Palestinian refugee problem is sustained at least partially by the unrelenting effort of Arab states to keep the Palestinian refugees and their descendants stateless. Very few other similar conflicts ended up that way - displaced people in India/Pakistan were given immediate citizenship after Partition, for example, and the leaders of both countries were born in the other country.
I don't think it is a question of justification, it is a question of historical fact. The quoted article ignores the uprooting of long-established Jewish populations in the British mandate of Palestine and the surrounding countries, which were and are highly significant to the unfolding history afterward. The demographic infusion this gave to Israel materially assisted it in the 50s and 60s and likely contributed to the Israeli victory in 1967.
One other point. It's very interesting to compare the treatment of anniversaries of states here. On one side you have Israel, which has contested borders, has been militarily aggressive, and has a precarious relationship to its internal minorities. It has an established religion and is about 60 years old. The only commemoration here is relentlessly negative and from the viewpoint of its enemies.
On the other hand, you have Pakistan, which has contested borders and is militarily aggresive against its neighbors. It has a precarious relationship with its internal minorities and a state religion and is about 60 years old. The ethnic cleansing after its birth was of far greater extent and the death toll in the Bangladesh Liberation War against its own citizens was orders of magnitude more than the number of people killed in all Arab/Israeli wars to date. But any negative portrayal of Pakistan for its anniversary is rejected.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | May 9, 2008 12:22:01 PM
Pepito, where have you you been, kindred Spanish soul?
I miss your caustic remarks....
Think of this: What would civilization be, without Israel?
and
What the world be without bigotry?
Shalom, Salam, Paz, Peace!
Posted by: Felix E F Larocca MD | May 9, 2008 1:15:17 PM
Felix:
I doubt I am your 'kindred" soul, as you seem to have this romantic idea of a nation whose creation itself was an act of questionable morality.
You probably know that conterfactuals such as "what would civilization be without Israel" are basically pointless, and frankly, they seem bizarre. I am not advocating for a 'civilization without Israel' as you crudely seem to imply. All I can tell you is that I was raised to believe in equality and I don't believe there to be a necessarily indispensable nature or culture, or hold any mystical notion in support of any kind of 'exceptionalism'. I don't think you will see any bigotry coming from me, unless you redefine it as 'criticism of the state of Israel'.
To give your rhetorical question a stab at an answer: it's clear that the Jewish people played a big part in the development of what goes by the name of Western Civilization, although their main contribution in the past- the Abrahamic religions- have at their best, a checkered history (but then I'm deeply anti-religious and anti-clerical, so sue me).
As for our present world, I doubt it would be worse if the state of Israel was not there (Which, just for the sake of clarification, DOES NOT MEAN I am advocating for its destruction). Let's face it: the Israel that is now celebrating its 60th anniversary was founded on a deep injustice: the forced dispossesion of another group of people who must have been flabbergasted to see how, in a few decades, the land that was theirs was taken over by a group of people who had the express idea of doing exactly that. The fact that this deeply inmoral charade was supported by the 'International Community' at the time is just a reminder of how fucked up our world has been, is, and no doubt, will be: it's no secret that creating a nation in an already inhabited land against the will of most of their current inhabitants is bound to make many people unhappy. The fact that this was done, in part, out of the deep feeling of shame stemming from the failure of the West to prevent the Holocaust does not, in any case, make it more legitimate to dispossess a group of people who had nothing to do with it. For some strange reason I can't fathom it's virtually impossible for most 'Westerners' to understand this.
As for the other two clowns that are pointing out that the Palestinians left voluntarily, what can I say: I should probably add that they did it happily too. As a matter of fact, they always wanted to leave and were just looking for the perfect excuse. The presence of the approaching Israeli army that was commiting massacres of Palestinians in neighboring towns was just a gentle reminder that they should hurry up and catch the train to the happiness that awaited them in neighboring refugee camps.
Posted by: Pepito | May 9, 2008 2:58:07 PM
Thanks Pepito, for just being ready to speak out, whenever that's what's needed.
Saludos cordiales!
FEFL
Posted by: Felix E F Larocca MD | May 9, 2008 3:49:56 PM
Pepito,
You do realize that almost every country has been founded on a deep injustice, right? That almost no country has a reservoir of purity to draw from?
Posted by: Hektor Bim | May 9, 2008 10:39:30 PM
Of course, that's a well known fact. But in this case, many of the survivors from this particular injustice are still alive, aren't they? If Israel is so moral why doesn't it do what's right and compensate them?
Posted by: Pepito | May 10, 2008 8:08:04 AM
cf.
Ephraim Karsh's account of 1948:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/1948--israel--and-the-palestinians--annotated-text-11373
David Remnick's review of Benny Morris on 1948:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/05/05/080505crbo_books_remnick?currentPage=all
and Morris's review of Kimmerling and Migdal on the Palestinian people:
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=c8eea81f-4540-419e-ad72-ff8ef6ec59c9
Posted by: Benjamin.L | May 16, 2008 4:15:54 AM
Post a comment