back and forth with zionism part 3
anonymous @ Yeshiva:
In any case, with all due respect, I think you need to check your facts. Nearly a million Sephardic Jews were kicked out of Arab lands in 1948 -- their assets, worth billions of dollars were stolen from them by these Arab countries. This was not "10,000 per year" immigrating to Israel on their own volition -- it was mass expulsion of Jews from Arab countries. The reason you don't hear about this so much today is that Israel almost immediately absorbed all of these people into the country (though they were treated very poorly by the Ashkenazi Jews in Israel at the time). In contrast, about 600,000 Arabs left or fled Israel in 1948. The reason I say left or fled is that while some were in fact kicked out of their homes, many of them left on their own volition, prompted by their leaders who told them they would return in triumphant victory once the Jews were annihilated (Azzam Pasham, head of the Arab League at the time, compared what the Arabs intended to do to the Jews to the the Mongol massacres.) All of this is documented so you don't have to take my word for it.
Also in contrast to the Sephardic Jews, the Palestinian Arabs were not absorbed into any of the Arabs' 22 countries and have been kept as "refugees" by these countries, with the help of UNRWA of course, for all these years. These people are being used as pawns in the Arabs' struggle to destroy the Jewish state. It is a political and PR tactic that thus far has been working quite effectively. This is unfortunate both for Israel and for these Palestinian Arabs.
"Palestine" was recognized as the Jewish homeland for thousands of years by the entire world, even when the Jews did not control it. Except for the short-lived Crusader kingdoms, only the Jews had a nation in Palestine (on both sides of the Jordan River). These areas were conquered by others, but always they were part of larger empires. For example, under the Ottoman Turkish Empire (from 1517 to 1917), Samaria and Gaza were Districts and Judea was a Sub-District of the Empire.
In any case, the Palestinian Arabs were not an indigenous nation. They have no legal claim to the land. On the other hand, the Jewish people's historical claim to the land was recognized and affirmed by international law in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. In short, it was never "their(the Arabs'_ country," as you claimed in your argument. International law provided for the reestablishment of the "Jewish national home" in Palestine (all of Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan River). However, the British in 1922 "suspended or withheld" the Jewish right to settle and set up their national home in Eastern Palestine -- 78% of the land that was supposed to be the Jewish national home. In 1946, the British flat out lied to the UN, claiming this land was under a separate mandate (which it was not), and thereby established the Kingdom of Jordan -- which is a Palestinian Arab state. The Jewish people were left with only 22% of Palestine, and even that the Arabs want to shrink further (Israel is roughly the size of the state of New Jersey, just to put things into perspective. The Arab countries are over 500 times Israel's size and they want Israel to cede more territory which legally belongs to it).
The claims that this is a conflict about Palestinian Arab statehood are completely bogus. The Palestinian Arabs were offered another state in 1937, in 1947, in 1999, in 2000, etc. Each time they turned it down and renewed their attacks on Israel because they simply want the Jewish state wiped out (Hamas and the PLO says this outright in their charters btw). The attacks against Jews did not start in 1948 -- Arabs massacred Jews throughout the 1920s and 1930s in Palestine (e.g. the Hebron massacre in 1929). I guess it must have been because of the "occupied territories" that Israel liberated in 1967. And the war of annihilation in 1948 and the creation of the PLO (dedicated to armed struggle to liquidate the Jews) in 1964 -- all that was because of the lands Israel won in 1967 right? The fact of the matter is, if the Arabs had not started the wars to annihilate Israel, no Arabs would have been kicked out of the land.
As for Zionism harming the livelihood of the Palestinian Arabs, in fact the exact opposite is true. With increased Jewish immigration, the land which was previously a barren, desolate wasteland, began to thrive. Living standards of Arabs living in these areas rose substantially with Jewish immigration, and in fact, many of these Arabs actually only moved there for this very reason in the decades immediately preceding the establishment of the Jewish state.
I'm not really sure what point you were trying to make with the Golda Meir quote -- I believe the quote you gave just reiterates what I said before. The Palestinian Arabs were part of the Arab nation, or part of Syria (at least according to all their leaders from the early 1900's until about 1967), not a distinct nation. Golda Meir was merely stating a fact. There was no such people. Most of the Arabs living in Western Palestine when Israel was created left on their own accord, as I said before. Some were displaced, as happens in pretty much every war. Others chose to stay and when Israel was established, they were offered full citizenship in the country. Those who accepted it did in fact become full citizens with full voting rights in the new democratic state that was established. Today, Arabs serve in high position in the Israeli judiciary and government. Ten Arabs currently serve in the Israeli Knesset (Parliament).
I have not even touched upon the religious claims the Jewish people have to the Land of Israel -- I am an Orthodox Jew and believe in them fully. Needless to say they are well-known and do not need to be restated here. If you do not believe in the Bible or Torah, then my other arguments based on history and international law should suffice to establish the Jewish claim to the land. But yes, if you are so bold as to presume to know what Judaism has to say on something, you damn well better have studied Judaism. Hence my question which yeshiva you studied at. Judging by your non-response, I take it the answer is that you have not studied in a yeshiva at all-- it therefore demonstrates profound chutzpah on your part to tell us all what Judaism says. I for one have been studying Judaism my whole life (since it is such an integral part of my life), so when I venture to speak in the name of Judaism, I am prepared to back up my claims. It is a free country and you can comment on whatever you like, but my advice is stick to commenting on issues you know something about.
The Palestinian Arabs are people, though the majority of them support terrorist animals like Hamas and the PLO, (who are, incidentally, the ones who dehumanize and embrace the death of their "opposition."). They are not however, entitled to a state in Western Palestine in any way -- historically or legally. Furthermore, at this point in time, giving them a state next to Israel would only create another existential threat to the Jewish state (as evidenced by their election of Hamas, their mass smuggling of weapons, their inciteful media propaganda, etc.) by creating a terrorist state on Israel's border. So the point would be moot even if you were to claim that since 1967 a new nation was suddenly created.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response:
You are right, I did not study at a yeshiva. Suprise suprise. I ask you though, being an Orthodox Jew, does the Talmud not say that a Jewish state may not exist through human means until the coming of the Moshiach? Did Israel not gain recognition through much blood shed and terrorism and has the Moshiach arrived? Feel free to enlighten me.
History is meaningless without any context, so it is best that we frame it in what was happening at the time. The 1900s and even earlier had strong sentiments of anti-semitism and the jews were forced by the Spanish, Portuguese, French, etc. from their countries and Arab nations took in many refugees. Let's not pretend like Jews were treated fairly in the Arab countries, they lived in ghettos, but at the time, at least they had a place to live. Towards 1948 Jewish immigration had increased following the end of the war and the Jews were pushed out of the countries for 2 reasons.
1. Some Arab nationalist leaders were pro-Nazi and carried anti-semitic sentiment and wanted to get rid of the jews.
2. Increasing immigration into the Arab countries after the Jews were forced by anti-semitism in Europe caused increasing social instability between the Jews and the Arabs. This is not exactly unexpected, huge immigration is never met with open arms.
Palestinian Arabs were not hostile to initial Jewish immigration, BUT the Jews having no other recourse due to anti-semitism all fled to Palestine. Rapid immigration.
The Jewish expulsion was about 900,000 and is an aggregate of all Arab countries with jews residing with them. The number you gave of 600,000 is the Israeli gov't figure on Palestinians leaving the area that would become Israel. The UN marks that number at 700,000 and the Palestinians mark it at 900,000. Compensating that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders are trying to evoke sympathy for their cause, the numbers are not disimilar. Let's keep in mind that it was 900,000 Jews from Arab countries, and almost the same amount of Palestinians were forced from Israel (ONLY ISRAEL).
Your argument that Israel had a NATION and when Arabs controlled the land the disputed land was only a territory/district is a bit of semantics. The issue is not the governmental structure, it is the people who inhabited the land. I think you would find it hard to argue that during Ottoman rule, there was a large majority of Arabs residing in Palestine. It doesn't matter that there was no grand concept of nationhood by those residing in Arab Palestine, the Arabs lived there and layed their roots there. Such is my argument that Israel's claim to the land is no different from that of the Palestinians... historically that is.
I find it hard to believe your claim that while there was a civil war in Palestine in 1948 between the Jews and Arabs that the overwhelming majority (at least in the earlier years of Jewish immigration) just decided to get up and leave. It makes no logical sense why they would leave on their own accord. You simplify it to the point where it seems like people happily left, it is of record that most left Palestine because of forced expulsion or fear of further violence upon their families. Your argument is like saying that the Jews that fled Germany during the Nazi regime, left of their own accord under no threat. And what is emphasized in the Golda Meir quote is her advocacy of "throwing them out and taking their country", them being the Palestinians; this is Golda Meir describing the Jews entering Palestine and kicking the Palestinians out. What is difficult to understand about that quote? Others stayed in Israel, bc part of the Palestinian leadership urged them to stay. Other Palestinian leaders took credit for the leaving of Palestine as a way of saving face and pride from being forced out of a country that they had for years been the majority.
In another instance of your misreading my post or misunderstanding, I did not ask you if Zionism hurt the livelihood of Palestinian Arabs. Zionism led to mass immigration into Palestine, in fact just as you stated about the Palestinians, most Jews in the early 20th century did not want an Jewish state as they believed that that was not the path that Judaism had called for them. This is before the spread and popularism of Zionism. What I asked you was, since you legitimitely deny that there is a Palestinian state, if the popularism of a Palestinian national identity is a direct product of zionism and its pushing out of Arabs from the country they resided in. Did Zionism (Jewish national identity) not rise out of anti-semitism and their being pushed out of their homes? Do we not see the parallels?
From all of your study of Judaism and Israel, you still are able to paint a rosy picture of Israel and its fine moral grounding and label the British as liars and Israel as being cheated. Let us not forget that Israel's creation is grounded in the Zionist led immigration into Palestine leading to social unrest and the Arabs to start a war. Zionsim turned a majority's land into one that did not represent its culture, religion, and all disruption that a short period of radical social transformation leads to (100,000 Jews immigrated to Palestine in the 1920s ALONE). Israel with its larger numbers from immigration overwhelmed the Palestinian Arabs and despite whatever sunshiny emnigration you think happened, caused the Palestinians to lead en masse in fear of their lives and that of their families.
What was their to fear? Israel was won through force, military force and that of terrorism that it now screams foul at the Palestinians for. Zionist violence and terrorism of Irgun and Lehi are no historical mystery or unknown. They attacked the UN, they attacked the British, they attacked the Palestinians. Hundreds of Palestinian women and children were killed in their village by Irgun at the Deir Yassin massacre. To say that the British was unfair in their distribution of land is ironic.
No Israel is not entirely or in the majority at fault, but the untainted image of Israel that you try and present is not indicative of historical context and paints the Palestinians as wild inhumane misguided zealots. It is suprising as, at least for me, the examination of history increasingly leads to parallels between recent Palestinian nationalism and the Jews' 20th century pursuit of legitimacy and statehood. The Jews should understand the Palestinian dilemma better than anyone else, though most on this board continue to preach a one sided explanation of the middle east crisis.
I do not question the legitimacy of Israel, but I do point to Israel as the catalyst for the existence of Hamas and Hizbullah, however misguided those two organizations are in their tactics.
1 comments:
A very fair and well researched assessment Wang.
Post a Comment