The western left does not understand the cause of the
Israeli-Palestinian
conflict,
and for this and other reasons
it has made a historic mistake in picking the wrong side.
Step one should be to find out what is the cause of the conflict.
It is not what the left says it is.
It is something far darker and more depressing.
During World War 2,
when Israel still did not yet exist,
the Palestinian leadership
attempted to get the Germans
to exterminate the entire Jewish population.
In the event of Nazi victory over
Britain,
the Palestinian leadership planned to run an extermination camp for the Jews
near Nablus.
The conflict is not really about territory at all.
Rather it is driven by Muslim bigotry,
which cannot tolerate the existence of a non-Muslim state in the region.
It is about suppressing the dhimmis who rebelled against the Dar al Islam.
The conflict cannot be ended by any territorial concessions,
but only by change
in the Arab Muslim mindset and culture.
The Arab-Israeli conflict is not about freedom, human rights, occupation, settlements, colonialism or grievances.
It is about Islam, religion, anti-semitism, jihad, honour, shame, holy soil and blood.
No rational reason.
If you want a single article that explains how the left has got it wrong on Israel,
this is the article.
He points out that the reason why
the Muslims wanted to massacre the Jews in 1948
is the same
reason why
the Muslims massacred the Christians in Turkey
in 1909-23.
He explains why Israel's Arab neighbours
won't let Palestinians be citizens,
and why they keep them pointlessly
locked in camps
for decades.
He explains why the Arab states kept fighting Israel after 1948.
He explains everything.
No leftist can explain this stuff.
This article explains the Arab-Israeli conflict.
You won't get an explanation of the conflict in the Irish Times!
This is typical:
Some person
pontificates about Israel on Twitter.
And has never heard of the word dhimmi - the cause of the Israel conflict.
Jewish Virtual Library pages
here and
here and
here
says the population was
538,000 Jews. 397,000 Arabs.
This Jewish majority had developed peacefully (not through warfare)
over the previous 70 years.
Setting this area up as a state was reasonable because:
(a) the Jews (the majority in the area) wanted it,
and:
(b) the state would be a free democracy,
whereas the alternative was
dhimmi status within some standard Arab Muslim tyranny.
Setting up this area as a state
does not need to be justified by "making up" for the crimes
of the Holocaust
(with the Palestinians paying for European crimes).
The area was majority-Jewish, and had become so peacefully over the previous 70 years,
with no Palestinians evicted by force.
This area in 1947 had a right to self-determination,
independent of the Holocaust.
I see nothing wrong with setting up the majority-Jewish area
as Israel in 1947, therefore.
Whether it was sensible for Jews fleeing persecution to go to the Middle East
in the first place, however
- as opposed, say, to America -
is another question.
Apparently
(though I'd like to see a bit
more context),
Lord Curzon,
British Foreign Secretary 1919-24,
said about the idea of the Jews going to live in the Middle East:
"I cannot think of a worse fate for an advanced and intellectual community".
Still, once brave, embattled democrats are in the Middle East,
it is our duty to support them against non-democrats.
The Arabs rejected this state because it was Jewish.
Had it been just another Muslim group,
a separate state would have been accepted without controversy.
But it was intolerable to allow the
dhimmis
to set up a state.
Even worse, one in which dhimmis would rule over some Muslims.
This problem is the root cause of the conflict.
Hence for the future:
No solution that allows the existence
of a Jewish (or any non-Muslim) state
in any form
can possibly end the conflict.
The only thing that will end the conflict
is a change of mind by the Arabs,
such that they will tolerate the existence of a non-Muslim state,
and non-Muslims in general.
The root cause of the conflict is, and always has been, Muslim bigotry.
The left and the existence of Israel:
Interestingly, the western left did not always agree that setting up Israel was wrong.
Extract:
"The collective amnesia of the Left in this regard is especially striking since in the late 1940s, most Communists and socialists in the West enthusiastically hailed the "anti-colonialist" nature of the Israeli war of independence. Indeed they followed the USSR in strongly supporting the establishment of Israel as a blow against "Anglo-American domination of the Middle East." . . .
What today is eulogized as the Palestinian "struggle against Zionism" was considered by most Communists or Socialists in 1948 as utterly reactionary."
The use of violence:
The Arabs responded to the proposal for Israel in 1947,
and its actual existence in 1948,
with immediate violence.
It is extraordinary how modern leftists now justify such violence:
"Their land was being taken."
Whose land? The people living in the Israel area wanted this state.
"Areas cannot secede from a state like this."
What state? No state of Palestine existed.
"Were they meant to put up with this?"
Why not? No Arab would be oppressed by the new Israel. In fact, their life would get much better.
In reality, while an Arab might be disappointed that a majority Jewish area wanted a separate state,
the only moral response was to express such disappointment, not turn to violence.
A traitor to the West:
Englishman
Sir John Glubb,
commander of the Arab Legion 1939-56
in its wars against Israel.
All Westerners should defend Israel, because it is a democracy.
Photo from here.
In 1973, Glubb wrote the
foreword
to the autobiography of the Palestinian terrorist
Leila Khaled.
Glubb claims that Khaled was humane, and determined
"that her hijackings would not result in loss of human life, especially not in injury to children.
And in fact no one was ever hurt on these enterprises, except her own companion. The object, she explains,
was to show the world that the Palestinians were still alive".
Immediately after the declaration of the State of Israel in 1948,
a combined Arab army of
Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian, and Lebanese forces invaded
to try to destroy the dhimmi state and
exterminate the Jews.
Israelis turned out to be good at war,
because their culture is based on
western ideas
rather than "honour and shame" tribalism.
Israel managed not only to beat the combined Arab armies
but in fact expanded its territory.
Many Palestinians were expelled, others fled voluntarily,
during the 1948 war that established Israel.
Clearly there has been Palestinian suffering.
Though much of it
is self-inflicted.
Had the Arabs never tried to destroy Israel,
the Palestinians would never have been displaced.
They would now live either within Israel
(and therefore would be free and prosperous),
or would be next door, as peaceful trading neighbours
(and quite likely a thriving Arab democracy due to Israel's example).
Maybe they shouldn't have tried to destroy Israel?
But even if many Palestinians were wronged,
Israel exists and it's not going away.
You cannot re-run 1948 again.
Many huge
displacements of populations have taken place in
the last century:
It is usually forgotten that Israel is home to the descendants of
nearly 1 million Jews
expelled from the Arab countries and Iran after 1948.
They were expelled from all over the Middle East and North Africa,
where they had lived for centuries, even millennia.
Who on the Palestinian side cares about their rights?
Who in the western left cares about them?
On their lost world:
"We would have liked to be Arab Jews. If we abandoned the idea, it is because over the centuries the Moslem Arabs systematically prevented its realization by their contempt and cruelty.
...
Never, I repeat, never - with the possible exception of two or three very specific intervals ... did the Jews in Arab lands live in other than a humiliated state, vulnerable and periodically mistreated and murdered, so that they should clearly remember their place."
On why Israel makes Arabs angry:
"They have not yet recovered from the shock of seeing their former underlings raise up their heads, attempting even to gain their national independence! They know of only one rejoinder: off with their heads!
The Arabs want to destroy Israel."
In Hebron,
Jordan destroyed the
Abraham Avinu Synagogue
(built in 1540)
and built an animal pen on the ruins.
The West Bank and East Jerusalem were liberated
from brutal Jordanian rule in 1967.
Discussion
Was it wrong for Israel to expand its territory in the 1948 war?
No, not necessarily.
There is a long-standing principle that
those who start an aggressive war
should lose territory.
The Arab states have started repeated aggressive wars,
and should suffer for it.
It is almost impossible to define where any country's borders should be anyway,
so there is some rough justice in this.
Certainly, any Arab who finds himself within Israel's borders is lucky,
since they have the chance to live in freedom and with full human rights,
which they won't get in any Arab country.
In general,
since Israel is the only free country in the region,
I would broadly support expanding its borders
and reducing those of neighbouring countries,
in order to maximise the space of freedom in the Middle East.
For example, I think Israel should permanently acquire part of the
West Bank.
The novel
The Lemon Tree by Sandy Tolan (2006)
presents the left's view of Israeli-Palestinian history.
Negative reviews.
I love the one that says this is a "balanced" debate between
a left wing Israeli Jew
"who does nothing but "question" Israeli conduct and history"
and
a far right Palestinian Arab
"who does nothing but "question" Israeli conduct and history".
Anti-Israel people often complain that many Jews are "recent", 20th century arrivals.
While this is true for many Jews,
it is often forgotten that it is also true for many Arabs.
Almost none of these people are actual refugees.
They are Palestinians living outside Israel, who have never lived in Israel.
They often have restricted rights in the countries where they live.
But that is not Israel's fault.
The 60 year long
oppression of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
From FreeMiddleEast.com, 2011.
That demolitions are simply not a major issue can be seen by the fact that there has been a
massive growth in the Arab population of the WB and EJ since 1967.
Maybe a million Arab homes have been built in the WB and EJ since 1967.
Israel's Arab and Islamic enemies have always been clear that their goal is to destroy Israel
and kill or expel all the Jews.
See
Arab Threats Against Israel in 1967.
Israel's enemies
are the heirs to the Nazis,
with the same goals
but, thank heavens, not the power to implement them.
Israel, thank heavens, won in 1948 in 1967 and 1973
and prevented the Arabs carrying out their genocide.
But Israel cannot afford to lose even once,
or Holocaust II will happen under the eyes
of an indifferent world.
"I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war,
as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre or the Crusader wars.
...
This war will be distinguished by three serious matters. First - faith: as each fighter deems his death on behalf of Palestine as the shortest road to paradise;
second, [the war] will be an opportunity for vast plunder.
Third, it will be impossible to contain the zealous volunteers arriving from all corners of the world to avenge the martyrdom of the Palestine Arabs,
and viewing the war as dignifying every Arab and every Muslim throughout the world."
- Quote
from Azzam Pasha,
the first Secretary General
of the Arab League.
The quote is from an article of October 11, 1947.
As well as the genocidal intent, it is interesting that he confirms the Arab-Israeli conflict is about Islam,
not about nationalism/land/imperialism/oppression.
In May 1948
the non-democracies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq
launched their attempted war of extermination against the infant democracy of Israel.
"If the Jewish state becomes a fact, and this is realized by the Arab peoples, they will drive the Jews who live in their midst into the sea."
- Quote
by Hassan al-Banna,
founder and head of the Muslim Brotherhood, Aug 1948.
He was referring to the Jews in Arab countries, who were indeed soon after cleansed.
Later in the interview
he said the Jews should be deported to Australia.
"We knew that by closing the Gulf of Aqaba it might mean war with Israel. [If war comes] it will be total and the objective will be to destroy Israel."
- Quote
from the Egyptian dictator
Nasser
in May 1967.
PLO Chairman
Ahmad Shukeiri
was asked in June 1967
what would happen to the Jews if the Arabs won the coming war.
His answer has been misquoted, but the
real answer is horrifying enough:
"His answer: "We will endeavor to assist [the Jews] and facilitate their departure by sea to their countries of origin." Regarding the fate of Israeli-born Jews, he replied: "Whoever survives will stay in Filastin, but in my opinion no one will remain alive.""
"Oh Allah, vanquish the Jews and their supporters.
Oh Allah, vanquish the Americans and their supporters.
Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them all, down to the very last one."
- Quote
from
Ahmad Bahar,
Acting Speaker of the
Palestinian Legislative Council
and top Hamas official, Apr 2007.
"In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli - civilian or soldier - on our lands".
- Quote
from
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, July 2013.
"The notion that the Palestinians want to rule themselves, that they could do it successfully, that they really accept a two-state solution is one of the most grotesque deceptions ever foisted on the West. Alas, the entire conflict centers around the Palestinian/Arab/Muslim need to restore their lost honor by destroying that which has humiliated them, the autonomous Jewish state in the heart of Dar al Islam."
- Richard Landes
sums up the right-wing view of the Israel conflict,
which contrasts dramatically with the left-wing view that the Palestinians
are rational actors with rational grievances.
I used to unthinkingly believe the left-wing view.
Now I know it is a misunderstanding of the situation.
"Whoever studies the nature of the conflict between the Muslims and the Jews understands an important fact, [namely that] this is a religious conflict, not a dispute about politics or nationality, or a conflict between races or tribes, or a fight over land or country, as some describe it".
- Saudi schoolbook
tells the truth.
But the West isn't listening.
"That is actually one of my red flags when taking in the argument of someone who claims to have the solution to the Israel/Palestine problem. I ask, how have they factored in Islam. If they haven't, their solution has no real world application."
- Blog entry (unknown author) on
"5 Minutes For Israel" sums it up, Dec 2012.
Bat Ye'or
says that
Arab anger at Israel is:
"the distress of the oppressor
confronted by his victim's rebellion."
"Our enmity towards Hindus is not due to the Kashmir issue; our enmity towards America is not due to Iraq and Afghanistan;
the enmity between us and the Jews is not due to the Palestine;
the real cause is that they do not accept our system and Islam.
Our enmity towards them (the non-believers) will continue even if they renounce all their crimes." Al Qaeda, Sept 2013, explains the root cause of the Israeli conflict.
But the left isn't listening.
