roots of the conflict – from origin to the occupation friends of palestine society university of...

Roots of the Conflict – From Origin to the Occupation

Friends of Palestine SocietyUniversity of Warwick

The Jewish Diaspora• Effectively begins in 66CE after the Jewish revolt and the Roman capture of

Jerusalem.• Some attempts to recolonise surrounding areas, attempts crushed by 1st

century Roman emperors.• Jerusalem remains forbidden to Jews until it falls into Muslim rule• Jews remain a tiny minority until the 20th Century

Nationalism• An ideology dating from 18th century Europe, closely related

to and developed in the French revolution.• Nationalism relies on 3 claims:

– There are things called nations: groups of people defined in some sort of common identity, often in terms of common origin, ethnicity, or cultural ties.

– There are things called states, bureaucratic, political entities with jurisdiction of governance over a geographic area.

– States should exist to serve and be identified with a specific nation, forming nation-states, and the justification for one’s self determination depends on one’s membership to a nation.

Zionism is Jewish nationalism – to be brought about by a colonialist project.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/#2.1

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/#2.1

Origins of Zionism• Zionism emerges in 19th century nationalist Europe.• Two types:

– Eastern Zionism: Founded by material and physical hardship in Eastern Europe and Russia.

– Western Zionism: Though in the West laws lead largely to political emancipation, Western Jews feel discriminated and isolated.

– Practical Zionism originates from the East. First settlements created in the 1880s , by a central organisation, Hovevei Tzion -‘lovers of Zion’. These were largely small and unsuccessful.

Origins of Zionism• Defining works in the movement

– Leo Pinsker’s Selbstemanzipation -‘Autoemancipation’ - published in 1882 (read: http://www.mideastweb.org/autoemancipation.htm)

– Theodor Herzl’s ‘Der Judenstaat ’ –The Jewish state- published in 1896. (read: http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/6640/zion/judenstaadt.html)

http://www.mideastweb.org/autoemancipation.htm

http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/6640/zion/judenstaadt.html

Theodor Herzl• Born in Hungary, his family moved to Vienna, western

educated, became a doctor at law – but moved to work as a journalist

• Surprisingly he had neither read other Zionist works, nor been aware of Hovenei Tzion while writing the Jewish state.

• He worked in France during the Dreyfus affair and was inspired by it to write the Jewish State.

• The defining aspect of Herlz’s work is that he provides a specific plan for how Zionism would succeed.

• He defines the Jews as a nation , rejects concepts of integration as a solution and believes anti-semitism cannot stop whatever the attitude of Jews in their host countries.

• Herlz’s state is based on socialist and democratic principles, with the state and private sector working closely together.

Origins of Zionism6 Zionist Congresses were convened under Herlz

between 1897 and 1902. In these Zionist organisations are formed:

- The World Zionist organisaion- The Jewish national fund- The Jewish Colonial trust- Die Welt, the movement’s newspaper

- At the same time not all Jews support Zionism – some believe integration can be achieved, and Zionism will only fuel anti-Semitism

Origins of Zionism- Palestine selected as destination for Zionism in first

Zionist Congress(read program of first congress at:

http://www.mideastweb.org/basleprogram.htm )- The question of the people living in the Zionist

destination is never really considered early on.- 2 rabbis in Vienna send a fact finding mission, which

returns with the message ‘The bride is beautiful but she is married to another man’

- Population in early 19th Century: 350,000 - Population by 1914: 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000

Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews 1

1 The Population of Palestine: Population History and Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and the Mandate Justin McCarthy

http://www.mideastweb.org/basleprogram.htm

Origins of Zionism- For Herlz, the Arabs would welcome them, since the Jews

would bring the culture, prosperity and wonders of the West.

- In his novel Auldneuland (http://www.zionism-israel.com/an/altneuland.html ), a utopian vision of a perfect state by late 19th C standards, Herlz describes how the Arabs would live side by side to Jews in a pluralist society.

‘The Jews have made us prosperous, why should we be angry at them?’

Herlz asks for a great power sponsor- makes his case in the Ottoman empire as well as Brittain and other powers, but his request is not accepted untill his death, 1904.

http://www.zionism-israel.com/an/altneuland.html

World War 1Ottoman empire, controlling Palestine and the

lands of the Middle East allies itself with the Central Powers against France and England

3 different agreements define the future of the Middle East, all drawn during the period of World War 1:

- The Sykes Picot agreement- The McMahon-Hussein correspondence- The Balfour declaration

McMahon- Hussein correspondence 1915-1916

The Ottoman empire’s entry into the War arises concerns in Britain of Islamic solidarity - The Sultan, in his role as caliph, proclaimed Jihad against the Entente, and could potentially create unrest in the British route to India

Therefore England sought its own Islamic dignitary to serve as an ally, to counterbalance the sultan-caliph.

The correspondence: A series of letters between:Sheriff Hussein ibn Ali, amir of Mecca and Sir Henry McMahon British high commissioner in Egypt, in which Husseyin promises to lead the Arabs into revolt

against the Ottomans, in return for an Arab state

Read: http://www.mideastweb.org/mcmahon.htm

http://www.mideastweb.org/mcmahon.htm


No maps are drawn in the correspondence, and the borders of the state are subject to interpretation.

Initial request Bordered: North: by Mersina up to 37th degree

of latitude to the border of PersiaEast: By borders of Persia to Gulf of

BasraSouth: by Indian OceanWest: by the red sea to

Mediterranean sea to Mersina

‘’England will acknowledge the independence of the Arab countries, bounded on the north by Mersina and Adana up to the 37th degree of latitude, on which degree fall Birijik, Urfa, Mardin, Midiat, Jezirat (Ibn 'Umar), Amadia, up to the border of Persia; on the east by the borders of Persia up to the Gulf of Basra; on the south by the Indian Ocean, with the exception of the position of Aden to remain as it is; on the west by the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea up to Mersina. England to approve the proclamation of an Arab Khalifate of Islam. ‘’

-Sherif Hussein ibn Ali-July 14th1915


No maps are drawn in the correspondence, and the borders of the state are subject to interpretation.

Initial request Bordered: North: by Mersina up to 37th degree

of latitude to the border of PersiaEast: By borders of Persia to Gulf of

BasraSouth: by Indian OceanWest: by the red sea to

Mediterranean sea to Mersina

‘’England will acknowledge the independence of the Arab countries, bounded on the north by Mersina and Adana up to the 37th degree of latitude, on which degree fall Birijik, Urfa, Mardin, Midiat, Jezirat (Ibn 'Umar), Amadia, up to the border of Persia; on the east by the borders of Persia up to the Gulf of Basra; on the south by the Indian Ocean, with the exception of the position of Aden to remain as it is; on the west by the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea up to Mersina. England to approve the proclamation of an Arab Khalifate of Islam. ‘’

-Sherif Hussein ibn Ali-July 14th1915



McMahon accepts the boundaries, excepting: - the inclusion of districts of Mersina and Alexandretta

- coastal portions of Syria to the West of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo as they are not purely Arab

With regard to the questions of limits and boundaries, it would appear to be premature to consume our time in discussing such details in the heat of war, and while, in many portions of them, the Turk is up to now in effective occupation

-McMahon, August 30th

‘’As the limits and boundaries demanded are not those of one person whom we should satisfy and with whom we should discuss them after the war is over, but our peoples have seen that the life of their new proposal is bound at least by these limits and their word is united on this. ‘’

-Hussein, September 9th 1915

‘’The two districts of Mersina and Alexandretta and portions of Syria lying to the west of the districts of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo cannot be said to be purely Arab, and should be excluded from the limits demanded. ‘’

-McMahon, October 24t 1915 http://www.mideastweb.org/mcmahon.htm



However, McMacmahon mentions that British acceptance of borders is in those areas wherein Great Britain is free to act without detriment to the interest of her ally France

AND

That special administrative arrangements need to be arranged in the areas of Baghdad and Basra.

‘’As for those regions lying within those frontiers wherein Great Britain is free to act without detriment to the interest of her ally, France, I am empowered in the name of the Government of Great Britain to give the following assurances and make the following reply to your letter:-

1. Subject to the above modifications, Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of the Arabs in all the regions within the limits demanded by the Sherif of Mecca.’’

‘’5. With regard to the vilayets of Baghdad and Basra, the Arabs will recognise that the established position and interests of Great Britain necessitate special administrative arrangements in order to secure these territories from foreign aggression, to promote the welfare of the local populations and to safeguard our mutual economic interests.’’

- McMahon, October 24t 1915




• Hussein agrees to exclude Mersina and Alexandretta, but not the coastal areas of Syria.

• McMahon responds that since the interests of France are involved in those areas, further negotiation on those areas will be discussed later.

• Rest of correspondence focuses on war and logistics issues

‘’we renounce our insistence on the inclusion of the vilayets of Mersina and Adana in the Arab Kingdom. But the two vilayets of Aleppo and Beirut and their sea coasts are purely Arab vilayets, and there is no difference between a Moslem and a Christian Arab: they are both descendants of one forefather. ’’

-Hussein, November 5th

‘’With regard to the vilayets of Aleppo and Beirut, the Government of Great Britain have fully understood and taken careful note of your observations, but, as the interests of our ally, France, are involved in them both, the question will require careful consideration and a further communication on the subject will be addressed to you in due course. ’’

- McMahon, December 14th



The Sykes Picot Agreement - 1916

Both France and England are afraid that after the war, the other side may gain excessive influence in the Middle East region.

In secret, in 1916, the two sides sign an agreement with the assent of Russia, for Post War dismemberment of the Ottoman empire

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/israel_and_the_palestinians/key_documents/1681362.stm


The Sykes Picot Agreement - 1916The agreement is self-contradictory as to its

attempts to include the agreements made with Hussein

Understandings of the Agreement:- France and Britain are prepared to

recognise and ‘protect’ an independent Arab state or confederation of states.

- The area will be divided in 5 Regions:- In two France and England will each have indirect

influence and priority of rights and enterprise, and will supply ‘advisers’ and foreign functionaries.

- In the other two, England and France will be allowed to establish direct administration and control.

- In the area of Palestine, an international administration will be created

- All actions in the regions be done and arranged with the Arab states and the sheriff of Mecca.

‘’It is accordingly understood between the French and British governments: That France and Great Britain are prepared to recognise and protect an independent Arab states or a confederation of Arab states (a) and (b) marked on the annexed map, under the suzerainty of an Arab chief. That in area (a) France, and in area (b) Great Britain, shall have priority of right of enterprise and local loans. That in area (a) France, and in area (b) Great Britain, shall alone supply advisers or foreign functionaries at the request of the Arab state or confederation of Arab states.

That in the blue area France, and in the red area Great Britain, shall be allowed to establish such direct or indirect administration or control as they desire and as they may think fit to arrange with the Arab state or confederation of Arab states.

That in the brown area there shall be established an international administration, the form of which is to be decided upon after consultation with Russia, and subsequently in consultation with the other allies, and the representatives of the sheriff of Mecca.’’



The Balfour declaration - 1917November 2nd, 1917Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His

Majesty'sGovernment, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,Arthur James Balfour

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/balfour.asp


The Balfour declaration – 1917Why?

- Because British believed Zionists had large influence in Russia and the USA and could convince those governments to join the war effort.

- At the same time, Britain was afraid Germany or France might make a commitment to the Zionists.

The Balfour declaration – 1917How do we know?

Minutes of discussion on the issue on War Cabinet meeting No.227, 245, 259, 261

No. 227: ‘’there was a very strong and enthusiastic organisation, more particularly in the United States, who were very zealous in this matter (Zionism), and his (Acting Secretary of State Foreign Affairs) belief was that it would be of most substantial assistance to the Allies to have the earnestness and enthusiasm of these people enlisted on our side. ‘’

No. 245: ‘’...the secretary of State for foreign affairs stated that the German Government were making great efforts to capture the sympathy of the Zionist Movement. This movement... Had behind it the support of a majority of Jews, at all events in Russia and America... Mr. Balfour then read a very sympathetic declaration by the French government which had been conveyed to the Zionists, and he state that he knew that President Wilson was extremely favourable to the movement. ‘’

No: 261: ‘’(Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs says) If we could make a declaration favourable to such an ideal (Zionism) we should be able to carry on extremely useful propaganda in Russia and America’’

- Declaration made for purely propaganda justifications

-At the same time, the British war cabinet spend considerable time on the question of whether a declaration could create anti-Semitic backlash, a development undesirable for the British government.

-Though Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs expresses concerns that Zionism cannot succeed, there is no particular wish by the cabinet for it to be unsuccessful.

-There is never any consideration and discussion made at all regarding the people already living in Palestine.

‘Sources in the History of the Modern Middle East’, Akram Fouad Khater

The Balfour declaration - 1917November 2nd, 1917Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His

Majesty'sGovernment, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,Arthur James Balfour



OutcomeHussein starts the Arab revolt June 10, 1916Ottoman areas in Arabian peninsula soon fall into his

hands.Although the revolt does not spread extensively or gain

massive support, being more a matter of Hussein’s family and its supporters, it manages to capture Damascus in 1918, seen as its ultimate triumph. The capture is widely applauded in the Arab world.

Amir Faysal, son of Sheriff Hussein, commander of the Arab forces, starts forming a state in Damascus.

April 1920, in San Remo conference, France and England divide the Ottoman lands. The mandates for Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine are drawn. These are effectively colonial entities.

France, having the mandate for Syria marches into Damascus and throws Amir Faysal out.

He is later brought by Britain into Iraq and made its first king, to serve essentially British interests.

OutcomeAt the same time, when Amir Faysal is removed from

Syria, his brother Amir Abdallah moves a small force to Ma’an.

Britain decides to integrate Abdallah into its imperial network.

Abdallah is effectively given part of what was to be the mandate for Palestine.

The amirate of Transjordan is born.

Transjordan at the time of its creation is little more than a desert region of Beduin tribes. Amman, the capital, is a large village of 2500 to 5000 people.

Abdallah becomes a close ally of Britain. Britain places emphasis on building a reliable armed forced to police the area, and the Arab legion is born.

OutcomeSheriff Hussein faces discontent in his own kingdom

in Arabia.Reputation suffers further when he takes on the

title of caliph.

A Wahhabist warrior-statesman, Abd al-Aziz ibn Sa’ud based on the city of Riyadh takes Mecca and Medina in 1924 and drives Hussein into exile.

Ibn Sa’ud negotiates an agreement with Britain in 1927.

He officially names his new kingdom from his family name in 1932, Saudi Arabia.

The Mandate for PalestineFrom 1917 to 1920 is being placed under

British military Occupation.Amir Faisal, then still in Syria, begins

discussions with Weizman.An agreement is reached January 3rd 1919:• The Arab state will be created, as per the

points issued by Faisal in a manifesto published 4th January.

• Faisal would agree to Jewish immigration and settlement.

• The Zionist organisation will use its best efforts for the development of the Arab state.

• This agreement is rendered null when the French remove Faisal and the Arab state is not created

• Faisal never agreed to a Jewish State in Palestine

‘’If the Arabs are established as I have asked in my manifesto of 4 January, addressed to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I will carry out what is written in this agreement. If changes are made, I cannot be answerable for failing to carry out this agreement. ’’

‘’All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development. ‘’

‘’The Zionist Organization proposes to send to Palestine a Commission of experts to make a survey of the economic possibilities of the country, and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organization will place the aforementioned Commission at the disposal of the Arab State for the purpose of a survey of the economic possibilities of the Arab State and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organization will use its best efforts to assist the Arab State in providing the means for developing the natural resources and economic possibilities thereof. ‘’

http://www.mideastweb.org/feisweiz.htm

http://www.mideastweb.org/feisweiz.htm

The Mandate for Palestine – The Palin Report

In 1920 violent protests break out in Jerusalem by Arabs in early April. A commission is sent to Palestine to discover the reasons for the violence. The Palin report is

made.Findings: disturbances were caused: - by the Arabs' disappointment overunfulfilled promises of independence, made during World

War I to Sharif Husayn ibn Ali of Mecca -belief that the Balfour Declaration implied the denial of their own right of self-determination; -fear that the establishment of a Jewish National Home would lead to such substantial Jewish

immigration that the Arabs would be subject to the Jewish community. -The report argued, feelings were aggravated by the proclamation of Amir Faisal ibn Hussein

as king of Syria, in March 1920, with a potential claim to Palestine. -Feelings also aggravated by the actions of the Zionist Commission, which sought a privileged

status vis-à-vis the British military administration and asserted the right of the Jewish community to state-hood.

-The report called the Zionist Commission "arrogant,insolent and provocative" and said that its members could "easily precipitate a catastrophe"

http://www.answers.com/topic/palin-commission-report

http://www.answers.com/topic/palin-commission-report

The Mandate for Palestine – The Palin Report

- Findings paralleled the views of General Bols, who wanted to reduce the authority

of the Zionist Commission and reassure the Arabs

- The report was never made public or published, and did not generate any debate in London.

- Instead British government decided that the Arabs would acquiesce once British pro-Zionist policy was implemented firmly. Military administration replaced with a civilian administration on the day before the Palin Report was submitted;

- Administration guided in its policy by the Balfour Declaration and presided over by a Jewish High Commissioner

The Mandate for PalestineThe mandate awarded to Britain, 1920, San Remo

Conference.

High Commissioner placed: Sir Herbert Samuel A Jewish Zionist. Samuel stated in the conference that the Zionist objective is to make Palestine as Jewish as England is English.

Zionist interpretation: that Palestine would become a Jewish state and Britain should facilitate that.

British interpretation: no commitment to any idea of a state.

New provisions are made in the mandate, 1920, that alarm the Palestine Arabs, and raise Zionist expectation

The Mandate for PalestineThe Mandate grants Zionists direct access to the High Commissioner, and direct say

over the administration of the mandate.

‘’ART. 4. An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country. ‘’

‘’ART.11… The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilised by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration. ‘’

http://www.mideastweb.org/mandate.htm

No such powers granted to the Arabs whatsoever.

http://www.mideastweb.org/mandate.htm

The Mandate for Palestine- Hebert Samuel attempts to create a constitution in 1922 and a legislative

council of elected Christian, Muslim and Jewish representatives.- In 1923 he attempts to form an advisory council of Arab and Jewish

representatives.

- Both fail as Arab leaders refuse to serve any body that does not annul the Balfour declaration.

- Palestinian leaders refuse to work in a body in which doing so implies official acceptance of the Balfour declaration. But they do not hesitate to attempt to create their own groups to cooperate with the mandatory government, which do not imply acceptance of the Balfour declaration.

Palestinian Organisation in Mandate Years

- Local branches of Muslim-Christian associations formed in large towns in 1918-1919.

- Delegates meet in Jerusalem in 1919, form the first Palestinian Arab Congress (before even the official mandate is given).

- Meet Annually to adopt resolutions on matters of relationship to British and the Zionists.

- In 1920 Congress, an Arab Executive is created under Muza Kazim al Husseyni, former mayor of Jerusalem.

- Claimed to represent Palestinians, it is not accepted by the British. - Due to its inability to be a proper communication channel, it remains unorganised,

and dies in 1934 with Muza Kazim al-Husseyni.


POV: Samuel’s attitude was that in order to have any say on mandate administration, Palestinian leaders should serve in bodies, in which by doing so, they effectively accept the Balfour declaration. Given that Palestinian Arabs form the vast majority of the mandate yet had no say on the Balfour declaration, that the British are nothing but a colonial occupier, and that the Zionist proclaim worrying ambitions of statehood through the declaration that is not reasonable. At the same time, the Palestinians attempted to create their own representative bodies to communicate with the mandate administration long before Samuel’s constitutional attempts. They were rejected because they did not accept the Balfour declaration arrangements.

It was Sir Samuel that was unreasonable – unwilling to accept Palestinian representation or advise, unless they accept Zionism.


The British also attempted to play division between the two major families, the Nashashibis and the al’Husseynis, through their appointment policy.

-When Raghib al-Nashashibi was appointed mayor of Jerusalem in 1920

-The British selected Hajj Amin al-Huseyni to serve as mufti of Jerusalem.

Nashashibi responded declaring he would oppose any position of the mufti.

The mufti of Jerusalem, responsible for all Islamic affairs, had his jurisdiction expanded by the British to all the mandate. This in essense made Hajj Amin the most well connected and powerful Arab in Palestine.

When in 1921 the British created the Supreme Muslim council, responsible for Islamic institutions, Hajj Amin was elected president


The Supreme Muslim Council did not serve as a representative body for Palestinians – it was merely sometimes consulted.

Hajj Amin is vilified by Zionists as an ‘Islamic-fascist’.

- Hajj Amin was more a political figure given a religious post. He was not driven by Muslim religion.

- He was effectively granted his authority by the British.

- The Supreme Muslim Council never truly gained full control of the Palestinian population, or coordinated its actions later on.

- Hajj Amin was a far more moderate and politically motivated figure than Zionists portray.

Although Hajj Amin has been vilified by Zionists and glorified by certain Arab nationalists, his political behavior was more moderate than either group acknowledges. He was too pragmatic a politician to allow his opposition to Zionism to deceive him into thinking that an Arab uprising could dislodge the British. He also recognised that his own continued tenure in office depended upon British goodwill. Therefore until the outbreak of violence in 1936, the mufti urged restraint on his followers and demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with the British in seeking a negotiated solution to the question of Jewish immigration.

History of the Modern Middle East, William Cleveland

Hajj Amin Al-Husseyni Attended initially an Islamic School, JerusalemTurkish at a government schoolFrench with at the Alliance israélite universelle with anti-Zionist Jewish director Albert AntébiThen studied Islamic law at Al-Azhar University in CairoFinally studied at School of Administration in Istanbul, the most secular of Ottoman institutions .

Served initially in Ottoman army in WWI, was injured and returned to Jerusalem – being there when it was captured.

Joined the Arab revolt armies – in Palin report he is said to have had a particularly pro-British stance when recruited.

In Palin report it is also reported that British war pamphlets proclaimed to the Arabs soldiers they were fighting ‘a national cause to liberate their country from the Turks’.

Started Jerusalem branch of the pro-British Syrian-based 'Arab Club in 1919.

Attitudes change when the mandate and Balfour declaration are made known. In the April 1920 violence, he helped incite the Arabs.

Until 1921 he supports Arab nationalism centred on Greater Syria.When French occupy Syria, he turns to a Palestinian centred nationalism focused on Jerusalem

Hajj Amin Al-Husseyni- Nazi tiesPre WWII he communicated with Nazis to claim support and to ask they block

Jewish immigration to Palestine.At the same time he also expressed willingness to help the French government

in the region, and courted the American government as a non-imperialist entity who could see the errors of Zionism.

During the war he took a pro-axis stance, but this did not reflect Palestinian sentiment. His cousin Jemal and the Nashashibi family favoured dealing with the British.

None of the factions though controlled sentiment on the ground.

POV: Hajj Amin was driven by anti-Zionism and nationalism. His support for the Nazis was not driven by any particular ideological commitment to Nazism or fascism, or any such Arab popular feeling – they were merely the party which was on the opposite side of the British, who were facilitating Zionism

Jewish Organisation in Mandate Years

Jewish organisation was more extensive, better connected and funded.

-Founded in Original Zionist Congresses, 1896-1902

-Created as public body for consultation with British Administration, 1921

-Zionist executive reorganised into Jewish agency in 1929.

-Elected body of 300 delegates, 1920

-Council empowered with administrative decisions to be carried out with the British administration, selected by the national Assembly


- Jewish trade union founded in 1920, expanded to control most enterprise, create public works and create many companies. Histradrut found itself both controllin capital and representing labour.

- One of its objectives being the self-sufficiency of Jewish labour and produce, it boycotted Arab workers and products.

- Kibbutz were Jewish communal farmer communities, were all property belonged to the community, and responsibilities shared equally.

- Haganah was the Jewish defense force created in 1920 after the riots of that year.

- The leftist labor party created in 1930 that dominated political life until 1970s.

For early Zionists, Zionism and socialism went hand by hand, with a belief in Jewish rejuvenation through the dignity of labor.


Leading political figure to emerge, David Ben-Gurion:

-Born in Poland, passionate socialist and Zionist.-Moved to Palestine 1906, worked as a farmhand.-Worked in various socialist parties that merged to form Mapai.-Rose through the ranks, became secretary-general of the Histadrut in 1921 to

1935 and chairman of Jewish agency from 1935 to 1948.

-POV: Publically, before 1936, Ben Gurion proclaimed that there was no conflict between Zionism and the Arabs – that the conflict was a socialist class one between Arab peasantry and landowners, and once the landowners were deposed the Arabs would see their interests lay with Zionsm.

Privately, Ben Gurion did not believe this explanation, and saw the conflict with the Palestinian Arabs as an inescapable problem


Revisionist Zionism and Ze’ev Jabotinsky: The major opposition movement against the established order in Palestine, Jabotinsky’s revisionist Zionist

3 more maximalist positions:• That the Zionist land should extend to

TransJordan, and should be captured by massively increased immigration, 50000 a year.

• That Zionist Movement should immediately declare a Jewish commonwealth.

• The Concept of the Iron Wall

The Iron WallAn article published in 1923, with a follow up, ‘’The ethics of the Iron Wall’’

- Main arguments:

The Palestinian Arabs will never accept Zionism, as it would never be accepted by any indigenous people anywhere in the world.

Colonialism carries its own explanation, and the Palestinians are unwilling to accept it.

Whatever promises of economic wellbeing Zionists might offer cannot ‘trick’ Palestinians out of this basic reality.

‘’My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent. The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage.’’

‘’We may tell them whatever we like about the innocence of our aims, watering them down and sweetening them with honeyed words to make them palatable, but they know what we want, as well as we know what they do not want. They feel at least the same instinctive jealous love of Palestine, as the old Aztecs felt for ancient Mexico, and the Sioux for their rolling Prairies.

To imagine, as our Arabophiles do, that they will voluntarily consent to the realisation of Zionism, in return for the moral and material conveniences which the Jewish colonist brings with him, is a childish notion, which has at bottom a kind of contempt for the Arab people; it means that they despise the Arab race, which they regard as a corrupt mob that can be bought and sold, and are willing to give up their fatherland for a good railway system. ’’

‘’Colonisation carries its own explanation, the only possible explanation, unalterable and as clear as daylight to every ordinary Jew and every ordinary Arab. Colonisation can have only one aim, and Palestine Arabs cannot accept this aim. It lies in the very nature of things, and in this particular regard nature cannot be changed. ’’

-Ze’ev Jabotinsky 1923 http://www.mideastweb.org/ironwall.htm

http://www.mideastweb.org/ironwall.htm

The Iron WallA voluntary agreement with the Arabs

cannot be made.

The Zionists must build an Iron Wall, a Jewish military force so disproportionately strong it can defeat all Arab uprisings and resistance.

An agreement with the Arabs is possible, but only after the iron wall ensures they’ve lost all hope of defeating Zionism, and accept it out of despair.

Peace is possible and desirable, but only after conflict and the imposition of Zionist strength

‘’Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population. Which means that it can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population – behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach. That is our Arab policy; not what we should be, but what it actually is, whether we admit it or not. What need, otherwise, of the Balfour Declaration? Or of the Mandate? Their value to us is that outside Power has undertaken to create in the country such conditions of administration and security that if the native population should desire to hinder our work, they will find it impossible. And we are all of us ,without any exception, demanding day after day that this outside Power, should carry out this task vigorously and with determination. In this matter there is no difference between our "militarists" and our "vegetarians". Except that the first prefer that the iron wall should consist of Jewish soldiers, and the others are content that they should be British. We all demand that there should be an iron wall. Yet we keep spoiling our own case, by talking about "agreement" which means telling the Mandatory Government that the important thing is not the iron wall, but discussions. Empty rhetoric of this kind is dangerous. And that is why it is not only a pleasure but a duty to discredit it and to demonstrate that it is both fantastic and dishonest’’

‘’In the second place, this does not mean that there cannot be any agreement with the Palestine Arabs. What is impossible is a voluntary agreement. As long as the Arabs feel that there is the least hope of getting rid of us, they will refuse to give up this hope in return for either kind words or for bread and butter, because they are not a rabble, but a living people. And when a living people yields in matters of such a vital character it is only when there is no longer any hope of getting rid of us, because they can make no breach in the iron wall.’’



The Iron Wall• Jabotinsky knows he will be attacked as

immoral by other Zionists.• He explicitly states he does not believe

the Arabs should be expelled.

• He states that after the iron wall makes Palestinians accept Zionism, they will have equal rights and citizenship in the Jewish state – as outlined in the Helsingfors programme which he believes not ever Arab intellectuals have heard or can understand

• Jabotinsky has no problem with there being two nations in Palestine

As long as the Jews are the majority

‘’I am prepared to take an oath binding ourselves and our descendants that we shall never do anything contrary to the principle of equal rights, and that we shall never try to eject anyone. This seems to me a fairly peaceful credo.’’

‘’Emotionally, my attitude to the Arabs is the same as to all other nations – polite indifference. Politically, my attitude is determined by two principles. First of all, I consider it utterly impossible to eject the Arabs from Palestine. There will always be two nations in Palestine – which is good enough for me, provided the Jews become the majority. And secondly, I belong to the group that once drew up the Helsingfors Programme , the programme of national rights for all nationalities living in the same State. In drawing up that programme, we had in mind not only the Jews, but all nations everywhere, and its basis is equality of rights.’’

’’Let us go back to the Helsingfors Programme. Since I am one of those who helped to draft it, I am naturally not disposed to question the justice of the principles advocated there. The programme guarantees citizenship equality, and national self-determination.’’

-Ze’ev Jabotinsy, 1923



The Iron Wall

He pre-empts the accusation he is immoral:

‘’either Zionism is moral and just ,or it is immoral and unjust. But that is a question that we should have settled before we became Zionists. Actually we have settled that question, and in the affirmative.

We hold that Zionism is moral and just. And since it is moral and just, justice must be done, no matter whether Joseph or Simon or Ivan or Achmet agree with it or not.’’



The Iron Wall:Two points:

- Jabotinsky believes the Arabs are culturally backwards compared to the Jews

- Jabotinsky believes in the backwardness of the black man, when discussing the suggestion of Zionism in Uganda.

- If Zionism in Palestine is stealing from the Palestinians, in Uganda it will be even more morally reprehensible, since it would be like stealing from children. Even if the black man is not sufficiently advanced to send delegations to London, he will be helped by kind hearted white people.

- Jabotinsky considers it a given that his audience shares the same conception of Arabs and black people.

‘’ … Culturally they are five hundred years behind us, they have neither our endurance nor our determination; but they are just as good psychologists as we are, and their minds have been sharpened like ours by centuries of fine-spun logomachy’’

‘’It is true that these natives happen to be black. But that does not alter the essential fact. If it is immoral to colonise a country against the will of its native population, the same morality must apply equally to the black man as to the white. Of course, the blackman may not be sufficiently advanced to think of sending delegations to London, but he will soon find some kindhearted white friends, who will instruct him. Though should these natives even prove utterly helpless, like children, the matter would only become worse. Then if colonisation is invasion and robbery, the greatest crime of all would be to rob helpless children’’



The Iron WallPOV: Jabotinsky shows the context into which Zionism is developed

Zionism is a product of its times, encompassing popular western attitudes of the time.

- Colonisation is good for the Colonised- Western values, culture and conceptions are inherently

superior to those of the rest of the world- Spreading the culture and ideas of the West through

colonisation is a good thing.

The Iron Wall

POV:

- Jabotinsky’s justification for the iron wall can only hold if one accepts nationalism.

- Can there truly be equality and equal citizenship, both in practical and in psychological terms, in a state that must ensure that one nation is always a majority, and which views itself as centred on one nation?

- What would the creation of that majority, and Zionist immigration imply in practise?

Zionism on the ground

Zionism depended on two things for its success.

- Unrestricted immigration, which was granted by the British administration until 1939.

- Land purchases.

Land PurchaseLARGE LANDOWNERSJEWISH NATIONAL FUND

Jewish national fund purchases land from large, mainly absentee landowners outside Palestine (but not only)

-e.g First large purchase from the Sursock Family, Beirut ,50 000 acres of land in the Jesreel valley

JEWISH IMMIGRANTS

Land is then considered purely Jewish land. Current occupants are evicted and Jewish immigrants are leased the land at favourable interest rates.

Land purchased is usually the most fertile and cultivable.

SMALL PEASANT LANDOWNERS

At the same time, Brittain changes the tax system demanding money rather than payments in kind as in the Ottoman era.

Poor landowners are forced to take large loans from moneylenders.

Unable to pay they are forced to sell their land.

Land PurchasesPalestinians, with no political rights of governance have no say over:

- Land transfer laws- Taxation laws- Immigration laws

Result: A large class of landless, homeless peasants, unemployment, and wide spread fear of the effects of Zionism.

This was made worse in the 30’s by the effects of a massive increase in Jewish immigration after the rise of fascism in Europe, Zionist refusal to hire Arab workers, and the effects of the world depression.

Intercommunal tensions rise.

Immigration

Immigration to Palestine took place in a series of waves called aliyahs

Time period Number of refugees

1st, 2nd, pre WWI

3rd, 1919-1923 30 000

4th, 1924-1926 50 000, mainly from Poland

5th, 1933-1936 170 000

History of the Modern Middle East, William Cleveland

PopulationArab % Jewish % Other % Total

1931 864 806 82 174 139 16 18 269 2 1 057 601

1936 983 244 71 382 857 28 22 751 2 1 388 852

1941 1 123 168 68 489 830 30 26 758 2 1 639 758

1946 1 310 866 67 599 922 31 31 562 2 1 942 350

The population of Palestine, Justin McCarthy

Conflict in the MandateWailing wall disturbances, 1929: A year of claims on the status of religious

sites results into large scale violence and demonstrations

By the time the British managed to control the conflict, 133 Jews, 116 Arabs had died.

The British, believing the roots of the problem to lie deeper that concerns over a religious site, send a commission to examine the issues in Palestine.

September 1929, Shaw Commission is dispatched, headed by Sir Walter ShawA second commission is send, the Hope-Simpson commision, publicizing its

own results in Summer 1930.

Shaw and Hope-Simpson ReportsBoth effectively reached similar conclusions:• Main source of tension the creation of a landless class of

discontented Arabs• Widespread fear that Jewish immigration would result in a Jewish-

dominated Palestine.• Absorptive capacity of Palestine under present cultivation and

technological methods is severly limited• Recommend obligations to Arab community should be better defined• Recommend Jewish immigration be brought more directly under

control• Recommended practise of evicting Arab tenants after land transfers

cease

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Hope_Simpson.html


Hope Simpson Report

Jewish communities had every advantage of capital and organisation.

The Arabs had none of these advantages, and had received no help to improve their circumstance

‘’The Jewish settlers have had every advantage that capital, science and organization could give them. To these and to the energy of the settlers themselves their remarkable progress is due.(Chapter VI.)—The Arab has had none of these advantages and has received practically no help to improve his cultivation or his standard of life. The Arab population has increased with great rapidity and the land available for its sustenance has meanwhile decreased by about a million metric dunams which have passed into the hands of the Jews.’’



Hope Simpson Report

Widespread complaints of people losing their land, and not being able to cultivate.

An enquiry has been made by a Commission appointed by the Palestine Government into the economic condition of agriculturists in 104 representative villages. In these villages there reside 23,573 families, of whom 16,633 have holdings and 6,940 have not, that is to say, that there are in these villages 29.4 per cent, of families who live, not directly by cultivation, but by labour either in the village or outside and in other ways. Everywhere there is the complaint that many of the cultivators have lost their land. Doubtless this 29.4 per cent, includes these landless men who previously were cultivators. If a deduction of 29.4 per cent, is made from the total of 86,980 families reached above, the balance is 61,408 families actually cultivating the land in the Hills and the Five Plains. In addition, there are a large number of families which should be, but are not, cultivating the land.



Hope Simpson Report

Evidence submitted by Jewish agency to show land transfers did not have a negative effect on past Palestinian tenants is unconvincing

In the Memorandum submitted by the Jewish agency attempts were made to establish that the purchase of the villages in the Esdraelon valley and their settlement by the Jews had not had the effect of causing the previous tenants to join the landless class. A list of the ejected tenants was submitted as an annex to the Memorandum, giving the subsequent employment of each one of these tenants in so far as they could be traced. The annex dealt with 688 tenants. The following is an extract from the Memorandum : —” . . . . Very few traced belong to the landless class; 437 are continuing farming—58 as harraths; 89 are shepherds—they were all shepherds before the evacuation, farming being with them a merely subsidiary occupation; 4 are craftsmen, 14 are merchants; 50 are urban labourers; 4 are vegetable vendors; 10 are camel drivers; 2 are milkmen; 37 died; 41 whereabouts unknown. In addition, out of the 688 not less than 154 have became property owners—that is, they now possess a house and lot of their own.”In explanation of the above statement it must be pointed out that a ” harrath ” is a farm servant; he is not a tenant farmer. The real result of this enquiry is to establish that of 688 Arab families which cultivated in the villages in the Vale of Esdraelon which were purchased and occupied by the Jews, only 379 are now cultivating the land. Three hundred and nine of these families have joined the landless classes. In the cases described as ” died ” it is not the family that is extinguished, but the head of the family who has died. Presumably, the descendants are still alive and earning their bread in some other walk of life than agriculture. It is also to be recorded that the number, 688, does not by any means include all the families who were displaced.



Hope Simpson Report

Evidence of widespread unemployment

It is difficult to form an opinion, impossible to dogmatise, on the subject of Arab unemployment, but careful consideration of available information on the subject supports the belief that such unemployment not only exists but is serious and widespread. The estimate submitted by the Supreme Moslem Council, that altogether from 30,000 to 35,000 Arabs are unemployed, may be discarded. The figures were described as ” fairly reliable.” No explanation was offered as to the authority by whom they were supplied. There is, however, ample other evidence. A note by Miss Margaret Nixon, Government Welfare Worker, records that from her personal knowledge there is very serious unemployment among Arabs of the artisan class in Jerusalem. She suggests that the reason lies in the refusal of Jewish employers to engage Arab labourers in view of the riots of last August. Enquiry was made from a British Police Officer who had made a personal investigation into the question at Haifa. He reports that in that town alone 2,050 Arabs are unemployed, including 200 carpenters and 300 stonemasons. From TransJordan it was ascertained that a report that further recruits were required for the Frontier Force resulted in ” well over ” 4,000 men, mainly from Palestine and Northern TransJordan, besieging the Headquarters of the •Force in hope of employment. In Rarnleh there were 120 applicants for the post of scavenger overseer on a salary of £2.750 mils (£2 15s.) a month.



Hope Simpson Report

Jewish policy of not hiring Palestinian workers limits the employment of Palestinians, and Jewish enterprise is not offering any support to Palestinians.

‘’It is thus evident that Arabs are unemployed in at least considerable numbers, and that the fact is resulting in a distinct reduction of the standard of life among the Arab labouring class. As has been pointed out, the policy of the Jewish Labour Federation is successful in impeding the employment of Arabs both in Jewish colonies and in Jewish enterprises of every kind. There is therefore no relief to be anticipated from an extension of Jewish enterprise unless some departure from existing practice is effected. ‘’



Passfield White PaperThe Commission recommendations put in official British policy in the Passfield White

paper of 1930.

Criticises Zionist policies and institutions.Suggests Immigration be checked.Zionists would need to secure authority from the mandate administration

before purchasing more land.More strongly defines the responsibilities of the British government to the

Palestinian Arabs, and stresses that its obligations to the Zionists cannot be held over obligations to the Arabs.

-Arab grievances were largely adressed

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/passfield.html

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/passfield.html

McDonald-Weizman letter

Zionists, led by Chaim Waizmann in Britain, and other prominent members of the US and UK community, launch a concentrated effort to have the paper withdrawn.

British government brought under tremendous pressure.

In February 1931, British prime minister Ramsay McDonald makes public a letter to Chaim Weizmann, in which he effectively repudiates the Passfield white paper.

Known to Palestinian Arabs as the Black letter. Palestinians have no way of affecting the British government, and it serves to increase hatred between the two communities.

http://www.mideastweb.org/macdonald1930.htm

13 February 1931

Dear Dr. Weizmann:

In order to remove certain misconceptions and misunderstandings which have arisen as to the policy of his Majesty’s Government with regard to Palestine, as set forth in the White Paper of October, 1930, and which were the subject of a debate in the House of Commons on Nov. 17, and also to meet certain criticisms put forward by the Jewish Agency, I have pleasure in forwarding you the following statement of our position, which will fall to be read as the authoritative interpretation of the White Paper on the matters with which this letter deals…

1936 and the General StrikeTensions boil over to violence in April 1936, a spontaneous popular reaction. In April 19, local resistance committees declare a general strike. Aims, to continue until:- Britain set restrictions on immigration- Britain set restrictions on land sale- A democratic government is established

POV: This refutes the argument that Zionists ‘bought’ the land legally. It is obvious that they only bought the land, because the Palestinians were denied their democratic rights and had no control over land transfer, immigration and taxation laws.

In April 25, Arab notables form the Arab Higher Committee, made of all Palestinian factions – Muslims, Christians, Nashashibis, Al-Huseynis. However they lag behind popular opinion and cannot coordinate the strike.

Strike spread, accompanied at times by violence. It is crushed by the British, resulting in 1000 Arab deaths and 80 Jewish.

To facilitate the ending of the strike, British promise another commission be send to Palestine.

Peel Commission• Lord Peel leads another commission in 1937.

• Arrives at similar conclusion to previous reports on the source of violence.

• Concludes the mandate is unworkable.

• Suggests partition of Palestine in a Jewish and Palestinian state.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/peel1.html

Arab Response• Raghib Nashashibi’s National Defense Party was willing to accept limited

partition in 1937.• When Peel Commission report is released though, the concessions it

requires are too great:– abandon the olive- and grain- growing areas of Galilee – Abandon the orange groves on the Mediterranean coast– Abandon the urban port cities of HAIFA and ACRE.

Nashashibi rejects the Peel commission

All other Palestinian notables and general population give the same response.

Map prepared from data from: http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Books/Story831.html

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story571.html

Zionist ResponseRevisionist movement rejects plan outright

Official position reached in 20th Zionist Congress, accepts the principle of partition but not the details, and as a starting point for further realization of Zionism.

Ben Gurion writes to his son from London in 1937:‘I am certain, we will be able to settle in all the other parts of the country, whether through agreement and

mutual understanding with our Arab neighbours or in another way’

To the Jewish Agency Executive 1936:‘It is not in order to establish peace in the country that we need an agreement. Peace is indeed a vital

matter for us. It is impossible to build a country in a permanent state of war, but peace for us is a means. The end is the complete and full realisation of Zionism. Only for that do we need an agreement.

...A comprehensive agreement is undoubtedly out of the question now. For only after total despair on the

part of the Arabs, despair that will come not only from the failure of the disturbances and the attempts at rebellion, but also as a consequence of our own growth in the country, may the Arabs possibly acquiesce in a Jewish Eretz Israel’

The Arab Revolt• Upon the announcement of the Peel commission

proposal, violence resumes, from uncoordinated bands and local groups.

• The proposal effectively dies away.

• But revolt continues. Arab higher committee is dissolved by the British after commissioner for Galilee is killed.

• Revolt spreads to most of the countryside. It has anti- British and anti-Zionist characteristics, but also an element of revolution against landed notability.

• Local resistance committees ban the tarbush, the headgear of the Ottoman class and insist men instead wear the kaffiyeh, which becomes for the first time a symbol of Palestinian resistance and identity.

The Arab Revolt

The British restore order in 19393000 Arabs, 2000 Jews, 600 British had died.

The revolt forces Britain to reassess its policy in Palestine.With war seeming inevitable in Europe, Britain wants to remove

itself from the mandate and secure Arab cooperation.

Conference called in February 1939, fails to create an agreement.

Britain changes its policy and issues the white paper of 1939

The white paper 1939

- Explicitly states it is not the intention of the British government that there be a Jewish state in Palestine.

- Proclaims the mandate will be terminated in 10 years.

- An independent Palestinian state is to be created.

- Jews and Arabs are to share governance in the new state.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1939.asp

‘‘… His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State. They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will.’’

‘‘The objective of His Majesty's Government is the establishment within 10 years of an independent Palestine State in such treaty relations with the United Kingdom as will provide satisfactorily for the commercial and strategic requirements of both countries in the future. The proposal for the establishment of the independent State would involve consultation with the Council of the League of Nations with a view to the termination of the Mandate.’’

‘’The independent State should be one in which Arabs and Jews share government in such a way as to ensure that the essential interests of each community are safeguarded.’’

The white paper 1939- Various statements on the

transitional period to statehood and increase in representative power and municipal autonomy.

- States that the British government does not believe its obligations include facilitating continuous Zionist immigration.

- Limits immigration to 10000 per year for 5 years, plus 25000 as a contribution to solving the Jewish refugee problem. Further imimgration must acquiesce with Arab wishes.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1939.asp

‘‘His Majesty's Government do not read either the Statement of Policy of 1922 or the letter of 1931 as implying that theMandate requires them, for all time and in all circumstances, to facilitate the immigration of Jews into Palestine subject only to consideration of the country's economic absorptive capacity. Nor do they find anything in the Mandate or in subsequent Statements of Policy to support the view that the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine cannot be effected unless immigration is allowed to continue indefinitely. If immigration has an adverse effect on the economic position in the country, it should clearly be restricted; and equally, if it has a seriously damaging effect on the political position in the country, that is a factor that should not be ignored. Although it is not difficult to contend that the large number of Jewish immigrants who have been admitted so far have been absrobed economically, the fear of the Arabs that this influx will continue indefinitely until the Jewish population is in a position to dominate them has produced consequences which are extremely grave for Jews and Arabs

alike and for the peace and prosperity of Palestine.’’

For each of the next five years a quota of 10,000 Jewish immigrants will be allowed on the understanding that a shortage one year may be added to the quotas for subsequent years, within the five year period, if economic absorptive capacity permits.In addition, as a contribution towards the solution of the Jewish refugee problem, 25,000 refugees will be admitted as soon as the High Commissioner is satisfied that adequate provision for their maintenance is ensured, special consideration being given to refugee children anddependents.After the period of five years, no further Jewish immigration will be permitted unless the Arabs of Palestine are prepared to acquiesce in it.

ResponsesThe mufti now in exile, rejected the paper for not granting immediate independence,

but majority of Arab leaders accepted it.

Zionists saw it as a treachery and a crime, and swore to fight it. Ben Gurion says:

‘‘We shall fight with Great Britain in this war (WWII against Germany) as if there was no White Paper, and we shall fight the White Paper as if there were no war’’

In WW2 Jewish agency hires ships to bring Jewish

refugees into Palestine.Arab leaders and Arab political activity is

heavily restricted to avoid a future revolt.Zionist militant units start a terror campaign

against British targets:- Etzel, known as the Irgun, military arm of

revisionist Jews.- Lehi, known as the Stern gang from its

leader Avraham Stern

Haganah joins the terror campaign in 1945.

The Arab states- Syria and Lebanon gain independence in 1943. French eventually leave in

1945.- Egypt supposedly independent effectively is forced to serve British

interests.- Transjordan is granted independence formally in 1946 with little internal

incidents.- Iraq is formally independent from 1932, but serves again the interests of

Britain.

- In 1945 Egypt forms the Arab league, based on the Alexandria protocol 1944.

- Based on the understanding of the 1939 White Paper, Palestine is included as a de jure member state, to be formally accepted at its independence. Arab states become obliged to its protection.

- As regards the question of Jewish refugees:- The Committee also declares that it is second to none in regretting the woes which have been inflicted upon the Jews of Europe by

European dictatorial states. But the question of these Jews should not be confused with Zionism, for there can be no greater injustice and aggression than solving the problem of the Jews of Europe by another injustice, i.e., by inflicting injustice on the Arabs of Palestine of various religions and denominations.

http://www.mideastweb.org/alexandria.htm

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/arableag.asp

US involvementBy the end of the War, US Jewish opinion turns

towards support of Zionism, as a means of Western powers to atone for the Holocaust

Zionists met at the Biltmore hotel in New York 1942, and there formed the Biltmore program in support of Zionism.

- They begin a publicity drive to influence popular US opinion

- They find an ally in new President Truman – in 1945 he writes to the British PM to lift immigration restrictions, and allow 100 000 refugees to enter Palestine.

- The letter, made public, is made to coincide with the New York mayoral election in which the Jewish vote is particularly strong.

http://www.mideastweb.org/biltmore_program.htm

The Conference calls for the fulfillment of the original purpose of the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate which recognizing the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine' was to afford them the opportunity, as stated by President Wilson, to found there a Jewish Commonwealth

4 They have made the waste places to bear fruit and the desert to blossom. Their pioneering achievements in agriculture and in industry, embodying new patterns of cooperative endeavour, have written a notable page in the history of colonization.

5. In the new values thus created, their Arab neighbours in Palestine have shared. The Jewish people in its own work of national redemption welcomes the economic, agricultural and national development of the Arab peoples and states. The Conference reaffirms the stand previously adopted at Congresses of the World Zionist Organization, expressing the readiness and the desire of the Jewish people for full cooperation with their Arab neighbours.

US involvement• 1945, Ernest Bevin, British foreign minister at the time

proposed forming the Anglo-American position of Inquiry to explore ‘the possibility of relieving the position (of Jews) in Europe by immigration to other countries outside of Europe’

• After American pressure driven by the Zionist lobby, the mandate of the group was changed to ‘to make estimates of those who wish or will be impelled by their conditions to migrate to Palestine or other countries outside of Europe’.

• In essence diplomatic facts were created in international political circles that defined Palestine as the area of a Jewish state, well before 1947.

• President Truman also requested in 1946 for 100 000 Jewish refugees to be allowed in the US.

• The policy was widely unpopular, and drew opposition from the Zionists.

British American Committe of Inquiry

• The committee visits both refugee camps in Europe and Palestine, and receives evidence from the Arabs and Zionist sides.

• Concludes:– Immigration into Palestine to be allowed, with 100000

permissions to be given.– Reccomends against partition

President Truman supports the call for increased immigration, but takes no stance on partition

http://www.mideastweb.org/angloamerican.htm

Arab Evidence to the Committee of Inquiry

On economy:

Immigration reacts upon prices and values, makes the whole economy dependent upon inflow of foreign capital, arises continuous political unrest.

The entry of incessant waves of immigrants prevents normal economic and social development and causes constant dislocation of the country’s life; in so far as it reacts upon prices and values and makes the whole economy dependent upon the constant inflow of capital from abroad it may even in certain circumstances lead to economic disaster. It is bound moreover to arouse continuous political unrest and prevent the establishment of that political stability on which the prosperity and health of the country depend. This unrest is likely to increase in frequency and violence as the Jews come nearer to being the majority and the Arabs a minority.


On economy:

Even if economic equilibrium is reached, it is to the detriment of Arabs.

-Zionists have- superior capital resources

- greater economic knowledge - control of the bigest companies and

enterprises - a large proportion of the highest quality land,

which is off limits to non- Jews

- This state of affairs, together with refusal to employ Arabs will push the Arab population to the economic margins

Even if economic and social equilibrium is re-established, it will be to the detriment of the Arabs. The superior capital resources at the disposal of the Jews, their greater experience of modern economic technique and the existence of a deliberate policy of expansion and domination have already gone far towards giving them the economic mastery of Palestine. The biggest concessionary companies are in their hands; they possess a large proportion of total cultivable land and an even larger one of the land in the highest category of fertility; and the land they possess is mostly inalienable to non-Jews. The continuance of land-purchase and immigration, taken together with the refusal of Jews to employ Arabs on their lands or in their enterprises and the great increase in the Arab population, will create a situation in which the Arab population is pushed to the margin of cultivation and a landless proletariat, rural and urban, comes into existence.’


On benefits from Jewish immigration:

-Population increase is unrelated to Zionism-Wage increases are illusionary, offset by

price increases- What real wage increases exist are a

common trend in the Middle East unrelated to Zionism

-Capital inflow has raised money prices and real estate values

- What benefits of industrial development exist are offset by the failure to hire Arab workers

The alleged social and economic benefits are much less than is claimed. The increase in the Arab population is not primarily due to Zionist immigration, and in any case would not necessarily be a sign of prosperity. The rise in money wages and earnings is largely illusory, being offset by the rise in the cost of living. In so far as real wages and the standard of living have risen, this is primarily an expression of a general trend common to all Middle Eastern countries. The inflow of capital has gone largely to raising money prices and real estate values. The whole economy is dangerously dependent on the citrus industry. The benefits derived from the establishment of industries and the exploitation of the country’s few natural resources have been largely neutralized by the failure of Jewish enterprise to employ Arabs’’


On Zionism as a mediator of Western civilisation:

-Even if true, their services are unneeded- the Arab world is already in touch with the West.

- There are no benefits to be gained as long as Jewish culture is expressed through the Hebrew language.

- Arab culture was completely unaffected by Zionism

- Instead Zionism acts as an obstacle to understanding the West

The Zionists claim further that they are acting as mediators of Western civilization to the Middle East. Even if their claim were true, the services they were rendering would be incidental only: the Arab World has been in direct touch with the West for a hundred years, and has its own reawakened cultural movement, and thus it has no need of a mediator. Moreover the claim is untrue: so long as Jewish cultural life in Palestine expresses itself through the medium of the Hebrew language, its influence on the surrounding world is bound to be negligible; in fact, Arab culture today is almost wholly uninfluenced by the Jews, and practically no Arabs take part in the work of Jewish cultural or educational institutions. In a deeper sense the presence of the Zionists is even an obstacle to the understanding of Western civilization, in so far as it more than any other factor is tending to induce in the Arabs an unsympathetic attitude towards the West and all its works


8 ) In the Arab view, any solution or the problem created by Zionist aspirations must satisfy certain conditions:(i) It must recognize the right of the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine to continue in occupation of the country and to preserve its traditional character.(ii) It must recognize that questions like immigration which affect the whole nature and destiny of the country should be decided in accordance with democratic principles by the will of the population.(iii) It must accept the principle that the only way by which the will of the population can be expressed is through the establishment of responsible representative government.(The Arabs find something inconsistent in the attitude of Zionists who demand the establishment of a free democratic commonwealth in Palestine and then hasten to add that this should not take place until the Jews are in a majority.)(iv) This representative Government should be based upon the principle of absolute equality of all citizens irrespective of race and religion.

The land transfer Regulations should be made more stringent and extended to the whole area of the country, and severer measures be taken to prevent infringement of them. Here again, once self-government exists matters concerning land will be decided in the normal democratic process.


On Jews in the Arab state-Opposed to political Zionism, but not to

Jews as a whole- Those Jews already in Palestine, shall

obtain Palestinian citizenship- They shall have full civil and political

rights- No question of being thrust in the

position of ‘minority’ in the negative sense of the world.

- They will be joined to Arabs by links of interest and goodwill, not the goodwill of the strong to the powerless.

The Arabs are irrevocably opposed to political Zionism, but in no way hostile to the Jews as such nor to their Jewish fellow-citizens of Palestine. Those Jews who have already entered Palestine, and who have obtained or shall obtain Palestinian citizenship by due legal process will be full citizens of the Palestinian state, enjoying full civil and political rights and a fair share in government and administration. There is no question of them being thrust into the position of a ‘minority’ in the bad sense of a closed community, which dwells apart from the main stream of the State’s life and which exists for sufferance of the majority. They will be given the opportunity of belonging to and helping to mould the full community of the Palestinian state, joined to the Arabs by links of interest and goodwill, not the goodwill of the strong to the powerless, but of one citizen to another


On Jews in the Arab state- Recognition of the peculiar position and

need of the Jews.- No attempts to interfere with their

communities.- Schools and institutions would be left to

operate independently.- In their most closely settled districts

they will have municipal authority and Hebrew will be an official language.

- Questions of immigration should be decided after the formation of democratic representative systems.

It is to be hoped that in course of time the exclusiveness of the Jews will be neutralized by the development of loyalty to the state and the emergence of new groupings which cut across communal divisions. This however will take time; and during the transitional period the Arabs recognize the need for giving special consideration to the peculiar position and the needs of the Jews. No attempts would be made to interfere with their communal organization, their personal status or their religious observances. Their schools and cultural institutions would be left to operate unchecked except for that general control which all governments exercise over education. In the districts in which they are most closely settled they would possess municipal autonomy and Hebrew would be an official language of administration, justice and education.’

Morrison Grady compromiseAnother team is set afterwards to set a compromise between US and UK positions.

The Morrison Grady compromise in July 1946 finds both US and UK agreeable:- Calls for 100000 refugees to be allowed in Palestine

- Proposes a federal Palestine with a small Jewish enclave and a larger Arab one.

President Truman thinks the plan fair

Zionists launch an extensive negative publicity campaign against it. Truman is advised not to support it due to the effects support would have in upcoming elections.

The Morrison Grady plan is allowed to die off.

http://www.mideastweb.org/us_supportforstate.htm

UN decision

Britain sends the matter to the UNUNSCOP (Special Commission on Palestine) send

to draw recomendation by September 1st

Detailed survey of Palestine created by Mandate government- also details land ownership

UNSCOP recommends the termination of the mandate, but is split on what must replace it – partition or a federal state

http://www.mideastweb.org/unscop1947.htm

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Books/Story831.html

UN Decision- The proposal for partition requires a 2/3 majority to pass

from the General assembly. - On November 25th, Tuesday, an ad hoc committee votes to

pass it to the General assembly.- The vote is enough to pass to the General assembly- However it fails to gather the 2/3 support that would pass it

from the General assembly itself.

- General assembly vote is postponed, eventually pushed to Saturday

UN Decision- US and Zionist officials put pressure to force countries to vote in favour of

partition.Ecamples: Greece and France threatened with loss of foreign aid. Liberia threatened with a rubber embarfo Dean Rusk, head of the State Department's UN desk in Washington, later

wrote, "when President Truman decided to support partition, I worked hard to implement it....The pressure and arm-twisting applied by American and Jewish representatives in capital after capital to get that affirmative vote are hard to describe

- On Saturday the partition plan passes the General Assembly

- Palestinians have no delegation of their own at all.- Left to be represented by the Arab states, often with their own interest

in taking maximalist positions

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story448.htmlhttp://www.mideastweb.org/us_supportforstate.htm

Inter communal War of 47-48• The British warn that they will not be helping to implement the partition

plan, and that it is unrealistic that the plan will take place without violence.

• Palestine falls into violence. The Haganah moves on to secure the area to be granted to the Jewish state. Scattered Arab groups resist the partition but cannot match the Jewish forces. More coordinated resitance blocks the road to Jerusalem but is eventually defeated.

• Reprisals and counter reprisals throughout the period.

• Lehi and Irgun carry a number of terrorist attacks on Palestinian civilians to frighten the rest of the population to evacuate the area that is to be Israel.

• Most famous is Deir Yassin, an Arab village outside the boundaries of Israel which the Irgun massacred

David Shipler, Jerusalem bureau chief for The New York Times from 1979 to 1984, provides this assessment:

“The Jewish fighters who planned the attack on Deir Yassin also had a larger purpose, apparently. A Jerusalem woman and her son, who gave some of the men coffee in the pre-dawn hours before their mission, recall the guerrillas talking excitedly of the prospect of terrifying Arabs far beyond the village of Deir Yassin so that they would run away. Perhaps this explains why the Jewish guerrillas did not bury the Arabs they had killed, but left their bodies to be seen, and why they paraded surviving prisoners, blindfolded and with hands bound, in the backs of trucks through the streets of Jerusalem, a scene remembered with a shudder by Jews who saw it

“Accept my congratulations on this splendid act of conquest…As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou hast chosen us for conquest.” – Menachem Begin

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/july01/0107070.html

Plan Daleth – Plan D

Initiated by Haganah in 1948, it effectively green lighted the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

The Haganah field officers interpreted Plan D as giving them authority to undertake the systematic expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs living within the area allocated to the Jewish state as well as those whose villages were situated just inside the area awarded to the Arab state. The implementation of Plan D intensified the fears that already existed among the Arab population and contributed to the flight that soon took an irreversible momentum. As hundreds of thousands of Arab civilians headed for the frontiers, the Israeli command took advantage of the opportunity that was presented to ensure a contiguous and homogenous Jewish state with a solid Jewish majority

-William Cleveland, History of the Modern Middle East

Plan D

Effectively allows occupation and attack on any area either phrased as response or pre-emption

http://www.mideastweb.org/pland.htm

‘’1Launching pre-planned counter-attacks on enemy bases and supply lines in the heart of his territory. whether within the borders of the country [Palestine] or in neighboring countries.’’2. Ensuring freedom of military and economic activity within the borders of the [Hebrew] state and in Jewish settlements outside its borders by occupying and controlling important high-ground positions on a number of transportation arteries.3. Preventing the enemy from using frontline positions within his territory which can easily be used for launching attacks. This will be effected by occupying and controlling them.4. Applying economic pressure on the enemy by besieging some of his cities in order to force him to abandon some of his activities in certain areas of the country.5. Restricting the capability of the enemy by carrying out limited operations: occupation and control of certain of his bases in rural and urban areas within the borders of the state.

Plan D

Allows complete destruction of villages and mining of the debris (no prior justification defined in the Plan)

Allows encircling of villages and conducting operation inside. In the case of any form of resistance, the population must be expelled outside the state


Mounting operations against enemy population centers located inside or near our defensive system in order to prevent them from being used as bases by an active armed force. These operations can be divided into the following categories:- Destruction of villages (setting fire to, blowing up, and planting mines in the debris), especially those population centers which are difficult to control continuously.- Mounting search and control operations according to the following guidelines: encirclement of the village and conducting a searhc inside it. In the event of resistance, the. armed force must be destroyed and the population must be expelled outside the borders of the state.The villages which are emptied in the manner described above must be included in the fixed defensive system and must be fortified as necessary

Plan D

Calls for occupation of all major cities. Arabs municipal centres to have vital services terminated. In case of resistance, all population to be expelled to the Arab municipal centre.


‘’Deployment in Major CitiesPositions will be taken in the large cities according to the following principles:1. Occupation and control of government facilities and property (post offices, telephone exchanges, railroad stations, police stations, harbors, etc. )2. Protection of all vital public services and installations.3. Occupation and control of all isolated Arab neighborhoods located between our municipal center and the Arab municipal center, especially those neighborhoods which control the city’s exit and entry roads. These neighborhoods will be controlled according to the guidelines set for searching villages. In case of resistance, the population will be expelled to the area of the Arab municipal center.4. Encirclement of the central Arab municipal area and its isolation from external transportation routes, as well as the termination of its vital services (water, electricity, fuel, etc.), as far as possible.’’

May 1948By spring 1948 some 400 000 Palestinians have fled.On first week of May, US proposes an unconditional cease-fire and the

extension of the mandate for 10 days for on the spot negotiations. It is rejected by the Jewish agency

A British Proposal calls for a truce in Jerusalem. It is rejected again by the Jewish agency

On 12th May the Provisional State Council decides whether to issue a declaration of independence immediately.

Ben Gurion throws his support towards immediate declaration- no indication the borders of the future state in the declaratio.

On 14th May Ben Gurion declares the independence of IsraelOn 15th May the armies of Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq invade.

http://www.mideastweb.org/israeldeclaration.htm

Collusion across the Jordan• On 17th November 1947, Golda Meir

secretly meets with Jordan’s King Abdullah in Naharayim.

• They agree that Abdullah will annex the areas of the Arab state in Palestine, in exchange for recognition of a Jewish state.

• On 11th May, she returns to Abdullah to salvage their agreement. Abdullah informs her he cannot stand against the tide in favour of military intervention. Sugggests that Palestine remain unitary, under his crown, with autonomy for the Jewish areas.

• Golda Meir rejects the plan – Abdullah urges reconsideration and to contact him again.

1948 war- Of the Arab states, the only one with any real army was Transjordan’s Arab legion. - Egypt and Iraq had some forces but they were uncoordinated, untrained, and too

small.- Lebanon and Syria had little in the way of military.

- The war is fought in 3 stages with cease-fires in between.- In the first phase the haganah forces are numerically superior (Mid-May: 35 000 to

25 000).- Debatably, Haganah is more-ill equiped in the first stage of the conflict. An illegal

weapons smuggling operation from Czechoslovakia tips the scales in its favors.- In the next two phases, Hagannah increases its numbers (Mid-July 65 000,

December 96 441)- Arab numbers are smaller in all stages of the conflict.- The objectives and goals of each Arab state are conflicting and no true

organisation exists.

1948 war

At the same time, King Abdullah remains honourable of the original agreement with Golda Meir.

The Arab legion moves into areas of the Arab state and stands in defense, but does not attack Israel proper.

Haganah/IDF forces are ordered into the Western areas of Palestine granted to the Arab state.

1948 warDuring the second cease fire Kamil Riad, a peace feeler from King Farouk of

Egypt meets with the head of the middle eastern department of the Israeli foreign ministry in Paris.

Proposes a peace treaty and Egyptian recognition of Israel, in exchange for Egyptian annexation of a strip of territory in the Negev.

Ben Gurion brushes the offer aside. On October 6th cabinet meeting, Ben Gurion proposes the renewal of the war with Egypt – the peace offer is kept hidden.

On 15th October Israel breaks the cease fire and attacks the Egyptian position, annexing most of the Eastern parts of the Arab state.

1948 war conclusion• Armistice agreements signed 1949. First Egypt

then Lebanon, Jordan, Syria.• 700000 Palestinian refugees flee to the West Bank,

Gaza Strip, other Arab states, or around the world.• West Bank is annexed by Jordan, Gaza Strip by

Egypt.• In 1950, absentee property law passes in Israel,

which effectively annexes all refugee property into Israel.

Jewish refugeesAt the same time a large number of Jewish

refugees (some 400000) were fleeing the Arab states, either out of a wish to go to the Jewish state or the majority out of increased anti-Semitic feeling due to the events of the early 40s.

Israeli policy has consistently been that the Jewish refugee problem counterbalances the Palestinian problem. Therefore none get any form of compensation from the evicting countries.

Differences in Perspective• Israel and the Arab states had different views on what the armistice

agreements meant

Israel

-saw the armistice lines are permanent borders-Saw the agreements as permanent ends of the war-Saw the refugee problem as the creation of the Arab states

Arab states

-did not regard the armistice lines are permanent borders-Saw the agreements as temporary halts of the war until permanent peace treaties were made-Saw the refugee problem as the responsibility of Israel

Palestinians in IsraelSome 160 000 Palestinians had remained in Israel after 1948.

In 1952 nationality law is passed to grant them Israeli citizenship.In practise treated as third class citizens.

1948-1966: Areas of Arab concentration placed under Military administration. Palestinians required to carry special identity cards and special permits to travel between villages.

First decade of statehood Israel expropriated thousands of acres of Israeli Arab land and relocated the inhabitants.

Further alienated by wage and employment discrimination.

Palestinians outside Israel• By 1950: 960 000 Palestinians registered for relief by the UN, living in

makeshift refugee camps. • Prosperous and well connected refugees were able to restart their lives.

The vast majority could not.

Egypt, Lebanon: Harshest restrictions on movement and employment.Syria and Iraq: Palestinians allowed to work and open businessJordan: Granted citizenship and conscious attempt to be integrated.

However there was a shortage of cultivable land and a huge surplus of unskilled labour. Most refugees remained dependent on aid, or found extremely low-paid unskilled jobs.

The Arab World Developments

The context of developments in the Arab World:

-At the height of its power the Ottoman empire grants trade concessions to Western states which grant Western traders privileged status in the empire.

-As the empire declines, the concessions remain, and a class of rich, wealthy Westerners, exempt from the law and in control of much of the empire’s wealth develops.

-With most enterprise controlled by Westerners, other subjects of the empire remain in poverty.

The Arab World DevelopmentsThe Outcome of World War 1 leaves the Arab world open to Western exploitation.

- Syria, some 600 000 Arabs die in WWI, and the area is then violently taken over by the French. French have full control of Syrian and Lebanese institutions – no attempt is made to prepare the state for independence. Instead France attempts to feed local divisions in a divide and conquer policy. Damascus and other areas are attacked more than once by the French to stop local revolts, leaving thousands dead. When the French collaborationist regime takes over in WWII, Allied blockades lead to massive hunger and poverty. Even after allied reoccupation, France only leaves after conflict with locals.

- Egypt, becomes essentially a puppet state of Britain, supposedly independent, but more than once being forced to follow British desires rather than local ones. Control in WWII makes Egypt the centre of the British war effort in the area, and all resources are taken over, resulting in massive poverty. After 1950s resentment over British influence grows.

- Similarly in Iraq, mandate is enforce after crushing local revolts – ‘independence’ in 1932 makes the state a British puppet, creating wide spread resentment.

The Age of Nasser• The Israeli victory in 1948 seems a victory of Western

imperialism and colonialism over the wishes of the Arab world.

• The Arab population becomes disenchanted with its leaders, often landed landlords and notables from families from the Ottoman era with Western orientations.

• The creation of military schools allows for a generation of educated, originally low class officers to emerge.

• This is personified in Gamal Abd al’Nasser, himself the son of a low class postal-clerk.

• A number of coups and counter coups take place in Iraq and Syria. The most successful is in Egypt. In 1952-54 the ‘free officers’ take over the country.

The Age of NasserThe new regime is:

- Nationalist- Secular- Intenting of reform- Promoting Arab self-sufficiency- Decidedly anti-Israeli- Effectively highly popular dictatorship

- Nasser follows the ideology of Pan-Arabism. Arab states are artificial constructs of Western imperialism, and must come together in one Arab state. Though attempts of merging with Syria and Iraq are made, they prove unsuccessful.

The Age of NasserNasser has two practical aims:- Building an armed force- Building the Aswan dam, a project to be a symbol of newly found Arab

power and progress.

- The US is willing to provide both. But it requires that weapons sold not be used against Israel, and that negotiating progress for peace is made.

- The concept is under consideration until 1955. Palestinian commando forces stage an attack on a water pumping station. Israeli response attacks an Egyptian command post in Gaza killing 38 Egyptian soldiers.

- Unwilling to abide by US rules any more, Nasser negotiates an arms purchase with the Soviet Union through Czechoslovakia.

- In July 1956, Egypt’s US ambassador enters a meeting with US secretary of State to discuss a deal on funding for the Aswan dam. He is rudely told the US government no longer intends to provide the funding.

- Nasser declares he will fund the dam no matter what

The nationalisation of Suez and the 1956 war

Nasser nationalises the biggest generator of income in Egypt the Suez canal.After a secret agreement, Britain and Israel invade Egypt.

Israel occupied the Gaza strip and makes preparation for long term occupation.

World criticism forces Britain and Israel to withdraw. The result is seen as a triumph for Nasser.

But the war generates renewed negative feeling towards Israel, and leaves the countries even further apart.

The June war 1967

• Within the Arab states, memories of 1948 and 1956 become a part of popular consciousness. Israel is seen as a symbol of Western intervention in the Middle East and Arab nationalist rhetoric focuses on the liberation of Palestine and solving of the Palestinian problem.

• In Israel, there is constant fear of a potential conflict with a unified Arab state, and of the rhetoric that comes from the Arab world. At the same time, the situation of Israeli Arabs remains much the same, even worsened by increasing discrimination due to Arab distrust

• This all comes to head in June 1967

The June war 1967• May 1967, Soviet intelligence reports, inaccurately, that Israel is

preparing a major assault against Syria for sponsoring Palestinian resistance.

• This is passed to Nasser, who uses the opportunity to assert himself in the Pan-Arab movement. He places troops in the Sinai, and requests that UN troops deployed there leave the area. Surprisingly, they do.

• He then moves to previous UN positions, and announces a block of the straits of Tiran.

• In retrospect, Nasser was probably blocking. The mass of the Egyptian army was in Yemen, and in no way ready for war. But he unleashed feelings he could no longer control.

Arab states seem the situation as a prelude to a showdown with Israel and start military mobilisation.

Issues (legitimacy of control of Tiran/willingness negotiate/initial use of force/assurances of non-armed response)

Israel attacks pre-emptively, defeats the Arab army in 6 days and captures the West Bank and Gaza, occupied until today.

The June war 1967

1967 onward - Issues

- Psychological effects on Israel and the Arab world

- Beginning of al-Fatah and the PLO- The Israeli change of power, 1977- 1973 war with Egypt and peace negotiation- Lebanese civil war- Negotiations in the 1990s

roots of the conflict – from origin to the occupation friends of palestine society university of...

Documents

origins of zionism zionism

western zionism

jewish state

eastern zionism

jews support zionism

practical zionism

jewish nationalism

th century slide