Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Bogus History of "Palestine"
FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | April 28, 2003 | David Harsanyi

Posted on 4/28/2003, 12:22:09 PM by SJackson

“Anything but history, for history must be false.” One-time British Prime Minister Sir Robert Walpole could very easily have been concerning the Middle East, in particular the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, when he muttered those words. In no other region of the world is every argument and grievance so centered on the past. Regrettably, in no place has it been so distorted, revised and mangled.

Before any discussion on the topic can ensue, one simple but valuable question needs to be asked: Where should the historical discussion of Palestine begin? Many Jews point to the arrival of the Moses and Israelites in Canaan, a land that was promised to Abraham and the Jews a millennia earlier in the Bible. But applying a biblical birthright to a national claim will get you few sympathetic ears in modern times. Muslims will inevitably point to the invasion of Israel in 632. Some Arab archeologists have even claimed their ancestors are the original Canaanites.

But if the first declaration of a Palestinian national identity is the point we must return to, there is no choice but to begin with the years leading up to 1947’s War of Independence – what Arabs refer to as nakba or "catastrophe," a phrase coined by Syrian scholar Constantine Zurayk, who defined the war as “one of the harshest trails and tribulations with which Arabs have been afflicted throughout their long history.”

In The Palestinian People: A History, authors Baruch Kimmerling and Joel S. Migdal argue, rather unpersuasivly, that the peasant revolt in Palestine against the Egyptian ruler Muhammad Ali in 1834 was moment the Palestinian people coalesced into a nation. This is a noteworthy assertion. It strategically denies that Palestinian nationalism was a direct consequence of Zionism. It rejects the notion that Jewish immigration and appeals for statehood sparked counter-nationalism in Palestine. In other words, it manufactures history.

If the nation of Israel had never been realized, would the world have seen the emergence of a Palestinian nation? Not only was the Arab population ignorant of a momentous national awakening before Zionism, their leaders struggled against its initiation. In 1918, the legendary Arab enthusiast, T.E. Lawrence, confessed in a confidential report that Arab nationalism in Palestine “was invented in Cairo as a common denominator…it was convenient to pretend to find a common ground in all of them.” The very next year, Arab representatives to the Paris Peace Conference stated that they “considered Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.”

This disconnect with a independent sub-Arab identity was reaffirmed in 1937, when top Palestinian leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, an official British committee that came to investigate the roots of the Arab-Jewish conflict ultimately suggesting the partition of Palestine, that "there is no such country. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented …Our country was for centuries part of Syria." This sentiment was reiterated by Arab leaders prior to 1947 – and occasionally after, when it could potentially damage the Palestinian public relations’ cause. A high-ranking PLO official, Zuheir Moessein, claimed in 1977 that “there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians and Lebanese; we are all members of the same nation. Solely for political reasons are we careful to stress our identity as Palestinians.”

Masking their extreme revisionism in scholarly language, Kimmerling and Migdal liberally disregarding the words and deeds of the Arab leadership in this era. The rest of The Palestinian People follows a similar pattern and is unmistakably a politically motivated chronicle. Proof of this can be discerned from a remarkable disclaimer in introduction of the book that may reveal more than intended regarding the historical authenticity of the Palestinian national movement:

“For convenience we will refer to Palestinian Arabs as Palestinians, and to the country as Palestine, even when applied to periods in which such usage in anachronistic – when the Arabs’ sense of participations in a common history had not yet evolved, and when the territory was administratively figurative”

In other words, the authors apply nationhood to people before they are aware of its existence. How convenient that must be for a historian. Palestine, the nation, of course, still happens to be anachronistic, another fact ignored by the authors. But this stance isn’t surprising. Kimmerling’s zealous leftist and anti-Zionist positions, like his validation of terror as a justifiable tool of resistance, are the norm in The Palestinian People.

In his recent book Politicide, Kimmerling purports to “expose the brutality of Ariel Sharon and his junta’s ‘solutions’” and “indiscriminate slaughter.” The word “solution” in this context is a less-than-subtle reference to the Nazis’ Final Solution, imagery that is a standard and cruel tool of anti-Zionists. What makes this Nazi correlation particularly ironic is that The Palestinian People glosses over the significant role of Haj Amin al-Husseini, Yassir Arafat’s mentor, Mufti of Jerusalem from 1921-1936 and the father of Palestinian nationalism. For not only did al-Husseini engineer the bloody riots against Jews in 1929 and 1936, but he was directly involved in the mobilization of support for Nazis among Muslims. In 1941,the Mufti met personal with Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Joachim Von Ribbentrop and numerous other Nazi leaders. al-Husseini, it turned out, was a conspicuously successful Nazi, recruiting 20,000 Muslim volunteers for the SS, many of which participated in the killing of Jews in Croatia and Hungary. Kimmerling does not venture a guess as to what this man held for the Jews in Palestine had he and the Arab nationalists had their way.

Another topic of considerable dispute virtually ignored by the authors, is the issue of pre-1948 immigration by Arabs into Palestine. Early on, the authors dismiss Joan Peter’s widely read From Time Immemorial, which contains 490 pages of heavily footnoted evidence asserting that the Arab population in Palestine developed as much through immigration as natural growth. It is discarded in a single sentence as the authors claim “numerous sober historians” had already dismantled its basic arguments. The principal ‘sober’ historian who targeted Peters’ work is Noam Chomsky disciple Norman Finkletstein, whose outrageous claims about the Holocaust , Israel and terror should disqualify him as a reputable commentator on issues relating to Jews.

And what about terror? Who can deny that it has been a considerable part of the national Palestinian identity since the progroms against Jewish civilians in the 1920s. Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, is personally responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians. Nevertheless, a close look at the index of The Palestinian People, uncovers that the word “terror,” does not have a single entry, instead we are told to “see violence.”

Despite the Palestinians’ tenuous claim to a distinct nationalism, no one can deny they exist as people. Women, children live in squalor, men have no work and misery is ubiquitous. They have suffered not only under Israel, who captured this land in a defensive war, but also beneath the significant burden of their own autocratic rulers, who often fall prey to the bellicose political manipulation of the Arab world. Unfortunately, Kimmerling and Migdal fail to accept that the Palestinian leadership, the land’s people, should also be faulted, at least in part, for the many tribulations they face. After having systematically aligning themselves with the losers of history from Hitler to Gamal Abdel-Nasser to Saddam Hussein, many of the same mistakes are being repeated.

After 9-11, thousands of Palestinians paraded through cities in the West Bank and Gaza, celebrating the attacks. Just last month, even as coalition troops entered Baghdad and spontaneous celebration by residents erupted all over the city, Palestinians watched in disbelief and bitter disappointment. "We were certain that the Iraqis will win the war and that this will be the end of U.S. and Israeli suppression," a 32-year-old Amjad Shaaban from Gaza told the AP. "I'm terribly disappointed."

Palestinians should be terribly disappointed by history. By the end of last year, almost 2000 Palestinians, many of them suicide bombers, Molotov cocktail hurlers and other terrorists leaders, have been killed since the start of the “al-Aqsa Intifada.” A revolting death cult has emerged, and the now a people find themselves further from statehood than a decade ago when it seemed inevitable.

While the indignation and non-stop violence directed at Jews that dare live on Arab soil continues, Palestinians argue for a “right of return” for refugees and their offspring into Israel. With potentially three million refugees, not to mention a million Arab-Israelis, “right of return” is a suicidal proposition for Israel. Kimmerling and Migdal view this demand as wholly reasonable, categorizing it as the “right of return” as the “fundamental building block of Palestinism.” They write that heading to 2000 talks at Camp David that would have created an autonomous Palestinian state with huge concession offered by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, “Arafat felt that Palestinians were not ready for such far-reaching compromise” on this issue. What issue has the Palestinian leadership compromised?

Today, Palestinian society is in disarray and Arab nations continue to promote terror, a policy that breeds hopelessness and destruction for the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian Authority, a diluted version of the PLO terror organization, is still administrated by former (possibly current) terrorist Arafat, it suffers in financial ruin despite generous help from around the world. Its political prospects in shambles, the PA’s popularity shrivels daily while overt terror groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad see their popularity swell. If The Palestinian People offers a true perspective of a people’s psyche – and I hope it doesn’t -- slight optimism for a future Arab state.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Israel
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:22:09 PM by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Yehuda; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; ...
If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
2 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:22:56 PM by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Bump for later...
3 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:30:19 PM by Lyford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lyford
Baruch Kimmerling is an Israeli Communist. That credential should be taken into account in reading his history of "Palestine." Its about as factual as Michael Bellesiles report on gun ownership in pre-revolutionary America. Basically, its political anti-Israel propaganda masquerading as impartial history.
4 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:33:16 PM by goldstategop ( In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Arab nations continue to promote terror, a policy that breeds hopelessness and destruction for the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza.

I predict most Arabs that support this view will continue on their own roadmap to oblivion.

5 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:51:32 PM by Magoo (Moral Relativism Sucks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Magoo
I hope they breed themselves out of existence.
6 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:54:06 PM by goldstategop ( In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Thanks for the helpful perspective.
7 posted on 4/28/2003, 12:56:27 PM by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: SJackson; Lyford
"The Myth Of The Palestinian People"
9 posted on 4/28/2003, 1:23:15 PM by Dallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
bump to meself for later
10 posted on 4/28/2003, 1:50:44 PM by Puddleglum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
This was written by Yashiko Sagamori when a candidate for Secretary of State of California. A very interesting article written by a "Japanese" man.

If you are so sure that "Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history", I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of Palestine: When was it founded and by whom? What were its borders? What was its capital? What were its major cities? What constituted the basis of its economy? What was its form of government? Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat? Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation? What was the language of the country of Palestine? What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine? What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date. And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

If you are lamenting the "low sinking" of a "once proud" nation. Please tell me, when exactly was that "nation" proud and what was it so proud of?

And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call "Palestinians" are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over -- or thrown out of -- the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War?

I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day "Palestinians" to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history won't work here. The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal with military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy.

For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it "the Palestinian people" and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the "West Bank" and Gaza, respectively?

The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less claim to nationhood than that Indian tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so called Palestinians" have only one motivation: the destruction of Israel, and in my book that is not sufficient to consider them a nation" -- or anything else except what they really are: a terrorist organization that will one day be dismantled. In fact, there is only one way to achieve peace in the Middle East. Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side should, pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited on it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of their terrorist organization from the land of Israel and accepting Israel's ancient sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria.

That will mark the end of the Palestinian people. What are you saying again was its beginning?

You are absolutely correct in your understanding of the "Palestinians" murderous motives. I am afraid however that you, along with 99% of the population of this planet have missed the beginning of WWIII (the enemy call it Jihad) quite a few years ago. The siege of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979, an event to which the latest Nobel Peace Prize winner had so miserably failed to respond, can be very well used as the day WWIII stepped out of the pages of the Koran and into the current events.

I pray the United States and Israel lead the world to victory in this war. Come to think of it, there is no choice, be you a Christian, a Jew, or even, believe it or not, a Muslim.

This letter was written by Yashiko Sagamori Nov 6, 2002. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant.
11 posted on 4/28/2003, 3:52:29 PM by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Bump!
12 posted on 4/28/2003, 5:25:08 PM by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Who edited this article? The English grammar is pretty weak, as is the spelling.
13 posted on 4/28/2003, 7:01:35 PM by Rockitz (After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson