The roots of the Palestinian question: historical truth against Islamist propaganda (part one)
When we talk about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we cannot ignore the historical context at the origin of everything: the outcome of the First World War. In 1918, now in retreat on all fronts and with the army reduced to one sixth of its original strength, the Ottoman Empire had nothing to do but negotiate its surrender: on October 30 its representatives signed the armistice of Mudros and on October 13 November an allied occupation force settled in Constantinople. In the following years, after the events of the Turkish war of independence, which saw the rise to power of the "father of Turkey" Kemal Atatürk, with the various mandates established by the then League of Nations, the Arab countries belonging to the Ottoman Empire are awarded to France and the United Kingdom. France had the mandate over Syria and Lebanon, while the United Kingdom over Palestine, Transjordan and Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq), following the spheres of influence defined in the secret Sykes-Picot agreements of 1916.
With the territorial subdivisions the Allies of the First World War benefited from the victory through direct or indirect control of large territories, in this case, also of the Middle East. The purpose of the League of Nations was to guide the economy of Arab countries, promising development plans to improve the already precarious living conditions of large sections of the population.
The British Mandate on Palestine – The Jewish community was already present in Palestine and in 1915 numbered 83,000 people. The "Zionist" project, already theorized in the nineteenth century, aimed to ensure that the Jews scattered around the world could return to having their own nation after centuries. When Palestine was assigned to the British mandate, the United Kingdom decided to endorse the project, also to keep the Arab presence under control. Lord Arthur J. Balfour in 1917 said:
"Her Majesty's government welcomes the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people and will do its best to ensure that this end can be achieved, remaining clear that nothing must be done that would prejudice the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish communities existing in Palestine. "
This is a fundamental point for understanding the origin of hostilities. The Jewish point of view starts from here: after the First World War the Arabs certainly had the right to have their own states, but in reality this would not have been identified in Palestine, which should have been of Jewish relevance in its entirety. In fact, a version of the flag of Palestine during the British mandate had the "Star of David" imprinted, as it appears today also in the flag of the State of Israel. We can see it portrayed in a 1939 edition of the Larousse dictionary.
It is important to dwell on this point. The British had certainly promised lands to the Arab populations for having supported the Alliance in the decisive attack against the Ottomans, of which they themselves were eager to get rid of them for good, but even reading the historic declaration of Balfour it is the Hebrew version that appears most corroborated. : the entire British mandate on Palestine should have passed under the control of the Jewish people (respecting the rights of the non-Jewish communities present), while the Arabs would have belonged to the other states (Egypt became independent as early as 1922). In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia itself would subsequently arise, all countries that in the plans of the various mandates had already been assigned to the Arab populations. If we do not start from this fundamental historical fact, we cannot understand why Palestine has always been a land disputed, rightly or wrongly, by both the Jewish and Arab populations.
Jewish immigration to Palestine, from the various communities present in other countries, underwent a sharp acceleration during the British mandate. Thus it happens that from the 84,000 present in 1922 we arrive at over 900,000 Jews in Palestine in 1947. The large immigration is assisted by the Jewish Agency ( "Sochnut" ) which also allowed the use of funds to purchase land from the Arabs present in Palestine, to accommodate the arrival of the new settlers. The effective organization prompted the British authorities to advise the Arabs to found an agency with the same aims, a proposal that was immediately rejected by the leaders of the local communities. Strong immigration did not take long to fuel tensions with Arab communities that felt threatened by the growing arrival of Jewish settlers. We also add the scarce resources present and the increase in unemployment, particularly among Arabs, and the picture is complete. Although the Agency regularly bought the lands from the Arabs, thus causing them to be removed from different areas, the idea of an invasion by the Arabs spread, also due to the ambiguity of the British on what had been established for Palestine. Jews in a land which was regularly assigned by the agreements following the First World War.
Zionism certainly suited the British, who saw in the Jews a reassuring presence in the Middle East, as a bulwark and barrier to Arab expansion. The proposal of the two states in Palestine actually arises only later, where the project of a single state fails, which should have been the perfect continuum of the British mandate, without altering its borders. In essence, the Arabs present there, certainly guaranteed civil and religious rights, should have allowed themselves to be governed by the Jewish community as is partly the case today in the current State of Israel. The Arabs would remain the direct government of all the other states that arose from the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
The Jewish people, on the other hand, is seen as an existential threat on the part of Arab communities – but above all of the newborn neighboring Arab states – and from acceptance they quickly pass to rejection. The new geopolitical arrangements in the Middle East that arose from the First World War were therefore rejected by the Arabs, who had deluded themselves that they could free themselves from Ottoman rule without giving anything in return. Palestine thus became the real object of exchange, that eternal promised land always denied to a proud people and proud of its origins and its history.
The post The roots of the Palestinian question: historical truth against Islamist propaganda (first part) appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL http://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/le-radici-della-questione-palestinese-verita-storica-contro-propaganda-islamista-prima-parte/ on Wed, 26 May 2021 03:53:00 +0000.