ISRAEL INFORMATION
HISTORY of the ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT
A brief Introduction
PALESTINE – does the name indicate that the land belonged to the Palestinians?
The Romans called the land Palestina in the 2nd century, after they captured the land from the Jews, and in an effort to eradicate its Jewish memory. Palestina was named after the sea-faring Phillistines who lived in the area at the time and has absolutely nothing to do with the Palestinians
Jews never lost sight of the land and always prayed for their return to it; ‘if I forget thee o Jerusalem…’ There was always a Jewish settlement in Jerusalem and in Tiberius
DID JEWS ‘DISPLACE’ THE ARABS IN PALESTINE ?
The Arabs created a narrative which asserts that; ‘Jews displaced the indigenous population who had been there from ‘time immemorial’ [Arab propaganda machine]
This invention, by the Arab Propaganda, has been swallowed whole by so many who are not well versed with the facts.
It is simply untrue
‘A LAND WITHOUT A PEOPLE FOR A PEOPLE WITHOUT A LAND….’ [Zangwil]
19th century
Early 19th century when Jews began the return to their ancestral lands, the Ottoman Empire population census records the population of Palestine at around a mere 275,000 of which around 240,000 were Muslim
Palestine included what is now known as ; Gaza, Israel, West Bank and Jordan which means there was hardly any population there and what did exist appears to have comprised of revolving Bedouin tribes
This corroborates all the evidence from visitors [eg, Mark Twain, Pierre Loti, Arthur Penryn Stanley, Rev Manning etc,] that the land was barren, desolate and empty
From around 1780, Jews began to return to their ancestral homes. Jews created industry and enterprises. Jews brought with them Jewish and socialist ideals which include good treatment of labour
In response, peoples from the whole region are slowly drawn into the land - in search of jobs and opportunities
As Jewish Aliyah accelerated it acted as a magnet which drew in an influx of labour from surrounding countries. The British conquest in 1917 made Palestine even more attractive with the British gift of law and order.
CLICK HERE >> History of the Arab-Israeli Conflict
The Current ISRAEL-ARAB [PALESTINIAN] CONFLICT
Present day
WHY IS THE CONFLICT STILL ON TODAY?
As will have been seen from the History of the conflict, The Arabs and Palestinians have consistently refused an offer of a state even though such an offer would have created a Palestinian state for the first time in history - there has never been such an entity as a Palestinian people or state.
The question is WHY?
The answer lies in the Palestinian psyche [or the psyche of their leaders]. They would rather have nothing than allow Israel anything. They would rather have no state and no peace if such a state and such peace entail recognition and acceptance of Israel’s right to exist.
When they talk to the West, their spokespersons talk sweetly of their dream of independence etc, but what they mean is the annihilation of Israel. They do not want a state alongside Israel but one in place of Israel.
This is the root cause of every war and every conflagration [always started by the Arabs / Palestinians] in the region.
Palestinian supporters will argue that Israel will never return territories but the facts prove otherwise. When Egypt made peace in 1979, Israel returned the whole of Sinai, oil-wells, settlement and all. And then, Gaza: in an effort to create peaceful co-existence, in 2005, Israel withdrew completely and voluntarily from Gaza. It left no soldiers, no settlements, nothing. In return, what Israel got was a regular barrage of rockets which, in the end forced it and Egypt, to impose a blockade in 2007.
Israel is a reluctant occupier and is there only in response to the THREE wars it had to fight for survival - 1948, 1956 and 1967 [and incidentally, long before there was an occupation or settlements] and to ongoing Palestinian belligerence, ever since. Israel has the experience of what withdrawal from Gaza means [unceasing rocket attacks] and does not need to have rockets fired or waves of suicide bombers sent, from the West Bank and the Golan heights too.
If the Palestinians just abandon their traditional hatred and belligerence and declare genuine peace, there will be no occupation and the Palestinians will have a state, peace and prosperity. Is that asking too much?
WHY DO SO MANY WELL MEANING PEOPLE SUPPORT THE PALESTINIAN CAUSE?
Pre 1967, the majority of the Western world supported Israel. They saw Israel as a courageous and brave little country, standing up and defending itself against the huge Arab countries and Palestinian militias.
As Israel, miraculously, won the wars in 1948, in 1956, in 1967 and in 1973, the world began to perceive Israel as the regional superpower. It was no longer the ‘David’ but the ‘Goliath’. At the same time the Arab propaganda machine changed its tune so that instead of it being seen as the huge Arab states against tiny Israel, the conflict was now between the tiny Israel and the smaller Palestinians.
This has enabled the Arab / Palestinian propaganda machine to portray the Palestinians as the poor ‘underdogs’ and most decent people tend to sympathise with and support ‘underdogs’
The reality of course is that Israel consists of some 8 million people whereas the Palestinians [apart from being the cause of all the problems and of their own misfortune] are supported by some 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and by some 1.5 billion Muslims in the world. So that Israel is the real ‘David’ and the Palestinians, with their vast Arab and Islamic support, the ‘Goliath’.
Sadly, the sympathy and support for the Palestinians is not founded on facts. Many well intentioned people do not know the history and the facts. If they did, they would likely be supporting Israel.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE PALESTINIAN CAUSE?
The Palestinians start every war and every conflagration yet make every demand. They crave the world’s sympathy yet reserve for themselves the right to belligerence. They seek the sympathy of the world without making the slightest effort to make peace and to help themselves. They maintain their historic line: no concession if it means recognition of Israel’s right exist. Their focus on the destruction of Israel, not on looking after their people
It is not just about Israel. The Palestinians [and many Arab states] have little regard for their own people – preferring to have their brethren languish in refugee camps, paid for by UNRWA. The Palestinians now have five generations of refugees and are apparently quite happy to live on the generosity of western taxpayers who fund UNRWA [see following paragraph]
THE JIHADIST APPROACH - THE HAMAS CHARTER
On the Destruction of Israel
"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." (Preamble)
The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area
"The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one can renounce it or any part or abandon it or any part of it." (Article 11)
"Palestine is an Islamic land... Since this is the case, the Liberation of Palestine is an individual duty for every Moslem wherever he may be." (Article 13)
Anti-Semitic Incitement
"The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him'." (Article 7)
THE JIHADIST APPROACH - THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
The PA Ministry of Religious Affairs posted guidelines for mosque preachers instructing preachers what content they should include in their Friday sermons [PA Ministry of Religious Affairs, Facebook page, Oct. 18, 2023]
“The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, and the rock or a tree will say: ‘Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him’; except for the Gharqad tree, for it is the tree of the Jews.”
WHAT IS THE PALESTINIAN ‘REFUGEE’ PROBLEM?
When the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al Husseini, began stirring the Arab population to violence against Jews [with calls to Jihad] which led to serious rioting by the Arabs, the Peel Commission offered a compromise solution: areas predominantly Arab would form a Palestinian state and those predominantly Jewish, an Israeli state [the ‘two-states’ solution]. The offer was repeated by the UN in it ‘partition plan’ of 1947. These offers were rejected by the Palestinians who chose instead to join the five Arab armies and attack the tiny Jewish state on the day of its birth in 1948.
In that war [the war of Independence], despite calls by the Israel government for them to remain, many Arabs left the country. Some because they feared Jewish reprisals [after all, they had called for a total massacre of the Jews], though this hardly occurred. Some fled the country because of calls by the Mufti to ‘clear the land for a massive counter-attack’ and some left because many of the wealthier leading families emigrated to neighbouring countries and left them leaderless.
As a result, some 450,000 Arabs became refugees [the numbers banded about of some 600,000-700,000 seem to be exaggerated – see the UN records].
Had the Arabs not attacked the nascent tiny Jewish state, there would have been no refugees
The surrounding Arab countries with all their vast lands and enormous wealth & resources and with the connivance of the Palestinian leadership, treated the refugees as rejects and kept them in refugee camps [contrast that with the 900,000 Jewish refugees, expelled from Arab lands, who were absorbed by the tiny Jewish state with dignity and honour]
Israel may well have considered their return if the Arabs & Palestinians would have shown the slightest interest in peaceful co-existence but the opposite was the case. The Arab & Palestinian calls were for the annihilation of the tiny Jewish state, not for co-existence.
Interestingly, in the cease-fire talks [in Rhodes 1949-1950] Israel contemplated allowing 150,000 refugees to return but the suggestion was rejected by the Arabs & Palestinians because, accepting it would have entailed recognising the state of Israel.
Similarly, in 1948 the UN General Assembly proposed [resolution 194] that Israel accepts the return of some Arab refugees. However, this came to nothing because the Arab countries opposed the proposal since, accepting it, meant recognising the state of Israel.
WHY ARE THEY STILL REFUGEES? UNHCR vs UNRWA
Why are those refugees still refugees? Why do we have 5th generation refugees? And, is there such a thing as a ‘right of return’?
The answer to the last question is that there is no such right of return. Since 1945, some 30 million people have been displaced all over the world yet no one ever mentions any ‘right of return’. No one speaks of a right of return of millions of Hindus to Pakistan. No one believes millions of Muslims should return to Greece or Bulgaria, that millions of Christians should return to Turkey or that millions of Germans should return to the Czech Republic and Poland - a fortiori, where the refugees’ intention is to annihilate the host state. The only people who claim a ‘right of return’ is the Palestinians – supported by virtually the whole world of Islam.
Similarly, whereas since 1940, all the millions of refugees throughout the world, were dealt with by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees [UNHCR], the Arabs managed to set up the United Nations Works & Relief Agency [UNRWA] which is designed exclusively to look after Palestinian refugees.
Whereas the purpose of the UNHCR is to help refugees start a new life and end their refugee status; the goal of UNRWA is the opposite - to perpetuate the refugee status [see the ‘Industry of Lies’, by Ben Dror Yemini]
As a result, Palestinians have no interest in ending the refugee status of their own people [contrast that with the way Israel absorbed and integrated the 900,000 Jewish refugees, expelled from Arabs lands]
This behaviour and attitude is a stain on the Arab and Palestinian leadership who seem not to care a damn about their own people
IS THERE A CONNECTION BETWEEN ISRAEL AND APARTHEID?
The latest line generated by the Arab propaganda machine is that Israel is an apartheid state and many of those who follow that line do so in ignorance.
As to Palestinian Arabs who live in Israel, they have equal rights in every respect, in law and in practice. In fact, the only place, in the Middle-East, where Arabs have a genuine vote is in Israel and the only place Arab women have a true vote, is in Israel. Arabs serve in the Knesset [Parliament], in the Judiciary, in commerce, in academia and in every field.
As to Palestinian Arabs who live in Gaza, Israel is not in occupation there. They are governed by Hamas, not Israel.
As to Palestinian Arabs living in the West Bank, the vast majority are governed by the Palestinian authority, not Israel. The small numbers who live in the areas controlled by the Israel military, yes, they live under martial [as opposed to civilian] law but that is because the Palestinians refuse peace, send suicide bombers and knife attackers to kill Israelis etc, forcing Israel to maintain its military ‘occupation’. If the Palestinians made genuine peace, there would be no occupation.
As to the Palestinians in East Jerusalem [an intermediate status], they freely attend everywhere in Jewish [West] Jerusalem - in shopping malls, universities, parks, hospitals etc, as they should but if a Jew walks into an Arab neighbourhood in East Jerusalem, he is unlikely to come out alive. Moreover, it is the Palestinians who call for the annihilation of Israel, not the reverse. That is the real Apartheid in the area.
SO WHY THE BDS MOVEMENTS?
The BDS movement is led by people who are either ignorant, malicious or anti-Semitic.
Firstly, every war and every conflagration has been initiated by the Arabs / Palestinians, not by Israel.
Secondly, there is no apartheid in Israel. Quite the contrary: Israel is the place where Arabs have total equality under the law and in practice. Israeli Arabs are able to express themselves in ways they cannot do in any other Arab country. The fact the B’zelem [a tiny fringe extreme anti-Israel Israeli organisation] or the UN Human Rights Council [whose members include countries such as, China, Cuba, Russia, Congo, Iraq, Libya, Venezuela, Uganda, etc and who for some reason seem to focus almost exclusively and singularly on Israel] assert otherwise, is hardly compelling because the facts do not support their stance.
To highlight the apparent hypocrisy of the BDS movement [and of the UN Human Rights Council], there are so many areas in the world where apartheid is blatant [eg, the way the Chinese treat their Uyghur community, the way the Russians treat their Chechnian community, the way the Turks treat their Kurd communities etc], yet no one hears of a BDS movement there.
Thirdly, the real Apartheid in the region is one perpetuated by the Arabs against Jews [see above] and against the Palestinians.
In 1948, when the Arabs [and Palestinian hordes] lost the war they had started against the tiny Jewish state, and refugees arrived into the neighbouring Arab countries, the Arab countries – despite their vast lands and untold wealth – placed them in refugee camps and gave them no chance to integrate into the local communities [contrast that with tiny Israel, which had no resources yet absorbed all 900,000 Jewish refugees expelled from Arab lands as well as many refugees from the DP camps in Europe, and integrated them with grace and dignity].
In 1959, the Arab League adopted resolution 1547 which denied Palestinians’ requests for citizenship in Arab states. Thus, the Arab countries subjected the Palestinians to apartheid and misery. They have ensured that, unlike the 30 million refugees around the world since 1945, who have been absorbed by their host countries, the Palestinian are left to decay in refugee camps
IS THE SEPARATION WALL NECESSARY?
Firstly, for most of its length, it is not a wall but a fence
Secondly, the wall was set up to stop Palestinian suicide bombers from entering Israel. During the last Intifada, before the wall was set up, these bombers killed over 1,000 civilians
When Palestinians cease trying to kill Israelis, there fence / wall can come down
WHY ARE THERE ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK?
The frequently asked question ought perhaps to be reversed: why should there not be Israeli settlements in the West Bank?
From a legal standpoint, the land belongs to no one. Historically, the lands were Jewish. They were then captured by the Romans and since then, the lands passed through multiple conquests culminating with the Ottoman empire, Great Britain and Jordan – all of whom have long left the land.
Israel captured the lands from Jordan in 1967 [after a 3rd war for survival against repeated Arab assaults and, incidentally, long before there was an occupation or settlements] and the Jordanians have long relinquished any claim to the land.
So, the question is: whose land is it?
Historically, there has never been such an entity as a Palestinian nation or land so, clearly, the land does not belong to the Palestinians. Israel and the world would be very happy to create a Palestinian state on the West Bank but this cannot happen if the Palestinian intend to create a base for aggression and terror there. Gaza is a case in point, where Israel withdrew completely in 2005 only to receive daily rocket fire [forcing it and Egypt to impose a blockade in 2007].
Ironically, to date, it is the Palestinians who do not want a state if this means recognition of the state of Israel. This is the reason they refused the offer of a state in 1937 [Peel commission], in 1947 [UN partition Plan], 1967 [the offer by Israel], in 2000 [Camp David], etc. This has always been their maximalist / Jihadist approach: they would rather have nothing than allow Israel [and the Jewish people] anything
Israel is a reluctant occupier and has no territorial ambition. It’s only concern is security. If the Palestinians were to abandon their traditional hatred and belligerence and make genuine peace, there would be no occupation and no settlements.
IS CRITICISM OF ISRAEL NECESSARILY ANTI-SEMITIC?
Not at all. Criticism of Israel is legitimate. Indeed, in Israel’s vibrant democracy, many criticise its policies and actions – as they do in all Western democracies. What is not legitimate is the massive, disproportionate and unbridled assault on Israel. There are so many far bigger problems everywhere, there are so many far worse things happening within the Palestinian territories and in Arab land and there are so many good things taking place in Israel, yet for media outlets such as the Guardian, the Independent and the Irish Times there is nothing but evil in Israel. That singular focus on just one country [apart from the factual inaccuracies, lack of balance and lack of context] does raise questions and one of those is: is the real driver, a resurgent anti-Semitism?
WILL THERE EVER BE PEACE?
In the words of Premier Golda Meir; “there will be peace only when the Palestinians’ love of their own children exceeds their hatred of Jews and Israel”
In another of her famous statements she said; “if the Arabs and Palestinians lay down their arms, there will be peace. If Israel lays down its arms, there will be no Israel…”
When Egypt made peace, Israel returned the whole of Sinai, settlements, oil fields at al. When Jordan made peace, it received the priceless gift of water from Israel. If the Palestinians ever abandon their traditional hatred and belligerence and make genuine peace, there will be no occupation and they will have a state, peace and prosperity. Is that asking too much?