A heated diaspora that often calls for rambunctious actions and voices, but never a listening ear.
This hostile ground’s history dates back to the Ottoman Empire, which met its downfall at the end of World War 1 in 1922. With the advent of Zionism in 1896, Austrian-Jewish journalist, Theodore Herzl turned sparks of Jewish nationalism into a fire which has been raging for 125 years now. With wars and uprisings frequenting the country along with breaching of territories, disputes never seem to settle. What started off as seeking refuge, later turned into an act of settler colonialism; followed by a series of sinister agreements and treaties that were never strictly implemented. The land that stretched from river Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea lay in tatters.
Is it fair that those who still grieve from the Holocaust of 1945, ruthlessly fuel another?
Where did it all begin to tumble downhill?
The Sharif of Mecca, Hussein Bin Ali sided with the British to overthrow the Ottomans in a series of letters (McMahon-Hussein Correspondence, 1915) during World War 1. Britain promised a unified Arab State from Aleppo to Aden in return. But alas, the promise turned out to be a Trojan horse, as Britain and France coalesced to form the Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916, dividing the Middle East to themselves.
The agreement called for a haphazard splitting of territories between Britain, France and Russia.
France would receive the region of South-Eastern Turkey, Northern Iraq – including Mosul, most of Syria and Lebanon.
British-controlled areas included: Jordan, Southern Iraq, Haifa and Acre in Palestine and a coastal strip between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan.
Russia would be granted Istanbul, Armenia and the strategic Turkish Straits.
After the war, France ceded its share of Palestine and Mosul to the British.
Now the factor worth considering is the Balfour Declaration issued in 1917. The mastermind? Arthur James Balfour. Then Britain’s Prime Minister and later Foreign Minister, who on behalf of the British Government sent a letter to the leader of the Jewish community in Britain, Walter Rothschild.
His letter read:
“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.”
Palestine was never Balfour’s to hand over so casually. Periodt.
This set of unrealistic promises that fooled the Arab King, propelled by the Balfour Declaration, led directly to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Both actions are a stark manifest of how colonialism works - bartering resources and lands without considering the true owners of the disputed land.
Thus forms the state of Israel.
Along with ensuring the onset of Nakba.
To provide a little to chew on about Zionism and the Zionist agenda; in brief, it is Israel’s national ideology, with Judaism serving as both a nationality and religion. Arabs and Palestinians generally oppose Zionism, as the explicitly Jewish character of the Israeli state means that Jews have privileges that others don’t. For instance, any Jew anywhere in the world can become an Israeli citizen, a right not extended to any other class of person. Arabs, then, often see Zionism as a species of colonialism and racism aimed at appropriating Palestinian land and systematically disenfranchising the Palestinians that remain. (cited from Vox)
Food for thought: How is it that a non-Israeli Jew in a far off corner has his rights over the state, but Palestinians are at war for their homeland? Well, it can’t be called a war right? One side has billion dollar ammunition and discreet funds, while the other has only hands in prayer.
To summarize what took place during the inter war period between 1918-1939 (British Mandate for Palestine), there’s a massive Jewish emigration into Palestine to escape anti-Semitism, which later results in militant Jewish groups fighting to secure a Jewish nation in Palestine, alongside an Arab nationalist movement calling for an Arab state in Palestine.
The British, unable to control the violence, hands over the issue into the hands of the UN, which proposes a partition plan of either states, which is as follows:
The United Nations decided to split the Palestine into two estates, roughly 6,50,000 Jews were allocated into the Blue Portion, while the Arabs, whose population was almost double that of the Jews were given the Brown Portion.
While the former gladly accepted the bounty, the latter predicted the Zionist dream at the cost of the motherland’s extinction.
The Arab states of Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and Syria, unsatisfied with the placement took to war with nascent Israel.
In a vicious series of conflicts, namely the Arab-Israeli wars, which included the Six-Day War; Israel not just defeated the militia but disoriented about 7,00,000 Palestinians into refugees of their own land.
Albeit Israel won the war, it was on illegitimate grounds. The UN allocated 56% of British Palestine for the Jewish state, but toward the end, Israel possessed 77%, everything but West Bank, Eastern Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.
The Nakba – 1948
Genocide. Or euphemistically put ethnic cleansing. Either way, inhumane!
A 73 year old holocaust of the late 20th century, that increases in numbers into early 21st century.
Here’s an infographic of the Nakba, and the damage done.
Credits- nativethreads.co
Map Representation of Palestinian land from 1946 till date.
Credits – nativethreads.co
All said and done, let’s consider the now and today.
There are about 6 million UN Designated Palestinian refugees.
More than 10 million Palestinian diaspora.
About 6,15,000 settlers in 158 settlements (Israeli colonies) in the West Bank & East Jerusalem.
All of which are illegal under International Law.
Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1987, saw 1,30,000 Syrians expelled and 100 Syrian villages destroyed. This destruction precedes over 20,000 Israelis forming settler colonies of only Jews.
On the Gaza Strip, a population over 1.8 million and 50% displaced, is now the 3rd most dense area in the world.
Completely suppressed under Israeli blockade and militia.
Despite the evident destruction, Israel still argues that all military action was taken under breach of national security.
So do Palestinian refugees have the right to return back to their homeland?
Their right to return is well established in the pages of international law. The first source of support for Palestinian refugee’s claims to a right of return is U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194 (III) Of December 1948, paragraph 11, in which the U.N. General Assembly,
“Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the governments or authorities responsible;
Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation…”
The rights outlined in this resolution are firmly grounded in international humanitarian, human rights, and refugee law!
Since 1949, this resolution together with UNSC Res. 242 and 338 have been regularly reaffirmed by the U.N. General Assembly, but have no action whatsoever.
Another interesting feat of 1949 was that, on the 9th of August, in an interview between an AFSC (American Friends Service Committee) employee, Don Stevenson and Israeli Ambassador to the US, Eliahu Elath. When questioned, if Israel would accept the return of Palestinian refugees back to their homes, Elath replied, “Israel would commit suicide if she would take back all the refugees.”
This very breach of UN accord negates the argument of national security that Israel claims.
“The Gaza blockade (through the land, air and sea) is a denial of basic human rights in contravention of international law and amounts to collective punishment” – United Nations
One may state, that the aforementioned statement was made during the 20th Century , but it’s the 21st now. Well Israel’s constitution doesn’t say so. It explicitly states that the Constitution is built on Zionist strategies and it aims to create an only Jew state and nation. Even if the Constitution is taken into liability, mandates 8, 9 & 10 calls for Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Movement and Freedom of Expression. Decree 12 mentions, “Every person is entitled to a fair trial”, and the 13th talks about innocent until proven guilty. Mandate 30 states, “Every community has the right to preserve its culture, language, and heritage. The State may allow a distinct community, including one consisting of members of a particular religion, to maintain separate communal settlements.”
In all truth, leaving international law out of the equation, I don’t see the country following its own constitution. If that is what’s etched in the country’s own preamble, I find it appalling to comprehend the reason behind countless murders of innocent Palestinian civilians.
Does the case still remain within the premises of “National Security”?
Therefore, having reached the end, I take the liberty to question my reader,
From the river to the sea, now you tell me, who should be free?
Author: M.S.Reeha, Associate, GIO Chennai
Pic. Credits: Canva, Google
Date: 4th June, 2021.
Comments