The origin of Israel-Palestine conflict

Summary

The transcript discusses the historical events surrounding the establishment of Israel in 1948, known as the Nakba for Palestinians, which involved the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians. The conversation highlights differing perspectives on the United Nations' role, the partition plan, and the actions of both Arab and Jewish communities. It touches on the complexities of the conflict, including the resistance to partition, the ensuing civil war, and the ultimate failure to establish a Palestinian state, emphasizing the significance of these events in understanding contemporary Middle Eastern issues.

Takeaways

• 🗺️ The 1948 events are pivotal, marking the establishment of Israel and the Nakba for Palestinians, leading to the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians.
• 🏛️ The UN's role in 1948 was to address a practical problem of two national communities with irreconcilable differences, rather than adjudicating rights and wrongs.
• 🌐 The UN Special Committee on Palestine recommended a two-state solution, with a minority position advocating for a single state under certain conditions.
• 📜 The UN Partition Plan of 1947 envisioned two states with guarantees of full equality for all citizens, irrespective of demographic majorities.
• 🤝 The concept of 'Jewish State' and 'Arab State' was ambiguous, raising questions about the nature of these states beyond demographic differences.
• 🇺🇳 The Soviet Union's stance, as expressed by Foreign Minister Gromyko, was原则上 supportive of a single state but acknowledged the necessity of a two-state solution given the intractable conflict.
• 🔄 The Zionist movement's ideology was inherently expansionist, with transfer (expulsion) of the Arab population seen as inevitable for the establishment of a Jewish state.
• ⚔️ The Arab rejection of the partition resolution and their initiation of hostilities led to a civil war and, subsequently, an Arab invasion aiming to prevent a Jewish state.
• 🏹 The 1948 Arab-Israeli War resulted in Israeli victory and the establishment of Israel, while Palestinians became stateless, with their return prevented by Israeli policies.
• 🏠 The acquisition of land by Jewish organizations prior to the British Mandate period is highlighted, challenging the narrative of unjust land distribution.
• 🔄 The historical narrative often starts at 1947 or 1948, potentially overlooking earlier events and focusing on the catastrophe and moral judgments without considering the broader historical context.

Q & A

What is the significance of the year 1948 for Israelis and Palestinians?

For Israelis, 1948 marks the establishment of the State of Israel and its War of Independence. For Palestinians, it represents the Nakba, or catastrophe, which involved the displacement of around 700,000 Palestinians from their homes due to the war.

What was the UN's role in addressing the Palestine question after World War II?

After World War II, the British decided they no longer wanted to deal with the Palestine question and handed the issue over to the United Nations. The UN was confronted with the practical problem of two national communities in Palestine with irreconcilable differences, particularly on the issues of immigration and land. The UN Special Committee on Palestine recommended the partition of Palestine into two states, a decision that was eventually supported by the UN General Assembly.

What was the minority position regarding the partition of Palestine within the UN Special Committee?

The minority position, supported by Iran, India, and Yugoslavia, favored a single state but acknowledged that if forced into a two-state solution, the communities might find a way to live together. However, they believed that the two-state solution was not the best option.

What did the UN partition resolution entail for the Jewish and Arab states?

The UN partition resolution called for the establishment of a Jewish state and an Arab state, with the understanding that each state would have to guarantee full equality of all citizens regarding political, civil, and religious matters, regardless of the demographic majority.

What was the Soviet foreign minister's stance on the establishment of a Jewish state?

The Soviet foreign minister, Andrei Gromyko, supported the establishment of a Jewish state, acknowledging the exceptional sorrow and suffering of the Jewish people, especially during the Holocaust. He initially supported a single state but was open to a two-state solution if the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine could not be reconciled.

How did the Arab community react to the UN partition resolution?

The Arab community, both the Arab states and the Arabs of Palestine, rejected the UN partition resolution outright. They were against the principle of partition and the idea of a Jewish state within Palestine.

What was the outcome of the Arab rejection of the partition resolution and the subsequent war?

The Arab rejection of the partition resolution and their decision to launch a war against the Jewish community in Palestine led to a civil war and, eventually, an invasion by the Arab states. This resulted in the establishment of the State of Israel after the Jews resisted and defeated the Arab forces in a two-stage war.

What was the 'nakba' and why did it occur?

The 'nakba', meaning catastrophe, refers to the displacement of a large number of Palestinians from their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. It occurred as a result of the conflict between the Arab and Jewish communities, and the subsequent war initiated by the Arab states against the newly declared State of Israel.

What was the role of the Zionist movement in the events leading up to 1948?

The Zionist movement played a crucial role in advocating for a Jewish state. While some Zionist leaders proclaimed a state based on absolute equality of all citizens, the movement was also characterized by expansionist ideologies, which contributed to the displacement of the Arab population and the establishment of a Jewish state.

How did the historical context of Zionism influence the outcome of 1948?

Zionism, with its aim of establishing a Jewish state, was a significant factor in the events of 1948. The movement's goals and actions, including land purchases and the resistance to Arab attacks, contributed to the eventual establishment of Israel and the displacement of Palestinians.

What is the significance of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

The 1948 Arab-Israeli War is significant as it marked the first major conflict between Arab states and the newly established State of Israel. The war and its aftermath, including the creation of a large Palestinian refugee problem, laid the groundwork for ongoing tensions and conflicts in the region.

Outlines

00:00

🌍 The 1948 Events: Nakba and the Establishment of Israel

This paragraph discusses the significance of the year 1948 from different perspectives. For Israelis, it marks the establishment of the State of Israel, while for Palestinians, it represents the Nakba, or catastrophe, signifying the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians due to the war. The speaker highlights the importance of understanding the events leading up to 1948 and their implications on current situations. The narrative then shifts to post-World War I, where the British, unwilling to handle the Palestine question, handed it over to the United Nations. The UN's challenge was to address the irreconcilable differences between two national communities in Palestine, leading to the recommendation of two states. The paragraph emphasizes the need for full equality of all citizens in both proposed states, regardless of demographic majorities, raising questions about the true meaning of a 'Jewish State' and an 'Arab State'.

05:00

📜 UN Partition and Soviet Perspective on Jewish State

The paragraph delves into the historical context of the United Nations' partition plan for Palestine and the diverse viewpoints during the UN General Assembly proceedings. It mentions the Soviet foreign minister's, Gromo, acknowledgment of the Jewish people's exceptional suffering and the UN's inability to ignore their plight. Gromo's speech is highlighted, emphasizing the Soviet Union's support for a single state solution原则上 but acceptance of a two-state solution if Jewish and Arab populations could not peacefully coexist. The paragraph also critiques the Zionist ideology as inherently expansionist, leading to the inevitable transfer or expulsion of the Arab population, which was a key factor in the establishment of a Jewish state.

10:03

🤼‍♂️ Arab Rejection and Israeli Response to the 1948 Partition

This section focuses on the Arab rejection of the 1948 partition resolution and the subsequent Israeli response. It explains that while the Zionist movement found a pretext to expel the indigenous population and expand borders during the first Arab-Israeli War, the Arab states and Palestinians rejected the principle of partition outright. The discussion includes the Peel Commission's earlier recommendation for two states and the eventual Arab states' invasion of the newly declared state of Israel, which ultimately led to the failure of the partition resolution as neither side adhered to its terms. The speaker concludes by acknowledging the complex realities that led to the establishment of Israel and the displacement of Palestinians.

15:06

🏛️ Zionism, Transfer, and the Historical Significance of 1948

The paragraph examines the historical significance of 1948, focusing on Zionism's objectives and the concept of transfer. It references the head of the World Zionist Organization's statement about making Palestine as Jewish as other nation-states are to their respective majorities. The speaker disputes the idea that the 1947 partition resolution could be accepted today, given the demographic and political realities of the time. The discussion includes the inevitability of the Nakba as a product of the partition, the destruction of Palestinian society, and the prevention of Palestinian return, which the speaker equates to ethnic cleansing. The paragraph also touches on the collusion between Zionist leadership and Jordanian leadership to prevent an independent Arab state in Palestine.

20:10

📚 Selective Historiography and the Narrative of 1948

This paragraph critiques the tendency to selectively interpret history, particularly when discussing the events of 1948. The speaker points out that often, the narrative begins with the catastrophe of 1948 and assigns blame solely to the Israeli state, ignoring the complex historical context. It is emphasized that the civil war starting in 1947, largely due to Arab rejection of the partition plan, and the purchases of land by Jewish organizations are often overlooked. The paragraph argues against the notion that Zionism inherently led to population transfer or expulsion, highlighting the political, social, and military realities on the ground that influenced the events. The speaker asserts that the Arabs' refusal to negotiate and their use of war as a tool contributed to the犹太人 gaining land and the eventual establishment of the State of Israel.

Keywords

💡Establishment of Israel

The term refers to the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. It is a pivotal event in the history of the Middle East and is central to the narrative of the video, highlighting the complex political and social dynamics that led to the formation of a Jewish state after World War II.

💡War of Independence

This term refers to the series of military engagements fought by the newly declared State of Israel against its Arab neighbors in 1948. It is a key concept in the video as it outlines the conflict that followed the establishment of Israel and the resistance from neighboring Arab states.

💡Nakba

Nakba, meaning 'catastrophe' in Arabic, refers to the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. It is a term of profound emotional and political significance, representing the loss of homes and the creation of Palestinian refugees.

💡Partition of Palestine

The Partition of Palestine refers to the 1947 United Nations proposal to divide the British Mandate of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. This concept is crucial to the video's discussion, as it represents the international community's attempt to resolve the conflicting national aspirations of Jews and Arabs in the region.

💡Demographic Majority

Demographic majority refers to a group of people who form the largest percentage of a population within a specific area. In the context of the video, it is used to describe the Jewish and Arab populations in the proposed partition plan, emphasizing the importance of population distribution in the establishment of separate states.

💡Equality of Citizens

This concept refers to the principle that all citizens of a state should have equal rights and opportunities, regardless of their ethnicity, religion, or other differences. The video highlights this as a critical aspect of the proposed Jewish and Arab states, questioning how the concept of a 'Jewish state' or 'Arab state' could coexist with this principle.

💡Zionism

Zionism is a political movement that supports the establishment and development of a Jewish state in the historic land of Israel. In the video, Zionism is discussed as a driving force behind the creation of Israel and its associated ideologies, which include the concept of a Jewish state and the implications of such a state's formation.

💡Population Transfer

Population transfer refers to the forced movement of people from one region to another, often as a result of conflict or political decisions. In the context of the video, it is associated with the displacement of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the establishment of Israel.

💡Arab Rejectionism

Arab Rejectionism is the refusal by Arab states and Palestinian leaders to accept the establishment of Israel and the UN partition plan. This concept is significant in the video as it outlines the opposition and resistance from Arab parties to the proposed division of Palestine.

💡Palestinian State

A Palestinian state refers to the aspiration of establishing a sovereign state for the Palestinian people. The video discusses the historical context in which a Palestinian state was not established, and the consequences of this for the Palestinian people.

💡Ethnic Cleansing

Ethnic cleansing is the systematic removal or extermination of a specific ethnic group from a region, often involving forced displacement, mass killings, or other forms of violence. In the video, it is used to describe the consequences of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War for the Palestinian population.

Highlights

1948 marks the establishment of the State of Israel and the Nakba, or catastrophe, for Palestinians, involving the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians.

The United Nations General Assembly's partition plan faced irreconcilable differences between two national communities in Palestine, leading to the recommendation of two states.

The UN Special Committee on Palestine recommended two states, with a minority position by Iran, India, and Yugoslavia supporting one state but acknowledging the potential for two states.

The concept of a 'Jewish State' and an 'Arab State' was unclear, except that the Jewish state would be demographically Jewish and the Arab state demographically Arab.

Both the Arab State and the Jewish State were required to guarantee full equality of all citizens regarding political, civil, and religious matters.

The partition resolution was seen as the correct decision, as the Arab and Jewish communities could not have lived together at that point.

The Soviet foreign minister, Gromo, emphasized the exceptional sorrow and suffering of the Jewish people during the war, influencing the UN's decision.

Zionist ideology was inherently expansionist, leading to the inevitable displacement of the Arab population for the establishment of a Jewish state.

The Arab side rejected the partition resolution outright, leading to a war against the Jewish community in Palestine.

The 1948 war was two-staged, with the first stage being the civil war between the Arab community in Palestine and the Jews, and the second stage being the invasion by the Arab states.

The Nakba, or the Palestinian refugee problem, was a consequence of the 1948 war.

The Jewish community prepared to establish a state, fought for it, and established it, while the Palestinian Arabs did not attempt to create a state before 1948.

The Zionist objective was to make Palestine as Jewish as other nation-states are homogeneous, emphasizing political, demographic, and territorial supremacy.

The partition resolution inverted the relationship between the two communities in Palestine, leading to the Arab states and Palestinian leadership's resistance.

The UN partition resolution would not likely pass today's UN General Assembly due to the significant changes in its composition and the realities on the ground in Palestine.

The Zionist leadership and the Hashemite leadership of Jordan colluded to prevent the establishment of an independent Arab state in Palestine.

The refusal of the Arabs to negotiate and their use of war as a tool led to the Jews acquiring land through military means.

Transcripts

first question is about

1948 for Israelis 1948 is the

establishment of the state of Israel and

the war of independence for Palestinians

1948 is the nakba which means

catastrophe or the displacement of

700,000 Palestinians from their homes as

a consequence of the war what to you is

important to understand about the events

of 1948 and the period around there

4749 that helps us understand what's

going on today and uh maybe helps us

understand the roots of all this that

started even before

1948 I was hoping that Norm can speak

first and Benny then way and then

Norm after World War

I the

British decided that they didn't want to

deal with the Palestine question anymore

and the ball was thrown into the court

of the United

Nations

now as I read the record the UN was not

attempting to arbitrate or adjudicate

Rights and

Wrongs it was confronting a very

practical

problem there were two national

communities in

Palestine and there were irreconcilable

differences on fundamental questions

most importantly looking at the historic

record on the question of

immigration and associate with the

question of immigration the question of

land the UN special committee on

Palestine which came into being before

the UN 181 partition

resolution the UN special committee it

recommended two states in

Palestine there was a minority position

represented by uh Iran India

Yugoslavia they supported one

state but uh they

believed that if forced to the two

communities would figure out some sort

of Modis sendi and live

together United Nations General

Assembly supported partition between

what it called a Jewish State and an

Arab

State now in my reading of the record

they understand there's new scholarship

on the subject which I've not read but

so far as I've read the record there's

no Clarity on what the United

Nations General Assembly meant by a

Jewish State and an Arab State except

for the fact that the Jewish state would

be demogra graphically the majority

would be Jewish and the Arab state

demographically would be

Arab the unscop the UN special committee

on Palestine it was very clear and it

was re reiterated many

times that in recommending two

states each state the Arab State and the

Jewish state would have to guarantee

full equality of all citizens with

regard to political civil and religious

matters now that does raise the question

if there is absolute full equality of

all citizens both in the Jewish State

and the Arab state with regard to

political rights civil rights and

religious rights apart from the

demographic

majority it's very unclear what it meant

to call a state Jewish or call a state

Arab in my view the partition

resolution was the correct

decision I do not believe that the Arab

and Jewish communities could at that

point be made to live together I

disagree with the minority position of

indiaan Iran and

Yugoslavia and that not being a

practical option two states was the only

other

option in this regard I would want to

pay tribute to what was probably the

most moving speech at the UN General

Assembly

proceedings by the Soviet foreign

minister

gromo I was very tempted to quote it at

length but I

recognized that would

be uh taking too much

time uh so I asked a young friend Jamie

Stern Winer to edit it and just get the

essence of what foreign minister gromo

had to

say during the last war gromo said the

Jewish people

underwent exceptional sorrow and

suffering without any

exaggeration this sorrow and suffering

are

Indescribable hundreds of thousands of

Jews are wandering about in various

countries of Europe in search of means

of existence and in search of

shelter the United Nations cannot and

must not regard this situation ation

with

indifference past

experience particularly during the

second world war shows that no Western

European state was able to provide

adequate assistance for the Jewish

people in defending its rights and its

very existence from the violence of the

Hitler ites and their

allies this is an unpleasant

fact but

unfortunately like all other facts it

must be

admitted gromo went on to say in

principle he supports one state or the

Soviet Union supports one state but he

said if relations between the Jewish and

Arab populations of

Palestine proved to be so bad that would

be impossible to reconcile them and to

ensure the peaceful coexistence of the

Arabs and the Jews the Soviet Union

would

support two

states I

personally am not

convinced that the two states would have

been unsustainable in the long

term if and this is a big if the Zionist

movement had been faithful to the

position that proclaimed during the

unscop public

hearings at the time benorian

testified quote I want to express what

we mean by a Jewish

State we mean by a Jewish State simply a

state where the majority of the people

are

Jews not a state where a Jew has in any

way any privilege more than anyone

else a Jewish State means a state based

on absolute equality of all her citizens

and on

Democracy alas this was not to

be as Professor Maris has

written quote Zionist ideology and

practice

were

necessarily and

elementally

expansionist and then he wrote in

another

book

transfer the euphemism for

exposion transfer was

inevitable and inbuilt into

Zionism because it sought to transform a

land which was Arab into a Jewish state

and a Jewish State could not have Arisen

without a major displacement of Arab

population and because this aim

automatically produced resistance among

the

Arabs which in turn persuade the yes's

leaders the yeshu being the Jewish

Community the yes's leaders that a

hostile Arab majority or large minority

could not remain in place if a Jewish

state was to arise or safely

endure or as Professor Mars

retrospectively Put it

quote a removing of a

population was

needed without a population

exposion a Jewish state would not have

been

established

unquote the Arab side rejected outright

the partition resolution I won't play

games with that I know a lot of people

try to prove it's not true it clearly in

my view is true the Arab side rejected

out write the partition

resolution while Israeli

leaders acting under

compulsions

inevitable and

inbuilt into to

Zionism found the pretext in the course

of the first Arab Israeli War to expel

the indigenous

population and expand its

borders I therefore

conclude that neither side was committed

to the letter of the partition

resolution and both sides aborted it

thank you Norm nor asked that we make a

lengthy statement in the beginning uh

Benny I hope it's okay to call Everybody

by their first name in the name of

camaraderie Norm has quoted several

things you said uh perhaps you can

comment broadly on the question of 1948

and maybe respond to the things that

Norm said yeah unop the United Nations

special committee on Palestine um

recommended partition the majority of

unop recommended partition which was

accepted by the UN General Assembly in

November

1947

looking back to the peel Commission in

1937 10 years earlier a British

commission had looked at the problem of

Palestine the two Waring National groups

who refus to live together if you like

or um um consolidate a a unitary state

state between them um and Peele said

there should be two states that's the

principle The Country Must Be

partitioned into two states this would

give a modum of Justice to both sides if

if not all their demands of course um

and the United Nations followed suit the

United Nations unop and then the UN

General Assembly representing the will

of the International Community um said

two states is the just solution in this

complex situation the problem was that

immediately with the passage of the

resolution the Arabs the Arab states and

the Arabs of palestin said no as Norman

Franklin said they said no they rejected

the partition idea the principle of

partition not just the idea of what

percentage which side should get but the

principle of partition they said no to

the Jews should not have any part of

Palestine for their Sovereign territory

maybe Jews could live as a minority in

Palestine that also was problematic in

the eyes of the the Palestinian Arab

leadership husseini had said only Jews

who were there before 1917 could

actually get citizenship and continue to

live there but the Arabs rejected par

and the Arabs of Palestine launched in

very disorganized fashion war against

the resolution against the

implementation of the resolution against

the Jewish community in Palestine um and

this was their defeat in that civil war

between the two communities while the

British were withdrawing from Palestine

um um led to the Arab Invasion the The

Invasion by the Arab states in May

1948 of of the country again basically

with the idea of eradicating or

preventing the emergence of a Jewish

state in line with the United Nations um

decision and the will of the

International

Community Norman said that the Zionist

Enterprise and he quoted me meant from

the beginning um to transfer or expel

the Arabs of Palestine or some of the

Arabs of Palestine um and I think he's

sort of um quoting out of context the

context in which the statements were

made that that the

the Jewish State could only emerge um if

there was a transfer of Arab population

was preceded in the way I wrote it and

the way it actually happened by Arab

resistance and hostilities towards the

Jewish Community had the Arabs accepted

partition there would have been a large

Arab minority in the Jewish state which

emerged in 48 47 and in fact Jewish um

economists and state Builders took into

account that there would be a large Arab

min minority and its needs would be

cared for ETC um but this was not to be

because the Arabs attacked and had they

not attacked um perhaps a a Jewish state

with a large Arab minority could have

emerged but this didn't happen they went

to war the Jews resisted and in the

course of that war and Arab populations

were driven out some were expelled some

left because Arab leaders advised them

to leave or ordered them to leave and at

end of the war Israel said they can't

return because they just tried to

destroy the Jewish State um and and

that's the basic a reality of what

happened in 48 the Jews created a state

the Palestinian Arabs never bothered to

even try to create a state a before 48

and in the course of the 1948 war and

for that reason they have no state to

this day the Jews do have a state

because they prepared to establish a

state fought for it and um established

it um a hopefully lastingly when you

said hostility in case people are not

familiar there was a full-on war where

Arab States

invaded and Israel won that war let me

just add to clarify the war had two

parts to it the first part was the Arab

community in Palestine its militia men

attacked the Jews um a from November

1947 in other words from the day after

the UN partition resolution it was

passed Arab gunmen were busy shooting up

Jews and that snowballed into a

fullscale civil war between the two

communities in Palestine in May 1948 a

second stage began in the war in which

the Arab States invaded the new state

attacked the new state um and and they

too were defeated and thus the state of

Israel emerged in the course of this

two-stage War a a vast Palestinian

refugee problem

um um occurred and so after that the

transfer the expulsion the the thing

that people call the

nakba uh happened um we could you speak

to 1948 and the historical significance

of it sure um there's there's a lot to

unpack here I'll try to limit myself to

just a few points regarding Zionism and

transfer I think Heim whitesman uh the

head of the world Zionist organization

had it exactly right when he said that

the objective of Zionism is to make

Palestine as Jewish as England is

English or France is

French um in other words um as as Norman

explained um a Jewish

State requires

Jewish political demographic and and

territorial Supremacy without those

three elements um the state would be

Jewish in name only and I think what

distinguishes Zionism is its

insistence Supremacy and

exclusivity that would be my first point

second point is um I think what the

Soviet foreign minister at the time

Andre gomo said is exactly right with

one

reservation um um gromo was describing a

European savagery Unleashed against

Europe's Jews at the time you know it

wasn't Palestinians or Arabs uh the

Savages and The Barbarians were European

to the

core um it had nothing to do with

developments in

Palestine um uh or the Middle

East secondly at the time that groma was

speaking um those Jewish uh survivors of

the Holocaust and and others who were in

need of Safe Haven were still

overwhelmingly on the European continent

and not on Palestine not in Palestine

and I think

um given um the scale of the savagery I

don't think that any one state or

country um should have borne the

responsibility uh for addressing this

crisis I think it should have been an

international uh

responsibility um Soviet Union could

have contributed Germany certainly could

and should have uh contributed um the

United Kingdom and the United States uh

which slammed their doors shut to um uh

the persecuted Jews of Europe as the

Nazis were rising to power they

certainly should have uh played a role

but instead what passed for the

International Community at the time

decided to partition Palestine and here

I think we need to um uh judge the

partition resolution against the

realities that obtained at the

time um two 2third of the population of

Palestine was

Arab uh the yeshu the Jewish community

in Palestine constituted about onethird

of the total population and controlled

even less of um of of the land uh within

Palestine as as a preeminent Palestinian

historian uh W Al khi has pointed out

the partition resolution in giving

roughly

55% of Palestine to the Jewish

Community um and I think 41

42% uh to the Arab Community to the

Palestinians did not preserve the

position of each Community or even um uh

favor one community at the expense of

the others rather it thoroughly inverted

and

revolutionized uh the relationship uh

between between the two communities and

as many have written the neba was the

inevitable consequence of partition

given the nature of Zionism um given the

territorial

disposition given the weakness of the

Palestinian Community whose leadership

had been largely de decimated during a

major Revolt at the end of the

1930s um given that the Arab states uh

were still very much under French and

British

influence um uh the neba was um

inevitable the inevitable product of the

um partition uh resolution and and one

last point also about um the un's

partition resolution is yes um formally

that is what the International Community

decided in on the 29th of November

1947 it's not a resolution that could

ever have gotten through the UN General

Assembly today for a very simple reason

it was a very different General Assembly

most African most Asian States um were

not yet

independent um were the resolution to be

placed before the inter ational

Community today and I find it telling

that um uh the minority opinion was led

by India Iran and Yugoslavia I think

they would have represented the clear um

uh majority so

partition given what we know about

Zionism given that it was entirely

predictable what would happen given um

uh the realities on the ground in

Palestine um was deeply unjust and the

idea that either the Palestinians or the

Arab states could have accepted um such

a resolution is is I think um uh an

illusion that was in 1947 we saw what

happened in 48 and 49 Palestinian

Society was essentially um uh destroyed

over 80% I believe of Palestinians

resident in the territory that became

the state of Israel were either expelled

or fled uh and ultimately were

ethnically cleansed because ethnic

cleansing consists of two components

it's not just forcing people into Refuge

or expelling them it's just as

importantly preventing their return and

here and and and beny Morris has written

I think an article about ysep vites and

the transfer committees um there was a

very detailed initiative to prevent

their return and it consisted of raising

hundreds of Palestinian villages to the

G

which was systematically implemented and

so on and so Palestinians became a

stateless people now um what is the most

important reason that no Arab state was

established um in Palestine well since

the

1930s um the Zionist

leadership and um the hasite um uh

leadership of uh Jordan as has been uh

thoroughly researched and written about

by the Israeli British historian a islim

essentially

colluded um to prevent the establishment

of an independent Arab State um in

Palestine uh in the late

1940s um there's there's much more here

but I think um those those are the key

points I I would make about uh

1948 we may talk about Zionism Britain

un assemblies and all all the things you

mentioned there's a lot to dig into so

again if you can keep it to just one

statement moving forward after Sten if

you want to go a little longer uh also

we should acknowledge the fact that the

speaking speeds of of people here are

different Stephen speaks about 10 times

faster uh than me uh Stephen do you want

to comment on 1948 yeah I think it's

interesting where people choose to start

the history um I noticed a lot of people

like to start at either 47 or 48 because

it's the first time where they can

clearly point to a catastrophe that

occurs on the Arab side that they want

to ascribe 100% of the blame to the

newly emergent Israeli state to uh but I

feel like when you have this type of

reading of History it feels like the

goal is to moralize everything first and

then to pick and choose facts that kind

of support the statements of your

initial moral statement afterwards um

whenever people are talking about 48 or

the establishment of the Arab State uh I

never hear about uh the fact that a

Civil War started in 47 uh that was

largely instigated because of the Arab

rejection ISM of the 47 partition plan

uh I never hear about the fact that the

majority of the land that was acquired

happened by purchases from Jewish

organizations of uh Palestinian Arabs of

the Ottoman Empire before the mandatory

period in 1920 even started um funnily

enough King Abdullah of Jordan uh was

quoted as saying the Arabs are as

prodical in selling their land as they

are in Weeping about it uh I never hear

about the multiple times that Arabs

rejected partition uh rejected living

with Jews um rejected any sort of state

that would have even uh had any sort of

Jewish exclusivity it's funny because it

was brought up before that the partition

plan was unfair and that's why the Arabs

rejected it as though they rejected it

because it was unfair because of the

amount of land that Jews were given and

not just due to the fact that Jews were

given land at all as though a 30%

partition or a 25% partition would have

been accepted when I don't think that

was the reality of the circumstances I

feel like most of the other stuff has

been said but I I I noticed that um

whenever people talk about 48 or the

years preceding 48 um I think the worst

thing that happens is there's a there's

a cherry picking of the facts where

basically all of the blame is ascribed

to this uh this built-in idea of Zionism

that because of a handful of quotes or

because of an ideology we can say that

transfer or population expulsion or the

the basically the Mandate of all of

these Arabs being kicked off the land

was always going to happen when I think

there's a refusal sometimes as well to

acknowledge that regardless of the ideas

of some of the Zionist leaders there is

a political social and Military reality

on the ground that that they're forced

to contend with and unfortunately the

Arabs because of their inability to

engage in diplomacy and only to use

tools of War to try to negotiate

everything going on in mandatory

Palestine basically always gave the Jews

a reason or an excuse to fight and

acquire land through that way uh because

of their refusal to negotiate on

anything else whether it was the

partition plan in 47 whether it was the

uh the Lucan peace conference afterwards

where Israel even offered to Annex Gaza

in 51 where they offered to take in

100,000 refugees every single deal is

just rejected out of hand because the

Arabs don't want a Jewish State anywhere

in this region of the

world