By Abraham Sion, jns
Palestinian leaders demand that their refugees move to and live in the Jewish state, not to the envisioned Arab one.
Libelous and defamatory words have constantly been used in the last century to undermine Jewish legitimacy. Since Nazi Germany, no other people have mastered this craft more efficiently than the Palestinian Arabs and their supporters, particularly after the peace treaty between Israel and the PLO (the Oslo Accords). Since the Oslo Accords of Sept. 13, 1993, the Arabs of Palestine have been waging a psychological warfare aimed at the destruction of Israel’s image in the world.
To facilitate their campaign, Palestinian leaders and their supporters created a false narrative on various issues, knowing that it would have a deep psychological effect on public opinion, especially when repeated incessantly year after year. Here, I am referring to phrases that we see every day in the news, among politicians and community leaders, even within the Jewish community; phrases such as “The two-state solution,” “West Bank” and “Occupied Territories,” which have become rooted in today’s rhetoric around the world. The only nation in the Arab-Israeli conflict that seems to have neglected to recognize this fabrication is the Jewish nation, for its leaders, politicians and newscasters have fully adopted the Arab narrative.
To begin with, there is no such a thing as a two-state solution when referring to Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has existed as a viable state since 1948. It no longer needs to be established or to be recognized. Therefore, Israel is not a party to any “solution” in this false equation. What the two-state solution really means is the formation of another Arab state in the territory promised to the Jewish people as their national Homeland. This is in addition to the eastern part of Palestine, namely Transjordan, which was offered by the British to Abdullah, the Emir of Hedjaz, to appease the Arabs.
As I point out in my book, To Whom Was the Promised Land Promised?, the Middle East was divided by the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference in April 1920 between the Arab nation and the Jewish nation. The Arabs were granted independence in the entire Middle East except for Palestine, while Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan River, was designated to constitute the national home for the Jewish people. In 1921, Great Britain carved out Transjordan from the territory of Palestine, and on Nov. 29, 1947, the Arabs of Palestine were offered a substantial part of what was left of the Jewish National Home by the General Assembly (in its Resolution 181 II). Nevertheless, the Arabs rejected the offer and invaded the newly born Jewish state for the purpose of obliterating it. They failed. Now, the Palestinian Arabs wish to take the international community back almost 75 years to Nov. 29, 1947, and make it sound as if we are now dealing with the establishment of two states: one Arab and one Jewish.
However, Israel exists as a viable state and is more advanced than many others in almost every aspect of life: medicine, military intelligence, technology, startups, agriculture, desalinization, etc. The truth is that the Arabs and their supporters wish to establish a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), and it is far easier to convince the world that this is done on an even-handed basis.
Another inherent conflict regarding the two-state solution is that Palestine, as envisioned by their leadership, is completely Arab, devoid of any Jews living as equal citizens in their midst; whereas Israel has Arab citizens forming more than 20 percent of the total population that regards themselves as Palestinian, as do their representatives in the Knesset, who mostly work hard to make Israel vanish as a Jewish state. We never hear suggestions that those who regard themselves as Palestinians move to the Arab state. On the contrary: Palestinian Arab leaders demand that their refugees move to and live in the Jewish state, not to the envisioned Arab one.
Moreover, this unrealistic plan is no solution to the conflict since the Palestinian Arabs refused to see an end to the conflict by the establishment of a Palestinian state. It is no secret that they would continue to carry out their terrorist activities from within Palestinian territory to achieve the goal of eradicating the Jewish state completely. It is crucial to recall that time after time, the Palestinian Arabs have rejected any attempt to offer them a state subject to the ending of all hostilities and terrorist activities against Israel.
The two-state solution, therefore, is false. It is a misnomer. It serves as baseless Arab propaganda. It is, therefore, not clear why the supporters of truth—let alone the Israeli government and world Jewry—would adopt the Arab narrative of a two-state solution. Why not insist that the entire raison d’être of the Palestinian Arabs and their supporters is to create another Arab state in what was actually, in fact, designated under international law to become the National Home for the Jewish people?
The same argument applies to the West Bank. This again is a misnomer aimed at enhancing Arab propaganda, and at disconnecting the area from Jewish roots and history. The West Bank is the territory known in biblical times and thereafter as Judea and Samaria. Even during the British Mandate, this area was referred to as Judea and Samaria. The term West Bank was given to this area by the Kingdom of Transjordan after occupying it in 1948 ostensibly to disconnect the term from its Jewish roots. It later annexed it in flagrant violation of international law and Article 2 (4) of the U.N. Charter.
Interestingly, the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank was not recognized by any other country except Britain and Pakistan. It wasn’t even recognized by the Arab League or by any other Arab country. However, renaming the area as the West Bank had a strong psychological effect. It made its annexation to Transjordan possible and enabled the recognition of the term “Occupied Palestinian Territory” by the International Court of Justice and in U.N. resolutions. It would have been much more difficult for the Kingdom of Transjordan to annex a territory known as Judea and Samaria or for the international community to regard this area as “Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
It is therefore quite obvious why the Arabs and their supporters prefer to relate to Judea and Samaria as the West Bank. However, it’s not clear why anyone who pursues truth and justice—let alone Jewish leaders around the globe, Israeli politicians, statesmen and journalists—wishes to adopt the misnomer rather than the correct name.
Abraham Sion is a professor emeritus at Ariel University and author of “To Whom Was the Promised Land Promised?” (Mazo Publishers of Jerusalem), which is available on Amazon.
My comment was deleted again – reposting:
Reader
December 6, 2021 at 10:40 am
@FelixQuigley
My comment was deleted – reposting:
Reader
December 6, 2021 at 9:02 am
@FelixQuigley
My view of history is as follows:
1) there is a natural process of history/economy/society/whatever that will proceed with the development of technology no matter what the humans will try to do about it, and I think the Marxian model is the best so far minus the untimely revolutions (it was a product of his time);
2) the 20th century taught us that trying to speed this process up by socialist revolutions taking place in backward countries, as well as trying to slow it down by creating fascist dictatorships backed by the capitalists trying to retain their power at all costs, does not work and causes enormous bloodshed – however, the humans will keep trying;
Stalinism, Maoism, etc. (not Hitlerism bc it is a racial theory and fascism) was caused by the socialist idea whose time hadn’t come yet falling to the level of the lowest common denominator and degenerating into plain dictatorship.
I apologize for quoting Hitler but he said: “Stalin is no socialist. He recreated the Russian monarchy but in its more extreme form.” [can’t find the actual source now]
3) I am not going to argue about the virus or the climate but I think that the virus, at least, is certainly being used by the PTB for nefarious purposes, and serves as a distraction from a worldwide fascist coup which is taking place as we watch (yes, it will fail but how many millions of lives will it take first?);
4) The Balfour declaration, etc. was an attempt on the part of Great Britain to take over the ME which almost worked – they did manage to kick out the French but failed to do the same with the Jews, even though they did cut down enormously on the size of the National Home and created lots of other problems for the Jews;
5) I think that a large part of the problems Israel is facing now is due to its “elites” trying to be “good” and accommodating in the face of the unrelenting enmity of the outside world, especially the Arabs. I also think that abandoning Zionism and becoming Americanized was wrong.
@FelixQuigley
My comment was deleted – reposting:
Reader
December 6, 2021 at 9:02 am
@FelixQuigley
My view of history is as follows:
1) there is a natural process of history/economy/society/whatever that will proceed with the development of technology no matter what the humans will try to do about it, and I think the Marxian model is the best so far minus the untimely revolutions (it was a product of his time);
2) the 20th century taught us that trying to speed this process up by socialist revolutions taking place in backward countries, as well as trying to slow it down by creating fascist dictatorships backed by the capitalists trying to retain their power at all costs, does not work and causes enormous bloodshed – however, the humans will keep trying;
Stalinism, Maoism, etc. (not Hitlerism bc it is a racial theory and fascism) was caused by the socialist idea whose time hadn’t come yet falling to the level of the lowest common denominator and degenerating into plain dictatorship.
I apologize for quoting Hitler but he said: “Stalin is no socialist. He recreated the Russian monarchy but in its more extreme form.” [can’t find the actual source now]
3) I am not going to argue about the virus or the climate but I think that the virus, at least, is certainly being used by the PTB for nefarious purposes, and serves as a distraction from a worldwide fascist coup which is taking place as we watch (yes, it will fail but how many millions of lives will it take first?);
4) The Balfour declaration, etc. was an attempt on the part of Great Britain to take over the ME which almost worked – they did manage to kick out the French but failed to do the same with the Jews, even though they did cut down enormously on the size of the National Home and created lots of other problems for the Jews;
5) I think that a large part of the problems Israel is facing now is due to its “elites” trying to be “good” and accommodating in the face of the unrelenting enmity of the outside world, especially the Arabs. I also think that abandoning Zionism and becoming Americanized was wrong.
@FelixQuigley
My view of history is as follows:
1) there is a natural process of history/economy/society/whatever that will proceed with the development of technology no matter what the humans will try to do about it, and I think the Marxian model is the best so far minus the untimely revolutions (it was a product of his time);
2) the 20th century taught us that trying to speed this process up by socialist revolutions taking place in backward countries, as well as trying to slow it down by creating fascist dictatorships backed by the capitalists trying to retain their power at all costs, does not work and causes enormous bloodshed – however, the humans will keep trying;
Stalinism, Maoism, etc. (not Hitlerism bc it is a racial theory) was caused by the socialist idea whose time hadn’t come yet falling to the level of the lowest common denominator and degenerating into plain dictatorship.
I apologize for quoting Hitler but he said: “Stalin is no socialist. He recreated the Russian monarchy but in its more extreme form.” [can’t find the actual source now]
3) I am not going to argue about the virus or the climate but I think that the virus, at least, is certainly being used by the PTB for nefarious purposes, and serves as a distraction from a worldwide fascist coup which is taking place as we watch (yes, it will fail but how many millions of lives will it take first?);
4) The Balfour declaration, etc. was an attempt on the part of Great Britain to take over the ME which almost worked – they did manage to kick out the French but failed to do the same with the Jews, even though they did cut down enormously on the size of the National Home and created lots of other problems for the Jews;
5) I think that a large part of the problems Israel is facing now is due to its “elites” trying to be “good” and accommodating in the face of the unrelenting enmity of the outside world, especially the Arabs. I also think that abandoning Zionism and becoming Americanized was wrong.
Reader…your comment is remarkable but I’m not sure. My thoughts are a little out of kilter as there are too many things happening.
The revolution in 1917 was a real revolution but it happened in a terribly backward country and revolutions in rich Europe were quickly defeated. Stalinism arose, it was the product of defeats and more and more being also the cause of defeats. AND a murderous ideology involved too. Not science. The opposite.
Jews were burdened in many ways. First the psychology of the past as you mention. But also being very dependent on imperialism.
But the biggest burden was in Balfour itself which as Soon emphasises was a great good. Revolutionary socialism if it means anything has to say to Jews that they have earned the right to live alone free from Antisemitism and protected from world Antisemitism. Especially as it turned out from Islam. Mostly that is our present. And today an alliance of a left with Islam. And as regards Jordan if the King were to leave there will be a vacuum of leadership and with America (where Bannon moves to fascist answers) disintegrating. And can we defeat the virus? And global warming? And we got a glimpse of reality in that awful hatred to Netanyahu and for his wife and above all molesting his house. I’m horrified.
The truth of the matter is that we are facing huge problems now in every part of earth. The virus is no fake, also global warming is too real and we humans are in danger.
This man Sion is remarkable and can be a great aid to our understanding. I hope to read his book. He strikes at the heart of BDS which is my enemy too as a socialist in Europe who necessarily defends Jews.
“Too many Jews are too quick to believe the anti-Jewish anti- Israel narrative.”
This is not an accident, it was drummed into the population of Israel for the last 30 years (at least) by Israel’s politicians, intellectuals, academics,”New historians”, fiction writers, educators, etc. (and by some American Jewish organizations).
Every Israeli government since the 1980s agreed to the two-state solution and was actively promoting it behind the scenes, if necessary, while destroying the Zionist ideas and ideals.
The difference between “Right” and “Left” is only a question of how much land each “side” is willing to give away (the difference is minor) and how much demagoguery they deploy to confuse the public.
If you want to know what has really been going on, I HIGHLY recommend Kenneth Levin’s The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege.
Sion wrote:
A professor friend on mine who recently made aliya asked me if this was true. What follows is my answers.
@FelixQuigley
I really regret that Trotsky chose to devote his life to the cause of the Russian revolution instead of going with Jabotinsky or with the Zionist cause in general (he didn’t really have what could be called a Jewish upbringing in spite of being ethnically Jewish).
This man was so capable, we could have had a state BEFORE the WWII.
And, possibly, in the whole Mandate territory – the British wouldn’t get a chance to chop off Transjordan.
I left out by accident this beginning quotation from 1937
“The dispersed Jews who would want to be reassembled in the same community will find a sufficiently extensive and rich spot under the sun. The same possibility will be opened for the Arabs, as for all other scattered nations. – Leon Trotsky, ‘Interview with Jewish correspondents in Mexico’, 1937.”
Naturally we can only speculate but I think some of the ideas of the writer above would have found a place in the thinking of Trotsky. He was scathing in these interviews, in this period from 1937, towards the role of Britain. I think he would have went for the Jews living in all of Palestine and for the movement of all Arabs out of Palestine to an Arab place, a place so extensive, as he would have learned had he lived, because it was becoming more spacious by the year. And I think this is still the only answer. But only possible as I said in a socialist commonwealth.