Palestinians and their supporters will demonstrate in the territories, on Israel’s borders and around the world today to mark the anniversary of the Nakba. Nakba is an Arabic word which means disaster, and that is what those who participate in today’s protests consider the founding of the State of Israel on May 15, 1948. But the focus on 1948 is significant.
For those who claim the Middle East conflict is about borders or Jewish settlements in the West Bank, the prominence given Nakba commemorations ought to be an embarrassment as it highlights something Israel’s critics are often at pains to obfuscate. The goal of the Palestinians isn’t an independent state alongside Israel. Their goal is to eradicate Israel and replace it with yet another Arab majority country.
As Palestine Media Watch notes in their survey of official Palestinian Authority programs, the point about the Nakba narrative is that it draws no distinction between the pre- and post-1967 borders. That means the Jewish presence within the internationally recognized borders of the State of Israel is treated as just as illegitimate as that of the settlers in the territories who we are constantly told are the main obstacle to peace. This is not a minor point, because for the Palestinians, the desire for the descendants of the 1948 refugees to “return” to Israel is tantamount to demanding the dismantling of the Jewish state.
The Jewish left has become increasingly sympathetic to Nakba Day demonstrations. They feel it is only right that the victors show compassion to the losers in Israel’s War of Independence. But compassion for those who suffer — and the Palestinian Arabs have suffered since 1948 — is one thing. Indulging the political fantasies of those who wish to reverse the verdict of that war is something else.
As much as the world seems to have tired of hearing about the history of the events of that year, it is vital we point out that the war that created the refugees was one started by Arabs whose goal was not to share the land but to prevent Jewish sovereignty on any part of it. The vast majority of Palestinians who fled did so because they feared the consequences of this war. Most thought they would return to reap the spoils of the expected destruction of the besieged Jewish community. That they and their descendants still regret this reversal of fortune may be understandable, but it is not a point on which they have any right to demand the world’s sympathy.
Nakba Day is also a reminder that the focus on refugees also ought to discredit Israel’s critics and others who have kept the Palestinians stateless and homeless during the last 64 years. Unlike every other refugee population during this period, the Palestinians have been deliberately not resettled or allowed to assimilate into the Arab populations of the surrounding nations. Instead, they have been kept in poverty by a United Nations agency (UNRWA) supposedly dedicated to their welfare but which is, in fact, merely interested in perpetuating their status as refugees so they can remain props in the Arab war on Israel.
On this day, the unhappy fate of the Palestinian refugees will be endlessly rehearsed. But no mention will be made of the hundreds of thousands of Jews who fled or were expelled from Arab countries in the wake of the events of 1948. Unlike the Palestinians, these people were given homes and new lives in Israel and the West. If Arabs are entitled to compensation for what they lost when they fled the newborn State of Israel, the Jews of the Arab and Muslim world deserve to be paid for what was stolen from them.
Nakba Day takes us back to the unfortunate fact that the Arabs have always treated the struggle between these two peoples as a zero sum game. In 1948, the Jews were willing to share the country, but the Arabs would hear of no solution other than the destruction of any Jewish state no matter where its borders were drawn. Those who wonder why the Palestinians continue to refuse to negotiate with Israel and have rejected offers of statehood repeatedly during the past two decades need only go back to 1948 to discover the roots of this madness.
Another case of incitement by the Palestinians
The 'Nakba', eternal and hereditary 'refugee status' for 'Palestinians', like peerages and lordships, entitled in perpetuity to the privilege of soaking up UN funds and vilifying Jews. n nThe Palestinians are the arab world's perfect weapon. Better than tanks, planes,and missiles. n nAn albatross they have placed around Israel's neck. n nCan Israel shake it off?
Great piece here, I must link it to the end of my next post, just what I wanted to say. Perfect!
The Arabs who are now called "Palestinians" are not Palestinians. The names "Palestinians" and "Palestine" were synonymous with "Jew" and "land of the Jews" from the time that the Roman Emperor Hadrian changed the name of Judea to "Palestina" in 135 A.D, after he had defeated the last Jewish uprising under Bar Kochba. That is why Great Britain was given the "Palestine Mandate" after World War I to be "the homeland of the Jews." nCalling Arab non-Jews "Palestinian." with all the history rewrite and propaganda is an effect of the founding of the "Palestine Liberation Organization" by Gamel Nasser of Egypt and the Soviet Union in Cairo in 1964.
The East Prussians and Sudeten Germans must look upon this behavior with wonder. If they have time in their busy lives, of course.
This is a disaster for the conglomeration of nomads currently calling themselves "palestinians". n nMay 1948 began the countdown for the fulfillment of the Book of Obadiah , and the fulfillment of the remaining bible Prophecies of the One True God, the God of Abraham. n nAnd these rebels shall inherit the reward of rebels. Since this is a time of Blessing of the Children of Abraham of the Inheritance of the Blood Covenant of Abraham and the Living God Jehovah, that spells out a disaster for those who try to steal the inheritance of the Chosen Heir. n nOBADIAH n 1 The vision of Obadiah. Thus says the Lord God concerning [a]Edom: We have heard tidings from the Lord, and an ambassador is sent forth among the nations [saying], Arise, and let us rise up against [Edom] for battle! n2 Behold, I will make you small among the nations [Edom]; you shall be despised exceedingly. n3 The pride of your heart has deceived you, you dweller in the refuges of the rock [Petra, Edom’s capital], whose habitation is high, who says in his heart, Who can bring me down to the ground? n4 Though you mount on high as the eagle and though you set your nest among the stars, I will bring you down from there, says the Lord. n5 If thieves came to you, if robbers by night—how you are brought to nothing!—would they not steal only enough for themselves? If grape gatherers came to you, would they not leave some grapes for gleaning? [But this ravaging was done by God, not men.] n6 How are the things of Esau [Edom] searched out! How are his hidden treasures sought out! n7 All the men of your confederacy (your allies) have brought you on your way, even to the border; the men who were at peace with you have deceived you and prevailed against you; they who eat your bread have laid a snare under you. There is no understanding [in Edom, or] of it. n8 Will not I in that day, says the Lord, destroy the wise men out of Edom and [men of] understanding out of Mount Esau [Idumea, a mountainous region]? n9 And your mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed, to the end that everyone from Mount Esau will be cut off by slaughter. n10 For the violence you did against your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you, and you shall be cut off forever. n…
In 2008 I visited a relative in Brooklyn. 2008 was the 60th anniversary of the 1948 war of independence of Israel. The neighborhood was inhabited by peoples from the middle east, and their children born in USA. n n Every store front on the block had a poster mourning the Nakba.
Palaistinê n nTo expand (and also correct) what Judy Wubnig wrote. It is not only that the "Palestinians" and "Palestine" were synonymous with "Jew" and "land of the Jews", it is even more expansive. The name Palestine is not Roman/Latin. It is Greek and has no connection to the Philistines. It is simply the Greek translation for Israel. The argument was advanced by David Jacobson, University College London, in the Biblical Archeological Review, May/June 2001. n nThe Greeks (the majority of the non-Jews that lived in the area who were local Hellenists), referred to the land as Palaistinê. The name is Greek and not Roman. It was used by Herodotus (5th century B.C.) in his writings when referring to all of Israel. [He described the land where there is a large salt lake in the center (Dead Sea) and the inhabitants practice circumcision (definitely not the Philistines)]. n nThe name is not derived from the Philistines, as mistakenly reported by Josepheus in the Jewish War (in the introduction he even says his spoken Greek is somewhat O.K., but literary is very poor) . Before the Romans, the Greeks used the term to refer to all of Israel, not only the areas occupied by the Philistines. Linguistically, the name is derived from the Greek Palaistês meaning wrestler, a translation of Isra in Hebrew. n nFor those who doubt this go to Google translations and type in wrestler and translate into Greek. Comes out παλαιστu03aeς (Palaistês) n nThe Romans Latinized the Greek from Palaistinê to Palestina. Again this refereed to the land of Israel. After the Bar Kok’ba revolt in 135 C.E. (A.D.), the name became a political designation after the Hadrian’s reorganization of the provinces of the east, and Palestina was under the governorship of Syria, and was thus known as Syria Palestina. n nFurthermore, Jewish writers who wrote in Greek, before Hadrian, such as Philo of Alexandria, used the term Palaistinê and not Judea to refer to the land as a whole and not just the area around Jerusalem, and it appears that Hadrian just followed their lead. Thus the “change” of the name from Judea or Israel was not a slap in the face to the Jews as so often reported, it was just the used of the name Israel in Greek (as was the custom) representing the new political and administrative changes. n nBesides the current political implications, to tell a Palestinian that he is just an Israeli translated into Greek…. well, you can imagine. n n nApart from the linguistic evidence that he presents in his article, one thing that he barely mentions is that this type of translation for countries and geographical names was not a unique phenomena to Israel, but was the norm in the Greek world. n nPhoenicia is the Greek for Kna’an (Canaan), named after the mollusk and the purple-red dye derived from it. (It is also related to the red Phoenix). Nahariim in Hebrew or Naharin in Aramaic (land of the two rivers) was translated to Mesopotamia (land between the two rivers). Interestingly, Egypt – in Greek Aegyptus, is a translation of the Hebrew Mitzriim (the narrows) and not the old Egyptian KeMeT (black land named for the fertile soil). n nSuch examples that he did not mention lends even greater strength to his argument. Well at least I'm convinced. Well I was convinced even before I read the article, the general accepted explanation never made any sense to me. It went pretty much against standard Roman policy. There was no other instance that they changed places names for purely political reasons. Of course when they built a new city, as a Roman or Greek city it was given a Roman or Greek name, e.g., Jerusalem to Alia Capitolina, or the new area took over the name of the old, e.g., Neopolis (new city) the new suburbs outside of the old city of Shch'em – was latter corrupted to Nablus (since the Arabs can't pronounce the B sound). (In Italy, the Greek Neopolis was corrupted to Naples). n nThe reverse was also true. Roman names were generally corrupted into local dialects, but sometimes translated, like Aquae Sulis was roughly translated to Bath in England. Alba Regis (white king) became Székesfehervár (white throne castle) in Hungary. n
Google "Greek Wrestlers," and click on the Wikipedia link. I think your derived etymology is very potentially very valid. (From there you can Wiki search for "Palestine" and see how convincing or not you find the Palestine=Land of the Philines derivation.)
"The Jewish left has become increasingly sympathetic to Nakba Day demonstrations. " n nBecause their policies, and their fecklessness, have transformed Israel from a socialist country dominated by the "Labor" party, into a center-right capitalist country where the left is a tiny and increasingly powerless minority. This is good news for the average Israeli who is much more prosperous and free than his grandparents were 60 years ago. But the depth of leftist bitterness must not be underestimated as negative force in society.
For many the birth of Islam is a Nakba. How many Muslims are kept in abject poverty and ignorance and when time comes they are used to threaten or kill non-Muslims. What about their misogynism and xenophobism.
"In 1948, the Jews were willing to share the country, but the Arabs would hear of no solution other than the destruction of any Jewish state no matter where its borders were drawn." n nWell this isn't exactly the whole truth is it? What was Ben Gurion's plan for the Palestinians? Hint: It wasn't to live peacefully with them. The sad truth is that Ben Gurion wanted to move the Arabs out of what is now Israel and put them in Iraq. He was willing to do this by either coercion or force. And (very sadly) he had no moral concerns about doing this. How do we know this? It's in the Israeli archives. n nAs for the Jews accepting the 1947 UN proposal, if you go back and read (again, in the Israeli archives) what Ben Gurion was saying privately, you'll see that the Jews considered this a TEMPORARY measure. They still wanted the whole area to be Israel, but were willing to compromise as a temporary stop gap measure, in order to get what they really wanted. n nThe truth for both sides of this conflict is complicated. When we only tell half-truths to make our point, we aren't doing anything to advance the peace process. If we step back and take a long and honest look at the history of what got us here, we MIGHT have a chance of making some progress towards a just peace. n nShalom.
Iona — Read "Righteous Victims" by Morris. I know you'll be shocked at many of the things in this book, but it's important to know our history. Sadly, the truth is, that neither side likes to face the truth.