Proof of the Legal and Moral Right of Israel Sovereign State
by Jeremy James
This paper demonstrates that the modern
state of Israel
Arab-Palestinian problem has been deliberately engineered
by radical Islam in order to destroy it.
Arab-Palestinian problem has been deliberately engineered
by radical Islam in order to destroy it.
1. The Plight of the Arab-Palestinians
Hardly any
fair-minded person would deny that the treatment of the Arab-Palestinians has been
deplorable. There are some 2,345,000 living in the West Bank and
1,416,000 in the
Gaza Strip, all in circumstances inimical to their economic viability, their security and their dignity. Many live in conditions of abject poverty, while
unemployment is extremely high - around 40%
in Gaza
Demographics
Most westerners
are bombarded with information about the plight of the Arab-Palestinians, but have little
knowledge of their history. Worldwide about 12 million people describe themselves as Arab-Palestinian.
Most are Muslim, but a small proportion, about 6%, are Christian.
In addition to the Arab-Palestinians
living in the West
Bank and Gaza Israel
Other geographical regions in the Middle East with a significant Arab-Palestinian
population include Jordan Syria Lebanon Saudi Arabia
Arab-Palestinians
National Percentage
Population Arab-Palestinian
6,316,000 42.7%
21,900,000 2.0%
4,224,000 9.6%
25,700,000 1.3%
1
ww.zephaniah.eu
These figures
immediately prompt three important questions:
- Why
are so many Arab-Palestinians living peacefully in Israel
supposed to be enemies?
supposed to be enemies?
- Why
don’t neighboring Arab countries absorb a larger proportion
of the Arab-Palestinians currently confined toGaza West Bank ?
of the Arab-Palestinians currently confined to
- Why
is the Arab-Palestinian population of Jordan
Please keep these three questions in
mind as we proceed since the answers shed remarkable light on the entire Middle-Eastern situation.
2. The History of Palestine
The Jews entered the land of Canaan Israel
The Diaspora
After the fall
of Jerusalem Palestine
but social, economic and military impediments prevented them from doing so.
but social, economic and military impediments prevented them from doing so.
Successive Empires
With the slow
disintegration of the western half of the Roman Empire , Palestine Byzantium Byzantium Istanbul Damascus Baghdad Jerusalem Palestine Egypt Palestine Constantinople (yet again)
and remained under Ottoman rule until their empire collapsed after the First
World War.
Two important
points should be noted in this historical review. Firstly, while the land of Canaan Jerusalem Africa and Asia .
2
www.zephaniah.eu
Secondly, for the duration of the Ottoman Empire , and long before, geographical areas
were distinguished mainly by reference to tribal boundaries, proximity to large
towns, or by inclusion in an administrative district for taxation purposes. The
empire itself was the only sovereign entity in the Middle East and nation states as such did not exist.
The Post-War Carve-Up
This system was
completely obliterated with the fall of the Ottoman Empire . For the first time in 1,800 years these
vast tracts of land were without an internationally recognized political identity.
This is why the western powers acted quickly to reconfigure the Empire,
either as a number of sovereign states or as a group of autonomous regions overseen by Britain France
The British had already envisaged
this outcome when, in 1916, they made a secret draft agreement with France - known as the Sykes-Picot Agreement -
which specified how the Ottoman Empire would be carved up between them when the
war was over.
There had long been sympathy among a
segment of the British aristocracy for the establishment
of a homeland for the Jews in Palestine 2 November 1917 , it
read as follows:
read as follows:
"His Majesty's government view with
favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best
endeavors 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."
Never has a
single sentence been more controversial.
The British
government was almost certainly influenced in its decision by a desire to retain
favor, under wartime conditions, with the Jewish element of the
international banking system. It is likely that, at a critical
juncture in its conflict with Germany Palestine America
The role of a ruthless, dynastic
institution like the Rothschilds in the creation of the state of Israel
3
www.zephaniah.eu
The Arab Reaction
The Arabs had
put considerable pressure on the British to secure control over as much Arab-populated territory in the
former Ottoman
Empire as
they possibly could. In doing so they were prepared to make concessions
regarding a Jewish homeland in Palestine
The Arabs based
their claims on their contribution to the British war effort in the so-called Arab Revolt against
the Turks. This contribution involved occasional disruptions to traffic along
the Hedjaz railway by a rag-tag Bedouin force of only
600 men. While probably not big enough to be called a sideshow, it was
exaggerated shamelessly by
T.E.Lawrence in
his self-promotional work, The Seven
Pillars of Wisdom.
At the hastily
convened Paris Peace Conference in 1919, the international community hammered out a
detailed agreement regarding the disposal of the vast territory of the former Ottoman Empire . A further
meeting of the Allied Supreme Council was held in San Remo Palestine League of Nations formally
assigned Britain Palestine
It is important
to note that Emir Feisal, the principal Arab representative at the Paris Peace Conference, had earlier signed
a formal agreement with the principal Jewish representative, Chaim Weizmann,
which confirmed that the Arab people welcomed the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine
“His Royal
Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom
of Hedjaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist
Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between
the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realizing that the surest means of working
out the consummation of their natural aspirations is through the closest
possible collaboration in the development
of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists
between them, have agreed upon
the following...” -
Feisal-Weizmann Agreement, 3 January 1919
The various Articles which followed
addressed such matters as the rights of Arabs living in the Jewish state
of Palestine
Arab Acceptance in Principle
It is clear from the Feisal-Weizmann
Agreement that the Arabs had no problem in principle with the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine
4
The San Remo Resolution of April 1920,
which was confirmed by the League of Nations , incorporated the Balfour Declaration. However the precise boundaries of the territories
to be allocated to the Jewish state were still not determined.
Interestingly,
the Jewish proposal at the Paris Israel Jordan Hedjaz railway - see
map on next page. This left plenty of territory for the Mandate’s small Arab
population. The first British census of Palestine
Arab and British Abrogation of Agreements
However, once the Arabs got what they
wanted in the Ottoman carve-up, they reneged on their commitment to recognize
and live peacefully with the proposed Jewish
state in Palestine Palestine
What is more the British reneged, at
least in part, on their Balfour / San Remo Palestine
By any reckoning, this was a
remarkable triumph for the Arabs. Not only had they succeeded in acquiring
control over the vast majority of the Ottoman territory, but they had left the
Jews with significantly less than they had been guaranteed by the British and
her allies. Furthermore, the question of how much of the remaining Mandate
territory would fall to the Jews was still far from settled. The Arabs reckoned
that, if they put even more pressure on the British, the proposed Jewish homeland could be whittled down even further,
even to the point where it would be strategically indefensible.
Their intransigence worked and the
Foreign Office in London Palestine Jordan River . This, too,
was in contravention of the Mandate conditions approved by the League of
Nations .
5
Map showing the boundaries of the
proposed Jewish state, as outlined by the Zionist representatives at the
1919 Paris Peace Conference, super-imposed on modern boundaries.
proposed Jewish state, as outlined by the Zionist representatives at the
1919 Paris Peace Conference, super-imposed on modern boundaries.
Thus, from a situation where they
could reasonably expect a sizeable slice of the original Mandate territory
(which was 35,126 square miles in extent), the Jews were being confined to an area of only 10,429 square
miles, with the real prospect that this could be reduced even
further. As World War Two approached and tensions grew between Britain Germany Europe during the 1930s, the British continued to make it as difficult
as possible for any more Jews to enter
West Palestine (They were
already banned from entering East Palestine ). The British supplemented this strategy by violating
the legal terms of the Mandate and allowing virtually unlimited Arab
immigration into West Palestine -
which was supposed to become the Jewish homeland..
which was supposed to become the Jewish homeland..
6
www.zephaniah.eu
British Duplicity and Arab Terrorism
In addition to
this, the Arabs were engaging in an ongoing programme of harassment against the Jews in West Palestine , committing a long series of
terrorist atrocities
during the 1920s. These culminated in the murder of 67 Jews living inHebron
risk to their own lives). The British army did nothing to prevent this massacre, even
though it could easily have intervened. Any remaining Jews had to be evacuated for
their own safety.
during the 1920s. These culminated in the murder of 67 Jews living in
risk to their own lives). The British army did nothing to prevent this massacre, even
though it could easily have intervened. Any remaining Jews had to be evacuated for
their own safety.
This atrocity
made it abundantly clear to the Jews that the British were prepared to
let the Arabs wipe
them out, so they substantially enhanced their own paramilitary defense organization, the Haganah.
The Arab
terrorist attacks continued all through the 1930s and reached their zenith
in what history describes as another ‘Arab Revolt’ (1936-1939). This was an
organised
campaign of violence directed by senior figures in the Arab community, purportedly
in protest at the continued immigration of Jews intoWest Palestine . The irony is
that
the actual number of Jewish immigrants, whose influx was very tightly controlled by the British, was only a fraction of what it should have been under the League of
Nations Mandate. On the other hand, Arabs continued to migrate in large numbers
intoWest
Palestine .
In order to disguise this influx, the British recorded Jewish
immigrants only, not Arab. They also put pressure on other European countries not to allow their Jews to emigrate toPalestine
additional Jews would have emigrated toPalestine Europe during the
1930s had
they been allowed (Most of these were subsequently murdered by the Nazis).
campaign of violence directed by senior figures in the Arab community, purportedly
in protest at the continued immigration of Jews into
the actual number of Jewish immigrants, whose influx was very tightly controlled by the British, was only a fraction of what it should have been under the League of
Nations Mandate. On the other hand, Arabs continued to migrate in large numbers
into
immigrants only, not Arab. They also put pressure on other European countries not to allow their Jews to emigrate to
additional Jews would have emigrated to
they been allowed (Most of these were subsequently murdered by the Nazis).
Not only did the British make every
effort to restrict Jewish immigration, but they
confined those who were admitted to designated areas. This meant that, if and when a Jewish homeland was ultimately established, the Jewish claim, which would relate
largely to areas settled by Jews, would be further constrained. And this is exactly
what happened.
confined those who were admitted to designated areas. This meant that, if and when a Jewish homeland was ultimately established, the Jewish claim, which would relate
largely to areas settled by Jews, would be further constrained. And this is exactly
what happened.
In order to break the spirit of
Zionism and to win favour with the Arabs, the British Government published
a White Paper in 1939 which completely overturned the Balfour Declaration and promised to create
an Arab state in West Palestine within a short time. The fact that this was in
complete violation of international law did not seem to matter to the British.
UN Resolution, 1947
After World War
Two, when news of the Holocaust became widely known, there was a renewed international impetus to
resolve the plight of the Jews and create a
homeland for them inWest Palestine - the only part of Palestine
available. Weakened by the war and losing confidence in their ability to deal with thePalestine
decision. When the Jews were finally offered nationhood by the UN (Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947), the frontiers of their new state were determined mainly on the
basis of the land they already inhabited - just as the British had intended.
homeland for them in
available. Weakened by the war and losing confidence in their ability to deal with the
decision. When the Jews were finally offered nationhood by the UN (Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947), the frontiers of their new state were determined mainly on the
basis of the land they already inhabited - just as the British had intended.
7
www.zephaniah.eu
As we have
already noted, the original Palestine Mandate was 35,126 square miles in extent, but after East Palestine had been handed unilaterally to the
Arabs (known today as Jordan Negev Desert
United Nations
Resolution on West Palestine , 1947
Arab
population Jewish
population
Jewish
State 325,000 498,000
Arab
State 807,000 10,000
Despite the miniscule size of their
proposed homeland, three quarters of which was desert, the half million or so Jews who lived there were required by the
UN to share it with 325,000 settled Arabs, plus a further 90,000 or
so Bedouin who wandered the Negev. In
contrast, the portion of West Palestine that the UN
offered the Arabs was inhabited by just 10,000 or so Jews. (Under the UN
decision, Jerusalem
Thus, in the redistribution of the vast
territory of the Ottoman
Empire , an
area of around 1.1 million square
miles, the Jews got less than 1 per cent.
The total number of Jews in the
Empire at the start of the 20th century has been estimated
at 500,000, while that of the Empire as a whole was 20 million or thereabouts.
Had the Empire been redistributed on a pro rata basis to the various ethnic groups living within its borders in 1917,
the Jews would have received a much larger slice of Ottoman territory than they were ultimately awarded through
the UN. (By the same token, the Kurds, another significant ethnic
group, should have been given a homeland of
their own, but their needs were shamefully ignored.)
Even if the Zionist movement had
never pressed Britain, the US and the League of Nations for a Jewish homeland in the late 19th and
early 20th century, there would still have been a
need to set aside a contiguous parcel of land somewhere within the former Empire to enable this scattered and
oppressed ethnic group to relocate for their own protection.
Indeed, the Balfour Declaration was an implied recognition of this fact.
Two Remarkable Surprises
There seemed to be no basis on which
the Jews could accept the UN offer. The amount
of land they were being given was ridiculously small. In addition, they
were expected to share it with an almost equally large Arab
population which, under wartime conditions,
might act as a fifth column. To make matters worse, the proposed territory was divided into three indefensible
segments. For example, the tract of land along the Mediterranean was a narrow
corridor less than ten miles across (See map on next page).
8
Map
showing the three small parcels of land approved
by the UN in
1947 to form the state ofIsrael
Arabs (in orange).
1947 to form the state of
Arabs (in orange).
The
blue coastal segment is no more than 10 miles across.
Note
that the Negev
Desert Beersheba
One
historian noted the contradictions in this ‘solution’ as follows:
The borders
between the Arab and the Jewish states [under the UN Resolution] were a nightmare of
points and lines of friction, of isolated areas lacking in viable
contiguity; and, last but not least, a demographic absurdity characterized the proposed Jewish state where 500,000 Jews were supposed to coexist with an Arab ‘minority’ of close to the same size. - Ben-Ami,
p.34
9
www.zephaniah.eu
The Arabs, on the other hand, were
being made an incredibly generous offer. They already had East Palestine (Jordan
Against all expectations,
the Jews accepted the UN declaration, but the Arabs rejected it. The perversity of the Arab
attitude, which has asserted itself many times since, was summed up by Ben-Ami as follows:
The Palestinians themselves, in what
became a sad and self-defeating pattern of political behavior, acted as the
worst enemies of their own cause and did
their utmost to prevent the creation of their state. (p.60)
It was clear to all concerned that
the Arab rejection was based on their belief that the fledgling Jewish state
was too small to defend itself against a coordinated military invasion. The
British had reinforced the perception that Israel
The Arabs also expected to weaken Israel Israel
The Foundation of Israel
Despite the
Arab rejection, the UN stood over its decision and the Jews declared the
independent state of Israel 14 May, 1948 . This was the first time since
Sargon II conquered
the Northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 BC that a united, self-governing Jewish homeland had existed.
The very next day, 15 May, combined
Arab armies attacked Israel
Their stated aim was the total annihilation ofIsrael Egypt Syria Iraq Jordan Lebanon Saudi Arabia Golan Heights , the West Bank and Gaza
Their stated aim was the total annihilation of
10
www.zephaniah.eu
It is notable
that the Jordanian army included 48 experienced British officers, led by Major
General John Glubb (‘Glubb Pasha’). It would seem the British
determination to prevent the creation of a Jewish state had not abated
after World War II, despite the slaughter of the Holocaust.
The War of 1948
Even though it was at an enormous
strategic disadvantage, Israel
Most observers expected the invaders
to destroy Israel
The shock of defeat, the sheer
humiliation, had a devastating effect on the Islamic psyche. To this day it is
referred to among Arabs as “the Catastrophe” (al-Nakba).
Their defeat reflected, not just on their military prowess and their deep sense of racial superiority, but on their religion and the supposed omnipotence of their god, Allah. To lose in such a manner to a tiny Dhimmi state that was only a day old, having possessed almost overwhelming strategic advantages from the outset, was truly a catastrophe.
Their defeat reflected, not just on their military prowess and their deep sense of racial superiority, but on their religion and the supposed omnipotence of their god, Allah. To lose in such a manner to a tiny Dhimmi state that was only a day old, having possessed almost overwhelming strategic advantages from the outset, was truly a catastrophe.
It is impossible
to understand the obstinacy, intransigence and arrogance of the Arab attitude toward
Israel
Despite two
subsequent wars in 1967 and 1973, in which massed Arab armies again tried to
exterminate the tiny Jewish state, the Israelis prevailed and even strengthened
their position. The war of 1967 gave them Sinai (including Gaza Jerusalem West Bank and the Golan Heights , all of which,
as victors in a defensive war against a genocidal invader, they were
entitled to retain in perpetuity.
Questions and
Answers
Additional historical analysis of the
Arab-Israeli conflict will be presented where appropriate in the remainder of this paper.
Having set the scene as it were, we
will now focus on the principal questions that most westerners appear to have regarding the legitimacy of the state of
Israel and its treatment of the Arab-Palestinians, both before its foundation
in 1948 and thereafter.
11
1. Surely the Arabs who had already settled
in West
Palestine , and who had
been there for generations (“time
immemorial”), were equally entitled to the land and should have been given a state of their
own?
There
are four major assumptions embedded in this question.
Firstly, the question assumes that West Palestine was continuously settled for centuries
by a substantial population of Arabs, just like the surrounding regions (Syria Lebanon Jordan Holy
Land in the
19th century, such as Mark Twain and Karl Marx, were greatly surprised by the emptiness of the terrain, the
barrenness of the soil and the tiny size of the population. The
indigenous people, mostly Arabs, Jews and Christians, were confined in the main
to a few towns, where living conditions were primitive. The Ottomans had not invested in the country and there
was no infrastructure to speak of.
Secondly, the Jews had continuously
maintained an unbroken presence in Palestine Temple
They also
continued to migrate into West Palestine , albeit in
small numbers, during the entire period of the Diaspora. As Katz noted:
In spite of bans and prohibitions, in
spite of the most improbable and unpromising circumstances, there was
never a period throughout the centuries
of exile without Jewish immigration to Palestine
Thirdly, the
question assumes that the Arab-Palestinians were never given a state of their own. As we
have already seen, this assumption is completely false. The British gave the Arabs
the entire Mandate region east of the Jordan River (77% of Palestine Palestine San Remo
Finally, the question assumes that
the Arabs in West
Palestine -
who could have relocated to the new Arab-Palestinian state of Trans-Jordan -
were denied sovereign entitlement to part of West Palestine . As we have seen the UN offered the
Arabs a state of their own in West
Palestine in 1947 (in addition to the
one they had already been
given in East Palestine) but they refused it, almost certainly on the basis
that they expected to overrun and destroy
the fledgling state of Israel the following year, murder or evict the entire
Jewish population, and claim the whole of Palestine, East and West, as their own.
12
www.zephaniah.eu
Much misunderstanding has arisen,
even among those who ought to know better, from a failure to recognize these unfounded assumptions.
2. But many Arab families lost their homes in West Palestine after the Jews forced them out. How could this be fair?
When the Jews first began to return
to Palestine Aleppo Damascus Amman
Many of these
Jews were driven from their homes in other Arab countries, for which they received no compensation. (In
1945 there were about 990,000 Jewish families living in Arab countries. Today
that figure is a mere 8,000.) It has been estimated that the number of Jews who
lost property in this way was at least double the number of Arabs who left West Palestine 'temporarily' in 1947-1948 and lost
property as a result.
It is also
assumed that the Arabs had been settled in West Palestine for
generations, but
this is not the case. A significant number, at least 300,000, arrived in the 20th century,
attracted by the prospect of employment by Jewish immigrants who were redeveloping the land and producing crops where
none had grown for generations. It was worth their while to
relocate since the Jewish farmers were offering better pay and conditions of
employment than the same Arab workers would have enjoyed in their own countries. And this is why Arab-Palestinians
continue to live in Israel
3. That may be so but it does not excuse the
fact that many Arabs left West Palestine because they
were effectively driven out by Jewish threats. Surely this cannot be justified?
One must
consider the magnitude of the threats to which the Jews in West Palestine were themselves
subject. As Ben-Ami noted:
It was then
[just prior to the Arab invasion] that the Jews really felt they faced slaughter should they be
defeated and that the survival of the incipient
Jewish state hung by a mere thread. (p.56)
Despite having initially facilitated
the creation of a Jewish homeland, the British thereafter had consistently obstructed all attempts to create a Jewish
state, while the Arabs had been committing atrocities against Jewish settlers
on a fairly regular basis from the start of the 20th century.
These attacks had increased in frequency and intensity
after the Hebron Jerusalem West Palestine . This was not empty rhetoric. The
Grand Mufti had advised Hitler on the mass slaughter of Jews in Europe and had even requested that large
numbers of European Jews be forcibly
transferred to Poland West Palestine . He knew well the
fate that awaited them in Poland
13
"The Mufti of
Jerusalem was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European
Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the
execution of this plan...He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the
extermination measures." -
Dieter Wisliceny (Eichmann’s deputy) giving
evidence at the Nuremburg Trials [Wisliceny was hanged as a war criminal in 1948]
After the Holocaust, the Jews of West
Palestine knew only too well that the Arab threat of genocide was very
real. As a result their fears translated in some instances into actions
which cannot be justified. However, the popular claim that the Arabs were driven from West Palestine by Jewish
threats and aggression do not stand up to scrutiny. Here is how Samuel Katz described it in his tightly
argued book, Battleground:
Fact and Fantasy in Palestine
The fabrication can most easily be detected by the simple
circumstance that at the time the alleged expulsion of the Arabs by Zionists
was in progress, nobody noticed it. Foreign newspapermen abounded in the
country...even those most hostile to the Jews saw
nothing to suggest that the flight [of the Arabs] was not voluntary. In the three months that the major part of the flight took place, the London Times, a newspaper most notably hostile to Zionism, published 11 leading articles on the situation inPalestine
nothing to suggest that the flight [of the Arabs] was not voluntary. In the three months that the major part of the flight took place, the London Times, a newspaper most notably hostile to Zionism, published 11 leading articles on the situation in
The author was
a member of Irgun and served for a time as advisor to Prime Minister Begin. No doubt his enemies would have taken considerable satisfaction in disproving his sources and refuting his analysis
had they been able to do so.
14
www.zephaniah.eu
Ben-Ami, who gives a very
uncompromising analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict of 1948, stated that
[T]he mass exodus was, however,
inadvertently encouraged by the leaders of the Arab-Palestinian community
when, in their eagerness to trigger
the invasion of Palestine Jerusalem
Bard
commented as follows:
The Haganah did employ psychological
warfare to encourage the Arabs to abandon
some villages. For example, some were told that a large Jewish invasion force was coming to burn
their villages and that they had better get out...Arab fears were
exacerbated by fabricated stories of Jewish
atrocities following the attack on Deir Yassin. In his memoirs, King Abdullah of Jordan stated,
“The tragedy of the Arab-Palestinians was that
most of their leaders had paralyzed them with false and unsubstantiated
promises that they were not alone; that 80 million Arabs and 400 million Muslims would instantly and
miraculously come to their rescue.”
[pps.128 and 132]
It
is also significant that The Economist reported
as follows on 2 October, 1948 :
Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly
lived in Haifa
A
few years later, the New York Lebanese daily newspaper, Al Hoda, reported:
The Secretary General of the Arab
League, Azzam Pasha, assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine
and of Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade...He pointed out
that they were already on the frontiers and
that all the millions the Jews had spent of land and economic development would
be easy booty, for it would be a simple matter to throw Jews into
the Mediterranean...Brotherly advice was
given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes, and property and to stay temporarily in
neighboring fraternal states, lest the guns of the invading Arab armies mow them down. [Habib Issa, 8 June 1951 ]
15
Katz, who made extensive use of
published Arab sources, as well as reports and dispatches by British reporters
and public servants who were patently hostile to the Jewish cause, drew
attention to the fact that the British government ordered the destruction of a
significant number of official files in order to cover up their complicity in
the Arab campaign against the Jews. In addition to the file series relating to the Haganah and another entitled
‘Propaganda Among the Arabs,’ which dealt with the British policy of inciting Arabs against Jews, Katz noted
that
16
[t]he entire correspondence between
the Palestine administration and its chiefs at the Colonial Office in
London relating to the records of the meetings
of the Executive Council (in effect the Cabinet) of the Palestine government had been “destroyed under statute.”
These files,
had they been available, would have shed copious light on the extent to which the
British had, for almost the entire duration of the Mandate, incited the
Arabs to revolt
against the Jews and had trained and financed Arab terrorists. They even created
the Arab League (in 1945) to stiffen Arab resistance to the creation of the Jewish
state. These deceitful tactics were similar to those adopted by Britain Kenya Aden
Balfour Declaration and announced thatWest Palestine would in due
course become an Arab state.
Balfour Declaration and announced that
4. If the Arabs countries have made, and continue to make, every
effort to resolve the Arab-Palestinian refugee problem, then why should Israel
This is a common myth. The truth of
the matter is that the nations of Islam have continually
done everything in their power to retain the Arab-Palestinian refugee problem and
to use it as a rod to beat Israel Jordan West Palestine in 1947, but they refused the offer.
Then Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1950
(which it had already occupied for two years) and was in a position
to declare a new Arab-Palestinian state in that territory during the following 17 years, before it lost the West Bank
to Israel in 1967. However, it made
no attempt to do so. Here is how Kumaraswamy (2006) put it (Introduction, p.59):
no attempt to do so. Here is how Kumaraswamy (2006) put it (Introduction, p.59):
Even though Israel Palestine
these territories not only weakened the Arab-Palestinian cause but, more importantly, created doubts about their commitment to Arab unity.
these territories not only weakened the Arab-Palestinian cause but, more importantly, created doubts about their commitment to Arab unity.
Karsh, among others, has also drawn
attention to the glaring cynicism of the Arab position:
Perhaps the
best proof of British prescience regarding this matter was that neither Egypt Jordan Palestine Gaza West Bank . As the
Egyptian representative to the armistice talks told a British journalist: 'We don't care if all
the refugees will die.
There are enough Arabs around.' More than half a century later, many of these refugees still languish in squalid camps waiting for their problem to be solved. (p.92)
There are enough Arabs around.' More than half a century later, many of these refugees still languish in squalid camps waiting for their problem to be solved. (p.92)
17
www.zephaniah.eu
Furthermore, the low population
density of the former Ottoman Empire meant that there was never
any shortage of land to allocate to the refugees, even if the West Bank had not been
available. Nor was there ever a shortage of finances, either from
oil-rich Arab
states or from international organizations and sympathetic western sources, to facilitate their relocation. The reality is that some
of the Arab-Palestinians were evicted from Jordan Lebanon Israel
It should be noted also that the
alleged cultural affinity of the Arab-Palestinian refugees with the land of West Palestine has little or no
foundation since a large proportion are descendants of Arabs who had been
resident in West Palestine for no more than a few decades.
Besides being an open sore for
propaganda purposes, the Arab-Palestinian refugees have long provided convenient
cover for Islamic terrorist groups such as the PLO, Fattah, Hamas and
Hezbollah. That their operations must inevitably result in causalities among Arab-Palestinian
civilians is of no consequence in a society where martyrdom and death in the
cause of Islam are esteemed as the highest good. In such a twisted philosophy, women and children may be used as
human shields, with or without their consent. (For a disturbing
insight into the methods used by Hamas to control its members and sacrifice Arab civilians, read Son of Hamas by Mosab Hassan Yousef.)
In light of these well-established
facts, it is impossible to see how Israel
5. Given that Arabs and Jews lived peacefully together for
centuries under Ottoman rule, why can’t they jointly occupy and administer
a unified Arab-Israeli state in Palestine
This ‘solution’ is part of the
misleading propaganda spread by radical Islamists and their sympathizers. It tries to disguise the fact
that the Jews were always an oppressed minority under Islam, subject to extraordinary mistreatment and abuse.
As unbelievers, Jews were known
as dhimmis, a sub-class with significantly fewer social and political rights than Muslims, very little security, subject
to the prospect of arbitrary assault by any Muslim (against which
they had little or no legal recourse), and
made to pay an exorbitant tax called Jizyah. This tax, which was levied normally on all able-bodied
male infidels, was unusually onerous and could consume up to half of one’s annual
income. In short, dhimmis were
down-trodden serfs whose continued existence was tolerated mainly on economic
grounds. The dhimmi system
also had a major social advantage in that it placed a layer of indigent people
below the Muslim community.
So, no matter how badly the Muslims themselves were treated by an oppressive ruling regime, there was always a layer
beneath them that was even more exploited
and oppressed.
18
www.zephaniah.eu
Both the Koran and the Hadith (the sayings of Muhammad)
contain numerous verses which call for the exploitation, and even
the elimination, of Jews. They are described several times as a curse upon the
earth and a subhuman class - “pigs” and “apes” (Many websites list these verses).
Today it is virtually impossible for
anybody other than a Muslim to live safely in some Muslim countries. While immigrant workers are tolerated, they
have no status and may be
expelled at any time. The Christian Copts of Egypt
The Muslim
belief in the inferiority of non-believers is demonstrated in many ways, but perhaps the
best known is their insistence on the use of Sharia law in any country where they
possess sufficient political influence to compel its introduction. Sharia
is simply the
codification of Islamic doctrine in all matters pertaining to human behavior.
Applying as it does to just about every aspect of a person’s life; it is far
more sweeping and inclusive than any western idea of jurisprudence. Sharia law
is “above the law,” that is it supersedes the statutes of all western nations
and any law constituted outside the
parameters of Islam.
Arabs resident in Israel West Bank and Gaza
million, 8 times the number in 1948. They are eligible for full Israeli citizenship and enjoy the same rights as Jews (except they cannot join the armed forces). They live peacefully with the Jews, elect representatives to the Knesset, and worship in their mosques. As yet they have not been radicalized by Islamic extremist philosophy and seem to be satisfied to remain inIsrael Syria Egypt
million, 8 times the number in 1948. They are eligible for full Israeli citizenship and enjoy the same rights as Jews (except they cannot join the armed forces). They live peacefully with the Jews, elect representatives to the Knesset, and worship in their mosques. As yet they have not been radicalized by Islamic extremist philosophy and seem to be satisfied to remain in
6. Even allowing for these considerations,
surely there is still a case for allowing the Arab-Palestinians in Gaza West Bank to establish their own state? Would that not bring peace?
Many westerners
incline toward this view. There are even many Israelis who think it may be the best
solution. But it is founded on a lie.
Most Westerners
do not understand Islam. They fail to see that it is not just a religion in the accepted sense but an
autocratic political system, where all aspects of the individual’s life are
regulated by the state. It is lawful under Islam to kill a Muslim who converts
to another religion. No religion other than Islam may be preached openly in an
Islamic country. Their holy book espouses violence against Jews and Christians,
as well as other non-believers (infidel) and the concept of jihad -
the
aggressive expansion of Islam - is enshrined in its theology. It is even lawful for Muslims to deliberately deceive their enemies in defense of their religion and to sign a ‘peace’ treaty which they have no intention of honoring. (Muhammad himself set this precedent when, having made a 10-year treaty with the Jews of Mecca, he returned two years later and wiped them all out. In effect their code says “Make peace with your enemy until you are strong enough to destroy him.”)
aggressive expansion of Islam - is enshrined in its theology. It is even lawful for Muslims to deliberately deceive their enemies in defense of their religion and to sign a ‘peace’ treaty which they have no intention of honoring. (Muhammad himself set this precedent when, having made a 10-year treaty with the Jews of Mecca, he returned two years later and wiped them all out. In effect their code says “Make peace with your enemy until you are strong enough to destroy him.”)
19
www.zephaniah.eu
It is difficult to get an objective
account of any controversial incident in which Muslims were involved since their religion allows them to indulge in
fabrication if it will help the cause of Islam. Such lies are
neither immoral nor displeasing to Allah since
the overall aim, the protection of Islam, is what ultimately counts. This
principle is similar to the Jesuit belief that the end justifies the means, or
the supposedly ethical device, known as mental reservation, which Catholic
bishops use to justify their lies.
Furthermore few Westerners realize
that the Koran is not the only scripture in Islam. The Hadith or
sayings of Muhammad, which are even more intolerant, sectarian
and aggressively anti-Jewish and anti-Christian than the Koran, also carry divine authority.
There is no shortage of verses in either branch of Islamic scripture to
convince radical Muslims that their campaign of hatred and violence is
morally justified. (While it might be
true to say that the majority of Muslims give little weight to
these verses, it is equally true that the views of moderate, peace-loving
Moslems have no effect whatever in a
religion dominated by extremists.)
The nations of Islam will never be
satisfied until every trace of the Israeli state has been erased from the
earth. Never. Even if it was reduced to the size of a postage stamp they would still continue to rage until that
final insult to Allah was obliterated.
Israeli leaders
made some serious strategic errors in the past when they failed to grasp this fact. For example, having
secured a vital buffer zone to the west with the annexation of Sinai, they
gave it back to Egypt Israel
During negotiations brokered by the
US at Camp David in July 2000, the Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, offered
the Arab-Palestinians most of the West Bank, all of the Gaza Strip, and East
Jerusalem as the capital of a new Arab-Palestinian state; in addition, all Arab-Palestinian
refugees could apply for compensation for loss of property from an
international fund to which Israel would contribute along with other countries. And, incredibly, the Arab-Palestinian
leadership rejected this astonishing offer!
As Abba Eban
famously observed after the Geneva
The Arab-Palestinian
attitude at Camp David shows, if further proof were
needed, that the rulers
of Islam have no intention of resolving the plight of the Arab-Palestinian
refugees and no interest whatever in a negotiated settlement - their only goal
is the complete annihilation of Israel
20
www.zephaniah.eu
The Arab-Palestinian people have been
used by the leaders of Islam in a most despicable way, as pawns in a vicious
game which they intend to continue playing until Israel
Katz noted (p.163) an article in the
Egyptian journal El Muswar of December 1968 which frankly admitted that “[t]he expulsion of
our brothers from their homes should not cause us any anxiety,
especially as they were driven into Arab countries...The masses of the Arab-Palestinian
people are only the advance-guard of the Arab nation...a plan for rousing
world opinion in stages, as it would not be able to understand or accept a war by a hundred million Arabs against a
small state.”
In his
discussion of the same theme, Karsh stated:
Indeed, had the Jewish State lost the
war, its territory would not have been handed over to the Arab-Palestinians but
rather divided among the invading forces, for the simple reason that none of
the Arab regimes viewed the Arab-Palestinians
as a distinct nation. As the American academic Philip Hitti put the Arab view to a joint
Anglo-American commission of inquiry
in 1946: 'There is no such thing as Arab Palestine in history, absolutely not.' - p.91
Bard is just as
blunt:
The Arab League
created the Arab Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Cairo Israel Jordan Egypt West Bank or Gaza Israel Jordan Lebanon
The Arab-Palestinians already have
their own state - East Palestine (Jordan West Bank and Gaza Jordan
21
National flag of Jordan
The Arab-Palestinian refugees could
also be accommodated quite easily in another neighboring Arab state, such as Lebanon and Syria, which already have a
significant Arab-Palestinian presence, but they are not allowed
enter these countries. Or they could be given a slice of the vast Sinai peninsula by Egypt Saudi Arabia
But this will
never happen because the leaders of the Islamic world hate Israel
As Jamal al-Husseini, Vice-President
of the Arab Higher Committee, the effective government
of the Arab-Palestinians, told the UN General Assembly in 1947 as it was about
to cast its vote: 'We are solidly and permanently determined to fight to the
last man against the existence in our country of any Jewish state, no matter
how small it is.'
Former director of the UNWRA, Ralph
Garroway, didn’t mince his words when he stated
in August, 1958 that “The Arab States do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as
an affront to the United Nations and as a weapon against Israel
The essence of the wider problem, the
survival of Israel
The
battleground as such was never the only problem for Israel
The Islamic
monolith only needs to win once, while Israel
22
www.zephaniah.eu
In the end only one Viewpoint matters
For all our opinions and convictions,
and the huge diversity of views that obtain in this matter, at the end of the day only one viewpoint counts, and that
is God’s. And he has expressed
it with remarkable clarity for all to see.
Firstly, he
established a binding agreement with Abraham and all of his descendants around 2000 BC:
And I will
establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an
everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee,
and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger,
all the land of Canaan
Lest anyone
think for a moment that God might not honor his word, he said (around 1500 BC):
God is not a man, that he should lie;
neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he
not do it? or hath he spoken, and
shall he not make it good? (Numbers 23:19 )
Then, around 1000 BC he again
reminded his people that he had every intention of honoring his covenant with them:
He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he
commanded to a thousand generations. Which
covenant he made with Abraham,
and his oath unto Isaac; And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel
What is more,
he said he would honor this “everlasting covenant” even if his people strayed from the
precepts that he had laid down for them:
If his children forsake my law, and
walk not in my judgments; If they break my statutes, and keep not my
commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless
my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will
I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn
by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall
endure for ever, and his throne as the
sun before me. It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. (Psalm 89:30-37)
About 400 years
before Christ, he again reminded his people that he does not change, that his
covenant will stand, and that those who turn to him in the End Time (“in
that day”) will be spared, as though each man was His own son:
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore
ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
(Malachi 3:6)
And they shall be mine, saith the
LORD of hosts, in that day when I make
up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth
him. (Malachi 3:17)
23
Jesus confirmed
this promise when he said:
Finally, in the Book of Revelation
(around 96 BC), the LORD stated in stunning detail exactly how he intends
to deal with Satan, the enemies of Israel, and the gross apostasy of mankind in the End Time. If you think
for a moment that he did not mean what
he said, think again:
The burden of
the word of the LORD for Israel Jerusalem Judah Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem
Concluding Comments
When I set out to research this topic
I didn’t expect to end up here. Somehow I imagined
that the Arab cause would have some justification, however tenuous. After all,
there are two sides to every story. So it came as a real surprise to see just
how well defined the main issues really are.
On the one hand we have a small nation under siege, and on the other a
sprawling despotic empire which is determined at all costs to destroy it.
I have based this analysis on facts
which are fairly easy to establish. If you have difficulty with my conclusions, then I would suggest you research the
facts which, in your opinion,
have the greatest bearing on my analysis. I believe it is important that people
establish the actual historical position for themselves and not rely solely on secondhand sources.
This paper does not address the
conduct of the Israeli Defense Force in recent decades, the activities of
Mossad or Shin Bet, the Zionist influence on American politics or the global financial system, the use of Israel as a
flashpoint for World War Three, its role in the Illuminati plan to
create a New World Order, or any similar factor.
It simply sought to establish (a) whether or not the state of Israel (including
the land it currently controls) is constituted on sound legal and
moral grounds – the answer is Yes - and (b) whether or not the state
of Israel is responsible for the current plight of the Arab-Palestinians in the
West Bank and Gaza - and the answer is No.
A summary of
the subject as a whole is set out in Appendix A.
--o--
24
Note on the author
Jeremy James is a graduate in
philosophy and logic from University College Dublin. He has spent over 30 years
in public administration, dealing mainly with computerization policy, fiscal management and
strategic planning. He became a born-again Christian in 2008 and has no affiliation
with Judaism or any Zionist organization. This paper was
written primarily in response to the announcement in early 2010 by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) that it objected to the Israeli treatment of the Arab-Palestinians and supported the boycott of Israeli goods by Irish consumers. Such a policy, in his opinion, is based on a serious
misapprehension of the actual historical position and is harmful to the legitimate interests ofIsrael
written primarily in response to the announcement in early 2010 by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) that it objected to the Israeli treatment of the Arab-Palestinians and supported the boycott of Israeli goods by Irish consumers. Such a policy, in his opinion, is based on a serious
misapprehension of the actual historical position and is harmful to the legitimate interests of
--o--
For information
about the New World Order, the coming global financial collapse, and the Illuminati plan to
foment World War Three as a vehicle for
radical change, visit
www.zephaniah.eu
Published on the Internet, 9 June 2010
Jeremy James 2010
Jeremy James 2010
25
www.zephaniah.eu
Bibliography
Bard, Mitchell
Ben-Ami,
Schlomo
Burke, Jason
Fisk, Robert
Gottheil, Fred
Hammond, Peter
Huntington,
Samuel
Karsh, Efraim
Katz, Samuel
Kayyali, A W S
Kumaraswamy, P R
Lewis, Bernard
Lindsey, Hal
MacMillan,
Margaret Maybury, Richard
Morris, Benny
Peters, Joan
Yousef, Mosab
Hassan
Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli
Conflict, 2001
Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The
Israeli-Arab Tragedy, 2006
Al-Qaeda: The True Story of Radical Islam, 2003 Pity the Nation, 1990
The Smoking Gun: Arab Immigration into Palestine
1922-1931, TheMiddle East Quarterly, Winter 2003
1922-1931, The
Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The
Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat, 2008
The Clash of Civilizations and the
Remaking of World Order, 1996
The Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Palestine Palestine Palestine
Historical Dictionary of the Arab-Israeli
Conflict, 2006 The Crisis of
Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror, 2003 The Multiple Identities of the Middle East , 1998
The Everlasting Hatred: The Roots of
Jihad, 2002 Peacemakers:
Six Months that Changed the World, 2001 The Thousand Year War in the Mid-east, 1999 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War, 2008
From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the
Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine
Son of Hamas, 2010
26
www.zephaniah.eu
APPENDIX A
Summary
The main proof
of Israel Jerusalem Gaza West Bank ), along with
proof that it is not in any manner responsible for the plight of the Arab-Palestinians
in Gaza West Bank , is as follows:
1. The territory covered by the Arab-Palestinian
Mandate (today’s Jordan and Israel Ottoman Empire was only 20
million or so in 1917. The same area today has a population of about 220 million
(an average annual increase of 2.7%). Not only was the Empire as a
whole under-populated, butPalestine
that there was no room for a Jewish homeland inPalestine
displacing the indigenous Arab population, such as it was is untenable.
As it happens a large proportion of the Arabs inWest Palestine up to
1947 had arrived after the first Aliyah (wave of immigration) by the
Jews in 1880.
(an average annual increase of 2.7%). Not only was the Empire as a
whole under-populated, but
that there was no room for a Jewish homeland in
displacing the indigenous Arab population, such as it was is untenable.
As it happens a large proportion of the Arabs in
1947 had arrived after the first Aliyah (wave of immigration) by the
Jews in 1880.
2. There were no
national boundaries or nation states within the Ottoman
Empire (which existed
for about 400 years) and thus no national identity, whether among the Arabs of West
Palestine or anywhere else. All identity was a tribal and religious. A
state in Palestine West Palestine (Israel territory of Islam Syria Jordan
Empire
3. The sovereign control which the Turks
exercised over the Ottoman
Empire was broken in
1918 and the victors (notably Britain
had full legal discretion under international law to decide how the
Empire should be divided among competing interests.
Empire
had full legal discretion under international law to decide how the
Empire should be divided among competing interests.
4. Britain France
time to create a Jewish homeland inPalestine
known today asJordan Israel
time to create a Jewish homeland in
known today as
5. The leading Arab representatives
agreed to the creation of a Jewish
homeland inPalestine
given control over the remaining Ottoman territory, namelyLebanon
Syria Iraq Saudi Arabia
agreed.
homeland in
given control over the remaining Ottoman territory, namely
agreed.
6. The
leading Arab representatives stated in writing that they welcomed
the
creation of a Jewish homeland.
7. The international community (the Allies and later the League of
Nations)
ratified the understanding
at 5
above and noted the Arab
agreement
at 6 above.
27
www.zephaniah.eu
8. In 1922, in contravention of
international law, Britain Palestine
in two, giving
the area east of the Jordan River to the Arabs
(known later as
Trans-Jordan, then the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and finally
Jordan). Jews were completely excluded from this territory. In doing so
Britain
homeland by 75%. The rest ofPalestine
Jordan). Jews were completely excluded from this territory. In doing so
homeland by 75%. The rest of
9. Britain
restrictions on the immigration of Jews intoWest Palestine (the proposed
Jewish homeland), contrary to international law. These restrictions grew
steadily more oppressive in the 1930’s.
restrictions on the immigration of Jews into
Jewish homeland), contrary to international law. These restrictions grew
steadily more oppressive in the 1930’s.
10. Britain
11. Britain West
Palestine
by
restricting the purchase of land by
Jews to specific areas. This was done
with a view to further reducing the territory which the Jews could
ultimately claim as their homeland. Furthermore, the territory concerned was broken into three enclaves which would be more vulnerable to a
large-scale military attack than would a single contiguous parcel of land.
with a view to further reducing the territory which the Jews could
ultimately claim as their homeland. Furthermore, the territory concerned was broken into three enclaves which would be more vulnerable to a
large-scale military attack than would a single contiguous parcel of land.
12. At
the instigation of the British, the Arabs continued throughout the
1920s,
1930s and 1940s to carry out terrorist attacks on Jewish civilian
targets.
13. The Arabs
living in West Palestine were led to
believe by the leadership
in the surrounding Arab
states (via radio,
newspapers and word of
mouth) that a large-scale military
invasion would take place around the
time the Jewish state was declared. They were advised to leaveWest
Palestine temporarily so
as not to constrain the invading Arab armies.
time the Jewish state was declared. They were advised to leave
Palestine
14. Large numbers
of Arabs would leave in any event on foot of the violent
response by their leadership to the
UN Resolution of 29 November 1947 . This led to a great escalation of
tensions between the two communities. The numerous atrocities against
Jewish civilians during this period convinced many Arabs that, if the Jews
were ever to obtain the upper hand,
their safety would not be assured.
15. The official Jewish state, approved
by the United Nations in 1947, was
only a fraction of the whole of Palestine West Palestine . Furthermore,
a large part, about 75%, consisted of the inhospitable Negev Desert
16. Had the Jewish people been allocated
a homeland in proportion to their
numbers within the Ottoman Empire as a whole, they would have
received a far larger piece of territory. (The Kurds should have been
allocated a homeland on the same basis but were cheated by the Arabs.)
received a far larger piece of territory. (The Kurds should have been
allocated a homeland on the same basis but were cheated by the Arabs.)
28
www.zephaniah.eu
17. The Arabs
of West Palestine
18. The Jews in the
newly founded state of Israel
19. The massive invasion of Israel 15 May 1948 by the armies of six Arab countries were unsuccessful. This invasion was illegal under international
law and genocidal in purpose. Even though the invaders were attacking on
three fronts and had significant strategic advantages, they were unable to overcome Jewish resistance.
20. The Arab states refused to assimilate
most of the Arabs who departed temporarily
from West Palestine in 1947-1948.
Other countries assimilated far larger numbers of refugees after World War Two,
but the Arab states,
despite the extensive territory at their disposal and their ample revenue from
oil exports, have consistently refused to do so. This unfortunate group of
people, which today number around 3½ million, has
been used by the nations of Islam over the past 60 years as an open sore, a cynical propaganda tool to deceive the
international community, and as a human shield when conducting
terrorist operations against Israeli
civilian targets.
21. With
British approval, Jordan West Bank in 1950 and
held it
until 1967 when it was taken by Israel West Bank but made no
attempt to do so. Similarly,Egypt Gaza Israel
attempt to do so. Similarly,
22. The
Arab-Palestinian leadership has consistently rejected all reasonable offers of a solution.
As recently as 2000, they were offered Gaza West Bank , and East Jerusalem as the capital
of a new Arab-Palestinian state, but they rejected it.
23. The nations of
Islam will never recognize the state of Israel Israel Egypt
24. The goal of
radical Islam, which is heavily financed by Iran Saudi Arabia Israel
29
www.zephaniah.eu
