Until 1918, that part of the world was under the control of the vestiges of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. At the end of World War I, with the defeat of the Turks, the birth of many of today’s Arab countries took place. But, as the liberators, Britain decided to hold onto a narrow strip of land encompassing what is now modern day Israel so as to take control of Jerusalem.
As soon as possible after the fall of the Turks, the Zionist league began to organize immigration to Palestine of willing Jews in an attempt to legitimize their claims to the land. These initial settlers were the original Kibbutz founders. They established settlements in the desert and began the process of reclaiming land for farming.
These moves were not lost on the Arab residents who brought pressure to bear on the British to limit the numbers of Jewish refugees allowed in on a yearly basis so as to maintain a balance of numbers. The Arabs were already feeling betrayed because one of the promises that had been made them by the British for fighting the Turks was control of Jerusalem.
The influx of Jewish refugees continued to mount in the years leading up to World War II and even during the war. Those people able to make it to neutral Portugal would pool resources to purchase the risky passage across the Mediterranean trying to avoid German submarines and then the British patrol boats that would turn them away.
Of course after the war, with the revelations of the camps, the pressure increased for a Jewish homeland. By 1949, with world opinion strongly in favour of the Jews the British were ready to withdraw and wash their hands of the whole mess.
In an attempt to placate both sides they drew a line through the country right down the middle of Jerusalem. The Jewish state of Israel would retain the Kibbutz settlements in the Gaza and border the Red sea. The Arabs would be given the land up to the borders of Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Of course this pleased no one.
Attempts by both sides were made to encourage the others to leave territories through terrorism and other acts of violence against civilians.
The Zionist terrorist groups Irgun and Stern were responsible for the destruction of an entire village and a variety of other non military targets. Needless to say Arab groups reciprocated in kind.
The surrounding countries of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan saw an opportunity to take back the territory that had been promised them by the British. So instead of allowing the Arabs of Palestine the opportunity to establish a country beside Israel they invaded the moment the British mandate expired.
Article comments
1 - The Proprietor
An interesting historical tidbit is left out of this discussion - the role of the Mufti of Jerusalem, the notorious Haj Amir Al-Husseini, whose rabid antisemitism inflamed the Arab populace (his infamous quote "Remember, Abbady, this was and will remain an Arab land. We do not mind you natives of the country, but those alien invaders, the Zionists, will be massacred to the last man. We want no progress, no prosperity. Nothing but the sword will decide the fate of this country" was the blueprint for his later actions). Husseini of course instigated the 1936 Arab rebellion which killed hundreds of Jews and Arabs, with the active use of Nazi money and arms. Husseini of course spent the war years in Berlin as the guest of Hitler, who had promised Husseini a vernichtungslager of his own in Nablus once he took Palestine from the British.
This man is revered as a Palestinian national hero and was a mentor to the senior PLO leadership. While there is undoubtedly plenty of blame to be shared amongst the Israelis and Palestinians for many things that have happened, there has been a pernicious, vicious stream of anti-Jewish hatred from the Palestinian "leadership" since the 1930s, (if you ever listen to the original Arabic when hearing a Palestinian talk about Israelis, the word you hear is "el Yahoud" - the Jews, not "the Zionists") it's unsurprising that trust is in short supply on the Israeli side.
2 - Victor Plenty
Shameful prejudices can be found on both sides of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
Such "tidbits" can be allowed to poison the negotiation process. They could also be allowed to fade into historical obscurity like the slurs and prejudices common on both sides during the American civil war of the 1860s, or during the European religious wars of the 1600s.
That choice, like the land itself, is shared by both peoples.
3 - The Proprietor
I find the author's comment about "Jewish Nazism" to be both inflammatory and very telling of the author's prejudices, especially considering the Palestinian leadership was quite cozy with the genuine article.
4 - Victor Plenty
Calling Palestinians vermin is no better than calling Jews vermin, and ranting nonsense about "pure Jewish blood" is no better than ranting nonsense about "pure Aryan blood."
There is no "pure blood" in the world, and in fact there never was. If you hate something in another human's ancestry, you have chosen to hate yourself too. That same bloodline is also somewhere in your own ancestry.
5 - theSliver
Palestine was never part of the British Empire, it was administered under a UN Mandate after WWII and under the Treaty of Versailles before that from 1918. The UN Mandate came to an end in 1948, the British had to leave.
As it also happens the notion of a Jewish State as a part of a State of Palestine was defined in the Balfour Doctrine.
Yes the Mufti provoked riots with what he said but its also true that Israelis took over Palestinian property which had been abandoned by fleeing Palestinians, not all of those flights were unjustified.
6 - gypsyman
I would like to thank the silver for correcting me on the specifics of the history, I had honestly forgotten the Belfour decleration and that the Brits were being controled by the U.N. The point I was trying to make was that partition had not been the best solution in India and was a mistake again. Whether it was the Brits or the UN the result was the same. The Brits were still the force responsible for the keeping jewish refugees fleeing Europe out of Palastine, and the occupying army. My impression was that they did what they wanted and were controlled by the League of Nations/U.N. in name only.
As for my positions on Israel do not presume to speak for me... As a person of Jewish descent with family who died in the camps, I have long supported the right and the need for the state of Israel, just because I don't happen to like the form it takes on occasion doesn't mean I'm opposed to it.
My country right or wrong has never been my philosophy about Canada, and it's not going to be my philosophy about Israel.