|
|
|
Jewish World Review May 8, 2008 / 3 Iyar 5768 How ‘nakba’ proves the fiction of a Palestinian Nation By Steven Plaut
A primer on propaganda Of course, the real catastrophe that befell the Arabs in 1948-49 was that they failed in their attempt to annihilate Israel and exterminate its population, and for that they paid a price. Meanwhile, nakba Nonsense has been spreading. Google finds over 85,000 web pages referring to Israel's creation as a "nakba," and a Yahoo search finds even more than that. The anti-Israel web magazine Counterpunch cannot mention Israel without using the term. Even Israel's leftist minister of education, Yuli Tamir, has orderedthat the nakba be taught as partof the curriculum in Israeli schools, where Israel's schoolchildren can be taught to mourn their own country's existence. (Tamir, who was previously a professor of education at Tel Aviv University, is so bizarre that in the summer of 1996 she published an article in the Boston Review defending female circumcision in the Third World and denouncing those who expressed disgust at the practice — see http://bostonreview.net/BR21.3/Tamir.html.) Nakba ceremonies are now held each year by leftist professors at Israeli universities who mourn the very creation and existence of their country. The nakba of the late 1940's and 1950's that befell large numbers of Jews living in Arab countries who were suddenly expelled, persecuted, and stripped of their property does not interest such people. Those Jewish refugees made new homes in Israel and actually outnumbered the Palestinians who fled. Meanwhile, an urban legend has been fabricated about the origin of the term "nakba" — a fairy tale that claims the word was a banner waved by Palestinians starting in 1948, and that its very use shows how deep the roots of "Palestinian nationality" go. So here is a little current events quiz: What is the real origin of the term "nakba" and what is its original meaning? If you get the answer to the quiz wrong — in other words, if you say it refers to the events of 1948 — you are in very good company. I myself would have flunked the quiz up until a few days ago, when I stumbled on the correct answer. Not only does the bandying about of the "nakba" nonsense word not point to any "depths of roots of Palestinian nationality," it proves the very opposite: namely, that there is no such thing as a Palestinian nation or nationality at all. The authoritative source on the origin of "nakba" is none other than George Antonius, supposedly the first "official historian of Palestinian nationalism." Like so many "Palestinians," he actually wasn't — Palestinian, that is. He was a Christian Lebanese-Egyptian who lived for a while in Jerusalem, where he composed his official advocacy/history of Arab nationalism. The Arab Awakening, a highly biased book, was published in 1938 and for years afterward was the official text used at British universities. Antonius was an "official Palestinian representative" to Britain, trying to argue the cause for creating an Arab state in place of any prospective homeland promised the Jews under the Balfour Declaration of 1917. By the 1930's Antonius was an active anti-Zionist propagandist, and as such was offered a job at Columbia University (where some things don't seem to change much). He served as an academic fig leaf for xenophobic Arab nationalists seeking to deny Jews any right to self-determination in or migration to the Land of Israel. And he was closely associated with the Grand Mufti, Hitler's main Islamic ally, and also with the pro-German regime in Iraq in the early 1940's. Antonius was so passionately anti-Zionist that he continues to serve as the hero and mentor of Jewish leftist anti-Zionists everywhere. For example, the late Hebrew University sociology professor Baruch Kimmerling relied on Antonius at length in his own pseudo-history, Palestinians: The Making of a People (Free Press, 1993). So how does Antonius provide us with the answer to the current-events quiz concerning the origin of "nakba"? The term was not invented in 1948 but rather in 1920. And it was coined not because of Palestinians suddenly getting nationalistic but because Arabs living in Palestine regarded themselves as Syrian and were enraged at being cut off from their Syrian homeland. Before World War I, the entire Levant — including what is now Israel, the "occupied territories," Jordan, Lebanon and Syria — was comprised of Ottoman Turkish colonies. When Allied forces drove the Turks out of the Levant, the two main powers, Britain and France, divided the spoils between them. Britain got Palestine, including what is now Jordan, while France got Lebanon and Syria. The problem was that the Palestinian Arabs saw themselves as Syrians and were seen as such by other Syrians. The Palestinian Arabs were enraged that an artificial barrier was being erected within their Syrian homeland by the infidel colonial powers — one that would divide northern Syrian Arabs from southern Syrian Arabs, the latter being those who were later misnamed "Palestinians." The bulk of the Palestinian Arabs had in fact migrated to Palestine from Syria and Lebanon during the previous two generations, largely to benefit from the improving conditions and job opportunities afforded by Zionist immigration and capital flowing into the area. In 1920, both sets of Syrian Arabs, those in Syria and those in Palestine, rioted violently and murderously. On page 312 of The Arab Awakening, Antonius writes, "The year 1920 has an evil name in Arab annals: it is referred to as the Year of the Catastrophe (Am al-nakba). It saw the first armed risings that occurred in protest against the post-War settlement imposed by the Allies on the Arab countries. In that year, serious outbreaks took place in Syria, Palestine, and Iraq." Yes, the answer to our little quiz is 1920, not 1948. That's 1920 — when there was no Zionist state, no Jewish sovereignty, no "settlements" in "occupied territories," no Israel Defense Forces, no Israeli missiles and choppers targeting terror leaders, and no Jewish control over Jerusalem (which had a Jewish demographic majority going back at least to 1850). The original "nakba" had nothing to do with Jews, and nothing to do with demands by Palestinian Arabs for self-determination, independence and statehood. To the contrary, it had everything to do with the fact that the Palestinian Arabs saw themselves as Syrians. They rioted at this nakba — at this catastrophe— because they found deeply offensive the very idea that they should be independent from Syria and Syrians. In the 1920's, the very suggestion that Palestinian Arabs constituted a separate ethnic nationality was enough to send those same Arabs out into the streets to murder and plunder violently in outrage. If they themselves insisted they were simply Syrians who had migrated to the Land of Israel, by what logic are the Palestinian Arabs deemed entitled to their own state today? Palestinian Arabs are no more a nation and no more entitled to their own state than are the Arabs of Detroit or of Paris. They certainly are not entitled to four different states: Jordan, Hamastan in Gaza, a PLO state in the West Bank, and Israel converted into yet another Arab state via the granting of a "right of return" to Arab refugees. Speaking of Palestinians as Syrians, it is worth noting what one of the early Syrian nationalists had to say. The following quote comes from the great-grandfather of the current Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad: "Those good Jews brought civilization and peace to the Arab Muslims, and they dispersed gold and prosperity over Palestine without damage to anyone or taking anything by force. Despite this, the Muslims declared holy war against them and did not hesitate to massacre their children and women…. Thus a black fate awaits the Jews and other minorities in case the Mandates are cancelled and Muslim Syria is united with Muslim Palestine." That statement is from a letter sent to the French prime minister in June 1936 by six Syrian Alawi notables (the Alawis are the ruling class in Syria today) in support of Zionism. Bashar's great-grandfather was one of them. Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Steven Plaut, a frequent contributor to The Jewish Press, is a professor at Haifa University. Comment by
clicking here.
© 2008, Steven Plaut
| ||||||||||
