Who want Peace in The Middle East?
Arguably, the most dangerous place to live on the Earth is Palestine. There is no “common noun” for this place on the Earth. What will you call – country, state, occupied territory or something else? It’s a place where people (can I write citizen), live in constant fear, trauma, uncertainty and chaos. Above all, its own people live in refugee camp. I remember from Steven Spielberg’s Munich – “how do you feel when you live like a refugee in your own country”. The statement said by a Palestine to an Israeli must have left indelible remark on the mind of people across globe. People are suffering, they are angry, they want to live like others in other countries, but it is just not possible.
All the countries across the world say that they want peace in the region, but peace is becoming more elusive for this part of the world which you can’t even see on the small sized globe. I would mention in the very beginning that Israeli claim of the land is not completely baseless (please refer the last part of this article where I have discussed early history in brief).
Palestine is not represented by its own people. Hamas, the most popular group in Palestine, is considered a terrorist organization. Fatah, the group accepted by West as genuine representative lacks credibility on ground. There is hardly any strong leader after Yasir Arafat, who himself lacked popular support during last few years of his career. However, Arafat can be said the only leader Palestine ever had. Current Fatah leader and president Mohamud Abbas is considered liberal and progressive but he lacks popular support. Hamas, too has distributed leadership (its top leadership was killed by Israel). But is lack of true leadership is the cause of Palestine pain – no.
Who are main culprits behind Palestine sufferings? The most obvious answer is Israel, but a closer analysis and understanding of the region and historical development in the region give a different picture. The main culprits are the so called main guardians – the United States, Arab world and Europe. Many analysts have already pointed this out earlier, but they have emphasized more on the United States. I believe the biggest culprit is the so called main savior – Arab world.
Arab nations proclaim to have been fighting for Palestine. They have created propaganda that they are the true voice for Palestine and the only well wisher, however in my opinion they are the one who have ruined Palestine. Arabian hypocrisy since late 40s has brought Palestine under such a situation from where only Prophet himself can save them.
I will deal with history in another section. Here, I will talk from the context of Palestine options. In 1947, United States passed resolution 181 which proposed the partition with two states, Jewish and Arab, with the Jewish state receiving about 56.47 percent of the land, the Arab state about 43.53 percent (Source United nations Website). Arab nations opposed this idea vehemently. Arabs were more in number, but Jews were getting bigger part of land and on this ground Arab countries were opposed to this division. At the first place Arab nations, never wanted a Jewish state, at best they thought of allowing Jews to stay inside Palestine as minority. But this was clearly against the doctrine of “Independent state for Jews” and as a result of Second World War, every country, accepted the idea of a sovereign state for Jews, at least in principle or out of sympathy. However, on technical ground it was derived from Balfour declaration. Balfour declaration was a British Mandate (Palestine was under British Rule after First World War). Balfour declarations had mandated for an independent state for Jews in the region. Arabs rejected this mandate on the ground that it was done by an occupying power and did not reflect Arabs opinion. This was valid upto certain extent, but what was the options available. It is very unlikely that Arab did not understand that not allowing Jews to have an independent state was not possible, also at a time when all major power of that time was in Jews support. Even the people across globe had sympathy for Jews. Yet, Arabs opposed the idea of separate Jews state. In 1948, Israel declared independence. War broke out between Arabs and Israel, and Israel captured 77 percent of the land, including large part of Jerusalem. The war resulted into mass exodus of Palestinian people.
Arab nations had attacked Israel, however it remains controversial who started the war. Whosoever started it, but it resulted into loss for Palestinian people. After the war, Egypt and Jordan occupied the rest of the area. In my opinion, it was obvious that Israelis would not have allowed so many Arabs to live inside Israel (in fact Arabs were outnumbering Jews), as this would not have served the very purpose of having an independent Jewish state. I don’t say what Jews did was right. It was cruel and inhuman – killing innocent people and forcing them to leave the country, however at the same time if I look from Jews perspective I get a different picture. Jews did it to secure their future, they were scared, and they had known that any place where Jews would not be the massive majority their future would be insecure even if they controlled the nation. Their experience during the Second World War had taught them this lesson. I believe, Arabs also would have known this. If they would have thought of Palestinian people, they would have first asked Palestinian Arabs to come to the area which was allocated to them by the United Nations. Arab nations should have helped Palestinian people to get assembled into their given territory and should have avoided any direct confrontation till the time they were completely sure about their position inside UN allocated Palestine for Arab. Arab nations fought for their pride and showed complete lack of vision and least bothered for Palestinian Arabs. In fact there was no consensus among Arab countries, which resulted into half a million Arabs leaving Jews occupied Palestine. The United States was in full support to Jews for obvious reasons. It was a time when, Arab nations should have shown vision, shrewdness and smart resilience, but they showed complete lack of vision and hardly thought of Palestinian people. A visionary leader would have grabbed what he could get, consolidated its position there and then would have fought for rest, the way China has done during last 60 years. In fact, after reading war history of 1948 between Israel and Arab (mainly Egypt, Jordan and Syria), it become clear that continued war could have given Arab Palestinians significant advantage and in the end they could have been in advantageous position to negotiate. Israel was not in a position to fight for sustained period, specifically if Egypt, Jordan and Syria would have coordinated well. However, Arab nations accepted cease fire at a time when Israel had acquired 78% of total Palestine and more than half a million Palestinian Arabs were rendered homeless. The point to note it, Arab nations fought in the name of Palestine but ended up destroying what was there for Palestine after UN resolution. Israel had consented to accept the division with some reservations; Arab nations rejected the division and in the end remained with less than 25% of Area and all refugees. Another point to notice, Israel had no friend country in the region and it was easier for Arab to fight. They lost the land in war; three armies fighting together could not defeat a fragmented, newly born small Jewish state. Because, even at that time there was no united front from Arab side and there was no strategic thinking and Israel took advantage of Arab’s internal chaos. Why should Palestinian trust Arab for help!
After first Arab- Israel war, Egypt held Gaza Strip and Jordan West Bank. At least 22% of land was under direct Arab control. Egypt began to improve its relation with Israel, however they soon realized Israeli intention and another war broke out in 1956. It was a diplomatic and strategic error on the part of Arab nations specifically Egypt, which resulted in another defeat thought not so direct and major. Israel had colluded with European powers and isolated Egypt. However, here I believe there was another angle also; UK and France used Israel for their advantage, which upset the United States, which led to Israeli withdrawal from Sinai, an Egyptian territory. Israel received guarantee for uninterrupted movement of Israeli ships, but I believe that Israel could have got this assurance even without going for war through US support and diplomacy. In my opinion this was a mistake on the part of Israel.
After 1956, Egypt started building its military platform with the help of former USSR. It had built, supposedly, regions’ most powerful Air-force. Many other Arab nations were also enhancing its military power. Israel launched pre emptive strike in 1967. It is famously known as Six day war. Egypt, Syria and Jordan were fighting directly against Israel. The war turned out to be the biggest humiliation and defeat for Arab nations. So called mighty air force of the region (Egypt) could not even take off! A defeat in war has no excuse. Many historians and analysts say that Israel had shown aggression. There are some records showing that even some high ranked Israeli did not believe that Egypt was in a position to attack Israel, but I find it difficult to digest that Egypt was building the biggest military power jut to show case them in the museum. Egyptian president was giving provocative statements. Arab nations had instituted economic embargo against Israel. They were humiliated twice. More and more Arab nations were signing defense pacts. Considering all the circumstances, it appears that Pre emptive strike was one of the most important military judgments ever taken by country which ensured Israel’s dominance and existence. This war left an indelible remark on the minds of Arabs, which I believe would remain till eternity. It is same like, we Indians can’t forget our humiliating defeat in 1962 by Chinese. If you read the history of Indo Chinese war, one thing is clear; there is no excuse for defeat in war. India had some advantage because of its vast mountain range, which prompted Chinese to return voluntarily, however in Middle East no country has this advantage of having difficult geographic terrain. A militarily poorer force had defeated advanced force, fighting simultaneously around the border. Did Arabs still believe that they would get something to Palestinian! Again, Arab countries started giving excuses. If you read the war history, it becomes obvious why Israel could defeat Arab nations so easily. Many analysts believe that Arab nations, specifically Egypt did not real war. Here also, Arab nations were trying to score over each other in the name of Palestine. Israeli military was no where near to Arab armies; still Israel defeated them all in 6 days. Arabs had shown again that they had no strategy, no unity and no vision. Many Arabs believe that US support to Israel resulted in their defeat, but they could not get USSR support, this was their failure – not an excuse.
Israel occupied entire Palestine after Six Days War; in fact it acquired part of Egypt (Sinai) and Syria (Golan Heights) also. Various plans and settlement schemes were prepared and proposed but nothing could provide any concrete success. Here also, no Arab nation was thinking for Palestine. They all were fighting for their own cause. Little consideration was paid to Palestinian cause.
The Six Days War had inadvertently done something good to Palestine. The entire Palestine had come under Israeli occupation and now it was easier for Palestine Arabs to push for their demand. They no more required formal approval from Arab Nations. This was the time when PLO came into action. Yasser Arafat had become popular as PLO’s chairman. PLO was regarded as terrorist organization by Israel; however it was recognized by Arab nations.
In October 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel. Israelis were caught unprepared. The high mindedness and under estimation of Egyptian army led to major initial setbacks for Israel. Although, Israel could win its positions in the end, but initial success had given major relief to Egypt. It could regain part of its glory and made Israel believe that Israel was not invincible. The war can be said first strategically thought out plan by an Arab nation. The credit goes to Anwar Sadat, the then Egyptian president. This war was followed by Oil embargo led by Saudi Arabia countries that supported Israel in the war, mainly the United States and the Netherland. Oil prices increased by almost 400%! However, intense negotiations ended the oil crisis. Yasser Arafat was allowed to address the United Nations general assembly and PLO was granted an observer status. First time, something was done for Palestine due to Arabian efforts. However, Jordan had expelled PLO from its territory in 1970 as PLO was considered threat to the King. There were major differences on the issue of PLO between Syria, Jordan and other Arab nations. It was these differences and lack of vision and strategy that led to Lebanon crisis.
In 1979, Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menahem Begin signed final peace treaty brokered by the United States. Egypt recognized state of Israel and Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. A country, which had been presenting itself as true savior of Palestinian cause, had signed the peace agreement without thinking of other Arab nations. He was given Nobel Prize for Peace in 1978 and he accepted it. Anwar Sadat was assassinated by an Egyptian army member in 1981. Here, most of the Arab nations condemned Anwar Sadat for his action; however I believe that he had taken a step which can be considered the most important in recent Egyptian history. He could realize that boycotting and denying Israeli existence was not going to serve any purpose. He could bargain with Israel. Israel had respected the peace treaty since then with Egypt. Sadat had used the United States as broker as no other country could have ensured that Israel would respect the accord. However, if we consider Sadat’s action from Palestinian perspective it appears that he least cared for Palestine. He definitely did a great thing for Egypt, but he forgot the fact that it was Egypt which had raised wars against Egypt on previous occasions in the name of Palestinian Arabs. Again, the point is where was Arab unity!. Who cared for Palestine!
During these years PLO had become very active. The infamous killing of Israeli Athletes in Germany was executed by PLO (however there exists controversy on this). PLO was initially operating from Jordan, where it had built powerful army of Palestinian refugees. King Husain of Jordan considered Arafat threat to his power and expelled PLO from Jordan. Later on PLO shifted its base to Lebanon. In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon on the pretext of PLO threat. The invasion was followed by mass killing. Several thousands Lebanese left home. Israel army had committed war crimes, Israel accepts these facts but in parts. Lebanese invasion did more harm to Israeli reputation and probably for the first time popular sympathy moved away from Israel. Israeli defense minister was indicted by an Israeli commission and had to resign. However, it was a military victory and PLO was expelled from Lebanon. No Arab nation intervened directly; in fact there was fractured effort on the side of Arab nations. Arab nations could not secure anything; as a matter of fact a group which was fighting for Palestine was devastated by Israeli army. Saudi Arabia, brokered peace and international army was called to bring order in Lebanon. US created the propaganda that they were friends of Lebanon and trying to free Lebanon from Syrian dominance. However, reality was totally different. It hardly mattered to US, who dominated Lebanon till US interests was served. Saudi Arabia used it as an opportunity to strengthen its ties with US and increase its Arab prestige. Plethora of materials has been written on this invasion and anyone interested can read those views. But what happened to Palestine and Palestinian cause? PLO was fighting for Palestine, was there any effort to give something to Palestine – no (at least nothing noticeable). Saudi Arabia welcomed, Western forces in the region, but it was against Israeli occupation of Palestine!
Palestine continued to suffer till 1987, when finally they decided to take their destiny in their hand. First Intifada broke out in 1987 and a mass uprising against Israeli forces began. Palestinians had nothing to fight with but stones and some primitive weapons, if you compared them against Israeli weapons. This protest ran till 1991. Israeli suppression of uprising generated worldwide condemnation; of course most of the condemnation came from civil societies. The stone throwing scenes drew massive attention both in West and East. Although it was not exactly like Civil disobedience – Mahatma Gandhi Style- but it did leave an indelible remark on the minds of people – David fighting Goliath. The sympathy moved towards David (Palestinians) and finally Israel agreed to start peace process.
Israel agreed to talk to PLO and the Palestinian Authority was formed. PA was given power and recognition to negotiate on the behalf of its people. The Oslo Peace accord was signed by Israel and PA. Israel agreed to withdraw its forces (it never implemented the plan fully). It was the first achievement for Palestinian since 1948 and this was achieved by Palestinian themselves. The movement had given a clear message that the future of Palestine was in the hands of their own people.
The peace accord failed. There are so many reasons why the Oslo accord did not work. The reason of failure can be attributed both to Israel and Palestine; however Israel’s contribution was significantly higher. Hamas did not support the peace process on Palestinian side and there were many right wingers in Israel who did not even consider the treaty a legitimate one. Israel never withdrew from Palestinian territories (agreed upon) and Arafat also could not control violence. Here again, internal feud and differences of Arab nations did not allow Arafat to take full command. Many Arab nations did not like Arafat. Arafat had supported Saddam Husain on the issue of Kuwaiti Invasion and this had created major rift. Had all Arab nations acted jointly using their influence on the United States, the situation would have been much better after Oslo accord. I believe that the accord was a starting point to push their further. But there was clear lack of trust among Arabs. Even Arafat, was confused. He changed his positions so often, and this did more harm to his image as true Palestinian Leader. In fact, close analysis of the events during 1993- 2000, brings a question again – what was the core issue - was it existence of Palestinian state or non existence of Israel? Many people would say that these two aspects are interlinked but still there has to be one governing theme which would drive any movement. Some Arab countries were threatening to eradicate Israel and at the same time other Arab states were negotiating with Israel. Syria was negotiating with Israel on Golan Heights not for any Palestinian cause! Iran was helping (and still helping) Hamas, at the same time Some Arab states were with US on Iran issue as they perceived Iran as a threat.
Couple of years back, I had met an Iranian professor from Tehran University and had long discussion with her on Iran and Hamas issue. I remember the way she described Yasir Arafat “We feel sad for POOR Arafat. He does not know, he is being used. He used to be brilliant but he is confused now. Iran supports Hamas, as Iran has no other choice.” After reading various articles from different sources (and also some primary conversations with some people from Muslim world both Arab and non Arab), I could sense that there is no consensus among Arab world on Palestine issue and it is not clear whether they really want an amicable end to this conflict in favor of Palestine.
Second Intifada broke out in 2000, which was followed several discussions by different sections. One of the important events was Saudi Peace Plan in 2002. It was probably first of its kind and had some merits as it accepted the two nation theory in principle and it has so called baking of Arab League. However, it has failed to generate any result so far.
Yasir Arafat passed away in November 2004 and with him ended an era of Palestinian struggle. There is no leader of Arafat stature, although Arafat was also lack of popular support towards the fag end of his life, who can represent Palestine. Hamas has gained more popularity since then and controls Gaza. It is more popular than official PA president Mahmoud Abbas, who is considered liberal. Israel does not recognize Hamas and calls it a terrorist organization. This has resulted into catch-22 situation and Israel has been using this weakness of Palestinian and Arabs to wage war and atrocities against Palestinian people.
In 2008, Israel started massive offensive operation against Palestine, on the pretext of Hamas terrorist activities. Israel had full support of the United States. Israeli operation was condemned by several states around the world; however the condemnation lacked the intensity. The most important thing to notice was Arabs complacent attitude towards Israel. Some Arab nations were directly or indirectly (Some Arab national were saying this on TV), accusing Hamas for the catastrophe. Egypt deliberately distanced itself from Hamas till the offensive ended; however it started mediating later on. There was no unanimous voice from Arab World. Iran has been threatening Israel as if it would really eradicate Israel from globe. Israel conducted its full operation and killed many Palestinian civilians, the whole world was watching. Why didn’t Arab did something like major lobbying around or some financial muscle to Isolate Israel?
Actually, general Arabs were protesting vociferously, however their government were showing pusillanimity. This war showed clearly that the government in Arab nations and Arab nationals do not share same view on Palestine- Israel issue. It was clear that the Governments were acting considering their interest, and when I say their it means few vested interest of the ruling class not their national interest.
Arab League had established PLO in 1964 with an objective of destroying Israel through Arms struggle. When Israel defeated them in 1967 the whole equation changed and the country which was instrumental in establishing PLO, Egypt, signed peace treaty with Israel in 1979. Arab League suspended Egypt’s membership; however they failed to teach any lesson to Egypt. Yasir Arafat supported Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and in turn Kuwait expelled around 400,000 Palestinians living in Kuwait. Arab nations rather than teaching a lesson to Arafat, allowed innocent Palestinians suffer. At that time Arab world was divided on Arafat being true representative of Palestine. In 1994 Jordan, another country which supposedly always fought for Palestine and against Israel signed peace treaty with Israel without making any reference to Palestine. On the one hand most Arab states have been saying that PLO is the true representative of Palestinian people, but they did nothing to avoid Hamas victory in 2006. They could neither support Hamas nor oppose it simply because there was no unanimity. Iran has been openly supporting Hamas along with Syria. Since the demise of Yasir Arafat, Arab states, specifically, Saudi Arabia is busy bringing peace between the two Palestinian parties which has not given any positive result except some image building for Saudi Arabia in the West.
Recent time also saw new players taking center stage in Middle East like Qatar and for obvious reasons traditional powers like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria are not very happy with this. The United States and Israel would more than happy to have more mouths as it makes their task easier.
I believe the reason why Arab states acted so differently is the way these Arab states are ruled and the way resources are controlled. Almost all the governments in Arab world are running with American patronage – directly or indirectly. I always believed that Arab states at least controlled the price of Oil – the most important resource on the Earth- however I could see, that is just a perception. Arab nations hardly have any bargain power in reality. The cartel hardly works coherently, as every country in the cartel has its own limitations. They are mostly dependent on US even for their oil price!
Arab governments hardly reflect the will of its people. They are ruling as they control the means of production which have allowed them to control military. US want democracy everywhere except in the Middle East. RAND Corporation says, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman (almost all except Iran and few other countries) are friends of the United States. Saudi Arabia did not even allow human rights organization inside its territory till few years back. It is difficult for me to find any name which is worse than Saudi Arabia (don’t consider African nations) on freedom, human rights, rights for women, natural justice system etc. Kuwait has parliament but no political party and in reality there is no democracy and very limited press freedom. There is no press freedom in any Arab states (few have but not significant in comparison to Europe and Asia). Surprisingly, US want better government in Iran which is the most democratic among all Arab nations! The United States is fine with all these countries, but it has major problem with Chinese Tibet policy, Russian Chechnya policy and in fact it is concerned for Indian J&K, as it believes that human rights are being violated in these regions!
Actually, most of these Arabian rulers know that they are there because they have backing from West, specifically the United States. They can’t afford to disappoint the United States and the United States in turn can not disappoint Israel. Till the world was by polar the Arab rulers had some kind o backing at least some sort of unilateral action was not possible, however since the dismemberment of USSR, there has been significant shift in Arab policy towards the United States. It is fairly interesting to know that the United States sell arms to both Israel and Saudi Arabia (in fact to most Arab nations).
Obama could speak on everything when he was the president elect except on Israeli action in Palestine, as it was a state issue!
The biggest Arabian drama was recently created when Arab countries decided to gives billions of Dollars to rebuild Gaza, however the recent events made the intra regional differences even more obvious. In the name of Gaza, both Saudi Arabia and Egypt were trying to project its big brotherly role in the Middle East, which has received some threats from some smaller players like Qatar. The donor countries have decided to give billions of dollars to rebuild Gaza, but they won’t let this money go to Hamas. Mind it Hamas is the ruling party in Gaza. The question that comes to my mind is how can Hamas exist without Arabian support. It is not possible for Hamas to do anything without Arab support and Arab countries have no democracy where people can ignore will of the government at least on such matters. I believe, Arabs intention may be right at this time but their approach is again without any vision. They will again fail as they have failed on earlier occasion.
Many of you would have been wondering why I have not blamed United States or other Western countries, the reason for that is US and West has no brotherly affection. They are there with vested interest. With Arab world it is different. The United States and West will try for peace genuinely only when it fits their strategic goal otherwise they will not and all Arab States know this. The onus falls on Arab states o bring peace by whatever means. They have failed because they are divided, they have no vision, they have no leader of great charisma and the last but the most important they are not fighting for Palestinian peace they are fighting for their own existence- existence of the rulers.
The peace for Palestine will come only if they get a visionary leader of their own, who would act on the behalf of Palestinian people rather than a puppet in the hands of Arabs rulers. At the same time, I also believe that future of Palestine is tied to democracy in the Middle East and both appear elusive.
Note: this article is still being edited, so you are welcome for feedbacks.
Disclaimer: Everything written is my personal view and in no way related to the organizations I have been related to ever. I have not mentioned any source, as there is no unanimity of anything except the dates of events. I have used my own judgments based on the facts and analysis I have done.
Early History
The problem starts with “claim on land” in principle at least. Present day Israel and Palestine border with Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon (this is just for the reference so that you can imagine where it is). Whose land is this? At the time of Palestine independence and Israel formation, Arabs (Muslims) were in majority. However, Jews have established their claim on the area based on the 3000 years of historical account. Jews claim that Kind David and Solomon conquered the land in 1000 BC and Jews ruled the land intermittently till 586 BC (the exact period of Jews rule during 1250BC- 586 BC is not agreed upon). Thus Jews call themselves original owner of the land (if you remember Islam was not even in scene for almost another thousands years). However, Arabs refute this argument by saying that Jews were not the first settlers on that land. Prior to Jews victory, Cannanite civilization was in existence during 3000 BC to 1100 BC in the present day Israel, parts of Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan (the exact region is debatable). According to Arabs (also confirmed by independent historians and not completely refuted by Jews), original inhabitant were Cannanites (which is factual and not refuted by Jew either). But there are counter argument to Arabian logic (and I agree to it), Cannantes were mixed, heterogeneous society and didn’t represent any particular community which direct lineage we can trace (I don’t know any Cannaite who claims that Israel is his/her land!). In all possibility, Jews were the first people who established their rule on the land and exist in purity till today. So Jews historical claim is not flawed (at least on the ground of “first to come”). Again, just for reference- if we accept Arabs logic, Aryans from India will have to go back to their original land (if you believe that Aryan invasion theory of India is correct).
Does the eligible claim of first occupation makes Jews case strong enough to take possession of the land? After the fall of Judah (the last surviving kingdom of Jews till 586 BC), Babylonian rule was established. Babylonian expelled Jews and destroyed Solomon’ temple (Babylon was roughly present day Iraq). However, Babylonian rule was short lived (at this point), Cyrus the great (great Persian emperor) conquered Babylon and later allowed Jews to come back. This was the period of great many changes. Alexander the great conquered the land (331 BC). The history at this point is important but not so relevant in the context of Arab Israel conflict. The history becomes relevant in 70AD, when Roman emperor Titus, destroyed the second temple (first one was destroyed by Babylonians). At this point of time Jews started leaving their so called “promised land”. However, Jews came back and revolted in 133 AD (probably the biggest mistake). This time the then Roman king completely destroyed the city of Jerusalem and Jews were taken as slaves. Roman Empire ended and then Byzantine took over. Jews left the place to protect themselves. In 7th century AD, Muslims entered into the region. Again, history is interesting at this point but not so relevant in our context. Overall the region remained under Muslim rule. In 16th century Ottoman Empire conquered Palestine came (this included current day Israel). This was an important event from Jews perspective, as Ottomans were Turks not Arab. Thus, the Arabian claim to represent Palestine is brought under question by Jews, as Ottoman Empire ruled the region till its fall in the 20th century. However, this Jewish claim has few buyers. Even after Ottoman conquest of the area the region remained Arab by all means (except the nationality of the King). However, we Indians may have different perspective, as our claim to J&K is somewhat based on Jewish logic (the King raja Hari Sigh was Hindu who had signed the treaty). This is just to add another angle to analysis; it does not hold an analogy to the Arab- Palestine case as the context and background were totally different.
This was the overall background. Till the end of 19th century there was hardly any thing like Jewish state (at least on significant scale). It was Theodor Herzl who in his book Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) propounded the idea of Jewish state. The important point o note here is, Jews had already started coming to Palestine since 1880, and however there was no such thing as “Independent Jewish State” at least in public. I would Quote the BBC historical record
“The Congress issued the Basle Programme to establish a "home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured by public law" …. By 1903 there were some 25,000 of them, … lived alongside about half a million Arab residents …..then part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. A second wave of about 40,000 immigrants arrived in the region between 1904 and 1914.”
Beyond Roman Empire when Jews were expelled. History moves without much reference to Jews. There are few important points, though, Ottoman were not Arabs, Prophet Mohammed never visited Palestine, this is contested by Arabs, however the event quoted by Arabs regarding Prophet’s visit looks little too religious. During this period, the population was Arab, and there were very few Jews at any point of time. However, the scene changed in 18th century when under Ottoman Empire, emigrant Jews and Jews community started buying land in Palestine. Later on, there were some changes in the law that made it more difficult to for Jews to buy land (there is enough details and controversy on this), however Jews kept on buying land by other means.
Disclaimer: Everything written is my personal view and in no way related to the organizations I have been related to ever. I have not mentioned any source, as there is no unanimity of anything except the dates of events. I have used my own judgments based on the facts and analysis I have done.
Arguably, the most dangerous place to live on the Earth is Palestine. There is no “common noun” for this place on the Earth. What will you call – country, state, occupied territory or something else? It’s a place where people (can I write citizen), live in constant fear, trauma, uncertainty and chaos. Above all, its own people live in refugee camp. I remember from Steven Spielberg’s Munich – “how do you feel when you live like a refugee in your own country”. The statement said by a Palestine to an Israeli must have left indelible remark on the mind of people across globe. People are suffering, they are angry, they want to live like others in other countries, but it is just not possible.
All the countries across the world say that they want peace in the region, but peace is becoming more elusive for this part of the world which you can’t even see on the small sized globe. I would mention in the very beginning that Israeli claim of the land is not completely baseless (please refer the last part of this article where I have discussed early history in brief).
Palestine is not represented by its own people. Hamas, the most popular group in Palestine, is considered a terrorist organization. Fatah, the group accepted by West as genuine representative lacks credibility on ground. There is hardly any strong leader after Yasir Arafat, who himself lacked popular support during last few years of his career. However, Arafat can be said the only leader Palestine ever had. Current Fatah leader and president Mohamud Abbas is considered liberal and progressive but he lacks popular support. Hamas, too has distributed leadership (its top leadership was killed by Israel). But is lack of true leadership is the cause of Palestine pain – no.
Who are main culprits behind Palestine sufferings? The most obvious answer is Israel, but a closer analysis and understanding of the region and historical development in the region give a different picture. The main culprits are the so called main guardians – the United States, Arab world and Europe. Many analysts have already pointed this out earlier, but they have emphasized more on the United States. I believe the biggest culprit is the so called main savior – Arab world.
Arab nations proclaim to have been fighting for Palestine. They have created propaganda that they are the true voice for Palestine and the only well wisher, however in my opinion they are the one who have ruined Palestine. Arabian hypocrisy since late 40s has brought Palestine under such a situation from where only Prophet himself can save them.
I will deal with history in another section. Here, I will talk from the context of Palestine options. In 1947, United States passed resolution 181 which proposed the partition with two states, Jewish and Arab, with the Jewish state receiving about 56.47 percent of the land, the Arab state about 43.53 percent (Source United nations Website). Arab nations opposed this idea vehemently. Arabs were more in number, but Jews were getting bigger part of land and on this ground Arab countries were opposed to this division. At the first place Arab nations, never wanted a Jewish state, at best they thought of allowing Jews to stay inside Palestine as minority. But this was clearly against the doctrine of “Independent state for Jews” and as a result of Second World War, every country, accepted the idea of a sovereign state for Jews, at least in principle or out of sympathy. However, on technical ground it was derived from Balfour declaration. Balfour declaration was a British Mandate (Palestine was under British Rule after First World War). Balfour declarations had mandated for an independent state for Jews in the region. Arabs rejected this mandate on the ground that it was done by an occupying power and did not reflect Arabs opinion. This was valid upto certain extent, but what was the options available. It is very unlikely that Arab did not understand that not allowing Jews to have an independent state was not possible, also at a time when all major power of that time was in Jews support. Even the people across globe had sympathy for Jews. Yet, Arabs opposed the idea of separate Jews state. In 1948, Israel declared independence. War broke out between Arabs and Israel, and Israel captured 77 percent of the land, including large part of Jerusalem. The war resulted into mass exodus of Palestinian people.
Arab nations had attacked Israel, however it remains controversial who started the war. Whosoever started it, but it resulted into loss for Palestinian people. After the war, Egypt and Jordan occupied the rest of the area. In my opinion, it was obvious that Israelis would not have allowed so many Arabs to live inside Israel (in fact Arabs were outnumbering Jews), as this would not have served the very purpose of having an independent Jewish state. I don’t say what Jews did was right. It was cruel and inhuman – killing innocent people and forcing them to leave the country, however at the same time if I look from Jews perspective I get a different picture. Jews did it to secure their future, they were scared, and they had known that any place where Jews would not be the massive majority their future would be insecure even if they controlled the nation. Their experience during the Second World War had taught them this lesson. I believe, Arabs also would have known this. If they would have thought of Palestinian people, they would have first asked Palestinian Arabs to come to the area which was allocated to them by the United Nations. Arab nations should have helped Palestinian people to get assembled into their given territory and should have avoided any direct confrontation till the time they were completely sure about their position inside UN allocated Palestine for Arab. Arab nations fought for their pride and showed complete lack of vision and least bothered for Palestinian Arabs. In fact there was no consensus among Arab countries, which resulted into half a million Arabs leaving Jews occupied Palestine. The United States was in full support to Jews for obvious reasons. It was a time when, Arab nations should have shown vision, shrewdness and smart resilience, but they showed complete lack of vision and hardly thought of Palestinian people. A visionary leader would have grabbed what he could get, consolidated its position there and then would have fought for rest, the way China has done during last 60 years. In fact, after reading war history of 1948 between Israel and Arab (mainly Egypt, Jordan and Syria), it become clear that continued war could have given Arab Palestinians significant advantage and in the end they could have been in advantageous position to negotiate. Israel was not in a position to fight for sustained period, specifically if Egypt, Jordan and Syria would have coordinated well. However, Arab nations accepted cease fire at a time when Israel had acquired 78% of total Palestine and more than half a million Palestinian Arabs were rendered homeless. The point to note it, Arab nations fought in the name of Palestine but ended up destroying what was there for Palestine after UN resolution. Israel had consented to accept the division with some reservations; Arab nations rejected the division and in the end remained with less than 25% of Area and all refugees. Another point to notice, Israel had no friend country in the region and it was easier for Arab to fight. They lost the land in war; three armies fighting together could not defeat a fragmented, newly born small Jewish state. Because, even at that time there was no united front from Arab side and there was no strategic thinking and Israel took advantage of Arab’s internal chaos. Why should Palestinian trust Arab for help!
After first Arab- Israel war, Egypt held Gaza Strip and Jordan West Bank. At least 22% of land was under direct Arab control. Egypt began to improve its relation with Israel, however they soon realized Israeli intention and another war broke out in 1956. It was a diplomatic and strategic error on the part of Arab nations specifically Egypt, which resulted in another defeat thought not so direct and major. Israel had colluded with European powers and isolated Egypt. However, here I believe there was another angle also; UK and France used Israel for their advantage, which upset the United States, which led to Israeli withdrawal from Sinai, an Egyptian territory. Israel received guarantee for uninterrupted movement of Israeli ships, but I believe that Israel could have got this assurance even without going for war through US support and diplomacy. In my opinion this was a mistake on the part of Israel.
After 1956, Egypt started building its military platform with the help of former USSR. It had built, supposedly, regions’ most powerful Air-force. Many other Arab nations were also enhancing its military power. Israel launched pre emptive strike in 1967. It is famously known as Six day war. Egypt, Syria and Jordan were fighting directly against Israel. The war turned out to be the biggest humiliation and defeat for Arab nations. So called mighty air force of the region (Egypt) could not even take off! A defeat in war has no excuse. Many historians and analysts say that Israel had shown aggression. There are some records showing that even some high ranked Israeli did not believe that Egypt was in a position to attack Israel, but I find it difficult to digest that Egypt was building the biggest military power jut to show case them in the museum. Egyptian president was giving provocative statements. Arab nations had instituted economic embargo against Israel. They were humiliated twice. More and more Arab nations were signing defense pacts. Considering all the circumstances, it appears that Pre emptive strike was one of the most important military judgments ever taken by country which ensured Israel’s dominance and existence. This war left an indelible remark on the minds of Arabs, which I believe would remain till eternity. It is same like, we Indians can’t forget our humiliating defeat in 1962 by Chinese. If you read the history of Indo Chinese war, one thing is clear; there is no excuse for defeat in war. India had some advantage because of its vast mountain range, which prompted Chinese to return voluntarily, however in Middle East no country has this advantage of having difficult geographic terrain. A militarily poorer force had defeated advanced force, fighting simultaneously around the border. Did Arabs still believe that they would get something to Palestinian! Again, Arab countries started giving excuses. If you read the war history, it becomes obvious why Israel could defeat Arab nations so easily. Many analysts believe that Arab nations, specifically Egypt did not real war. Here also, Arab nations were trying to score over each other in the name of Palestine. Israeli military was no where near to Arab armies; still Israel defeated them all in 6 days. Arabs had shown again that they had no strategy, no unity and no vision. Many Arabs believe that US support to Israel resulted in their defeat, but they could not get USSR support, this was their failure – not an excuse.
Israel occupied entire Palestine after Six Days War; in fact it acquired part of Egypt (Sinai) and Syria (Golan Heights) also. Various plans and settlement schemes were prepared and proposed but nothing could provide any concrete success. Here also, no Arab nation was thinking for Palestine. They all were fighting for their own cause. Little consideration was paid to Palestinian cause.
The Six Days War had inadvertently done something good to Palestine. The entire Palestine had come under Israeli occupation and now it was easier for Palestine Arabs to push for their demand. They no more required formal approval from Arab Nations. This was the time when PLO came into action. Yasser Arafat had become popular as PLO’s chairman. PLO was regarded as terrorist organization by Israel; however it was recognized by Arab nations.
In October 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel. Israelis were caught unprepared. The high mindedness and under estimation of Egyptian army led to major initial setbacks for Israel. Although, Israel could win its positions in the end, but initial success had given major relief to Egypt. It could regain part of its glory and made Israel believe that Israel was not invincible. The war can be said first strategically thought out plan by an Arab nation. The credit goes to Anwar Sadat, the then Egyptian president. This war was followed by Oil embargo led by Saudi Arabia countries that supported Israel in the war, mainly the United States and the Netherland. Oil prices increased by almost 400%! However, intense negotiations ended the oil crisis. Yasser Arafat was allowed to address the United Nations general assembly and PLO was granted an observer status. First time, something was done for Palestine due to Arabian efforts. However, Jordan had expelled PLO from its territory in 1970 as PLO was considered threat to the King. There were major differences on the issue of PLO between Syria, Jordan and other Arab nations. It was these differences and lack of vision and strategy that led to Lebanon crisis.
In 1979, Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menahem Begin signed final peace treaty brokered by the United States. Egypt recognized state of Israel and Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. A country, which had been presenting itself as true savior of Palestinian cause, had signed the peace agreement without thinking of other Arab nations. He was given Nobel Prize for Peace in 1978 and he accepted it. Anwar Sadat was assassinated by an Egyptian army member in 1981. Here, most of the Arab nations condemned Anwar Sadat for his action; however I believe that he had taken a step which can be considered the most important in recent Egyptian history. He could realize that boycotting and denying Israeli existence was not going to serve any purpose. He could bargain with Israel. Israel had respected the peace treaty since then with Egypt. Sadat had used the United States as broker as no other country could have ensured that Israel would respect the accord. However, if we consider Sadat’s action from Palestinian perspective it appears that he least cared for Palestine. He definitely did a great thing for Egypt, but he forgot the fact that it was Egypt which had raised wars against Egypt on previous occasions in the name of Palestinian Arabs. Again, the point is where was Arab unity!. Who cared for Palestine!
During these years PLO had become very active. The infamous killing of Israeli Athletes in Germany was executed by PLO (however there exists controversy on this). PLO was initially operating from Jordan, where it had built powerful army of Palestinian refugees. King Husain of Jordan considered Arafat threat to his power and expelled PLO from Jordan. Later on PLO shifted its base to Lebanon. In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon on the pretext of PLO threat. The invasion was followed by mass killing. Several thousands Lebanese left home. Israel army had committed war crimes, Israel accepts these facts but in parts. Lebanese invasion did more harm to Israeli reputation and probably for the first time popular sympathy moved away from Israel. Israeli defense minister was indicted by an Israeli commission and had to resign. However, it was a military victory and PLO was expelled from Lebanon. No Arab nation intervened directly; in fact there was fractured effort on the side of Arab nations. Arab nations could not secure anything; as a matter of fact a group which was fighting for Palestine was devastated by Israeli army. Saudi Arabia, brokered peace and international army was called to bring order in Lebanon. US created the propaganda that they were friends of Lebanon and trying to free Lebanon from Syrian dominance. However, reality was totally different. It hardly mattered to US, who dominated Lebanon till US interests was served. Saudi Arabia used it as an opportunity to strengthen its ties with US and increase its Arab prestige. Plethora of materials has been written on this invasion and anyone interested can read those views. But what happened to Palestine and Palestinian cause? PLO was fighting for Palestine, was there any effort to give something to Palestine – no (at least nothing noticeable). Saudi Arabia welcomed, Western forces in the region, but it was against Israeli occupation of Palestine!
Palestine continued to suffer till 1987, when finally they decided to take their destiny in their hand. First Intifada broke out in 1987 and a mass uprising against Israeli forces began. Palestinians had nothing to fight with but stones and some primitive weapons, if you compared them against Israeli weapons. This protest ran till 1991. Israeli suppression of uprising generated worldwide condemnation; of course most of the condemnation came from civil societies. The stone throwing scenes drew massive attention both in West and East. Although it was not exactly like Civil disobedience – Mahatma Gandhi Style- but it did leave an indelible remark on the minds of people – David fighting Goliath. The sympathy moved towards David (Palestinians) and finally Israel agreed to start peace process.
Israel agreed to talk to PLO and the Palestinian Authority was formed. PA was given power and recognition to negotiate on the behalf of its people. The Oslo Peace accord was signed by Israel and PA. Israel agreed to withdraw its forces (it never implemented the plan fully). It was the first achievement for Palestinian since 1948 and this was achieved by Palestinian themselves. The movement had given a clear message that the future of Palestine was in the hands of their own people.
The peace accord failed. There are so many reasons why the Oslo accord did not work. The reason of failure can be attributed both to Israel and Palestine; however Israel’s contribution was significantly higher. Hamas did not support the peace process on Palestinian side and there were many right wingers in Israel who did not even consider the treaty a legitimate one. Israel never withdrew from Palestinian territories (agreed upon) and Arafat also could not control violence. Here again, internal feud and differences of Arab nations did not allow Arafat to take full command. Many Arab nations did not like Arafat. Arafat had supported Saddam Husain on the issue of Kuwaiti Invasion and this had created major rift. Had all Arab nations acted jointly using their influence on the United States, the situation would have been much better after Oslo accord. I believe that the accord was a starting point to push their further. But there was clear lack of trust among Arabs. Even Arafat, was confused. He changed his positions so often, and this did more harm to his image as true Palestinian Leader. In fact, close analysis of the events during 1993- 2000, brings a question again – what was the core issue - was it existence of Palestinian state or non existence of Israel? Many people would say that these two aspects are interlinked but still there has to be one governing theme which would drive any movement. Some Arab countries were threatening to eradicate Israel and at the same time other Arab states were negotiating with Israel. Syria was negotiating with Israel on Golan Heights not for any Palestinian cause! Iran was helping (and still helping) Hamas, at the same time Some Arab states were with US on Iran issue as they perceived Iran as a threat.
Couple of years back, I had met an Iranian professor from Tehran University and had long discussion with her on Iran and Hamas issue. I remember the way she described Yasir Arafat “We feel sad for POOR Arafat. He does not know, he is being used. He used to be brilliant but he is confused now. Iran supports Hamas, as Iran has no other choice.” After reading various articles from different sources (and also some primary conversations with some people from Muslim world both Arab and non Arab), I could sense that there is no consensus among Arab world on Palestine issue and it is not clear whether they really want an amicable end to this conflict in favor of Palestine.
Second Intifada broke out in 2000, which was followed several discussions by different sections. One of the important events was Saudi Peace Plan in 2002. It was probably first of its kind and had some merits as it accepted the two nation theory in principle and it has so called baking of Arab League. However, it has failed to generate any result so far.
Yasir Arafat passed away in November 2004 and with him ended an era of Palestinian struggle. There is no leader of Arafat stature, although Arafat was also lack of popular support towards the fag end of his life, who can represent Palestine. Hamas has gained more popularity since then and controls Gaza. It is more popular than official PA president Mahmoud Abbas, who is considered liberal. Israel does not recognize Hamas and calls it a terrorist organization. This has resulted into catch-22 situation and Israel has been using this weakness of Palestinian and Arabs to wage war and atrocities against Palestinian people.
In 2008, Israel started massive offensive operation against Palestine, on the pretext of Hamas terrorist activities. Israel had full support of the United States. Israeli operation was condemned by several states around the world; however the condemnation lacked the intensity. The most important thing to notice was Arabs complacent attitude towards Israel. Some Arab nations were directly or indirectly (Some Arab national were saying this on TV), accusing Hamas for the catastrophe. Egypt deliberately distanced itself from Hamas till the offensive ended; however it started mediating later on. There was no unanimous voice from Arab World. Iran has been threatening Israel as if it would really eradicate Israel from globe. Israel conducted its full operation and killed many Palestinian civilians, the whole world was watching. Why didn’t Arab did something like major lobbying around or some financial muscle to Isolate Israel?
Actually, general Arabs were protesting vociferously, however their government were showing pusillanimity. This war showed clearly that the government in Arab nations and Arab nationals do not share same view on Palestine- Israel issue. It was clear that the Governments were acting considering their interest, and when I say their it means few vested interest of the ruling class not their national interest.
Arab League had established PLO in 1964 with an objective of destroying Israel through Arms struggle. When Israel defeated them in 1967 the whole equation changed and the country which was instrumental in establishing PLO, Egypt, signed peace treaty with Israel in 1979. Arab League suspended Egypt’s membership; however they failed to teach any lesson to Egypt. Yasir Arafat supported Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and in turn Kuwait expelled around 400,000 Palestinians living in Kuwait. Arab nations rather than teaching a lesson to Arafat, allowed innocent Palestinians suffer. At that time Arab world was divided on Arafat being true representative of Palestine. In 1994 Jordan, another country which supposedly always fought for Palestine and against Israel signed peace treaty with Israel without making any reference to Palestine. On the one hand most Arab states have been saying that PLO is the true representative of Palestinian people, but they did nothing to avoid Hamas victory in 2006. They could neither support Hamas nor oppose it simply because there was no unanimity. Iran has been openly supporting Hamas along with Syria. Since the demise of Yasir Arafat, Arab states, specifically, Saudi Arabia is busy bringing peace between the two Palestinian parties which has not given any positive result except some image building for Saudi Arabia in the West.
Recent time also saw new players taking center stage in Middle East like Qatar and for obvious reasons traditional powers like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria are not very happy with this. The United States and Israel would more than happy to have more mouths as it makes their task easier.
I believe the reason why Arab states acted so differently is the way these Arab states are ruled and the way resources are controlled. Almost all the governments in Arab world are running with American patronage – directly or indirectly. I always believed that Arab states at least controlled the price of Oil – the most important resource on the Earth- however I could see, that is just a perception. Arab nations hardly have any bargain power in reality. The cartel hardly works coherently, as every country in the cartel has its own limitations. They are mostly dependent on US even for their oil price!
Arab governments hardly reflect the will of its people. They are ruling as they control the means of production which have allowed them to control military. US want democracy everywhere except in the Middle East. RAND Corporation says, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman (almost all except Iran and few other countries) are friends of the United States. Saudi Arabia did not even allow human rights organization inside its territory till few years back. It is difficult for me to find any name which is worse than Saudi Arabia (don’t consider African nations) on freedom, human rights, rights for women, natural justice system etc. Kuwait has parliament but no political party and in reality there is no democracy and very limited press freedom. There is no press freedom in any Arab states (few have but not significant in comparison to Europe and Asia). Surprisingly, US want better government in Iran which is the most democratic among all Arab nations! The United States is fine with all these countries, but it has major problem with Chinese Tibet policy, Russian Chechnya policy and in fact it is concerned for Indian J&K, as it believes that human rights are being violated in these regions!
Actually, most of these Arabian rulers know that they are there because they have backing from West, specifically the United States. They can’t afford to disappoint the United States and the United States in turn can not disappoint Israel. Till the world was by polar the Arab rulers had some kind o backing at least some sort of unilateral action was not possible, however since the dismemberment of USSR, there has been significant shift in Arab policy towards the United States. It is fairly interesting to know that the United States sell arms to both Israel and Saudi Arabia (in fact to most Arab nations).
Obama could speak on everything when he was the president elect except on Israeli action in Palestine, as it was a state issue!
The biggest Arabian drama was recently created when Arab countries decided to gives billions of Dollars to rebuild Gaza, however the recent events made the intra regional differences even more obvious. In the name of Gaza, both Saudi Arabia and Egypt were trying to project its big brotherly role in the Middle East, which has received some threats from some smaller players like Qatar. The donor countries have decided to give billions of dollars to rebuild Gaza, but they won’t let this money go to Hamas. Mind it Hamas is the ruling party in Gaza. The question that comes to my mind is how can Hamas exist without Arabian support. It is not possible for Hamas to do anything without Arab support and Arab countries have no democracy where people can ignore will of the government at least on such matters. I believe, Arabs intention may be right at this time but their approach is again without any vision. They will again fail as they have failed on earlier occasion.
Many of you would have been wondering why I have not blamed United States or other Western countries, the reason for that is US and West has no brotherly affection. They are there with vested interest. With Arab world it is different. The United States and West will try for peace genuinely only when it fits their strategic goal otherwise they will not and all Arab States know this. The onus falls on Arab states o bring peace by whatever means. They have failed because they are divided, they have no vision, they have no leader of great charisma and the last but the most important they are not fighting for Palestinian peace they are fighting for their own existence- existence of the rulers.
The peace for Palestine will come only if they get a visionary leader of their own, who would act on the behalf of Palestinian people rather than a puppet in the hands of Arabs rulers. At the same time, I also believe that future of Palestine is tied to democracy in the Middle East and both appear elusive.
Note: this article is still being edited, so you are welcome for feedbacks.
Disclaimer: Everything written is my personal view and in no way related to the organizations I have been related to ever. I have not mentioned any source, as there is no unanimity of anything except the dates of events. I have used my own judgments based on the facts and analysis I have done.
Early History
The problem starts with “claim on land” in principle at least. Present day Israel and Palestine border with Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon (this is just for the reference so that you can imagine where it is). Whose land is this? At the time of Palestine independence and Israel formation, Arabs (Muslims) were in majority. However, Jews have established their claim on the area based on the 3000 years of historical account. Jews claim that Kind David and Solomon conquered the land in 1000 BC and Jews ruled the land intermittently till 586 BC (the exact period of Jews rule during 1250BC- 586 BC is not agreed upon). Thus Jews call themselves original owner of the land (if you remember Islam was not even in scene for almost another thousands years). However, Arabs refute this argument by saying that Jews were not the first settlers on that land. Prior to Jews victory, Cannanite civilization was in existence during 3000 BC to 1100 BC in the present day Israel, parts of Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan (the exact region is debatable). According to Arabs (also confirmed by independent historians and not completely refuted by Jews), original inhabitant were Cannanites (which is factual and not refuted by Jew either). But there are counter argument to Arabian logic (and I agree to it), Cannantes were mixed, heterogeneous society and didn’t represent any particular community which direct lineage we can trace (I don’t know any Cannaite who claims that Israel is his/her land!). In all possibility, Jews were the first people who established their rule on the land and exist in purity till today. So Jews historical claim is not flawed (at least on the ground of “first to come”). Again, just for reference- if we accept Arabs logic, Aryans from India will have to go back to their original land (if you believe that Aryan invasion theory of India is correct).
Does the eligible claim of first occupation makes Jews case strong enough to take possession of the land? After the fall of Judah (the last surviving kingdom of Jews till 586 BC), Babylonian rule was established. Babylonian expelled Jews and destroyed Solomon’ temple (Babylon was roughly present day Iraq). However, Babylonian rule was short lived (at this point), Cyrus the great (great Persian emperor) conquered Babylon and later allowed Jews to come back. This was the period of great many changes. Alexander the great conquered the land (331 BC). The history at this point is important but not so relevant in the context of Arab Israel conflict. The history becomes relevant in 70AD, when Roman emperor Titus, destroyed the second temple (first one was destroyed by Babylonians). At this point of time Jews started leaving their so called “promised land”. However, Jews came back and revolted in 133 AD (probably the biggest mistake). This time the then Roman king completely destroyed the city of Jerusalem and Jews were taken as slaves. Roman Empire ended and then Byzantine took over. Jews left the place to protect themselves. In 7th century AD, Muslims entered into the region. Again, history is interesting at this point but not so relevant in our context. Overall the region remained under Muslim rule. In 16th century Ottoman Empire conquered Palestine came (this included current day Israel). This was an important event from Jews perspective, as Ottomans were Turks not Arab. Thus, the Arabian claim to represent Palestine is brought under question by Jews, as Ottoman Empire ruled the region till its fall in the 20th century. However, this Jewish claim has few buyers. Even after Ottoman conquest of the area the region remained Arab by all means (except the nationality of the King). However, we Indians may have different perspective, as our claim to J&K is somewhat based on Jewish logic (the King raja Hari Sigh was Hindu who had signed the treaty). This is just to add another angle to analysis; it does not hold an analogy to the Arab- Palestine case as the context and background were totally different.
This was the overall background. Till the end of 19th century there was hardly any thing like Jewish state (at least on significant scale). It was Theodor Herzl who in his book Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) propounded the idea of Jewish state. The important point o note here is, Jews had already started coming to Palestine since 1880, and however there was no such thing as “Independent Jewish State” at least in public. I would Quote the BBC historical record
“The Congress issued the Basle Programme to establish a "home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured by public law" …. By 1903 there were some 25,000 of them, … lived alongside about half a million Arab residents …..then part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. A second wave of about 40,000 immigrants arrived in the region between 1904 and 1914.”
Beyond Roman Empire when Jews were expelled. History moves without much reference to Jews. There are few important points, though, Ottoman were not Arabs, Prophet Mohammed never visited Palestine, this is contested by Arabs, however the event quoted by Arabs regarding Prophet’s visit looks little too religious. During this period, the population was Arab, and there were very few Jews at any point of time. However, the scene changed in 18th century when under Ottoman Empire, emigrant Jews and Jews community started buying land in Palestine. Later on, there were some changes in the law that made it more difficult to for Jews to buy land (there is enough details and controversy on this), however Jews kept on buying land by other means.
Disclaimer: Everything written is my personal view and in no way related to the organizations I have been related to ever. I have not mentioned any source, as there is no unanimity of anything except the dates of events. I have used my own judgments based on the facts and analysis I have done.
