DOCSLIB.ORG

Myths, Old and New Author(S): Norman Finkelstein Reviewed Work(S): Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Myths, Old and New Author(S): Norman Finkelstein Reviewed Work(S): Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol Myths, Old and New Author(s): Norman Finkelstein Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Autumn, 1991), pp. 66-89 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Institute for Palestine Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2537366 . Accessed: 22/09/2012 03:39 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press and Institute for Palestine Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Palestine Studies. http://www.jstor.org MYTHS, OLD AND NEVV NORMAN FINKELSTEIN In recentyears, a moreor less cohesivebody of work has emergedwhich challengesthe received wisdom on theorigins of theIsraeli-Arab conflict. Variouslylabelled "new history," "revisionist history," or simply"history" (as againstthe "pre" history of an earliergeneration), this scholarship se- verelyqualifies-without, however, roundly dismissing-the standard inter- pretationof the eve, unfolding, and aftermathofthe 1948 war. Its authors, mostlyIsraeli, argue five major points: 1) theZionist movement did noten- thusiasticallyembrace the partitionof Palestine;2) the surroundingArab statesdid not unite as one to destroythe nascent Jewish state; 3) thewar did notpit a relativelydefenseless and weakJewish David againsta relatively strongArab Goliath; 4) Palestine'sArabs did not take flight at thebehest of Araborders; and 5) Israelwas notearnestly seeking peace at thewar's end. In thisessay I wantto focuson thework of Benny Morris, a formerdiplo- maticcorrespondent of the Jerusalem Post who receivedhis doctoratefrom CambridgeUniversity. Morris is the mostinfluential and prolificof the "new"historians.' The centralconcern of his researchis themost passion- atelydisputed chapter of the 1948 war: theflight into exile of Palestine's indigenousArab population. Morris's first study, The Birth of the Palestinian RefugeeProblem, 1947-1949,2 was near-universallyacclaimed as a classic,a modelof scholarlyrigor and detachment.The recentpublication of Birth's companionvolume, 1948 and After: Israel and thePalestinians,3 is an espe- NormanFinkelstein, who receivedhis Ph.D. in PoliticalScience from PrincetonUniversity, currently teaches in NewYork. He is gratefulto Roane Carey,Noam Chomsky, Allan Naim, and FrankSheed for comments on an earlierversion of this article. Journalof Palestine Studies XXI, no. 1 (Autumn1991), pp. 66-89. DEBATE ON THE 1948 EXODUS: FINKEISTEIN 67 ciallypropitious occasion for taking stock of his-and, by extension,the "new"history's-achievement. In Birth,Morris definitively shatters one ofthe most enduring myths about theorigins of the Israeli-Arab conflict- but only to substitute another that is scarcelymore credible in itsplace. The aimof Morris's study is to explainwhy roughly 700,000 Palestinians fledtheir homes in thewake of the November 1947 United Nations General AssemblyResolution supporting the creation of an Araband Jewish state in MandatoryPalestine.4 The book'scentral thesis is thatneither of the stan- dardaccounts of the Palestinians' exodus can withstand close scholarly scru- tiny:the Zionists did not expel them with premeditation, as the Arabs allege, and theinvading Arab states did noturge them to leave,as theZionists al- lege. The truth,as Morrissees it,rather lies "in thevast middle ground" betweenthese two extremes: ThePalestinian refugee problem was bornof war, not by design, Jewish or Arab. It was largelya by-productof Araband Jewishfears of thepro- tracted,bitter fighting that characterised the firstIsraeli-Arab war; in smallerpart, it was thedeliberate creation of Jewishand Arabmilitary commandersand politicians.(1948, p. 88; Birth,p. 286) Morrisfurther asserts that, under the given circumstances-i.e., mutual fear and hostility,war, and so on-the creationof the Palestinian refugee prob- lemwas "almostinevitable." (Birth, p. 286) The resultsof Morris's research thus apparently belie the most damaging Arabclaims5 and exonerateIsrael of any real culpability for the catastrophe thatbefell Palestine's indigenous population in 1948.6 Whilethese conclu- sionswill not satisfy those among Israel's partisans who will accept nothing butArab culpability, they nevertheless substitute a new version of what oc- curredin 1948which as wellrequires judicious analysis. In thisessay I willargue that Morris has substituteda new myth, one of the "happymedian," for the old. Mycontention will be thatthe evidence Morris adducesdoes notsupport his temperateconclusions and thatthe truth lies verymuch closer to the Arab extreme.7 Specifically, I will argue that Morris's centralthesis that the Arab refugee problem was "bornof war, not by de- sign"is beliedby his own evidence which shows that Palestine's Arabs were expelledsystematically and withpremeditation. "Bornof War,Not y Design"? Morrismaintains that the Palestinian Arab refugee problem was "largelya by-productofArab and Jewish fears and of the protracted, bitter fighting that characterisedthe first Israeli-Arab war." Simplyput, it was "bornof war, not bydesign." Yet, in a noteto Birth, Morris suggests a rather significant qualifi- cationof this view: Theworld "expelled" was oftenused rather loosely by Israelis in 1948. It was quiteoften assumed by non-witnessesthat a givencommunity had been expelledwhen in factit had leftbefore Israeli forces arrived. The 68 JOURNALOF PALESTINE STUDIES desireto see the Arabsleave oftentriggered the assumptionthat com- manders-whoit was presumedshared this desire-had had toact overtly and directlyto obtainthis result, when this had notbeen the case. Buti denialof the right to return was aform of "expulsion, " then a greatmany villag- ers-whohad waited near their villagesfor the battle to die down before trying to returnhome-can be considered"expellees." (p. 343, note 7; emphasis added) Thus, Morrisagrees that,in at least one crucial sense, "a greatmany" Palestinianrefugees were systematicallyexpelled fromtheir homes. This thenraises the questions of whether the Zionists intended that the Arabs flee fromtheir homes and whetherthey acted in a mannerconsonant with this intention.If the answer to thesetwo questions is also in theaffirmative, then it becomesimpossible to sustainMorris's thesis that the refugee problem was "born of war, not by design." One could maintainthat, given the armed hostilities,the Zionistshad no alternativeexcept to expel the indigenous Arabpopulation; but one could not stillmaintain that the Arab flight was an unintendedor unanticipated"by-product" of the war. Beforeturning to the evidencein thisregard, it is not withoutinterest to considerthe Arab estimateof Zionistintentions on theeve of thewar. Mor- riscites a Britishreport on theconference of Arab prime ministers in Decem- ber 1947, in which the Arab view of Zionistambitions was summarizedas follows: Theultimate aim of all theZionists was "theacquisition of all ofPalestine, all Transjordanand possiblysome tracts in SouthernLebanon and South- ernSyria." The Zionist"politicians," after taking control of thecountry, wouldat firsttreat the Arabs"nicely." But then,once feeling"strong enough,"they would begin "squeezing the Arab population off their lands ... [and]if necessaryout of the State." Later,they would expand the Jewishstate at theexpense of thePalestinian Arab state. However, the mostmilitant Haganah commanders wished to movemore quickly.... Exploitingthe weakness and disorganization ofthe Arabs, they would first renderthem-especially in Jaffaand Haifa-"completelypowerless" and thenfrighten or forcethem into leaving, "their places being taken by Jew- ish immigrants."The Arableaders . thoughtthat there existed a still moreextreme Jewish plan, of the Revisionists, calling for more immediate expansion.(Birth, p. 24) For all the monumentalcorruption and incompetenceof theArab leaders, one cannotbut be impressedby the prescienceof theiranalyses. Curiously, Morrisvirtually admits as much but,in a peculiarturn of phrase,describes these Arab "prognoses" as "in the nature of self-fulfillingprophecies." (Birth,p. 24) If he means thatthe Arabs, by electingto wage war,facilitated theexpulsion, he is no doubtcorrect. Yet, this in no way belies thefact that it was an expulsion. The Arab flightfrom Palestine divides into basicallytwo stages,the first coveringthe period from the 29 November1947 UN GeneralAssembly reso- lutionto the Israeli independencedeclaration in May 1948, and the second DEBATE ON THE 1948 EXODUS: FINKEISTEIN 69 coveringthe period fromJune 1948 to the signingof the armisticeagree- mentsin mid-1949. I will deal witheach of thesestages in turn. November1947-May 1948 For the period precedingIsrael's birth,Morris focuses primarily on the monthsApril and May. Morris'scentral conclusion reads as follows: The mainwave of the Arab exodus, encompassing 200,000-300,000 refu- gees,was notthe result of a general,predetermined Yishuv policy. The Arabexodus of April-May caught the Yishuv leadership, including the au- thorsof Plan D, bysurprise, though it was immediately seen as a phenome- nonto be exploited.(Birth, p. 128) This conclusionincorporates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Briefing: Labor Zionism and the Histadrut
    Briefing: Labor Zionism and the Histadrut International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network-Labor, & Labor for Palestine (US), April 13, 2010 We are thus asking the international trade unions to Jewish working class in any country of the boycott the Histadrut to pressure it to guarantee Diaspora.‖6 rights for our workers and to pressure the The socialist movement in Russia, where most government to end the occupation and to recognize Jews lived, was implacably opposed to Zionism, the full rights of the Palestinian people. ―Palestinian which pandered to the very Tsarist officials who Unions call for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions,‖ sponsored anti-Semitic pogroms. Similarly, in the February 11, 2007.1 United States, ―[p]overty pushed [Jewish] workers We must call for the isolation of Histadrut, Israel’s into unions organized by the revolutionary minority,‖ racist trade union, which supports unconditionally and ―[a]t its prime, the Jewish labor movement the occupation of Palestine and the inhumane loathed Zionism,‖7 which conspicuously abstained treatment of the Arab workers in Israel. COSATU, from fighting for immigrant workers‘ rights. June 24-26, 2009.2 • Anti-Bolshevism. It was partly to reverse this • Overview. In their call for Boycott, Divestment Jewish working class hostility to Zionism that, on 2 and Sanctions (BDS) against Apartheid Israel, all November 1917, Britain issued the Balfour Palestinian trade union bodies have specifically Declaration, which promised a ―Jewish National targeted the Histadrut, the Zionist labor federation. Home‖ in Palestine. As discussed below, this is because the Histadrut The British government was particularly anxious has used its image as a ―progressive‖ institution to to weaken Jewish support for the Bolsheviks, who spearhead—and whitewash—racism, apartheid, vowed to take Russia, a key British ally, out of the dispossession and ethnic cleansing against the war.
    [Show full text]
  • • International Court of Justice • • • • •
    • • • INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE • • • • • . Request for an • Advisory Opinion on the • Legal Consequences of the • Construction of a Wall • in the Occupied Palestinian Territories • • WRITTEN STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY • THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN • • • • 30 January 2004 • • • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • 1. Introduction • Il. General background • III. Immediate background • IV. Relevant facts V. Relevant legal considerations • (a) The Court' s jurisdiction • (i) The request raises a legal question which the Court has jurisdiction ta answer • (ii) There are no compelling reasons which should lead the • Court ta refuse ta give the advisory opinion requested of it. • (b) Applicable legal principles (i) The prohibition of the use of force, and the right of seIf- • determination, are Iules of ius cogens (ii) The territory in whîch the wall has been or is planned to be • constructed constitutes occupied territory for purposes of international law • (lii) The law applicable in respect of occupied territory limîts • the occupying State's power$ (iv) Occupied territory cannot be annexed by the occupying • State • (c) Applicable legal principles and the construction of the wall (i) The occupying State does not have the right effectively to • alIDex occupied territory or otherwise to alter its status (ii) The occupying State does not have the right to alter the • population balance in the occupîed territory by estabIishing alien • settlements • ->- :.• 1 1. • -11- (iii) The occupying State lS not entitled in occupied territory to construct a wall
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's New Bible of Forestry and the Pursuit of Sustainable Dryland
    Israel’s New Bible of Forestry and the Pursuit of Sustainable Dryland Afforestation Alon Tal* Ben Gurion University of the Negev After several decades of dramatic reform in forestry practices, the Keren Kayemeth L’Yisrael (KKL) compiled the new orientation and specific management changes in a comprehensive policy entitled the Forestry Bible. While Israel’s foresters origi- nally planted monoculture “pioneer” pine plantations, the new orientation calls for diverse, indigenous, naturally regenerating woodlands and their rich suite of ecosystem services. Timber production has been downgraded and is not to be a priority for Israel’s dryland forests. Rather, a suite of maximization of ecosystem services with a particular emphasis on recreation and conservation drives much of the present strategy. The article highlights the evolution of Israel’s forestry policies and details the new approach to afforestation and forestry maintenance and its rationale. Key words: Forest, Israel, Keren Kayemeth L’Yisrael, pine trees, oak trees, ecosys- tem services. Restoring the vast natural woodlands destroyed during the past century con- stitutes one of the primary challenges for the world’s environmental community. The most accurate estimates place the total loss of total forest area on the planet since the advent of agriculture eight thousand years ago between forty (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) and forty-seven percent (Billington et al., 1996). Many countries have begun ambitious afforestation efforts that are starting to slow the net annual total loss of global forestlands (Nambiar, 2005) even as regrettably, old-growth forest destruction continues apace. While international attention tends to focus on tropical and temperate reforesta- tion, dryland areas, that comprise 47% of the planet, are also areas where afforesta- tion is urgently needed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Signatories of the Israel Declaration of Independence
    Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs The Signatories of the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel The British Mandate over Palestine was due to end on May 15, 1948, some six months after the United Nations had voted to partition Palestine into two states: one for the Jews, the other for the Arabs. While the Jews celebrated the United Nations resolution, feeling that a truncated state was better than none, the Arab countries rejected the plan, and irregular attacks of local Arabs on the Jewish population of the country began immediately after the resolution. In the United Nations, the US and other countries tried to prevent or postpone the establishment of a state, suggesting trusteeship, among other proposals. But by the time the British Mandate was due to end, the United Nations had not yet approved any alternate plan; officially, the partition plan was still "on the books." A dilemma faced the leaders of the yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine. Should they declare the country's independence upon the withdrawal of the British mandatory administration, despite the threat of an impending attack by Arab states? Or should they wait, perhaps only a month or two, until conditions were more favorable? Under the leadership of David Ben-Gurion, who was to become the first Prime Minister of Israel, theVa'ad Leumi - the representative body of the yishuv under the British mandate - decided to seize the opportunity. At 4:00 PM on Friday, May 14, the national council, which had directed the Jewish community's affairs under the British Mandate, met in the Tel Aviv Museum on Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv.
    [Show full text]
  • How Israeli Jewish Dissidents Attempt to Use Alternative National Identity Discourses to Connect with Their
    No Way Out: How Israeli Jewish dissidents attempt to use alternative national identity discourses to connect with their Palestinian Other Katie Attwell, B.A. (Hons) This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Murdoch University, 2012 1 I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content work which has not previously been submitted for a degree at any tertiary education institution. .................................... Kathryn Louise Attwell 2 Abstract This thesis explores the national identity dilemma arising within ethnocratic states when individuals belonging to the ‘privileged majority’ seek to rectify the privations of their ethnic Other. Ethnocratic states have been set up by activists seeking to protect those they see as belonging to the ethnic nation with which they identify. In the process, the activists marginalise those depicted as Others within the state’s borders, institutionalising a demonising discourse which justifies those Others’ lack of privilege. Dissidents from the privileged majority may seek to remodel the ethnocratic state or challenge its dominant discourse without necessarily opposing the underpinning view of the nation therein, generating dilemmas about how justice for the Other ought to look and how the Us might be reconstituted to attain it. A study of the narratives of dissident Israeli Jews employs the theoretical concepts of ethnocracy and ressentiment to understand these dilemmas. Existing literature on ethnocratic states is riddled with ‘groupism’ – the tendency to treat ethnic groups or nations as objectively real entities. This thesis emphasises the processes of reification occurring when nationalist activists institutionalise their particular discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Like a Swarm of Locusts'
    8 Friday, October 2, 2020 | Haaretz SUKKOT Ofer Aderet we have become as all the nations.” *** “All along the way there is no house, e turned a ma- no store, no workshop from which ev- hogany closet into erything was not taken… Things of a chicken coop ‘Like a swarm of locusts’ value and of no value – everything, and we swept up literally! You are left with a shocked the garbage with a impression by this picture of ruins and “Wsilver tray. There was chinaware with Refrigerators and caviar, champagne and carpets – a first-ever comprehensive study heaps of rubble, among which men are gold embellishments, and we would by historian Adam Raz reveals the extent to which Jews looted Arab property in wandering, poking through the rags in spread a sheet on the table and place order to get something for nothing. Why chinaware and gold on it, and when 1948, and explains why Ben-Gurion stated: ‘Most of the Jews are thieves’ not take? Why have pity?” – Ruth Lu- the food was finished, everything was bitz, testimony about looting in Jaffa taken together to the basement. In another place, we found a storeroom Raz, 37, is on the staff of the Akevot with 10,000 boxes of caviar, that’s Institute (which focuses on human- what they counted. After that, the guys rights issues related to the conflict), couldn’t touch caviar again their whole and edits the journal Telem for the life. There was a feeling on one hand Berl Katznelson Foundation. (He is of shame at the behavior, and on the also a frequent contributor of histori- other hand a feeling of lawlessness.
    [Show full text]
  • JNF Ebook (Volume 1, January 2010)
    JNF Colonising Palestine since 1901 JNF eBook (Volume 1, January 2010) Introducing the Jewish National Fund Ilan Pappe Abe Hayeem Uri Davis Susannah Tarbush Sonja Karkar Ben White Rahela Mizrahi Bob Williamson John Goss Foreword by Ghada Karmi Edited by Mortaza Sahibzada Second Edition Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign ISSN 2042-9037 (Print) / 2042-9045 (Online) JNF eBook (Vol 1) Foreword Israel was set-up in 1948 as an answer to the problem of Jewish persecution in Europe. The creation of a state for Jews where they could be safe was justified on this basis. But the new Israel also sought legitimacy for its choice of Palestine, a land already inhabited by an indigenous Arab people, through a series of myths, religious fantasies and distorted versions of history, many of which were swallowed whole, and continue to influence attitudes to Israel until today. Yet, Israel, whatever its pretensions, was quite clearly a settler colonialist creation engaged in the strictly un- mythological work of displacing the native Palestinian population and settling Jews in their place. This activity was a sine qua non of the Zionist project, without which there would not have been a Jewish state. And special agencies were created to develop the project and realise its objectives. One of the most important of these was the Jewish National Fund. Set up at the very beginning of the Zionist movement, in 1901, the JNF was the chief agent for the colonisation of Palestine. Its infamous history attests to its key role in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and its subsequent settlement by incoming foreign Jews.
    [Show full text]
  • How the Psychology of Zionism Explains Israeli Law
    Constitution or the Rule of Conscience? How the Psychology of Zionism Explains Israeli Law Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Jay and Jeanie Schottenstein Honors Program Yeshiva College Yeshiva University May 2021 Michael J. Weiner Mentor: Professor Neil Rogachevsky, Political Science Why doesn’t the State of Israel have a written constitution? This is a notable question because every single other democracy in the world has one, with only four exceptions. Moreover, Israel and its political leaders were fully on track to develop and implement a written constitution, in accordance with UN Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947, which asserted that “the Constituent Assembly of each state (Jewish and Arab) shall draft a democratic constitution for its state.” Just six months later, on May 14, 1948, the Israeli Declaration of Independence was unveiled, and it made explicit reference to a “Constitution which shall be adopted by the Elected Constituent Assembly not later than the 1st October 1948.” Thus, from a legal standpoint, both the UN Resolution setting out the conditions for the creation of a future Jewish state and the Israeli declaration of statehood itself make clear that a written constitution was to be an essential part of the political regime of Israel. Additionally, Nir Kedar points out that the Provisional State Council (Moetzet Ha’am), Israel’s interim parliament which served before the first Knesset elections were held in 1949, passed the Transition Act (Chok Hama’avar), which formally assigned the task of drafting the written constitution to the incoming Knesset (3). Alas, it was not to be.
    [Show full text]
  • When Lawrence of Arabia Met David Ben-Gurion: a History of Israeli “Arabist” Expertise in the Negev (1943-1966 )
    BEN- GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV FACULTY OF HUMINITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES WHEN LAWRENCE OF ARABIA MET DAVID BEN-GURION: A HISTORY OF ISRAELI “ARABIST” EXPERTISE IN THE NEGEV (1943-1966 ) THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS JOHN BITZAN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: Prof. Benny Morris and Prof. Gil Eyal SEPTEMBER 2006 -I- ABSTRACT This thesis is a study of the expertise associated with a small group of people known as the Negev “ mukhta>r s” (an Arabic term used to denote village headmen). When the first Jewish settlements were established in the Negev region in 1943, before the establishment of the state of Israel, the mukhta>r s were those who mediated between the vulnerable newly-founded settlements and the Arab Bedouin population that lived in the region. They took upon themselves the task of winning the good will of the Bedouin, purchasing lands and resolving disputes over land use and occasional thefts. As in Jewish settlements established in other parts of Mandate Palestine, the mukhta>r s in the Negev were usually Arabic speakers, who had acquired fluency in that language through prior contact with Arabs at work or in mixed Jewish-Arab neighbourhoods or because they were themselves Jews of Middle Eastern background. Over time, the mukhta>r s came to be those who not only interpreted the Bedouin for members of their own settlements, but also advised the leadership of the yishuv and later the state of Israel. From 1943 to the 1960s, the mukhta>r s served a variety of key roles in the Negev: from being peacekeepers in the early 1940s, they became intelligence officers in the yishuv ’s pre-state intelligence service, the Shai, once conflict broke out between Arabs and Jews in Mandate Palestine in 1947.
    [Show full text]
  • Off the Map Land and Housing Rights Violations in Israel’S Unrecognized Bedouin Villages
    March 2008 Volume 20, No. 5 (E) Off the Map Land and Housing Rights Violations in Israel’s Unrecognized Bedouin Villages I. Summary.................................................................................................................................. 1 Key Recommendations..........................................................................................................6 II. Note on Methodology and Scope............................................................................................ 8 III. Background...........................................................................................................................11 Legal Basis for Land Confiscation........................................................................................ 13 Government-planned Townships......................................................................................... 16 Battle over Land Ownership ................................................................................................ 18 Unrecognized Villages.........................................................................................................20 Developing the Negev .........................................................................................................22 Is Resolution Possible? .......................................................................................................23 IV. Discrimination in Land Allocation and Access ......................................................................27 Land Ownership and
    [Show full text]
  • The Events of 1948 and the Palestinian Refugees
    The Events of 1948 and the Palestinian Refugees Summary by Ron Stockton We can learn much about history from first-hand reports. What follows are two types of reports: contemporary documents and the perspectives of those who were present, and the results of recent scholarship. There is an exceptional amount of rhetoric around these events. A polemic is an argument designed to prove that you are right and some rival group is wrong. There is a Jewish-Arab polemic and a Jewish-Jewish polemic [between the Ben-Gurion/Haganah/Labour left and the Begin/Herut/Likud right]. These polemics are only marginally included. Tessler discusses them more fully. The New Historians : When Menachem Begin became Prime Minister in 1977, he was so stung by allegations that he was a terrorist that he began to open the state archives to researchers. More archives were opened under the 50-year rule in 1997 and 1998. These produced a wave of new research based on documents, journals, reports, minutes. Israelis saw themselves as peaceful and accommodating and the Arab side as the problem. Four books shook the way Israelis saw this history. These were Simha Flapan’s The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities; Benny Morris’ The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949; Ilan Pappe’s Britain and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 1948-1951; Avi Shlain’s Collusion Across the Jordan: King Abdullah, The Zionist Movement, and the Partition of Palestine; and Tom Segev, 1949:The First Israelis. Background: Fighting in Palestine went through three distinct stages with different characteristics and different military forces.
    [Show full text]
  • The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel: Reflections on Its Sixtieth Anniversary
    Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 3(2008): 1-15 Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations A peer-reviewed e-journal of the Council of Centers on Jewish-Christian Relations Published by the Center for Christian-Jewish Learning at Boston College The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel: Reflections on its Sixtieth Anniversary Volume 3 (2008): 1- 15 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol3 On May 14, 1948, on the eve of the expiration of the British Mandate, Jewish leaders in Mandatory Palestine gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum and issued a Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel. Like the American Declaration of Independence, this document sets forth their rationale for the formation of the state and the ideals that these leaders hoped it would embody. The founding of the state, mandated by the United Nations, was greeted with widespread joy in the Jewish world and with universal belligerence in the Arab world. Many parts of the Christian world, in many ways caught between the two and embedded in the legacy of its own anti- Judaism, were dismayed over this resumption of Jewish sovereignty over the Holy Land. Now, sixty years later, a revolution has occurred in the teachings of the Catholic and many Protestant churches about Jews and Juda- ism. In dialogue settings, the topic of Israel is very much on the table, no longer the proverbial “elephant in the room,” even if full un- derstanding remains an unattained goal. In this context, the editors of Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations have invited a series of brief reflections on the text of the “Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel” from the perspective of the author’s own en- gagement in Christian-Jewish relations.
    [Show full text]