Planning to join the Palestinian struggle? Be sure to get your colors right, lest you get caught representin’ in the wrong ‘hood.
GTA West Bank?
Previous post: SEOUL Needs a Writer
Next post: Back Door?
Follow Us!
Korea News via Yahoo- South Korea’s No. 2 Public Pension Fund to Boost Equities
- South Korea Set to Follow Australia’s Rate Pause as U.S. Revives
- CIA chief to visit Seoul for N. Korea talks: report
- South Korea’s No. 2 Public Pension Fund to Boost Equity Holdings
- South Korea Moves Closer to Setting Limits on Carbon Emissions
- South Korea Set to Follow Australia in Holding Rates as Inflation Persists
- N. Korea says new leader's youth no cause for concern
- Survival Rate of Cancer Patients in Korea Ranked in the Top in the World
- South Korea Plans to Buy China Shares to Diversify Reserves
- North Korea opens door to talks with South Korea
Buy My Seoul Guidebook!
Books and DVDs on Korea
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.”
–Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein
“Two thousand years ago Rome ruled much of the known world. The Jews in the land of Israel (called Judea at that time) were a colony of Rome with their capital in Jerusalem. The Jews revolted against harsh Roman rule and were defeated after a long and brutal war. As punishment the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and renamed that city Aelia Capilolina and renamed the land from Provincia Judea to Provincia Philistia/Palaistina in an attempt to even erase Jewish history. No Arabs were involved in this action. The capital’s name later reverted back to Jerusalem but the name Philistia/Palaistina evolved into Palestine and came to designate only a region, but never a country or a distinct people. This is the origin of the term ‘Palestine’ which is not even an Arabic name.”
“The use of the term Palestinian with application to the western Arab population of Palestine cannot be found in any dictionary, encyclopedia, or history book until after the State of Israel started to become a reality. The use of the term Palestinian for the country’s Arabs began in the early 1960’s as Arab leaders sought to create a unified identity. However, it does not appear that there was any serious nationalistic movement until the Six-Day War of 1967. Even then the primary goal of the Arabs was terrorism aimed at the destruction of Israel rather than the recovery of a homeland, since the territories captured by the Israelis in that conflict were not theirs but those of Egypt (Gaza Strip), Syria (Golan Heights), and Jordan (West Bank).”
http://thestupidleft.blogspot.com/2007/02/lie-about-palestinian-people-and_15.html
I have to disagree with Michael. It is true that Palestinians, and other Arabs from differing states, collectively refer to their homeland as Arabia when speaking in Arabic. However when speaking of specific states, or nationalities, Palestinians do refer to themselves as “Falestini”, and did so back in 1972 when several of my college friends were Falestini (I am hearing impaired, so it might have been an initial P instead of an F.) They were also quite cognizant of the perceived differences between themselves and Lebanese (viewed as quit close to themselves in terms of education and modernization), Syrians, Egyptians, and Libyans.
Like every other nationality, Palestinians define themselves. Arguing that they have no right or basis to do so is vacuous at best.
Lirelou: “However, it does not appear that there was any serious nationalistic movement until the Six-Day War of 1967.” Well before your friends “defined themselves” in 1972, coincidentally the year of the Palestinian militant group massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics.
Even one of the PLO’s top members stated the term “Palestinian” is a political construct, not a historical one.
Now I have a new question to ask all my friends and family. What’s the difference between Palestinian liberation groups in the West Bank and gangs full of ign’ant thugs from the West Side?
“Like every other nationality, Palestinians define themselves. Arguing that they have no right or basis to do so is vacuous at best.”
I agree, and in the case of the Palestinians, I’ve seen this done to discredit their claims to nationhood, territory, etc. (I’m not defending the extremism and violent tactics of some Palestinian groups, but just pointing out that denying that the Palestinians exist as a group is often used as a means of dismissing their grievances as a whole.)
Nationality can be defined on the basis of race, ethnicity, language, geography, common history, or whatever else you can think of. And, as lirelou noted, it is very often self-defined. I don’t think there is a recognized standard.
Good overview of various Palestinian colors. I wonder if it breaks down further into local chapters (i.e. Rafah Hamas, Jericho Al Aqsa, or Hebron Islamic Jihad.) a la Bloods and Crips.
“I agree, and in the case of the Palestinians, I’ve seen this done to discredit their claims to nationhood, territory, etc.”
Global, the point is they discredit their own claims: “For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem” –Zuheir Mohsen
It isn’t about “reclaiming” a fictitious homeland, it’s about wiping out Israel.
“Even one of the PLO’s top members stated the term “Palestinian” is a political construct, not a historical one.”
He said this in the 1970s, most likely in an effort to play up pan-Arab sentiment in order to encourage greater sympathy/support for the Palestians. He wouldn’t have used that language for a domestic audience; however, giving a different message to different audiences is hardly unique to Palestian politicians. Actually, could not the term Palestinian be both a political and historical construct?
“It isn’t about “reclaiming” a fictitious homeland, it’s about wiping out Israel.”
For some of them, it is about wiping out Israel, and I think it is a distinct possibility that may have been Arafat’s hope up until the end. I’m not denying Israel is/has been under constant threat from neighboring countries, nor would I deny that Israel is the only democratic, functional country in the immediate region; however, that shouldn’t invalidate any legitimate claims and grievances the Palestinians may have. michael, were the pre-1948 Arab/Palestian residents of this homeland also ficticious?
The pre-1948 residents of the area–how far back do you want to go? The area has been ruled by Hebrews, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, an Arab caliphate, then the crusades, followed by Ottoman rule. “Palestine” always designated a geographic area, not a people, until it was taken by Arabs in the area in the 1960s.
Israel’s treatment of people in this area has hardly been begnign, however, the belligerence of its Arab neighbors, which have used the Palestinians as a proxy in their agression against Israel, is a far more serious regional problem.
“The pre-1948 residents of the area–how far back do you want to go? The area has been ruled by Hebrews, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, an Arab caliphate, then the crusades, followed by Ottoman rule. “Palestine” always designated a geographic area, not a people, until it was taken by Arabs in the area in the 1960s.”
I wasn’t talking about rulers of Palestine. I was referring to its inhabitants at the time Israel was created in 1948. The majority were Arabs, who regardless of when they started to identify themselves as Palestinian – which I think is their way of saying that they are Arabs who inhabited the area formerly known as Palestine – define themselves as being Palestinian now. Arguably, the influx of Jews into the area post-WWI and especially the creation of the state of Israel were Palestinian nation-defining events that certainly pre-dated the late 60s, regardless of what terminology was used at the time.
Having said that, the Palestinians may be proving to be their own worst enemy. Corrupt and inept leadership, factionalization, increasing religious fundamentalism, etc.
Michael,
There was no “Korea” before 1945, but Koreans identified themselves as such (actually, as “Han” people. The countries name in Korean is “Dae Han Min Gook”. Previously, it was Choseon.) Likewise, Vietnam never existed under that name until 1945. Indeed, arguments similar to yours were used by French colonialists to argue that the Vietnamese weren’t really a people. Similarly, there was no United States before 1787, but that did not stop Americans from defining themselves and staking out a homeland.
The audience you need to convince is that body which refers to itself as Palestinian. And as you surmise, that would be a wasted effort. Man defines himself. Thus bands of Vikings become Normans or Rus, and their descendants French and Russians. French immigrants to North America split into Canadiens and Acadiens, and those shipped back to France from the latter are recruited to colonize Louisiana and become Cajuns. Who would deny any of these peoples their right to define themselves and people a homeland? The British tried. In 1757-58 they cleared the Acadiens from Acadia, and resettled the area with Scots. Yet the Acadien people survived, and many of their descendants today live within an easy driving distance of Nova Scotia.
If there is one lesson from the Middle East, it is that a people’s definition of themselves outlasts dynasties and empires. As the Jews returned to Palestine, so will the Palestinians return to Palestine. With luck, they will learn to coexist in a secular state. Otherwise, historians of the future will be studying modern Israel much as medieval scholars study the Crusader kingdoms.
“….Otherwise, historians of the future will be studying modern Israel much as medieval scholars study the Crusader kingdoms.”
Well, like when the Crusader Kingdoms were on their last legs, there certainly wouldn’t be any help coming from Europe in the event that Isreal ever finds itself in its final days.
Is it your opinion that the US would not provide US forces as a matter of direct military assistance to Israel under any circumstances?
I understand (unlike, perhaps, many others) that the US has never been a formal military “ally” of Israel, also that the Israelis have never asked the US (and probably never would) for the commitment of a single US soldier to help them fight their battles.
I commend this attitude of Israel’s
(2005 population approx 7 million, 2002 GDP approx 102 billion $US) —
to the ROK
(2000 population approx 47.5 million, 2000 est of GDP 765 billion $US).
I suppose what’s left of an Israeli govt might request US Marines to land and help cover the sea evacuation of surviving Jewish civilians, in the face of triumphant advancing Arab forces following up a successful “Islamic bomb” first strike.
One that had succeeded in “taking out” the Israeli a-bomb arsenal “on the ground”. Such a scenario is however rather fantastic, at least to my mind.
I think you’re an “old soldier”? Perhaps you’re still resentful over what happened to the Liberty during the 67 war. I am too but after all the Israelis did eventually pay some amount of reparations; I don’t think we’ve ever collected (or ever will) anything for the Stark, the Cole, or the good ol’ Pueblo.
Global, Lirelou, I understand your points and I agree that those who can trace their ancestors who resided in the area should also be able to reside there, but as you both know that’s not so simple in the modern world–the Palestinians are a political entity now, used as a proxy by regional Arab powers. I can easily turn the “Vietnamese aren’t really a people” argument around because a similar one is used by these Arab countries on Israelis to deny their right to exist in an area that was ruled by Jewish kings for centuries. If “Palestinians” are an ethnically cohesive group than certainly “Israelis” are as well.
This guy put it better than me: “These lands have been conquered time after time by many different nations. It’s a little ridiculous at this point to say that anyone has the “right” to be there, but it’s a little less ridiculous to suggest that those that are there should be allowed to stay where they are.”
His proposal for the area is good–in fact it’s based on an earlier UN proposal:
http://fastolfe.net/2007/06/30/can-terrorism-wipe-out-israel
“With luck, they will learn to coexist in a secular state.” I think we can all agree on that–enjoyed the discussion.
“With luck, they will learn to coexist in a secular state.” I think we can all agree on that–enjoyed the discussion.
Yes.
Paul H. Nations don’t have friends, they have interests. On a personal level, I have attended courses with Israeli military officers and assess their armed forces as the finest in the world. (Necessity, not vanity. They have to be, or they perish.) Nevertheless, the U.S. is not obligated to guarantee Israel’s survival, and I would hope that we would approach any crisis effecting Israel in light of: “What’s in it for us?” If we have vital interests worth the expenditure of American blood, then let’s assist them. Otherwise, let’s wish them good luck, and write them off when the time comes. We did not fight the Korean War because of any altruistic ideal to “save Korea”. We did so because we viewed the “Communist spectre” as a threat to our way of life, and a loss in Korea as a preliminary step to a loss in Japan, and eventually, a push in Europe that would have put most of the world under Moscow’s thumb. The fact that decision to fight in Korea saved the ROK and made the “miracle on the Han” possible was ancillary to our original purpose. We deserve a pat on the back and the gratitude of our host nation, but the moment has likewise arrived where our common interests no longer converge. That moment will someday arise in Israeli-U.S. affairs. When it does, let’s hope we have a government with the vision to recognize that fact, and to courage to act on it. Our survival and interests should be what counts to us, not Israel’s, nor Ireland’s, nor Poland’s, nor any others.
You must log in to post a comment.