As you all know, my articles could be a bit controversial, and spark up a lot of discussion as well as comments of differing perspectives. On my article entitled "The 'Generous" Peace Treaties Israel Offered", I wrote about the claims of the Israeli governments' strive for peace with the Palestinians, and to reach a final solution of a Palestinian State. Of course, if you look back in recent history and examine each peace process that ever came into existence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, you would see that it was full of biased, and had a typical pro-Israeli point of view, and degraded the Palestinians right of statehood.
However this is the following comment I receive from "Anonymous" and I hope that this person would re-visit my blog as so he could see the response that I'm about to write. He/she said:
"Sorry but Israel is 17% of historic palestine whilst West bank and Gaza are about 5% and Jordan is 78% of historic palestine. No one has yet justified why a second arab state in palestine - in addition to Jordan - is really necessary.
Can't the two arab populations living on either side of the Jordan River be consolidated into one single state? This would give the Arabs about 80% of historic Palestine as their own exclusive Arab state with not one Jew living amongst them or controlling their lives.What more could the Arab population ask for?"
There is a lot of confusion by many foreigners on this topic, and pro-Israelis would always like to confuse them and use this as propaganda. Yet we have to understand the very essence of this claim. In the Ottoman Empire, before World War I, borders of modern day Arab states were not drawn. Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and Jordan were all part of "Greater Syria" yet each region of Great Syria had their own culture, customs, dialect, and lifestyles. When the Ottoman Empire fell, the Allied Forces of Britain and France chose to divide Greater Syria amongst themselves and drew out the borders of modern day Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan. Britain retained Palestine and Jordan, and France controlled Syria and Lebanon. So Palestine and Jordan (which was called the Kingdom of Transjordan) were separate, even though the cultures were very similar, were seperate regions, but were under the name of British Mandate, and Transjordan, along with the British, was controlled by the Hashemites. Many borders are drawn and redrawn in the entire world, for example the Soviet Union and Russia, Czechoslovakia, etc. But the natives remain the same, they are the only constant variable, as well as culture.
Regardless of all of these facts, let us look more personally at the situation. Why should it be alright for countless human rights to be violated. Why is it perfectly acceptable that natives of the land, of their towns and villages, should be expelled from their homes and suffer under the status of refugee, in which neighboring countries pack these people into horrid camps? Why should they not live free in the land and home of their ancestors? Why is it alright for a child never to see the home in which he was born in and in the city or town that he grew up in? The natives had established their lives on the land that they lived in which was Palestine, and all of their hard work and money were in this land. So for an outside force to come and cleanse the land of all the natives to establish an exclusively Jewish state, is going to receive massive retaliation, and that is the expected response.
So "Anonymous" and anyone of the same mind-set can look at this situation in two perspectives, the well known facts and politics of the claim, or the humanly and personal point of view. I suggest you look at both, and then on these proven facts and human rights, come up with a perspective.
Posts
Hey Omar just found your blog randomly, i think what you said is very true but as you said there is so much confusion on this topic. People will debate you forever and never accept the truth. keep up the good work :).
ReplyDeleteI have to comment on the following:
ReplyDelete"When the Ottoman Empire fell, the Allied Forces of Britain and France chose to divide Greater Syria amongst themselves and drew out the borders of modern day Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan. Britain retained Palestine and Jordan, and France controlled Syria and Lebanon. So Palestine and Jordan (which was called the Kingdom of Transjordan) were separate, even though the cultures were very similar, were seperate regions, but were under the name of British Mandate, and Transjordan, along with the British, was controlled by the Hashemites."
This is not quite accurate. Jordan did not become the present day country until 1946. There was a very small area the Hashemites had in Trans-Jordan. However, they were given the greater part of then Palestine by Great Britian as a thank you for their help in overthrowing the Ottoman's. This was land Great Britian had promised Chaim Weismann to be returned to Israel and the Jews for Weismann's help in the development of acetone/TNT that helped the UK defeat Germany in WWI. That promise was known as the "Balfour Declaration". It was also agreed to by Emir Feisal at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. This was known as "The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement" and was signed on January 3, 1919.