Thank you for this! It is sad that so many young minds are filled with such distorted history, it seems there is a lot of social status, incentives, and rewards for passively accepting the recent woke anti-Israel narrative and not daring to learn something more nuanced. The entirety of woke ideology seems to be one that punishes people who attempt nuance and rewards script-followers.
I would add one thing to your post if I could, which I just wrote about quite a lot in my last post called "The Myth of the Indigenous," that in the early 19th century, there was barely a population in the three Sanjaks colloquially known by some as Palestine - Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre - in the Ottoman Vilayet of Syria. The Muslim population basically consisted of three sets of warring Arabs - the Qays who believed themselves from the North of the Arabian Peninsula, and the Yamans who believed themselves from the South of the Arabian Peninsula. Meanwhile, the Bedouins were everyone's enemy and were a chief reason that any development in the land was curtailed and the population (which also included Jews and Christians) smaller than it was during the first Ottoman census of 1596.
Jews and other Muslims began immigrating into the three Sanjaks of Palestine or neighboring regions in Syria at around the same time for roughly the same reasons: in the mid-19th century, the Ottoman Tanzimat Reforms made it much easier to buy land, policed the Bedouins, and changed the corrupt previous tax structure. There was also some mass Arab migration into Palestine for other reasons - when Egypt briefly occupied Syria, they left behind tens of thousands of soldiers who squatted on land promised to Jewish philanthropist Moses Montefiore for purchase for Jewish refugees. There was an immigration wave of Algerians due also to local rebel leaders. But towards the end of the 19th century, the rise of Pan-Nationalisms across Europe and the Middle East caused massive demographic shifts. The Russian Empire's "pan-Slavism," under Alexander III and later, was the belief in ruling any Slavic people and having a solely Slavic and Orthodox Russia - caused wars for Ottoman territory and also caused them to wage campaigns of violence against both Russian Muslims and Jews, millions of whom fled down into the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire under Abdulhamid II responded with "Pan-Islamism," the start of an ideology persisting today. He strategically relocated many of the Russian Muslim refugees - like Circassian, Chechen, Daghastani, etc - into Syria to maintain a Muslim majority against the Jews who had been purchasing land there, Jews who were also refugees during Pan-Slavic ideology (at the time, Jewish neighborhoods in Russia was subject to extermination at whim, Jewish kids were taken as child soldiers for the tzarist army at ages as young as 12 and kept for 25 years, Jews were forced into slums and 40% of the Jewish Russian population subsisted on foreign charity, etc).
Most of the population of Israel and pre-State Israel come the 1940s were new immigrants, whether they be Muslim or Jewish or Christian. The myth that Jews "stole the land from the indigenous Palestinians" is laughable, they were simultaneous and often synergistic immigrants - there was an internal zionist debate over the hiring of Jewish or Arab workers and many hired Arab workers at different points, causing more immigration under Mandatory Palestine.
Of course, the Arab leaders of the new Muslim territories during WWII also allied with Hitler as you pointed out, who, under SS Directover no. 30 (written about wonderfully by historian Jeffrey Herf), purposefully broadcast into Arabic language radio antisemitic propaganda, and had antisemitic classics like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf and the International Jew translated into Arabic and distributed. Hitler planned to extend the Final Solution into the Jews of the Middle East and would have if not for the battle of El Alamein.
Unfortunately, the influence of Naziism and Pan-Islamism, and also Pan-Arabism, has remained to this day, a dangerous combination that has resulted in the relentless targeting of Jews and Israel. Anyone who is sympathetic to Hamas should reader their charter, as they directly cite by name "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as part of their list of the crimes of Jews, blaming us as far back as the French Revolution for all world turmoil and imploring others to kill us wherever we may hide. Unfortunately, Fatah has been no better. Mahmoud Abbas did his PhD in a Soviet university on the topic of "zionology," basically the Soviet academic version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The PLO was, after all, a Soviet pet project made in conjunction with Egyptian president Nasser, before Egyptian-born Arafat began using the PLO for his personal enrichment. He also largely turned down the fantastic 2-state solution deal brokered after the Oslo Accords due to the growing popularity of Hamas at the time, and keeping the adulation of the growing religiously radicalized population.
I should add that Israel was a nation made no differently than pretty much any other nation of prior Ottoman territories, including Greece, a country which I rarely hear any leftist care about despite being founded as it currently is by violence against Muslims and expelling 500,000 of them while importing 1.5 million ethnic Greeks to the land from elsewhere in the Ottoman Empire.
Unfortunately, the Palestinian people have been held captive by bad leaders using them for their own ideological aims since the nation of Israel started and the Palestinian identity created.
It is a shame that this "myth of the indigenous" Palestinian farmers going back through time immemorial persists and is rabidly shouted at by anyone on the left or sympathetic to Islamism as a justification for violence. Even if it was true, the actions of people from a century and a half ago to 75 years ago gives no excuse in the present for rape, kidnapping, violence, and attempt at ending another sovereign nation. Imagine if members of the Chumash tribe did this to residents of present-day California. Doubt those same leftists would see it as justifiable, despite similar enough timelines.
So that's my short-ish (okay, not very short) comment just to add in that it's quite nuts how young leftists treat any notion of the "indigenous" as sacrosanct and a-historical. They see ignorance as a virtue since questioning or nuancing identity structures like claims of "indigeneity" is taboo, and they make that virtuo-ized ignorance - the upholding of taboo - as the basis of their morality.
"The truth is that if Israel were to put down its arms there would be no more Israel. If the Arabs were to put down their arms there would be no more war." For all the billions of words that have poured out of the mouths of pundits down the years, I have yet to hear a single one that in any way diminishes the baleful truth of these words of Benjamin Netanyahu in 2006.
In 2000 @ Camp David, the Israelis gave Yasser Arafat 95% of what he asked for. Most of Judea & Samaria, aka The West Bank. Arafat said no. Do you know why ? In his book, Ehud Barak, who attended the negotiations on behalf of Israel, wrote that Arafat wanted two things: (1) right of return for Palestinians, and (2) Palestinian sovereignty over the Western Wall. If you know as much as you have written, you’ll know that Israel could not accept this because it would be the end of the Israel. Arafat was not someone who wanted a peaceful neighbor. Arafat was someone who wanted to eliminate his neighbor. After this, the idea of a two state solution and the Oslo framework was abandoned by Israel because the other party to the negotiations would not negotiate.
I'm not an expert on the historical details. My memory is that Israel offered Arafat a Palestinian state that Israel would still control in some important respects. If true, then Israel offered Arafat a deal that Israel would not have accepted if it were in Arafat's position. It's not clear to me that a truly sovereign Palestinian state has ever been on the table.
Anyway, this is all very old news. The situation now is that there is no longer any chance of peace, so the wise people on both sides should be getting out of the Middle East asap.
Israel gave the Palestinians this opportunity in Gaza in 2007. But Hamas took over Gaza and it became a launching pad for rockets into Israel. So the security concerns Israel voiced since the beginning have been proven right. Would you have Israel cede Judaea & Samaria and have either Hamas or Fatah launch rockets on Tel Aviv ?
You see, Israel signed peace agreements with Jordan and Egypt. And this relationship is working. Each respects their borders and neither launches attacks on the other.
When the Palestinians express a will to act like Egypt or Jordan, then Israel can cede their security concerns. Not a minute sooner.
To my knowledge, Israel has never offered any group of Palestinians full sovereignty over any land. If you know otherwise, please link us to some independent information source other than yourself. And anyway....
All of this kind of historical blame game analysis is a complete waste of time. None of it has ever made anybody in the region safe.
You write, "When the Palestinians express a will to act like Egypt or Jordan, then Israel can cede their security concerns."
As I see it, the Palestinians will never accept limited sovereignty, and Israel will never grant full sovereignty, therefore...
Any hope of peace between the two parties is officially dead. It's probably been dead for years, but in case anyone was in doubt about that, Oct 7 put the final nail in the coffin. If true, then all the memorized slogans about who did what when and who is right and who is wrong etc etc are now entirely pointless. But everyone keeps chanting those slogans, because they've become addicted to the chanting.
I would compare this situation to a failed marriage that is beyond repair. The parties tried to work it out various times, but failed to accomplish that goal, so the marriage is now finally over for good. The problem in the Middle East is of course that, the parties involved are very stubbornly determined to fight to the death over who gets to keep the house.
My best guess is that both of them may wind up dead on the bathroom floor. WMD is coming to this conflict sooner or later.
Belligerence is a funny thing. If a belligerent party continues its belligerence, the other side will eventually crush it. This is why we let playground disputes continue. To let little boys fight it out. To bring closure. This is what has happened throughout history. This is what stops the fight. When the belligerent party realizes that it cannot win. So far in this conflict, the belligerent party has been permitted, either by Israel or the international community, to survive. In my opinion, this will only end when Israel is permitted to finish the fight. To put the belligerent party down.
That is horse shit. They always go to the table and when they give a little bit they get bit every time. They forced Jews out of Gaza did you know that’s what they did? These people are the modern day Nazi who want to extinguish every last Jews off the face of the planet.
Israel can't accept the Palestinians as equal citizens because they would be a majority and vote to extinguish Israel. If it gave Palestinians a state it would be a failed state, because the Palestinians are failures, and then they would blame the Jews for their failures, as they do now.
Given that, it's inevitable that the Palestinians will have to be removed from Gaza and the West Bank and pushed into Egypt/Jordan or wherever else. Settlements simply get that inevitable process rolling.
Other Arabs don't want the Palestinians because they know they are awful, but that should be their problem not Israel's problem.
Israel owns this land by right of conquest. Woe to the vanquished.
It was a speech to the Knesset after the Israel-Lebanon conflict. Yes Gurt's gist is similar but my comment wasn't in any way intended to suggest otherwise....quite the reverse in fact?? https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/
It's absolutely true, but the answer is simple: so do it, and withdraw from possibly the worst possible region of the world for you to live. Come live in the UK, US, Canada, Australia, France, or any of the other countless safe places for you, instead of insisting on perpetuating misery for everyone involved.
I’m a Jewish journalist who has written about Israel/Palestine for a decade, and has gone from being a centrist Zionist to an anti-Zionist in that time as I replaced a historically false narrative- one I believe your essay above largely resonates with- with a narrative based more on the research of Israeli historians, recently declassified Israeli government archives, and the work of both Israeli and Palestinian legal scholars and human rights activists- as well as histories of Palestine which significantly contradict much of what you’ve written. I’m not going to try to debate you here, but if you’d like a reading list from me which I think would upend much of what you’ve written, let me know. I don’t agree with many of your beliefs but I read you because I find you to be a good thinker and an honest writer, and I benefit from it. This essay, though, is mired in what I think are historical errors and some significant confusion. Reach out if you’re interested.
Hi Gurwinder, ask and you shall receive! Here are some recommendations:
First of all, Peter Beinart's substack is indispensable. His personal essays and statements as well as video interviews with Palestinians and Jewish voices are excellent:
I’m curious if you ever listened to the MartyrMade podcast series “Fear and Loathing in New Jerusalem”. It’s considered a fair account of both sides by many, and it left me with a very different impression of the history than you are presenting here.
Would be interesting to know what about which of these sources wasn't convincing to you (I haven't read them but may well do so and it would in any case be interesting to know what sorts of arguments or ways of putting together evidence don't ring true for you)
I read Ehrenreich’s book, and found it interesting, but often a little too anecdotal and emotion-based. I’m also familiar with the work of Gorenberg, and agree with him about West Bank settlements, but haven’t found aspects of his work that dispute what I wrote.
The sheer complexity of the history of the region can easily lend itself to any interpretation one wants. There are and were factions on either side that wanted peace and factions that wanted war. Factions that wanted compromise and those that did not. We see this over and over throughout history. It's a lot easier to sow chaos than peace. Who fired the first shot is a pointless question. The fact is that Israel has been attacked many times from within and without. They have also attacked within and without.
And recall that even among Jews there are anti-Zionists who believe strongly that the Jews should not have a state. Some of the negative treatment of Zionism comes from them.
My point is that there is little of value in going over the history to cast blame and conclusive moral judgments. The question is how to achieve peace now. What Hamas and the other Jihadi groups did on 10/7 was designed to sow chaos and draw the surrounding states into a war against Israel. They may yet succeed.
There is a reason the surrounding states refuse to take in more Palestinians. If you read the history of Jordan - the state that took in the largest number after the '48 war - you will get some sense of what they would be importing. Along with a vast majority of Palestinians who just want to live their lives would come Jihadi warriors who create terror and instability.
To pretend there are easy or good solutions to this situation is to engage in wishful thinking. Only bad and worse and it's near impossible to know which is bad and which is worse. I feel that Israel should relent on bombing Gaza because they are killing a lot of civilians. Will that bring peace? It certainly won't stop Hamas and the other Jihadis. I'm not sure anything will.
One factor that gets overlooked a lot in this discussion is the paucity of resources in the region. Peebo mentions the unwillingness of neighboring Arab states to take in millions of refugees. Unlike the US or EU, Egypt & Jordan simply do not have the capacity to take in such an influx of people. Jordan is one of the most water-scarce countries on earth that has, and is, in a sense the largest refugee camp too. Egypt fares a little better, but the Nile isn’t guaranteed to flow forever. The conditions in the Negev are dire when compared to the western edge of Israel. I think here in the US we take for granted our enormous capacity to absorb large population transfers as a way of ameliorating conflict, but in the Middle East scarcity is a gasoline that lights a lot of fires.
The thing that might save Israel is Russia. They have steadfastly refused to take sides and may be the only powerful nation with the credibility to negotiate some kind of peace.
It is unsurprising that there are competing narratives re the history of Israel, or any other nation. Now that Israel is an entity what future does an antizionist promote? What reaponse, if any should be made to Hamas? I agree that history is useful in understanding the present but it doesn't help tremendously in plotting the future. Thanks.
Have you also read Myths and Facts: a guide to the Arab-Israeli conflict by Mitchell Bard? It is indispensable for understanding the historical facts, up to the present time which sheds light on the current situation.
Hiiii I really really appreciate your response!!! May I repost your reading list on Tiktok with full credit to you? I think more people need to see this.🥹
Since you seem to be very widely read, have you read Myths and Facts: a guide to the Arab-Israeli conflict by Mitchell Bard? It is indispensable for understanding the historical facts, up to the present time which sheds light on the current situation.
Will you write an update / retraction if you are able to deem yourself mistaken? Otherwise the whole “I’m an objective observer who sticks to the facts unlike the woke and radical left” stick becomes ordinary, conservative grifting of which there are already so many.
Unlikely huh? I see that humility is your strong suit. But I’m sure you know more than Israeli scholars, Palestinian researchers and historians on both sides, because you’re good with Google. I’m even more confident because of the *checks notes* 0 references or sources in your essay. Really just fills me with confidence that you’ll honestly admit your mistakes.
I am not the one making extraordinary claims, am I? I also do not pretend to be an expert on topics I am not. I am familiar enough with the conflict to know that your claims require some significant sourcing and referencing. The OP commenter demonstrated his credentials and indicated you are wrong in your claims. If you are as objective as you claim, that should be enough to at least demonstrate how you are substantiating these claims you are making. Is that too much to ask?
Gurwinder, I’m curious now what your position is on Israel and their “self defense”? After 7 months of continuous slaughter, full on siege of water and food supply, 30,000+ dead, and leveling of the complete infrastructure including hospitals and UN centers… gotta say it looks pretty bad on them in this moment.
Also curious your opinion on Palestinians AND Israelis held captive by aggressive and inherently undemocratic leadership that doesn’t represent what the common sense majority seem to want, which is none of this craziness.
You left out that Jewish settlers were fighting the British before WW2 and were allied with the Nazis... were the Arabs also allied with them? I hadn't heard that, but you're deff giving the Israeli sides version.
Thank you. Since when defending human rights and denouncing genocide became equated with being a “leftist” oh and a “muslim”? To stand against war crime and genocide is to be a human. Period.
I would definitely recommend listening to Darryl Cooper's MartyrMade series on the Israel/Palestine conflict called "Fear & Loathing in the New Jerusalem."
Your account in section 1 follows fairly well with his up until the late 1930s, at which point the narratives diverge significantly. Especially in 1947.
If you want to skip to that point in the series, go straight to episode 5.
He strikes me as very even-keeled and fair to both parties in his historical account, but you should judge for yourself.
I listened to it, and I thought the same thing. Unfortunately, as I followed him more closely I discovered that he’s pretty extreme in his thinking. He does a YouTube video with some other guy, and they are both very far right. I also remember seeing Dan Carlin (Hardcore History) give Darryl a dressing down on Twitter.
Kudos for actually listening to it, but not-kudos on your textbook, lazy use of the perfect rhetorical fortress to get out of actually having to engage on the substance of someone's position.
It's fine if you have actual disagreements on points of fact or interpretation, but just labeling him as far-right so you don't have put in any effort into understanding or critiquing his point of view is childish and anti-intellectual.
Get over yourself. I really liked the article, but this comments section is one of the worst I’ve come across in a while. Do you really feel the need to use put downs in order to make yourself seem better? It’s not working.
If you'll read my response again, you'll see that I critiqued specific actions and behaviors, not your personal character.
If you'd like to choose to be offended by that rather than ask yourself if there is any merit to the constructive criticism (maybe there is, but maybe there isn't), that's your prerogative.
The funniest thing about your assertion that he is "extreme" and "very far right" is that after listening to all 25 hours of his deep dive on the history of the conflict, I came away with much more sympathy for the Palestinian cause. That's kind of the opposite effect of the "far right wing" position.
He is self-admittedly a troll on Twitter though, so if that's the extent of your exposure to him, then that makes a little more sense.
He sounds like he is copying Dan Carlin's voice and cadance in the podcast. It is uncanny. Now I need to go look for that exchange on Twitter / X. I'm a big Dan Carlin fan.
I think I was a bit too harsh. Darryl is very knowledgeable, but he can be awfully “dark.” However, I thought his MartyrMade podcast was excellent. I just recommended it to a friend. I remember him being on Daniele Bolelli's podcast (History on Fire) where they talked about the incident with Dan Carlin, and it sounded like a misunderstanding.
Yes, Dan Carlin is a favorite, but with everything happening now, I’m having a hard time listening to anything that has so much doom and gloom in it. He can get a little too graphic. I’m interested in history, but I don’t need a detailed description of torture.
Respectfully, you must read Myths and Facts: a guide to the Arab-Israeli conflict by Mitchell Bard. It is indispensable for understanding the historical facts, up to the present time which shed light on the current situation.
What is the average citizen supposed to believe? Here we have 2 seemingly reasonable journalists completely disagreeing on the actual history of the region. How is one to determine the truth of these matters?
We have a long history, Torah long, of self hating Jews. They recur in every generation. There’s even a name for them ‘erev rav’. They are the Yevsetskaya Jews (who championed Communists, only to be destroyed by them), the Jews for Hitler (see above) and the progressive American Jews. They are the ‘mixed multitude’ who break the original commandment to have no God but God. Whether they worship Lenin, Hitler or at the church of woke, they turn on their own first, since this initially gives them the popularity, the exceptionalism their hungry, fearful souls demand. For a short time, they are tokenized by those who can strip them for parts. Then, inevitably they are discarded. They are the Judas goats to the Jewish people. For a list of the latest erev rav, see the list provided by Matthew Gindin.
Oh, and the “one drop” rule is straight from the Nazis. Love that you can actually say that without actually knowing or understanding what you just said. You are an example of why Jews needed the state of Israel and why we should be afraid of western culture.
My understanding is that most Jews were not Zionists until WWII and the H - and they were not 'self hating' either. This is not to say they were right or wrong either ...
Most Jews did not ascribe to an idea that did not exist until it existed? This was 100 years ago, there was no twitter. The idea had to spread organically.
Yeah, a lot of folks outside the western world are entho chauvinists.... but most western conditioned folks are more modern in their outlook and don't feel like their ethno world is under threat. Are there really only 13M Jews in the world? They certainly make a big bang for their buck...
I’m sure there are more than that genetically speaking, if you go by a “one drop” rule. But as it stands NYC is the largest single population center of Jews by a long shot.
I think that’s part of the disconnect people have here, there are 1+ billion Muslims, 500 million Arabs. That’s why reframing the Jewish-Arab conflict as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was such a genius PR move.
I have been reading/listening as much as possible these last weeks and am more confused than ever. The contradictions, cherry picking, willful ignorance of facts on both sides is astounding. I think the fundamental question is should Israel have the right to exist? If you answer yes to that question, how does Israel secure their nation against the majority of its neighbors who wish to see them wiped off the face of the earth? What does a peaceful Palestinian state look like? How do the Palestinians co exist with Jews? And vice versa. If you answer no to this question, where do the 15 million Jews go? How should they be removed?
Hi Ann - I hear you. I think one some levels where one stands on this conflict depends on deeper issues- the pre-existing moral and philosophical commitments one brings to the issue. This is probably why Gurwinder and I disagree, more than just disagreeing about information- though I think if we could dialogue we might learn from each other in the “what is true” area. With regards to “the right to exist” I think Israel, like all states, only has a right to exist to the extent that it is democratic and honours the human rights of all those it rules. Palestinians are not an issue external to Israel, but internal to it. They are ruled by Israel, but not given the rights of citizens. So I’m my opinion Israel needs to become a pluralistic, democratic state for all in order to maintain its legitimacy in the eyes of those it rules. If it doesn’t, it will be forever attacked. Is a just Israeli state which is not founded and structured, as it currently is, by Jewish supremacist legislation and power, possible? I think that it is, and also that the path to that is dangerous and brutally difficult, and would require great courage and creativity from Israelis. Yet it is not more dangerous and brutal than decades of war and the horrific state Israel keeps Palestinians in currently. The current status quo is morally intolerable and strategically short-sighted; it will result either in perpetual war or in Israel finally expelling or exterminating the Palestinians, in my opinion. Israel is an incredibly well resourced country on every level, and I believe those resources could be channeled towards truth and reconciliation as in South Africa rather than perpetual occupation and war. Again, hard and dangerous, but better than the status quo of the last few decades.
"I think Israel, like all states, only has a right to exist to the extent that it is democratic and honours the human rights of all those it rules. Palestinians are not an issue external to Israel, but internal to it. They are ruled by Israel, but not given the rights of citizens."
How do you co-exist with someone who believes that you shouldn't exist altogether? Who is ready to blow themselves so that they can harm you. You seem to be making a point that Palestine issue has arisen because somehow Israel is not giving Palestinians rights they so deserve. What about the possibility that they don;t want rights from Israel rather that there be no Israel.
Not gonna happen until there are peacemakers willing to compromise on both sides. With Netanyahu still at the helm, the Palestinian Authorities openly supporting Hamas and with Hezbollah, this is currently unlikely.
Well said Matthew. I too have been listening to many journalists and researchers, who have a great deal of experience living, studying, and thinking about these issues. Ultimately it is these people, you included, we should consider as the experts, not armchair philosophers of whom there is a gorgeous abundance at the moment.
Have you listened to Darryl Cooper's MartyrMade series on the history of Israel & Palestine?
It's called "Fear & Loathing in the New Jerusalem." It's 6 episodes long and totals about 25 hours history deep dive.
I ask because Darryl would disagree quite substantially on the claim that the Arabs started the war in 1948.
His account details how between Ben-Gurion's hardline leftwing para-military and Begin's hardline rightwing para-military, there was an all out war of terror (what the Arabs now call the Nakba) that was waged against peaceful Palestinian residents in both the territory that was allocated to Israel by the UN AND the territory that was allocated to Palestine immediately following UN's decision, and that the military response by the Arabs in 1948 was confined to those areas given to the Palestinians by the UN to protect Palestinians there from the atrocities that were being committed agasint them by the forces that would soon thereafter become the IDF.
Does that track with the history as you understand it now, Matthew?
Just started the first one of "Fear and Loathing etc."
Just one quote that struck me
"Any fight that goes on this long suffers from a lack of empathy, with a list of grievances so long on both sides, you are going to find plenty of reasons to hate whoever you want to hate if that's what you're looking for."
Kudos on being the type of person to actually engage with thoughtful, nuanced, high context deep dives. Hope it's as illuminating for you as it was for me.
You are denying historical facts. All the meetings specifically when Arafat was involved gave hope of settlement, ones that was not favourable to Israel, Israel would do anything to secure peace. All of them were rejected by that Billioner thief. Ask to look at his wife bank account a woman who lived in Paris on money stolen from the Palestinians. The Palestinians had a raw deal, but not from Israel but their own people.
Thank you Mathew. This is a one sided narrative. Ill add. There is no excuse on earth for occupation. The Palestinians are the only people on earth that are still under occupation. Give them their state and recognize them as people and not as “HUMAN ANIMALS•.
Did you even read what was said here? Waving around leftist Shibboleths does not constitute an argument. There were 100 million displaced persons after WWII, the Palestinians are the only ones left. Why?
Here's what I posted elsewhere in the thread: Hi Gurwinder, ask and you shall receive! Here are some recommendations:
First of all, Peter Beinart's substack is indispensable. His personal essays and statements as well as video interviews with Palestinians and Jewish voices are excellent:
If it’s possible, I also would appreciate a small reading list, because it’s clear I would do well to broaden my understanding. My email is deborah4bp2001@yahoo.com. No worries if you’d rather not. 🌿
HI Deborah, I posted this one for Gurwind elsewhere in the thread: Hi Gurwinder, ask and you shall receive! Here are some recommendations:
First of all, Peter Beinart's substack is indispensable. His personal essays and statements as well as video interviews with Palestinians and Jewish voices are excellent:
Oct 26, 2023·edited Oct 26, 2023Liked by Gurwinder
Excellent piece that goes a lot more deeper than the usual starting point of Israel's formation as a nation in 1948. And an important one too - the 3 misconceptions you tackle above are being peddled to the world daily.
Glad that you stuck with the facts and backed your views with points that can be easily researched further (if us readers decide to).
I see some disagreement in the comments but most aren't able to provide the same degree of specificity as you did.
Instead, their replies usually come in the form of emotional or politicized anecdotes (there are some reasonable replies but unfortunately, they are just a handful) without properly addressing your points. Some reasonable responses seem to be able to only provide links without owning and presenting the knowledge in them.
Thanks for the work put into researching this essay and writing with such clarity.
A big part of the reason you see links instead of point by point rebuttals in the reasonable replies is because there are HUGE pieces of missing information and context that would take their own blog posts to lay out.
For instance, let's look at this one single paragraph and start to explore some important missing context from the Palestinian perspective since Gurwinder has already represented the the moderate Israeli perspective:
"After WWII, the British, war-weary and facing a crumbling empire, surrendered administration of Palestine to the UN. In 1947 the UN voted to divide Palestine into two states; one Jewish, one Arab. This time more land was offered to the Jews than to the Arabs, but this was because most of the Jewish areas were deemed by the UN to be low quality swampland and arid wastes in the Negev Desert. Nevertheless, the Arabs rejected the deal, believing they were being swindled, and many took to the streets to protest. The protests became riots, which soon escalated into a civil war between Arabs and Jews, with the British desperately trying to maintain order."
-The British did not simply "surrender" administration of Palestine to the UN because they were "war weary." They were being subjected to an all out war of terror by the Irgun, a Zionist paramilitary group led by Menachem Begin (who would eventually become Prime Minister of Israel). The only reason these assassinations, bombings, and terror attacks were not met with overwhelming force and crushed was because Britain did not have the heart to bring these Zionists to justice in 1946/47 for obvious reasons, so they threw their hands up and gave the problem to the UN.
-The Arabs had good reason not to participate in the UNs commission. They had made previous attempts at negotiation with the British and Zionists which were not returned in good faith. By this point, the Zionists had made it very clear that they would accept nothing less than complete possession and political control of Palestine by a Jewish State. The Palestinians had no reason to trust either the Zionists or the UN. The Nakba would prove their suspicions correct. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
-It should also be noted in the division of land by the UN that the Zionists interests were well represented at the UN, while the Palestinians, who had no access to the international halls of power, were not.
-It is disingenuous to call the conflict between Palestinians and Jews at this point in the situation "civil war." What little organized resistance that the Palestinians could muster against their occupation had already been thoroughly stamped out by the British army in the 1930s. In the 1940s, the Zionists were well armed, well organized, and completely committed. The Arabs simply had no answer to the forces that were able to openly terrorize the British Army unrepudiated.
-Almost immediately upon the UN's decision to divide Palestine into two states, the Irgun and the Hagenah commenced a campaign of gruesome violence and terror against Palestinian civilians including rape, torture, and mass murder, first in the land granted to the Jewish state by the UN in order to ethnically cleanse it, AND THEN IN THE LAND GRANTED TO THE ARAB STATE AS WELL TO FORCIBLY OCCUPY AND ANNEX ADDITIONAL TERRITORY NOT GRANTED BY THE UN. This is the Nakba I referenced earlier. The Zionists had no respect for the UN or international law.
-Gurwinder's later assertion that the Arabs initiated the war in 1948 fails to account for the fact that it was the Israeli's who initiated violence against Arabs in territory granted to the Arabs by the UN and created a humanitarian crisis of over 500k Arab refugees who were fleeing into all of the surrounding Arab nations. Despite this transgression, none of the Arab nations involved in the war in 1948 conducted operations anywhere other than the areas granted to the Arab state of Palestine by the UN.
When did international law ever help the Jewish people? First- in the founding of Israel- second - never
The Arabs attacked the new state of Israel in 1948: its a fact no matter how you wish it was not a fact. And as with October 7 Israel was attacked first. Repeat again in 1956-repeat again in 1967- repeat and rinse again in 1973.
Very good account. I would add that in all honesty the entire creation of the UN was to protect only the interests of Jews or to be more specific the Zionists. Hint the bias in their decision by basically granting them an entire land “WITH A ENTIRE NATION AND PEOPLE IN IT”. Unlike the constant barking notion of “A LAND WITHOUT PEOPLE”. We see the bis live and well all the way up until this day. Why was that the case? If we follow history and dates. The 30s and 40s were the worst period ever for European jews who were being slaughtered left and right. Amid the end of WWII the “jewish problem “ had to be solved! How? The British surrendered Palestine “who was under their mandate” to the Zionists who were getting more snd more powerful by voice and by funding in all honesty. There are countless historical counts as to how slowly and diligently the zionists bought and paid for land directly to the British to give them Palestine. The British are fully and wholeheartedly responsible for this entire evil deal in mankind history!
There was no Palestinian nation, they did not conceive of this idea until around 1970. They were mostly nomadic Arabs. The Palestinian identity was created as a PR stunt that proved very useful to neighboring Arab states.
Calling the UN a Zionist entity is comically insane. The UN has served no real purpose other than to attack Israel since last century. UNRWA schools teach blatant antisemitism and martyrdom.
I don't care if there was a Palestinian nation or not - there is a 'Palestinian entity' and if there can be peace in a 2 state solution one day that would be wonderful. Obvs not under Hamas, Hezbollah or indeed the present Palestinian authority.
There was no Palestinian nation, they did not conceive of this idea until around 1970. They were mostly nomadic Arabs. The Palestinian identity was created as a PR stunt that proved very useful to neighboring Arab states.
Calling the UN a Zionist entity is comically insane. The UN has served no real purpose other than to attack Israel since last century. UNRWA schools teach blatant antisemitism and martyrdom.
Thank you. It is totally legitimate for people to be critical of Israel (as I see people are mostly respectfully doing here) but so often the conversation descends into outright anti semitism. As a Jew this stuff is scary.
Which all originated in Europe and not in the middle east or by Arabs. The notion that oh arabs and Palestinians hate jews is fabricated and all made up. I have jewish ancestry in my family and i am a Palestinian. How can i advocate for Jewish hate or be portrayed as hostile. My issue isn’t jews. Palestinians have an issue with Israel occupying their land and committing genocide against them for almost a century. If we want to speak history we have to be prepared to lay it all on the table.
The term originated in Germany. The Germans at the time only had Jews in their country to refer to. Claiming that “as an Arab I’m also a Semite” is historically false in this context.
Infighting between Jews and Arabs is ancient. Who fights more than anyone? Family. This stuff goes back a very long way, long before we went to Europe.
“For the love of Father Abraham, can Yishmael and Yitzchak please reconcile”. Shalom ✡️
I think "retaliating" isn't correct. Israelis have realized that they must, in self defense, eliminate Hamas. Hamas is dedicated to eliminating "infidels" who, by their very existence, stand in the way of an Islamic state -- not just in Palestine, but everywhere.
I m gonna begin by saying my comment will not be popular and will probably be attacked. We live in the united of states where free speech is at the forefront so as an American citizen im gonna express my view freely and without censoring i hope or the accusation that its an emotional account.
Here is the other perspective:
Hamas is a byproduct of Israels brutal policies towards Palestinians and to the miserable conditions it forced a whole people to undergo. No excuses. Occupation is no joke and it has consequences. Further we can debate myths who and what all day long, the end result there is an occupied people and their occupation has to end. Period. Thats if we are to continue in freedom and democracy for all citizens of this world. Last i checked, in this country we do. However we clearly only believe it for the few a big shame! Any how, myth or whatever the heck you want to call it. Go ahead get rid of Hamas , ill go along with you in this so called objective logic. then what? As a state, You keep your violent policies toward a whole people, by annihilating them in a very organized manner btw. Whats the end result? Peace for Israel awhile millions of Palestinians continue to live under the occupation? How is peace even possible after so much killing. And the world is supposed to support such agenda? The Israelis are master brains in ensuring the erasure of a whole population. but Palestinians in their long history of occupation and oppression are catching up as well. What you will get in response is more organized resistance which is a very Normal reaction. If Israel thinks it’ll easily get rid of the Palestinians and Hamas in a miserable effort to avoid recognizing them as people and to avoid serious effort for coexistence, it will never rest in peace.
How is the state of Israel sustaining on almost every single Israeli being forced to serve in an army? This is a state of army. Nothing more! How is this mentality is to pursue a true path to peace in the region? These are critical questions.
The history over 75 years proved it and will prove it again for the next 75 years. The moe brutality you show the more organized resistance from the indigenous population you will receive. Hamas or not is not the important issue therefore. Occupation is the issue. You can call it emotional, call it objective call it whatever you want, the bottom line Palestinians have a right to self determination and to be recognized as human beings who deserve to live.
October 7 wouldn’t even to tell it hon. Go face up the real history instead of faking it day and night. Drop the fake propaganda. And i know exactly what you are as well. Definitely not a Jew. A mere zionist. Nothing more. FREE SPEECH. FREE SPEECH.
Not so sick according to many Israeli officials who came to deplore the Israeli effort to promote (the predecessor of) Hamas to play divide and rule and weaken the PLO and Fatah.
The problem is that Hamas will not be eliminated. Doesn’t matter how many are eliminated in this conflict, there is a new generation of Hamas coming up behind them. I can’t see an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Thank you, Gurwinder. I live in a majority Muslim country on the other side of the world from all of this where people tend to have a completely irrational view of the conflict - i.e., based only on religious partisanship. The longer I live and the more I learn about what's happening and what has happened I am more and more convinced that Israel, while far from being wholly innocent, are fighting for their own historical right to survival, and peace.
I am a Jew and I know our people's history. I am very much tied to a Jewish homeland as the only means to ensure our survival as a people. And the survival of the Jewish people is a core value of mine.
We have given the world a great deal and the world has taken a great deal from us in blood and terror. No more and never again.
I agree by the way with every criticism of the Israeli government in this essay. I loathe Netanyahu. His priority has been to stay out of jail, because he abused his office. That priority has in turn led to a number of very stupid policies.
Thank you for this. It helps put some things in perspective.
I don’t believe Israel should not have its own state and think Hamas needs to be burned to the ground but I do think Israeli holds a great deal of accountability for what is happening there now.
I recall back in the 90s watching a documentary about Palestinians who were being forcefully removed from their homes to support Israeli expansion - not at all purchased land but land taken by force. I recall Palestinian families pointing out their beautiful homes they once owned but from which they had been unceremoniously ejected so an Israeli family could have them.
I also watched footage, in the early 2000s showing IDF soldiers mercilessly beating an unarmed Palestinian boy who was defenceless against them. The boy would have been about 15 years old. The soldiers filmed themselves laughing as they repeatedly hit the boy in the head with the butts of their rifles.
In yet another video, Israeli citizens filmed themselves sitting on lawn chairs overlooking the Gaza Strip watching bombs drop on Palestinian homes and cheering as if they were watching a fireworks display. That is grotesque.
I have beautiful Jewish friends and I don’t have any feelings of hatred toward the Jewish race however I do know from my own direct experience, that the ultra Zionist Jews can be very hateful people who think the rest of us as little more than animals.
In the 90s I lived in an ultra Zionist neighbourhood and it was the first time in my life that I fully understood what it meant to be hated based on my race not on anything I had done.
I understand Israel has the right to defend itself but it doesn’t have the right to commit war crimes or genocide.
I also think they bear some responsibility for Hamas. As does the US.
Right now Israel is committing war crimes. It is cutting off water and food and as far as I can determine from people on the ground there at the moment who I understand to be credible people (of course I’m not there so I am happy to be proven wrong) Israel is deliberately telling people to go in a direction to avoid being bombed and then bombing the places they where they told them they would be safe. They have also bombed the only exit into Egypt. That’s revolting to me.
The annexation of land that blocks Palestinian access to basic resources is not ok either and a sure fire way in my book to radicalise people. When you have nothing to lose what is left but to die fighting.
You can support Israel’s right to have their own state but I will never understand how anyone can condone what is happening to the Palestinian civilians.
I soundly condemn Hamas equally because they had to know by attacking the Israelis they were going to bring the wrath of Israeli army raining down upon innocent people.
But I also think Israel is using as much propaganda as Hamas.
Some of the footage they’ve used to show dead Israeli babies is actually footage of Palestinian children from some time ago - at least according to sources I have known to be trustful.
Everyone I know who has been to Palestine has come back with stories of the beautiful hospitality they encountered and the kindness and generosity of the people they met. I have great difficulty agreeing with anyone who thinks all Palestinians are radical extremists who need to be exterminated from the earth (and no, I’m not saying you have said this here).
I don’t think anything is black and white and I definitely don’t have answers to how to resolve this.
All I know is I can’t sit by and say nothing as innocent people die. My humanity won’t allow it. I don’t care what side they are on.
For anyone whose interested in expanding their understanding of what is happening now Moneycircus on substack is an intelligent source of information. At least I have found them to be.
There’s my two cents for what it’s worth, which isn’t much at all. Let the pile on begin.
You are writing half truth. That is dangerous because it blocks the full truth from surfacing. You think Oct 7th was Jewish propaganda? I wish. Think again and watch a few more of the videos taken by the Hamas people. I can’t sleep at night since that fateful day, thinking of my Mother and Grandparents who were shot into the Danube on 15th December 1944. Such similarities in the way the anti Israel and anti Jewish World would like to finish us off. The only thing stopping them is the State of Israel. Am Israel Chai.
Your comment is typical of people who wish to shut down conversation and debate, and misrepresents my comment completely.
I am not anti-Jewish, but neither am I anti-Palestinian and while what happened to your family in 1944 was undoubtedly awful and horribly traumatic (and should never have happened) it is no justification for what is happening now.
If you think the Israeli government (or any government for that matter) is your friend I suggest you read the book 180 degrees. However, I doubt you will. It's far easier after all to use the kind of lazy emotional blackmail you have attempted here.
I’m not sure I understand. Would you have stopped bombing Germany and Japan as the only way the war cold have been won because innocent civilians were killed in WWII? Would you have given up and allow the Nazis and Japan to rule just to void civilian death. I blame the Germans and the Nazis for all the suffering and death their own civilians suffered instead of blaming the Allies. The same as I blame Hamas for the suffering of the Palestinians. They started this war and they could have stopped this war by giving back the hostages and stopping the fighting.
I applaud you for getting out of the echo chamber to understand the history.
The next step is to retreat from your bias on war, your goal of stopping it, and your ideals around "civilians" not being killed.
Those are moral positions that in many cases are not held by either the Jews or the Muslims (that you use Jews and Arabs also shows a bias on avoiding diving in to the Jewish faith versus Muslim faith issue).
The Jewish faith treats all non-Jews as Gentiles. Jews are not evangelistic (as Christians are) nor do they have a goal of making anyone else Jewish). Gentiles are not required to follow Jewish law. Jews have no moral objective based on their faith to convert anyone to the Jewish faith. Jews observance of their faith is certainly from the most Orthodox extreme to those who are just "Culturally Jews" by heritage.
Muslim on the other hand are by the Koran expansionist (in the early days mostly through militancy) with the goal of making the world into one Caliphate and in the strictest sense, under sharia law. Muslims go from the most radical who view they are called to Jihad to make the world Muslim (males go to heaven and get 70 virgins. Unclear what females get. Gays are just killed as morally corrupt.) There are also Muslims who are just cultural Muslim by heritage and don't really ascribe to the literal details in the Koran.
The Jews have a very "western" world view (i.e. endorse Capitalism) including their democratic government. The state of Israel is LGBTQ friendly, abortion friendly, etc.
Muslims don't in general align with any of the West's moral values.
There is also the issue of Jerusalem and the Temple mount. There is no dispute (something you are unclear on) any longer that it was the site of the Jewish Temple. The Muslim scholars agreed until Israel came into existence. Then they realized that position was not helpful to them controlling the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple mount.
Why do I point this out? Its time that Westerners stop assessing the situation with a Western moral perspective. Especially in assessing the morality of HAMAS or the Palestinians and certainly the larger Muslim world.
At this point, I don't believe there will ever be peace between Western culture (The Judeo-Christian view) and Muslim culture (even for cultural Muslims). The Islamohobia concept is a red herring. Acknowledging the elephant in the room that our cultures are incompatible is not Islamophobia its avoiding insanity.
I'm Danish. The Danes are very open to all. They have let many Muslims immigrate to Denmark. They are no longer letting them. Why, because Muslims don't want to integrate into the Danish culture. They create an island with their own culture.
Bottom line, next step is for you not to evaluate the situation with western moral glasses on.
The West will never be at "peace" with the Muslim world. Israel is an island of western culture in the middle of the Muslim world. Israel has control of Jerusalem. They have restrained themselves and left control of the Temple mount to the Waqf which has controlled it for centuries.
You either support maintaining that island including Israel goals of controlling of the West Bank and Jerusalem and ultimately rebuilding the Temple on the Temple mount or you do not. The Muslim world doesn't want Israel to exist especial in control of the Temple mount. They certainly would never support rebuilding of the Temple.
The not trying to judge either side position is meaningless. Your judgements are inconsequential to the situation. The only question is when you acknowledge that in general Muslim values are incompatible with the Western values. That simple.
I keep abreast on the left and right on their opinions.
Many people in the divided states believe multiculturalism is the answer.
They are ignoring that the "multiculturalism experiment" is failing. Its the reason the divided states is so divided.
Government can't define culture. Culture defines the government. We can't even agree between the far left, far right and center on what the culture in the divided states should be. People in the divided states have no bases to judge the Israel v Palestine from a culture or "human rights" perspective.
Many people read into "human rights" whatever they believe is a "human right". I have asked many who use "human rights" as justification for their judgement where those human rights are defined (the pro-abortion crowd as an example). They can't use the UN definition of Human Rights. That does have allot of details that align with the general view, but it also includes the state and religion as a human right. Those are at odds with each other.
Mm, I disagree on the multiculturalism point. Most people on the same economic class spectrum work and play together fine. The rancor is coming almost exclusively from over-educated young progressives from elite institutions and activist groups.
"Most" a plan does not make. Whether its most or some - which you don't know, its the ones that don't fall into "most" or "some" that are the problem.
Most Palestinians are not going to be involved in Jihad. Yet the Palestinians voted for HAMAS which they knew wanted to wipe Israel and Jews off the map by any means. Do the Palestinians that voted for HAMAS have any culpability or are they just victims of their situation?
Israel is 20% Arab citizens who are largely Muslim. They are not involved in Jihad but oppose a Jewish state. Interesting given EVERY OTHER ARAB STATE IS A MUSLIM STATE. Why are Arab Muslims in Israel oppose to Israel being a Jewish state?
When you look at it from the details, its pretty obvious that most people of Muslim culture are not really supportive of western culture regardless of their economic class. Any why would we expect them to be? Not allot of alignment between traditional Muslim culture and western culture.
All the people who believe somehow that Muslims are good with western cutlure are projecting their ideals on others. I have a very good Muslim friend from 30 years ago. He forced his wife and kids to wear the Hijab. Wouldn't let his kids participate in any standard Western culture activities. They were very well off.
The Muslim's forcibly conquered the area that is "Israel/Palestine" in the 800s and built a Mosque on the most holy site of the Jews. Do any of the Muslims have any culpability in that they have never apologized to the Jews for what their militant ancestors did? Like the divided states, can we really move forward if the country hasn't apologized for slavery and what happened to indigenous people. Can Germans move forward if they haven't apologized for the Holocaust. The religious history puts Muslims and Jews at total odds with each other. How does that get reconciled. That's the reason that their had never been an agreement for peace in the area and their never will be. If Israel as a Jewish state is to exist, the Israeli's have to assume the ones (i.e. not most or some) that are opposed to the Jewish state will want to wipe them out. How do they distinguish between the "most/some" and the ones that want to wipe them out?
Its Western moral superiority that biases so many to believe Muslims can integrate into the Western culture.
That multiculturalism works just fine for “most” (sounds like we agree there) shows that multiculturalism is not the problem, which is the part I disagree with you about (you said multiculturalism has failed).
Bad ideology is the problem, which was my point. It exists in the minority of the populations you pointed out, it also exists in a minority of useful idiots on college campuses whose grandparents were born here.
The challenge I see with so many articles and comments is that they are ideological with no practical implementation.
In the technology industry, you are proposing a sunny day solution assuming all goes well.
The only meaningful plan is one that is a rainy day solution - i.e. takes into account extreme ideology. The history of humanity proves that is the only rationale recourse.
Its the reason the US has the strongest military in the world. Its the only rationale recourse to the existence of extreme ideology. Its the reason "defund the police" was doomed. It didn't take into account the extremely ideology that assumes shoplifting is justified.
Bad think is the reason the war in the middle east happened. The US was part of that bad think by suggesting that a two-state solution will address the extreme ideology on both the Israeli and Palestine sides.
Good walls are the only way to make good neighbors with Israel and the middle east unless you decide that Israel cannot exist especially as a Jewish state. The Jews have always planned based on extreme ideologies. They have millennia of experience to prove that is the only way to protect themselves.
Mostly, their own local leaders told them to get out of the way, so that the five armies could push the Jews into the sea - where that genocidal jingle ‘from the river to the sea’ originated. Some were pushed out by the fighting, some because they presented a threat. War is messy. As a comparison, almost a million Jews who lived in Arab states, were stripped of their land, business and often their lives, as soon as Israel won the war Israel didn’t start. The local Arab population could have made peace, which is all the Israelis asked for. The Arabs that stayed have equal rights, and with the exception of oil rich countries, the highest per capita net worths in the Middle East.
Yeah..like how Jews were ethnically cleansed from their islamic/arab territories. Israel still have 2 million Arabs (majority Muslim) in its dominion (apart from Gaza or westbank ) but no jew in any of the arab/islamic states.
This notion that Israel committee genocide while it's the actual Jews who were ethnically cleansed from nearby countries is how propoganda supposed to work and it worked on the gullibles.
Atleast if the surrounding arab/islamic countries are an example of human rights, religious freedom, secular values imbibed as part of modern democracy, we could have a moral equivalency.
Actually, according to Wikipedia (quoting the jewish Virtual Library), 8300 Jews lived in Iran in 2019 . 2000-2500 Jews live in Morrocco, there are 110 synagogues and there is a jewish museum.
Coming to this late and assuming this is sarcasm, but regardless, adding color for posterity.
Jewish population pre-Iranian revolution (1979) >100,000. Jewish population in Iran today (2019) < 1,000. Trend in Iraq is worse. Morocco >250,000 (1950); < 5,000 today. No Jewish populations of note on the Arabian peninsula despite long histories in each of these countries. I think the term is ethnic cleansing.
They left on their own accord. Their leaders promised them that Israel will be wiped off the face of the Earth in the ensuing war. That didn’t quite go their way, so now they’re stuck. However, many millions of refugees were absorbed by many countries but not the Palestinians. Why? Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi, Iraq wouldn’t have them, didn’t want them. Why? They knew they were trouble!
One of the most sane and balanced analyses I have encountered in the Israel-Palestine conflict. The agenda of hatred and violence must be destroyed at all costs. Thank you Gurwinder for doing this.
"Israel’s excesses are Hamas’s norms. It’s the only liberal democracy in a sea of autocracies, and unlike all of them it’s willing to openly criticize itself and set high humanitarian standards even if it can’t always meet them. In short, it’s not perfect, but it’s also not the villain it’s been portrayed as.
Ultimately Israel can only be a better neighbor to the Palestinians when Hamas and its allies are gone. Tragically, that requires violence. Israel should know that the world is watching, and will hold it to account for any excesses. At the same time, it is doing what must be done, and so, for the sake of both Israelis and Palestinians, I give it my cautious and conditional support."
“I didn’t want to comment on Israel and Palestine, because it’s a topic I don’t feel I understand well enough.” Shoulda stopped there and trusted your first instinct. The problem with hubris is that the cost is tallied in human lives. Killing civilians is evil. Full stop. When you justify the genocide taking place before the world’s eyes, you become complicit. I subscribed to you because I liked your writing but maybe you should read some of your own pieces and apply them here. There are plenty of human rights organizations, independent, principled journalists, and trusted, educated scholars who have studied this issue for decades who would take you to task for what you have written. Maybe just check out Jewish Voice for Peace, Chris Hedges, Ilan Pappe, Norm Finkelstein, Democracy Now, and Caitlin Johnstone, many of whom are here on Substack. Don’t contribute unless you know what you are doing. The cost to humanity is too high. Use your gifts for peace, not for fueling genocide.
I feel I understand this topic better than all of the people you mentioned. Amy Goodman, the host of Democracy Now, was my idol when I was a leftist teenager. I still value her eloquence, but have been forced to conclude that she's an activist, not a journalist. The others you mentioned I have little time for. By all means, if I've gotten something factually wrong, call me out on it, but please don't regurgitate what left-wing media have been telling you -- such actions only betray your naivety.
Grace; is your fight for justice? Your statement is so one sided I have a difficult time seeing exactly what you believe--oh I see it now...the killing of innocent Jews does not equate in your world view; the means justified those deaths. everyone you named who you said should be read is squarely on your “side”. There really are no sides here just two people who are locked in a struggle neither side can win. We are in desperate need of solutions- 2 states that is. also if your not Jewish your fight is theoretical at best. Sorry but Gurwindrs post is fair, historically accurate and does not blame. Solutions are hard/ complaining easy.
All accurate, balanced. The reality is, there are no books with “Palestinian” history -- as you said before, there was never a Palestinian state and the Arabs never looked at creating one until Jews started moving back home. In addition, there was never not a Jewish presence in the area. Even as expelled and diminished the population has been at points in history, it’s never been without Jews since the the time of the canaanites.
Just wanted to add that one of the things that surprised me most when I visited Israel was the diversity of the population. Jewish Israeli's are afraid of Hamas, obviously. But I think it's worth mentioning that Palestinian Israelis are afraid as well.
Thank you for this! It is sad that so many young minds are filled with such distorted history, it seems there is a lot of social status, incentives, and rewards for passively accepting the recent woke anti-Israel narrative and not daring to learn something more nuanced. The entirety of woke ideology seems to be one that punishes people who attempt nuance and rewards script-followers.
I would add one thing to your post if I could, which I just wrote about quite a lot in my last post called "The Myth of the Indigenous," that in the early 19th century, there was barely a population in the three Sanjaks colloquially known by some as Palestine - Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre - in the Ottoman Vilayet of Syria. The Muslim population basically consisted of three sets of warring Arabs - the Qays who believed themselves from the North of the Arabian Peninsula, and the Yamans who believed themselves from the South of the Arabian Peninsula. Meanwhile, the Bedouins were everyone's enemy and were a chief reason that any development in the land was curtailed and the population (which also included Jews and Christians) smaller than it was during the first Ottoman census of 1596.
Jews and other Muslims began immigrating into the three Sanjaks of Palestine or neighboring regions in Syria at around the same time for roughly the same reasons: in the mid-19th century, the Ottoman Tanzimat Reforms made it much easier to buy land, policed the Bedouins, and changed the corrupt previous tax structure. There was also some mass Arab migration into Palestine for other reasons - when Egypt briefly occupied Syria, they left behind tens of thousands of soldiers who squatted on land promised to Jewish philanthropist Moses Montefiore for purchase for Jewish refugees. There was an immigration wave of Algerians due also to local rebel leaders. But towards the end of the 19th century, the rise of Pan-Nationalisms across Europe and the Middle East caused massive demographic shifts. The Russian Empire's "pan-Slavism," under Alexander III and later, was the belief in ruling any Slavic people and having a solely Slavic and Orthodox Russia - caused wars for Ottoman territory and also caused them to wage campaigns of violence against both Russian Muslims and Jews, millions of whom fled down into the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire under Abdulhamid II responded with "Pan-Islamism," the start of an ideology persisting today. He strategically relocated many of the Russian Muslim refugees - like Circassian, Chechen, Daghastani, etc - into Syria to maintain a Muslim majority against the Jews who had been purchasing land there, Jews who were also refugees during Pan-Slavic ideology (at the time, Jewish neighborhoods in Russia was subject to extermination at whim, Jewish kids were taken as child soldiers for the tzarist army at ages as young as 12 and kept for 25 years, Jews were forced into slums and 40% of the Jewish Russian population subsisted on foreign charity, etc).
Most of the population of Israel and pre-State Israel come the 1940s were new immigrants, whether they be Muslim or Jewish or Christian. The myth that Jews "stole the land from the indigenous Palestinians" is laughable, they were simultaneous and often synergistic immigrants - there was an internal zionist debate over the hiring of Jewish or Arab workers and many hired Arab workers at different points, causing more immigration under Mandatory Palestine.
Of course, the Arab leaders of the new Muslim territories during WWII also allied with Hitler as you pointed out, who, under SS Directover no. 30 (written about wonderfully by historian Jeffrey Herf), purposefully broadcast into Arabic language radio antisemitic propaganda, and had antisemitic classics like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf and the International Jew translated into Arabic and distributed. Hitler planned to extend the Final Solution into the Jews of the Middle East and would have if not for the battle of El Alamein.
Unfortunately, the influence of Naziism and Pan-Islamism, and also Pan-Arabism, has remained to this day, a dangerous combination that has resulted in the relentless targeting of Jews and Israel. Anyone who is sympathetic to Hamas should reader their charter, as they directly cite by name "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as part of their list of the crimes of Jews, blaming us as far back as the French Revolution for all world turmoil and imploring others to kill us wherever we may hide. Unfortunately, Fatah has been no better. Mahmoud Abbas did his PhD in a Soviet university on the topic of "zionology," basically the Soviet academic version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The PLO was, after all, a Soviet pet project made in conjunction with Egyptian president Nasser, before Egyptian-born Arafat began using the PLO for his personal enrichment. He also largely turned down the fantastic 2-state solution deal brokered after the Oslo Accords due to the growing popularity of Hamas at the time, and keeping the adulation of the growing religiously radicalized population.
I should add that Israel was a nation made no differently than pretty much any other nation of prior Ottoman territories, including Greece, a country which I rarely hear any leftist care about despite being founded as it currently is by violence against Muslims and expelling 500,000 of them while importing 1.5 million ethnic Greeks to the land from elsewhere in the Ottoman Empire.
Unfortunately, the Palestinian people have been held captive by bad leaders using them for their own ideological aims since the nation of Israel started and the Palestinian identity created.
It is a shame that this "myth of the indigenous" Palestinian farmers going back through time immemorial persists and is rabidly shouted at by anyone on the left or sympathetic to Islamism as a justification for violence. Even if it was true, the actions of people from a century and a half ago to 75 years ago gives no excuse in the present for rape, kidnapping, violence, and attempt at ending another sovereign nation. Imagine if members of the Chumash tribe did this to residents of present-day California. Doubt those same leftists would see it as justifiable, despite similar enough timelines.
So that's my short-ish (okay, not very short) comment just to add in that it's quite nuts how young leftists treat any notion of the "indigenous" as sacrosanct and a-historical. They see ignorance as a virtue since questioning or nuancing identity structures like claims of "indigeneity" is taboo, and they make that virtuo-ized ignorance - the upholding of taboo - as the basis of their morality.
A two state solution is the only way.
Please read section on ottoman rule.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Palestine
They surely don’t allow anyone to confuse them with the facts.
Ask one of the srcreamers which
‘river’ and which ‘sea’ they are all
screaming about, and they have to put you on hold, or simply hang up, not having any idea which ‘river,’ nor which ‘sea.’
They would see it as justified
"The truth is that if Israel were to put down its arms there would be no more Israel. If the Arabs were to put down their arms there would be no more war." For all the billions of words that have poured out of the mouths of pundits down the years, I have yet to hear a single one that in any way diminishes the baleful truth of these words of Benjamin Netanyahu in 2006.
Also quote from Golda Meir-- when Arab mothers love their children more than they hate the Jews there will be peace.
Yes, the Israeli position seems to be, "so long as we get everything we want, there's no need for a conflict."
In 2000 @ Camp David, the Israelis gave Yasser Arafat 95% of what he asked for. Most of Judea & Samaria, aka The West Bank. Arafat said no. Do you know why ? In his book, Ehud Barak, who attended the negotiations on behalf of Israel, wrote that Arafat wanted two things: (1) right of return for Palestinians, and (2) Palestinian sovereignty over the Western Wall. If you know as much as you have written, you’ll know that Israel could not accept this because it would be the end of the Israel. Arafat was not someone who wanted a peaceful neighbor. Arafat was someone who wanted to eliminate his neighbor. After this, the idea of a two state solution and the Oslo framework was abandoned by Israel because the other party to the negotiations would not negotiate.
I'm not an expert on the historical details. My memory is that Israel offered Arafat a Palestinian state that Israel would still control in some important respects. If true, then Israel offered Arafat a deal that Israel would not have accepted if it were in Arafat's position. It's not clear to me that a truly sovereign Palestinian state has ever been on the table.
Anyway, this is all very old news. The situation now is that there is no longer any chance of peace, so the wise people on both sides should be getting out of the Middle East asap.
Israel gave the Palestinians this opportunity in Gaza in 2007. But Hamas took over Gaza and it became a launching pad for rockets into Israel. So the security concerns Israel voiced since the beginning have been proven right. Would you have Israel cede Judaea & Samaria and have either Hamas or Fatah launch rockets on Tel Aviv ?
You see, Israel signed peace agreements with Jordan and Egypt. And this relationship is working. Each respects their borders and neither launches attacks on the other.
When the Palestinians express a will to act like Egypt or Jordan, then Israel can cede their security concerns. Not a minute sooner.
To my knowledge, Israel has never offered any group of Palestinians full sovereignty over any land. If you know otherwise, please link us to some independent information source other than yourself. And anyway....
All of this kind of historical blame game analysis is a complete waste of time. None of it has ever made anybody in the region safe.
I’m not saying that Israel offered sovereignty to the Palestinians.
I’m saying the example of Gaza proves why Israel will not provide such sovereignty. It cannot be trusted.
If Hamas put their weapons down to tomorrow, there would be peace.
If israel put their weapons down tomorrow, israel would be destroyed.
You write, "When the Palestinians express a will to act like Egypt or Jordan, then Israel can cede their security concerns."
As I see it, the Palestinians will never accept limited sovereignty, and Israel will never grant full sovereignty, therefore...
Any hope of peace between the two parties is officially dead. It's probably been dead for years, but in case anyone was in doubt about that, Oct 7 put the final nail in the coffin. If true, then all the memorized slogans about who did what when and who is right and who is wrong etc etc are now entirely pointless. But everyone keeps chanting those slogans, because they've become addicted to the chanting.
I would compare this situation to a failed marriage that is beyond repair. The parties tried to work it out various times, but failed to accomplish that goal, so the marriage is now finally over for good. The problem in the Middle East is of course that, the parties involved are very stubbornly determined to fight to the death over who gets to keep the house.
My best guess is that both of them may wind up dead on the bathroom floor. WMD is coming to this conflict sooner or later.
Belligerence is a funny thing. If a belligerent party continues its belligerence, the other side will eventually crush it. This is why we let playground disputes continue. To let little boys fight it out. To bring closure. This is what has happened throughout history. This is what stops the fight. When the belligerent party realizes that it cannot win. So far in this conflict, the belligerent party has been permitted, either by Israel or the international community, to survive. In my opinion, this will only end when Israel is permitted to finish the fight. To put the belligerent party down.
Arafat also died one of the wealthiest men in the world. Makes you wonder where his priorities truly lay?
That is horse shit. They always go to the table and when they give a little bit they get bit every time. They forced Jews out of Gaza did you know that’s what they did? These people are the modern day Nazi who want to extinguish every last Jews off the face of the planet.
Netanyahu has been the chosen leader of Israel for many years now.
Netanyahu says there will never be a Palestinian state while he is in charge.
Netanyahu is steadily building new settlements on the West Bank.
Netanyahu will never accept Palestinians as fully equal citizens of Israel, as that would end the Jewish state.
Thus, the chosen long time leader of Israel has nothing to put on the table other than a never ending state of apartheid for the Palestinians.
And that equals a never ending state of conflict for Israeli citizens.
Israel can't accept the Palestinians as equal citizens because they would be a majority and vote to extinguish Israel. If it gave Palestinians a state it would be a failed state, because the Palestinians are failures, and then they would blame the Jews for their failures, as they do now.
Given that, it's inevitable that the Palestinians will have to be removed from Gaza and the West Bank and pushed into Egypt/Jordan or wherever else. Settlements simply get that inevitable process rolling.
Other Arabs don't want the Palestinians because they know they are awful, but that should be their problem not Israel's problem.
Israel owns this land by right of conquest. Woe to the vanquished.
You didn't read. Set your emotions aside so your reading comprehension will rise.
I don’t think you read the article closely
Fantastic quote!
Thank you
I know this quote. Gurt’s gist in this article sounds similar to me.
It was a speech to the Knesset after the Israel-Lebanon conflict. Yes Gurt's gist is similar but my comment wasn't in any way intended to suggest otherwise....quite the reverse in fact?? https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/
Very good. Read it wrong. Sorry.
It's absolutely true, but the answer is simple: so do it, and withdraw from possibly the worst possible region of the world for you to live. Come live in the UK, US, Canada, Australia, France, or any of the other countless safe places for you, instead of insisting on perpetuating misery for everyone involved.
Hi Gurwinder
I’m a Jewish journalist who has written about Israel/Palestine for a decade, and has gone from being a centrist Zionist to an anti-Zionist in that time as I replaced a historically false narrative- one I believe your essay above largely resonates with- with a narrative based more on the research of Israeli historians, recently declassified Israeli government archives, and the work of both Israeli and Palestinian legal scholars and human rights activists- as well as histories of Palestine which significantly contradict much of what you’ve written. I’m not going to try to debate you here, but if you’d like a reading list from me which I think would upend much of what you’ve written, let me know. I don’t agree with many of your beliefs but I read you because I find you to be a good thinker and an honest writer, and I benefit from it. This essay, though, is mired in what I think are historical errors and some significant confusion. Reach out if you’re interested.
I'm always happy to hear opposing views. A reading list would be appreciated.
Hi Gurwinder, ask and you shall receive! Here are some recommendations:
First of all, Peter Beinart's substack is indispensable. His personal essays and statements as well as video interviews with Palestinians and Jewish voices are excellent:
https://peterbeinart.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=reader2&utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fpeter%2520beinart&utm_medium=reader2
My favorite over-all history: "Enemies and Neighbours" by Ian Black
Legal- historical perspectives:
"The Unmaking of Israel" by Orthodox Jew and lawyer Gershom Gorenberg,
"Justice For Some: Law and The Question of Palestine" by Palestinian legal scholar Noura Efrat
Eyewitness to Palestinian reality:
"The Way To The Spring: Life and Death In Palestine" by Jewish journalist Ben Ehrenreich
The way forward:
"Haifa Republic" by Israeli philosopher Omri Boehm
"After Zionism" a collection of essays on the way forward by a number of experts in the area, edited by Moor and Lowenstein
Thank you. I'm familiar with some of these sources already, and was not convinced by them. But I'll keep an open mind and check the rest out!
I’m curious if you ever listened to the MartyrMade podcast series “Fear and Loathing in New Jerusalem”. It’s considered a fair account of both sides by many, and it left me with a very different impression of the history than you are presenting here.
Would be interesting to know what about which of these sources wasn't convincing to you (I haven't read them but may well do so and it would in any case be interesting to know what sorts of arguments or ways of putting together evidence don't ring true for you)
I read Ehrenreich’s book, and found it interesting, but often a little too anecdotal and emotion-based. I’m also familiar with the work of Gorenberg, and agree with him about West Bank settlements, but haven’t found aspects of his work that dispute what I wrote.
The sheer complexity of the history of the region can easily lend itself to any interpretation one wants. There are and were factions on either side that wanted peace and factions that wanted war. Factions that wanted compromise and those that did not. We see this over and over throughout history. It's a lot easier to sow chaos than peace. Who fired the first shot is a pointless question. The fact is that Israel has been attacked many times from within and without. They have also attacked within and without.
And recall that even among Jews there are anti-Zionists who believe strongly that the Jews should not have a state. Some of the negative treatment of Zionism comes from them.
My point is that there is little of value in going over the history to cast blame and conclusive moral judgments. The question is how to achieve peace now. What Hamas and the other Jihadi groups did on 10/7 was designed to sow chaos and draw the surrounding states into a war against Israel. They may yet succeed.
There is a reason the surrounding states refuse to take in more Palestinians. If you read the history of Jordan - the state that took in the largest number after the '48 war - you will get some sense of what they would be importing. Along with a vast majority of Palestinians who just want to live their lives would come Jihadi warriors who create terror and instability.
To pretend there are easy or good solutions to this situation is to engage in wishful thinking. Only bad and worse and it's near impossible to know which is bad and which is worse. I feel that Israel should relent on bombing Gaza because they are killing a lot of civilians. Will that bring peace? It certainly won't stop Hamas and the other Jihadis. I'm not sure anything will.
One factor that gets overlooked a lot in this discussion is the paucity of resources in the region. Peebo mentions the unwillingness of neighboring Arab states to take in millions of refugees. Unlike the US or EU, Egypt & Jordan simply do not have the capacity to take in such an influx of people. Jordan is one of the most water-scarce countries on earth that has, and is, in a sense the largest refugee camp too. Egypt fares a little better, but the Nile isn’t guaranteed to flow forever. The conditions in the Negev are dire when compared to the western edge of Israel. I think here in the US we take for granted our enormous capacity to absorb large population transfers as a way of ameliorating conflict, but in the Middle East scarcity is a gasoline that lights a lot of fires.
Unfortunately it really does feel unsolvable.
The thing that might save Israel is Russia. They have steadfastly refused to take sides and may be the only powerful nation with the credibility to negotiate some kind of peace.
“powerful nation with the credibility to negotiate some kind of peace” that committing genocide and terrorizing neighboring country right now.
It is unsurprising that there are competing narratives re the history of Israel, or any other nation. Now that Israel is an entity what future does an antizionist promote? What reaponse, if any should be made to Hamas? I agree that history is useful in understanding the present but it doesn't help tremendously in plotting the future. Thanks.
Have you also read Myths and Facts: a guide to the Arab-Israeli conflict by Mitchell Bard? It is indispensable for understanding the historical facts, up to the present time which sheds light on the current situation.
https://www.amazon.com/Myths-Facts-Guide-Arab-Israeli-Conflict/dp/0971294569
Hiiii I really really appreciate your response!!! May I repost your reading list on Tiktok with full credit to you? I think more people need to see this.🥹
Thank you for this reading list. You’re doing a public service by sharing this
Since you seem to be very widely read, have you read Myths and Facts: a guide to the Arab-Israeli conflict by Mitchell Bard? It is indispensable for understanding the historical facts, up to the present time which sheds light on the current situation.
https://www.amazon.com/Myths-Facts-Guide-Arab-Israeli-Conflict/dp/0971294569
Will you write an update / retraction if you are able to deem yourself mistaken? Otherwise the whole “I’m an objective observer who sticks to the facts unlike the woke and radical left” stick becomes ordinary, conservative grifting of which there are already so many.
I think it's unlikely I'm mistaken, but if I do turn out to be, I absolutely will issue a correction.
Unlikely huh? I see that humility is your strong suit. But I’m sure you know more than Israeli scholars, Palestinian researchers and historians on both sides, because you’re good with Google. I’m even more confident because of the *checks notes* 0 references or sources in your essay. Really just fills me with confidence that you’ll honestly admit your mistakes.
Point out what I got wrong.
I am not the one making extraordinary claims, am I? I also do not pretend to be an expert on topics I am not. I am familiar enough with the conflict to know that your claims require some significant sourcing and referencing. The OP commenter demonstrated his credentials and indicated you are wrong in your claims. If you are as objective as you claim, that should be enough to at least demonstrate how you are substantiating these claims you are making. Is that too much to ask?
Gurwinder, I’m curious now what your position is on Israel and their “self defense”? After 7 months of continuous slaughter, full on siege of water and food supply, 30,000+ dead, and leveling of the complete infrastructure including hospitals and UN centers… gotta say it looks pretty bad on them in this moment.
Also curious your opinion on Palestinians AND Israelis held captive by aggressive and inherently undemocratic leadership that doesn’t represent what the common sense majority seem to want, which is none of this craziness.
You left out that Jewish settlers were fighting the British before WW2 and were allied with the Nazis... were the Arabs also allied with them? I hadn't heard that, but you're deff giving the Israeli sides version.
Joaquim, I see that humility is not something you understand well.
Thank you. Since when defending human rights and denouncing genocide became equated with being a “leftist” oh and a “muslim”? To stand against war crime and genocide is to be a human. Period.
So glad to see that you are against the atrocities committed by Hamas!
Surf Wisely.
I'm against both sides - violence in this case is both sides just making the problem worse
I would definitely recommend listening to Darryl Cooper's MartyrMade series on the Israel/Palestine conflict called "Fear & Loathing in the New Jerusalem."
Your account in section 1 follows fairly well with his up until the late 1930s, at which point the narratives diverge significantly. Especially in 1947.
If you want to skip to that point in the series, go straight to episode 5.
He strikes me as very even-keeled and fair to both parties in his historical account, but you should judge for yourself.
https://martyrmade.com/fear-loathing-in-the-new-jerusalem/
I listened to it, and I thought the same thing. Unfortunately, as I followed him more closely I discovered that he’s pretty extreme in his thinking. He does a YouTube video with some other guy, and they are both very far right. I also remember seeing Dan Carlin (Hardcore History) give Darryl a dressing down on Twitter.
Kudos for actually listening to it, but not-kudos on your textbook, lazy use of the perfect rhetorical fortress to get out of actually having to engage on the substance of someone's position.
It's fine if you have actual disagreements on points of fact or interpretation, but just labeling him as far-right so you don't have put in any effort into understanding or critiquing his point of view is childish and anti-intellectual.
Get over yourself. I really liked the article, but this comments section is one of the worst I’ve come across in a while. Do you really feel the need to use put downs in order to make yourself seem better? It’s not working.
If you'll read my response again, you'll see that I critiqued specific actions and behaviors, not your personal character.
If you'd like to choose to be offended by that rather than ask yourself if there is any merit to the constructive criticism (maybe there is, but maybe there isn't), that's your prerogative.
The funniest thing about your assertion that he is "extreme" and "very far right" is that after listening to all 25 hours of his deep dive on the history of the conflict, I came away with much more sympathy for the Palestinian cause. That's kind of the opposite effect of the "far right wing" position.
He is self-admittedly a troll on Twitter though, so if that's the extent of your exposure to him, then that makes a little more sense.
He sounds like he is copying Dan Carlin's voice and cadance in the podcast. It is uncanny. Now I need to go look for that exchange on Twitter / X. I'm a big Dan Carlin fan.
I think I was a bit too harsh. Darryl is very knowledgeable, but he can be awfully “dark.” However, I thought his MartyrMade podcast was excellent. I just recommended it to a friend. I remember him being on Daniele Bolelli's podcast (History on Fire) where they talked about the incident with Dan Carlin, and it sounded like a misunderstanding.
Yes, Dan Carlin is a favorite, but with everything happening now, I’m having a hard time listening to anything that has so much doom and gloom in it. He can get a little too graphic. I’m interested in history, but I don’t need a detailed description of torture.
Listen to John Mearsheimer
Respectfully, you must read Myths and Facts: a guide to the Arab-Israeli conflict by Mitchell Bard. It is indispensable for understanding the historical facts, up to the present time which shed light on the current situation.
https://www.amazon.com/Myths-Facts-Guide-Arab-Israeli-Conflict/dp/0971294569
I try to read all comments, but when they're coming at me fast, I sometimes miss them. I missed your top comment and have now given it a like.
Thank you.... and sorry to be a grouch.
What is the average citizen supposed to believe? Here we have 2 seemingly reasonable journalists completely disagreeing on the actual history of the region. How is one to determine the truth of these matters?
We have a long history, Torah long, of self hating Jews. They recur in every generation. There’s even a name for them ‘erev rav’. They are the Yevsetskaya Jews (who championed Communists, only to be destroyed by them), the Jews for Hitler (see above) and the progressive American Jews. They are the ‘mixed multitude’ who break the original commandment to have no God but God. Whether they worship Lenin, Hitler or at the church of woke, they turn on their own first, since this initially gives them the popularity, the exceptionalism their hungry, fearful souls demand. For a short time, they are tokenized by those who can strip them for parts. Then, inevitably they are discarded. They are the Judas goats to the Jewish people. For a list of the latest erev rav, see the list provided by Matthew Gindin.
Well said
Just “people” ...who can be discarded...read Jews Don’t Count
If the 13 million Jews in the world today disappeared not many would truly miss us.
Oh, and the “one drop” rule is straight from the Nazis. Love that you can actually say that without actually knowing or understanding what you just said. You are an example of why Jews needed the state of Israel and why we should be afraid of western culture.
My understanding is that most Jews were not Zionists until WWII and the H - and they were not 'self hating' either. This is not to say they were right or wrong either ...
Most Jews did not ascribe to an idea that did not exist until it existed? This was 100 years ago, there was no twitter. The idea had to spread organically.
There were Jewish newspapers and most Jews knew about Zionism.
Wow, a serious ethno fanatic... lots of Jews are just people now.... and they aren't genocidal maniacs either..
Are the Palestinians Ethno fanatics? Why do you only have a problem with it when Jews do it?
Yeah, a lot of folks outside the western world are entho chauvinists.... but most western conditioned folks are more modern in their outlook and don't feel like their ethno world is under threat. Are there really only 13M Jews in the world? They certainly make a big bang for their buck...
I’m sure there are more than that genetically speaking, if you go by a “one drop” rule. But as it stands NYC is the largest single population center of Jews by a long shot.
I think that’s part of the disconnect people have here, there are 1+ billion Muslims, 500 million Arabs. That’s why reframing the Jewish-Arab conflict as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was such a genius PR move.
See my reading list, shortly arriving above, study and decide :)
I have been reading/listening as much as possible these last weeks and am more confused than ever. The contradictions, cherry picking, willful ignorance of facts on both sides is astounding. I think the fundamental question is should Israel have the right to exist? If you answer yes to that question, how does Israel secure their nation against the majority of its neighbors who wish to see them wiped off the face of the earth? What does a peaceful Palestinian state look like? How do the Palestinians co exist with Jews? And vice versa. If you answer no to this question, where do the 15 million Jews go? How should they be removed?
Hi Ann - I hear you. I think one some levels where one stands on this conflict depends on deeper issues- the pre-existing moral and philosophical commitments one brings to the issue. This is probably why Gurwinder and I disagree, more than just disagreeing about information- though I think if we could dialogue we might learn from each other in the “what is true” area. With regards to “the right to exist” I think Israel, like all states, only has a right to exist to the extent that it is democratic and honours the human rights of all those it rules. Palestinians are not an issue external to Israel, but internal to it. They are ruled by Israel, but not given the rights of citizens. So I’m my opinion Israel needs to become a pluralistic, democratic state for all in order to maintain its legitimacy in the eyes of those it rules. If it doesn’t, it will be forever attacked. Is a just Israeli state which is not founded and structured, as it currently is, by Jewish supremacist legislation and power, possible? I think that it is, and also that the path to that is dangerous and brutally difficult, and would require great courage and creativity from Israelis. Yet it is not more dangerous and brutal than decades of war and the horrific state Israel keeps Palestinians in currently. The current status quo is morally intolerable and strategically short-sighted; it will result either in perpetual war or in Israel finally expelling or exterminating the Palestinians, in my opinion. Israel is an incredibly well resourced country on every level, and I believe those resources could be channeled towards truth and reconciliation as in South Africa rather than perpetual occupation and war. Again, hard and dangerous, but better than the status quo of the last few decades.
"Israel needs to become a pluralistic, democratic state for all in order to maintain its legitimacy in the eyes of those it rules."
I am just a layman, but it doesn't seem to me like Hamas and its supporters are that interested in the pluralistic, democratic state you speak of.
"List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks
"I think Israel, like all states, only has a right to exist to the extent that it is democratic and honours the human rights of all those it rules. Palestinians are not an issue external to Israel, but internal to it. They are ruled by Israel, but not given the rights of citizens."
How do you co-exist with someone who believes that you shouldn't exist altogether? Who is ready to blow themselves so that they can harm you. You seem to be making a point that Palestine issue has arisen because somehow Israel is not giving Palestinians rights they so deserve. What about the possibility that they don;t want rights from Israel rather that there be no Israel.
Not gonna happen until there are peacemakers willing to compromise on both sides. With Netanyahu still at the helm, the Palestinian Authorities openly supporting Hamas and with Hezbollah, this is currently unlikely.
Well said Matthew. I too have been listening to many journalists and researchers, who have a great deal of experience living, studying, and thinking about these issues. Ultimately it is these people, you included, we should consider as the experts, not armchair philosophers of whom there is a gorgeous abundance at the moment.
But how does the actions, goals and treatment of Palestinians by Hamas, Iran, etc. figure into that equation?
Have you listened to Darryl Cooper's MartyrMade series on the history of Israel & Palestine?
It's called "Fear & Loathing in the New Jerusalem." It's 6 episodes long and totals about 25 hours history deep dive.
I ask because Darryl would disagree quite substantially on the claim that the Arabs started the war in 1948.
His account details how between Ben-Gurion's hardline leftwing para-military and Begin's hardline rightwing para-military, there was an all out war of terror (what the Arabs now call the Nakba) that was waged against peaceful Palestinian residents in both the territory that was allocated to Israel by the UN AND the territory that was allocated to Palestine immediately following UN's decision, and that the military response by the Arabs in 1948 was confined to those areas given to the Palestinians by the UN to protect Palestinians there from the atrocities that were being committed agasint them by the forces that would soon thereafter become the IDF.
Does that track with the history as you understand it now, Matthew?
Just started the first one of "Fear and Loathing etc."
Just one quote that struck me
"Any fight that goes on this long suffers from a lack of empathy, with a list of grievances so long on both sides, you are going to find plenty of reasons to hate whoever you want to hate if that's what you're looking for."
Thanks for pointing me towards this podcast Hans.
You're very welcome!
Kudos on being the type of person to actually engage with thoughtful, nuanced, high context deep dives. Hope it's as illuminating for you as it was for me.
🤜🤛
You are denying historical facts. All the meetings specifically when Arafat was involved gave hope of settlement, ones that was not favourable to Israel, Israel would do anything to secure peace. All of them were rejected by that Billioner thief. Ask to look at his wife bank account a woman who lived in Paris on money stolen from the Palestinians. The Palestinians had a raw deal, but not from Israel but their own people.
You have evidence that proves the existence of a historical state of Palestine and Palestinian people?
People lived there. They were expelled from form their home. Some of them were killed in the process. They were wronged.
Which of these statements is not true for you?
Thank you Mathew. This is a one sided narrative. Ill add. There is no excuse on earth for occupation. The Palestinians are the only people on earth that are still under occupation. Give them their state and recognize them as people and not as “HUMAN ANIMALS•.
Did you even read what was said here? Waving around leftist Shibboleths does not constitute an argument. There were 100 million displaced persons after WWII, the Palestinians are the only ones left. Why?
My latest piece of writing on this issue: https://matthewzgindin.medium.com/the-failure-of-zionism-c3a8ebc94dc0
Never mind. I just saw your other post. Thank you!
Matthew, please post the reading list for everyone!
Here's what I posted elsewhere in the thread: Hi Gurwinder, ask and you shall receive! Here are some recommendations:
First of all, Peter Beinart's substack is indispensable. His personal essays and statements as well as video interviews with Palestinians and Jewish voices are excellent:
https://peterbeinart.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=reader2&utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fpeter%2520beinart&utm_medium=reader2
My favorite over-all history: "Enemies and Neighbours" by Ian Black
Legal- historical perspectives:
"The Unmaking of Israel" by Orthodox Jew and lawyer Gershom Gorenberg,
"Justice For Some: Law and The Question of Palestine" by Palestinian legal scholar Noura Efrat
Eyewitness to Palestinian reality:
"The Way To The Spring: Life and Death In Palestine" by Jewish journalist Ben Ehrenreich
The way forward:
"Haifa Republic" by Israeli philosopher Omri Boehm
"After Zionism" a collection of essays on the way forward by a number of experts in the area, edited by Moor and Lowenstein
Please list one book. Ps I'm pro Israel, pro peace.
I'm told the best single book for folks likely to identify as "pro-Israel, pro-peace" is Daniel Sokatch's "Can We Talk About Israel?"
and my most recent thoughts: https://matthewzgindin.medium.com/what-is-israels-plan-d825d0c1c4e2
Thanks for your perspectives.
If it’s possible, I also would appreciate a small reading list, because it’s clear I would do well to broaden my understanding. My email is deborah4bp2001@yahoo.com. No worries if you’d rather not. 🌿
HI Deborah, I posted this one for Gurwind elsewhere in the thread: Hi Gurwinder, ask and you shall receive! Here are some recommendations:
First of all, Peter Beinart's substack is indispensable. His personal essays and statements as well as video interviews with Palestinians and Jewish voices are excellent:
https://peterbeinart.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=reader2&utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fpeter%2520beinart&utm_medium=reader2
My favorite over-all history: "Enemies and Neighbours" by Ian Black
Legal- historical perspectives:
"The Unmaking of Israel" by Orthodox Jew and lawyer Gershom Gorenberg,
"Justice For Some: Law and The Question of Palestine" by Palestinian legal scholar Noura Efrat
Eyewitness to Palestinian reality:
"The Way To The Spring: Life and Death In Palestine" by Jewish journalist Ben Ehrenreich
The way forward:
"Haifa Republic" by Israeli philosopher Omri Boehm
"After Zionism" a collection of essays on the way forward by a number of experts in the area, edited by Moor and Lowenstein
Thank you, Matthew. I will definitely use this list…starting with Beinart (who I’ve not read before). 🌿
Thank you for Educating him
Excellent piece that goes a lot more deeper than the usual starting point of Israel's formation as a nation in 1948. And an important one too - the 3 misconceptions you tackle above are being peddled to the world daily.
Glad that you stuck with the facts and backed your views with points that can be easily researched further (if us readers decide to).
I see some disagreement in the comments but most aren't able to provide the same degree of specificity as you did.
Instead, their replies usually come in the form of emotional or politicized anecdotes (there are some reasonable replies but unfortunately, they are just a handful) without properly addressing your points. Some reasonable responses seem to be able to only provide links without owning and presenting the knowledge in them.
Thanks for the work put into researching this essay and writing with such clarity.
A big part of the reason you see links instead of point by point rebuttals in the reasonable replies is because there are HUGE pieces of missing information and context that would take their own blog posts to lay out.
For instance, let's look at this one single paragraph and start to explore some important missing context from the Palestinian perspective since Gurwinder has already represented the the moderate Israeli perspective:
"After WWII, the British, war-weary and facing a crumbling empire, surrendered administration of Palestine to the UN. In 1947 the UN voted to divide Palestine into two states; one Jewish, one Arab. This time more land was offered to the Jews than to the Arabs, but this was because most of the Jewish areas were deemed by the UN to be low quality swampland and arid wastes in the Negev Desert. Nevertheless, the Arabs rejected the deal, believing they were being swindled, and many took to the streets to protest. The protests became riots, which soon escalated into a civil war between Arabs and Jews, with the British desperately trying to maintain order."
-The British did not simply "surrender" administration of Palestine to the UN because they were "war weary." They were being subjected to an all out war of terror by the Irgun, a Zionist paramilitary group led by Menachem Begin (who would eventually become Prime Minister of Israel). The only reason these assassinations, bombings, and terror attacks were not met with overwhelming force and crushed was because Britain did not have the heart to bring these Zionists to justice in 1946/47 for obvious reasons, so they threw their hands up and gave the problem to the UN.
-The Arabs had good reason not to participate in the UNs commission. They had made previous attempts at negotiation with the British and Zionists which were not returned in good faith. By this point, the Zionists had made it very clear that they would accept nothing less than complete possession and political control of Palestine by a Jewish State. The Palestinians had no reason to trust either the Zionists or the UN. The Nakba would prove their suspicions correct. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
-It should also be noted in the division of land by the UN that the Zionists interests were well represented at the UN, while the Palestinians, who had no access to the international halls of power, were not.
-It is disingenuous to call the conflict between Palestinians and Jews at this point in the situation "civil war." What little organized resistance that the Palestinians could muster against their occupation had already been thoroughly stamped out by the British army in the 1930s. In the 1940s, the Zionists were well armed, well organized, and completely committed. The Arabs simply had no answer to the forces that were able to openly terrorize the British Army unrepudiated.
-Almost immediately upon the UN's decision to divide Palestine into two states, the Irgun and the Hagenah commenced a campaign of gruesome violence and terror against Palestinian civilians including rape, torture, and mass murder, first in the land granted to the Jewish state by the UN in order to ethnically cleanse it, AND THEN IN THE LAND GRANTED TO THE ARAB STATE AS WELL TO FORCIBLY OCCUPY AND ANNEX ADDITIONAL TERRITORY NOT GRANTED BY THE UN. This is the Nakba I referenced earlier. The Zionists had no respect for the UN or international law.
-Gurwinder's later assertion that the Arabs initiated the war in 1948 fails to account for the fact that it was the Israeli's who initiated violence against Arabs in territory granted to the Arabs by the UN and created a humanitarian crisis of over 500k Arab refugees who were fleeing into all of the surrounding Arab nations. Despite this transgression, none of the Arab nations involved in the war in 1948 conducted operations anywhere other than the areas granted to the Arab state of Palestine by the UN.
When did international law ever help the Jewish people? First- in the founding of Israel- second - never
The Arabs attacked the new state of Israel in 1948: its a fact no matter how you wish it was not a fact. And as with October 7 Israel was attacked first. Repeat again in 1956-repeat again in 1967- repeat and rinse again in 1973.
Very good account. I would add that in all honesty the entire creation of the UN was to protect only the interests of Jews or to be more specific the Zionists. Hint the bias in their decision by basically granting them an entire land “WITH A ENTIRE NATION AND PEOPLE IN IT”. Unlike the constant barking notion of “A LAND WITHOUT PEOPLE”. We see the bis live and well all the way up until this day. Why was that the case? If we follow history and dates. The 30s and 40s were the worst period ever for European jews who were being slaughtered left and right. Amid the end of WWII the “jewish problem “ had to be solved! How? The British surrendered Palestine “who was under their mandate” to the Zionists who were getting more snd more powerful by voice and by funding in all honesty. There are countless historical counts as to how slowly and diligently the zionists bought and paid for land directly to the British to give them Palestine. The British are fully and wholeheartedly responsible for this entire evil deal in mankind history!
There was no Palestinian nation, they did not conceive of this idea until around 1970. They were mostly nomadic Arabs. The Palestinian identity was created as a PR stunt that proved very useful to neighboring Arab states.
Calling the UN a Zionist entity is comically insane. The UN has served no real purpose other than to attack Israel since last century. UNRWA schools teach blatant antisemitism and martyrdom.
I don't care if there was a Palestinian nation or not - there is a 'Palestinian entity' and if there can be peace in a 2 state solution one day that would be wonderful. Obvs not under Hamas, Hezbollah or indeed the present Palestinian authority.
There was no Palestinian nation, they did not conceive of this idea until around 1970. They were mostly nomadic Arabs. The Palestinian identity was created as a PR stunt that proved very useful to neighboring Arab states.
Calling the UN a Zionist entity is comically insane. The UN has served no real purpose other than to attack Israel since last century. UNRWA schools teach blatant antisemitism and martyrdom.
Thank you. It is totally legitimate for people to be critical of Israel (as I see people are mostly respectfully doing here) but so often the conversation descends into outright anti semitism. As a Jew this stuff is scary.
This article articulates the idea very clearly https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/why-is-israel-being-blamed-for-the-hamas-massacre/
And i am a Palestinian semitic human. Thank you very much. Arabs are all semitic people. Just like my dear very dear jewish friends.
I'm sure. But the term anti Semitism refers specifically to the very ancient hate of Jewish people.
Which all originated in Europe and not in the middle east or by Arabs. The notion that oh arabs and Palestinians hate jews is fabricated and all made up. I have jewish ancestry in my family and i am a Palestinian. How can i advocate for Jewish hate or be portrayed as hostile. My issue isn’t jews. Palestinians have an issue with Israel occupying their land and committing genocide against them for almost a century. If we want to speak history we have to be prepared to lay it all on the table.
What does “from the river to the sea” mean?
Where are all the Jews living in Arab countries? What’s a Dhimmi? How is it different than apartheid?
The term originated in Germany. The Germans at the time only had Jews in their country to refer to. Claiming that “as an Arab I’m also a Semite” is historically false in this context.
Infighting between Jews and Arabs is ancient. Who fights more than anyone? Family. This stuff goes back a very long way, long before we went to Europe.
“For the love of Father Abraham, can Yishmael and Yitzchak please reconcile”. Shalom ✡️
❤️👍👌
This is typically cogent, Gurwinder. Thank you.
"Now that Israel is retaliating ..."
I think "retaliating" isn't correct. Israelis have realized that they must, in self defense, eliminate Hamas. Hamas is dedicated to eliminating "infidels" who, by their very existence, stand in the way of an Islamic state -- not just in Palestine, but everywhere.
I m gonna begin by saying my comment will not be popular and will probably be attacked. We live in the united of states where free speech is at the forefront so as an American citizen im gonna express my view freely and without censoring i hope or the accusation that its an emotional account.
Here is the other perspective:
Hamas is a byproduct of Israels brutal policies towards Palestinians and to the miserable conditions it forced a whole people to undergo. No excuses. Occupation is no joke and it has consequences. Further we can debate myths who and what all day long, the end result there is an occupied people and their occupation has to end. Period. Thats if we are to continue in freedom and democracy for all citizens of this world. Last i checked, in this country we do. However we clearly only believe it for the few a big shame! Any how, myth or whatever the heck you want to call it. Go ahead get rid of Hamas , ill go along with you in this so called objective logic. then what? As a state, You keep your violent policies toward a whole people, by annihilating them in a very organized manner btw. Whats the end result? Peace for Israel awhile millions of Palestinians continue to live under the occupation? How is peace even possible after so much killing. And the world is supposed to support such agenda? The Israelis are master brains in ensuring the erasure of a whole population. but Palestinians in their long history of occupation and oppression are catching up as well. What you will get in response is more organized resistance which is a very Normal reaction. If Israel thinks it’ll easily get rid of the Palestinians and Hamas in a miserable effort to avoid recognizing them as people and to avoid serious effort for coexistence, it will never rest in peace.
How is the state of Israel sustaining on almost every single Israeli being forced to serve in an army? This is a state of army. Nothing more! How is this mentality is to pursue a true path to peace in the region? These are critical questions.
The history over 75 years proved it and will prove it again for the next 75 years. The moe brutality you show the more organized resistance from the indigenous population you will receive. Hamas or not is not the important issue therefore. Occupation is the issue. You can call it emotional, call it objective call it whatever you want, the bottom line Palestinians have a right to self determination and to be recognized as human beings who deserve to live.
Sure. Blame the Jews for October 7. Hamas didn’t really do it. We know what you are. Keep it up.
October 7 wouldn’t even to tell it hon. Go face up the real history instead of faking it day and night. Drop the fake propaganda. And i know exactly what you are as well. Definitely not a Jew. A mere zionist. Nothing more. FREE SPEECH. FREE SPEECH.
Zionism is the belief that Jews deserve a homeland.
This is a human right enshrined by your dear UN.
Anti-Zionism is saying Jews don’t deserve human rights.
Anti-Zionism is antisemitism.
Hamas is a byproduct of Israel’s policies??? Wow. That’s a sick stretch.
Not so sick according to many Israeli officials who came to deplore the Israeli effort to promote (the predecessor of) Hamas to play divide and rule and weaken the PLO and Fatah.
https://youtu.be/o7grSsuFSS0?si=h63Fe0w5Z3qbUhLW (direct Israeli quotes starting at 2.40).
How is it “occupation” when you did not control the land, or you did not own it, or you lost it?
If Israel didn’t have a strong army, there’d be no Israel.
The problem is that Hamas will not be eliminated. Doesn’t matter how many are eliminated in this conflict, there is a new generation of Hamas coming up behind them. I can’t see an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Thank you, Gurwinder. I live in a majority Muslim country on the other side of the world from all of this where people tend to have a completely irrational view of the conflict - i.e., based only on religious partisanship. The longer I live and the more I learn about what's happening and what has happened I am more and more convinced that Israel, while far from being wholly innocent, are fighting for their own historical right to survival, and peace.
Precisely, and yes, their enemies are instructed in their Quran to torture and murder every Jew,
(the little Satan), and every Christian, (the great Satan).
For the committed Muslim, it is their reason for living, and their parents openly lament that they
have only a few sons to sacrifice
unto allah, their god.
And if they had time and opportunity, they would murder me for not capitalizing the name of their god.
This is a helpful summary.
I am a Jew and I know our people's history. I am very much tied to a Jewish homeland as the only means to ensure our survival as a people. And the survival of the Jewish people is a core value of mine.
We have given the world a great deal and the world has taken a great deal from us in blood and terror. No more and never again.
I agree by the way with every criticism of the Israeli government in this essay. I loathe Netanyahu. His priority has been to stay out of jail, because he abused his office. That priority has in turn led to a number of very stupid policies.
👍👍👍
Thank you for this. It helps put some things in perspective.
I don’t believe Israel should not have its own state and think Hamas needs to be burned to the ground but I do think Israeli holds a great deal of accountability for what is happening there now.
I recall back in the 90s watching a documentary about Palestinians who were being forcefully removed from their homes to support Israeli expansion - not at all purchased land but land taken by force. I recall Palestinian families pointing out their beautiful homes they once owned but from which they had been unceremoniously ejected so an Israeli family could have them.
I also watched footage, in the early 2000s showing IDF soldiers mercilessly beating an unarmed Palestinian boy who was defenceless against them. The boy would have been about 15 years old. The soldiers filmed themselves laughing as they repeatedly hit the boy in the head with the butts of their rifles.
In yet another video, Israeli citizens filmed themselves sitting on lawn chairs overlooking the Gaza Strip watching bombs drop on Palestinian homes and cheering as if they were watching a fireworks display. That is grotesque.
I have beautiful Jewish friends and I don’t have any feelings of hatred toward the Jewish race however I do know from my own direct experience, that the ultra Zionist Jews can be very hateful people who think the rest of us as little more than animals.
In the 90s I lived in an ultra Zionist neighbourhood and it was the first time in my life that I fully understood what it meant to be hated based on my race not on anything I had done.
I understand Israel has the right to defend itself but it doesn’t have the right to commit war crimes or genocide.
I also think they bear some responsibility for Hamas. As does the US.
Right now Israel is committing war crimes. It is cutting off water and food and as far as I can determine from people on the ground there at the moment who I understand to be credible people (of course I’m not there so I am happy to be proven wrong) Israel is deliberately telling people to go in a direction to avoid being bombed and then bombing the places they where they told them they would be safe. They have also bombed the only exit into Egypt. That’s revolting to me.
The annexation of land that blocks Palestinian access to basic resources is not ok either and a sure fire way in my book to radicalise people. When you have nothing to lose what is left but to die fighting.
You can support Israel’s right to have their own state but I will never understand how anyone can condone what is happening to the Palestinian civilians.
I soundly condemn Hamas equally because they had to know by attacking the Israelis they were going to bring the wrath of Israeli army raining down upon innocent people.
But I also think Israel is using as much propaganda as Hamas.
Some of the footage they’ve used to show dead Israeli babies is actually footage of Palestinian children from some time ago - at least according to sources I have known to be trustful.
Everyone I know who has been to Palestine has come back with stories of the beautiful hospitality they encountered and the kindness and generosity of the people they met. I have great difficulty agreeing with anyone who thinks all Palestinians are radical extremists who need to be exterminated from the earth (and no, I’m not saying you have said this here).
I don’t think anything is black and white and I definitely don’t have answers to how to resolve this.
All I know is I can’t sit by and say nothing as innocent people die. My humanity won’t allow it. I don’t care what side they are on.
For anyone whose interested in expanding their understanding of what is happening now Moneycircus on substack is an intelligent source of information. At least I have found them to be.
There’s my two cents for what it’s worth, which isn’t much at all. Let the pile on begin.
You are writing half truth. That is dangerous because it blocks the full truth from surfacing. You think Oct 7th was Jewish propaganda? I wish. Think again and watch a few more of the videos taken by the Hamas people. I can’t sleep at night since that fateful day, thinking of my Mother and Grandparents who were shot into the Danube on 15th December 1944. Such similarities in the way the anti Israel and anti Jewish World would like to finish us off. The only thing stopping them is the State of Israel. Am Israel Chai.
Your comment is typical of people who wish to shut down conversation and debate, and misrepresents my comment completely.
I am not anti-Jewish, but neither am I anti-Palestinian and while what happened to your family in 1944 was undoubtedly awful and horribly traumatic (and should never have happened) it is no justification for what is happening now.
If you think the Israeli government (or any government for that matter) is your friend I suggest you read the book 180 degrees. However, I doubt you will. It's far easier after all to use the kind of lazy emotional blackmail you have attempted here.
I’m not sure I understand. Would you have stopped bombing Germany and Japan as the only way the war cold have been won because innocent civilians were killed in WWII? Would you have given up and allow the Nazis and Japan to rule just to void civilian death. I blame the Germans and the Nazis for all the suffering and death their own civilians suffered instead of blaming the Allies. The same as I blame Hamas for the suffering of the Palestinians. They started this war and they could have stopped this war by giving back the hostages and stopping the fighting.
You are using fallacious arguments and drawing a false equivalence. You are also attempting to put words in my mouth that I never said.
I applaud you for getting out of the echo chamber to understand the history.
The next step is to retreat from your bias on war, your goal of stopping it, and your ideals around "civilians" not being killed.
Those are moral positions that in many cases are not held by either the Jews or the Muslims (that you use Jews and Arabs also shows a bias on avoiding diving in to the Jewish faith versus Muslim faith issue).
The Jewish faith treats all non-Jews as Gentiles. Jews are not evangelistic (as Christians are) nor do they have a goal of making anyone else Jewish). Gentiles are not required to follow Jewish law. Jews have no moral objective based on their faith to convert anyone to the Jewish faith. Jews observance of their faith is certainly from the most Orthodox extreme to those who are just "Culturally Jews" by heritage.
Muslim on the other hand are by the Koran expansionist (in the early days mostly through militancy) with the goal of making the world into one Caliphate and in the strictest sense, under sharia law. Muslims go from the most radical who view they are called to Jihad to make the world Muslim (males go to heaven and get 70 virgins. Unclear what females get. Gays are just killed as morally corrupt.) There are also Muslims who are just cultural Muslim by heritage and don't really ascribe to the literal details in the Koran.
The Jews have a very "western" world view (i.e. endorse Capitalism) including their democratic government. The state of Israel is LGBTQ friendly, abortion friendly, etc.
Muslims don't in general align with any of the West's moral values.
There is also the issue of Jerusalem and the Temple mount. There is no dispute (something you are unclear on) any longer that it was the site of the Jewish Temple. The Muslim scholars agreed until Israel came into existence. Then they realized that position was not helpful to them controlling the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple mount.
Why do I point this out? Its time that Westerners stop assessing the situation with a Western moral perspective. Especially in assessing the morality of HAMAS or the Palestinians and certainly the larger Muslim world.
At this point, I don't believe there will ever be peace between Western culture (The Judeo-Christian view) and Muslim culture (even for cultural Muslims). The Islamohobia concept is a red herring. Acknowledging the elephant in the room that our cultures are incompatible is not Islamophobia its avoiding insanity.
I'm Danish. The Danes are very open to all. They have let many Muslims immigrate to Denmark. They are no longer letting them. Why, because Muslims don't want to integrate into the Danish culture. They create an island with their own culture.
Bottom line, next step is for you not to evaluate the situation with western moral glasses on.
The West will never be at "peace" with the Muslim world. Israel is an island of western culture in the middle of the Muslim world. Israel has control of Jerusalem. They have restrained themselves and left control of the Temple mount to the Waqf which has controlled it for centuries.
You either support maintaining that island including Israel goals of controlling of the West Bank and Jerusalem and ultimately rebuilding the Temple on the Temple mount or you do not. The Muslim world doesn't want Israel to exist especial in control of the Temple mount. They certainly would never support rebuilding of the Temple.
The not trying to judge either side position is meaningless. Your judgements are inconsequential to the situation. The only question is when you acknowledge that in general Muslim values are incompatible with the Western values. That simple.
Your last sentence taught me more than every comment, essay, and “news” I’ve read on the current issue. Thank you.
I keep abreast on the left and right on their opinions.
Many people in the divided states believe multiculturalism is the answer.
They are ignoring that the "multiculturalism experiment" is failing. Its the reason the divided states is so divided.
Government can't define culture. Culture defines the government. We can't even agree between the far left, far right and center on what the culture in the divided states should be. People in the divided states have no bases to judge the Israel v Palestine from a culture or "human rights" perspective.
Many people read into "human rights" whatever they believe is a "human right". I have asked many who use "human rights" as justification for their judgement where those human rights are defined (the pro-abortion crowd as an example). They can't use the UN definition of Human Rights. That does have allot of details that align with the general view, but it also includes the state and religion as a human right. Those are at odds with each other.
Mm, I disagree on the multiculturalism point. Most people on the same economic class spectrum work and play together fine. The rancor is coming almost exclusively from over-educated young progressives from elite institutions and activist groups.
"Most" a plan does not make. Whether its most or some - which you don't know, its the ones that don't fall into "most" or "some" that are the problem.
Most Palestinians are not going to be involved in Jihad. Yet the Palestinians voted for HAMAS which they knew wanted to wipe Israel and Jews off the map by any means. Do the Palestinians that voted for HAMAS have any culpability or are they just victims of their situation?
Israel is 20% Arab citizens who are largely Muslim. They are not involved in Jihad but oppose a Jewish state. Interesting given EVERY OTHER ARAB STATE IS A MUSLIM STATE. Why are Arab Muslims in Israel oppose to Israel being a Jewish state?
When you look at it from the details, its pretty obvious that most people of Muslim culture are not really supportive of western culture regardless of their economic class. Any why would we expect them to be? Not allot of alignment between traditional Muslim culture and western culture.
All the people who believe somehow that Muslims are good with western cutlure are projecting their ideals on others. I have a very good Muslim friend from 30 years ago. He forced his wife and kids to wear the Hijab. Wouldn't let his kids participate in any standard Western culture activities. They were very well off.
The Muslim's forcibly conquered the area that is "Israel/Palestine" in the 800s and built a Mosque on the most holy site of the Jews. Do any of the Muslims have any culpability in that they have never apologized to the Jews for what their militant ancestors did? Like the divided states, can we really move forward if the country hasn't apologized for slavery and what happened to indigenous people. Can Germans move forward if they haven't apologized for the Holocaust. The religious history puts Muslims and Jews at total odds with each other. How does that get reconciled. That's the reason that their had never been an agreement for peace in the area and their never will be. If Israel as a Jewish state is to exist, the Israeli's have to assume the ones (i.e. not most or some) that are opposed to the Jewish state will want to wipe them out. How do they distinguish between the "most/some" and the ones that want to wipe them out?
Its Western moral superiority that biases so many to believe Muslims can integrate into the Western culture.
That multiculturalism works just fine for “most” (sounds like we agree there) shows that multiculturalism is not the problem, which is the part I disagree with you about (you said multiculturalism has failed).
Bad ideology is the problem, which was my point. It exists in the minority of the populations you pointed out, it also exists in a minority of useful idiots on college campuses whose grandparents were born here.
You can't change the "ideology" people believe.
The challenge I see with so many articles and comments is that they are ideological with no practical implementation.
In the technology industry, you are proposing a sunny day solution assuming all goes well.
The only meaningful plan is one that is a rainy day solution - i.e. takes into account extreme ideology. The history of humanity proves that is the only rationale recourse.
Its the reason the US has the strongest military in the world. Its the only rationale recourse to the existence of extreme ideology. Its the reason "defund the police" was doomed. It didn't take into account the extremely ideology that assumes shoplifting is justified.
Bad think is the reason the war in the middle east happened. The US was part of that bad think by suggesting that a two-state solution will address the extreme ideology on both the Israeli and Palestine sides.
Good walls are the only way to make good neighbors with Israel and the middle east unless you decide that Israel cannot exist especially as a Jewish state. The Jews have always planned based on extreme ideologies. They have millennia of experience to prove that is the only way to protect themselves.
Divide and conquer is as old as humanity. If we are feeling divided then we surely aren’t in a category of conqueror are we?
We need to conquer our own biases. Ideals are easy. Implementing them is hard!
Amen on that. The hardest enemy to conquer is ourselves.
"Around 700,000 Arabs fled Israel in what some call the Nakba (catastrophe)"
What a glaring omission. Who is the perpetrator? How were they made to leave? Honestly, I stopped reading after that.
Mostly, their own local leaders told them to get out of the way, so that the five armies could push the Jews into the sea - where that genocidal jingle ‘from the river to the sea’ originated. Some were pushed out by the fighting, some because they presented a threat. War is messy. As a comparison, almost a million Jews who lived in Arab states, were stripped of their land, business and often their lives, as soon as Israel won the war Israel didn’t start. The local Arab population could have made peace, which is all the Israelis asked for. The Arabs that stayed have equal rights, and with the exception of oil rich countries, the highest per capita net worths in the Middle East.
Nakba denialism. I'll end my interaction here, thank you very much.
Yeah, it's like writing, 'after World War 2, six million Jews no longer lived in Europe' without mentioning what happened to them.
Yeah..like how Jews were ethnically cleansed from their islamic/arab territories. Israel still have 2 million Arabs (majority Muslim) in its dominion (apart from Gaza or westbank ) but no jew in any of the arab/islamic states.
This notion that Israel committee genocide while it's the actual Jews who were ethnically cleansed from nearby countries is how propoganda supposed to work and it worked on the gullibles.
Atleast if the surrounding arab/islamic countries are an example of human rights, religious freedom, secular values imbibed as part of modern democracy, we could have a moral equivalency.
Actually, according to Wikipedia (quoting the jewish Virtual Library), 8300 Jews lived in Iran in 2019 . 2000-2500 Jews live in Morrocco, there are 110 synagogues and there is a jewish museum.
Coming to this late and assuming this is sarcasm, but regardless, adding color for posterity.
Jewish population pre-Iranian revolution (1979) >100,000. Jewish population in Iran today (2019) < 1,000. Trend in Iraq is worse. Morocco >250,000 (1950); < 5,000 today. No Jewish populations of note on the Arabian peninsula despite long histories in each of these countries. I think the term is ethnic cleansing.
They left on their own accord. Their leaders promised them that Israel will be wiped off the face of the Earth in the ensuing war. That didn’t quite go their way, so now they’re stuck. However, many millions of refugees were absorbed by many countries but not the Palestinians. Why? Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi, Iraq wouldn’t have them, didn’t want them. Why? They knew they were trouble!
One of the most sane and balanced analyses I have encountered in the Israel-Palestine conflict. The agenda of hatred and violence must be destroyed at all costs. Thank you Gurwinder for doing this.
"Israel’s excesses are Hamas’s norms. It’s the only liberal democracy in a sea of autocracies, and unlike all of them it’s willing to openly criticize itself and set high humanitarian standards even if it can’t always meet them. In short, it’s not perfect, but it’s also not the villain it’s been portrayed as.
Ultimately Israel can only be a better neighbor to the Palestinians when Hamas and its allies are gone. Tragically, that requires violence. Israel should know that the world is watching, and will hold it to account for any excesses. At the same time, it is doing what must be done, and so, for the sake of both Israelis and Palestinians, I give it my cautious and conditional support."
“I didn’t want to comment on Israel and Palestine, because it’s a topic I don’t feel I understand well enough.” Shoulda stopped there and trusted your first instinct. The problem with hubris is that the cost is tallied in human lives. Killing civilians is evil. Full stop. When you justify the genocide taking place before the world’s eyes, you become complicit. I subscribed to you because I liked your writing but maybe you should read some of your own pieces and apply them here. There are plenty of human rights organizations, independent, principled journalists, and trusted, educated scholars who have studied this issue for decades who would take you to task for what you have written. Maybe just check out Jewish Voice for Peace, Chris Hedges, Ilan Pappe, Norm Finkelstein, Democracy Now, and Caitlin Johnstone, many of whom are here on Substack. Don’t contribute unless you know what you are doing. The cost to humanity is too high. Use your gifts for peace, not for fueling genocide.
I feel I understand this topic better than all of the people you mentioned. Amy Goodman, the host of Democracy Now, was my idol when I was a leftist teenager. I still value her eloquence, but have been forced to conclude that she's an activist, not a journalist. The others you mentioned I have little time for. By all means, if I've gotten something factually wrong, call me out on it, but please don't regurgitate what left-wing media have been telling you -- such actions only betray your naivety.
100%.
Aka “read all the material that lies to you so you too can celebrate the atrocities hamas committed and that I support”.
Grace; is your fight for justice? Your statement is so one sided I have a difficult time seeing exactly what you believe--oh I see it now...the killing of innocent Jews does not equate in your world view; the means justified those deaths. everyone you named who you said should be read is squarely on your “side”. There really are no sides here just two people who are locked in a struggle neither side can win. We are in desperate need of solutions- 2 states that is. also if your not Jewish your fight is theoretical at best. Sorry but Gurwindrs post is fair, historically accurate and does not blame. Solutions are hard/ complaining easy.
Jewish voice for National suicide and Jewish death.
Valiant start. Reading:
Jerusalem - Simon Sebag Montefiore
The History of the Jews - Simon Schama
And look into the Mizrahi Jewish History.
All accurate, balanced. The reality is, there are no books with “Palestinian” history -- as you said before, there was never a Palestinian state and the Arabs never looked at creating one until Jews started moving back home. In addition, there was never not a Jewish presence in the area. Even as expelled and diminished the population has been at points in history, it’s never been without Jews since the the time of the canaanites.
Nice try, but the state is a modern invention formally initiated by the European Treaty of Westphalia.
You may think you are an intellectual but I think you are an ignoramus.
Nice bare assertion, care to try again, this time without a logical fallacy in your defense of genocide?
Just wanted to add that one of the things that surprised me most when I visited Israel was the diversity of the population. Jewish Israeli's are afraid of Hamas, obviously. But I think it's worth mentioning that Palestinian Israelis are afraid as well.