1. 

   Sami, the beduin.

   August 9, 2009 // Reply

   Great post Mazin,

   It is really great to see you here Mazin.

   As a primitive bedouin, it would take me ages to compel such a collective and inclusive information… good that you put the dejecting facts at the begining, while giving us all hope to see “the light at the end of the tunnel” if to quote Eva, and have hope that we ALL can do something for a better future for us ALL.
2. 

   Elizabeth (Israel)

   August 10, 2009 // Reply

   Dr. Qumsiyeh, thank you very much for your post. While your post’s intention is to decrease cynicism, it only increased mine. How can I be hopeful about peace if such an educated man as yourself clearly doesn’t accept my right as a Jew to live in at least part of my historical homeland?
   The overwhelming majority of Israelis will never accept peace the way you see it (“right of return”). Since the Palestinians, despite continuous efforts, have been unable to win by using violence, you can not force us to accede to your version of peace. This conflict will go on and on until both sides are willing to compromise.
   Calling terrorists in Israeli jails “kidnapped political prisoners” is simply disturbing. Describing Hamas as if they want peace and Israel does not is even more preposterous (“Hamas rulers reiterated they are willing to accept a state on the border of 1967… The Israeli jailers still not satisfied, they maintain the medieval siege of the concentration camp of Gaza.”) Hamas is willing to have a Hudna for ten years if Israel withdraws to the 1967 border, and they don’t recognize Israel and get to keep their arms. Hamas leaders have clearly stated that this is only a stage in the full “liberation” of Palestine. Why would Israel be satisfied with this?!
   Your version of peace means that Jews become a minority once again, in a land that they feel is theirs. Not in hundreds of years will Jews agree to that. I’m sure that you want a speedy solution to the occupation, but I think that your positions are counter-productive to reaching this goal.
   Regarding the East-Jerusalem eviction. The compound was purchased in 1875 by Jews, during the Ottoman rule. Jews lived in the compound whenever it was safe until 1948. Right after 1967, when Israel gained control of East-Jerusalem, the owners of the compound went to the Israeli court to get their property back. The eviction last week is based on a ruling by the Israeli Supreme Court, which is blamed for being pro-Palestinian very often. The court compared the claims of both sides and the deeds they had that showed ownership of the compound. Experts of the Israeli police determined that the Muslim deed was altered, meaning, it’s not genuine.
3. 

   Mazin

   August 10, 2009 // Reply

   Dear Elizabeth:

   You are muixing thinsg up. The right of refugees to return to their homes and lands is an individual and collective right that is not contested and is actually strongly supported by International law. As for your personal situatioon, you did not tell us what you mean by taht. I certainly do not want to replace anyone. You havea right to live indeed but you certainly do not have a right to live on stolen property or to ethnically cleanse people of their homes and lands. You do not have teh right to havea racist society. Your right to form a fist stops at the moment you use to punch someone else. Studies actually show that refugees could be returned and accomodated without displacing Israelis. Your message though I believe eliciting responses liek the above from me I belive does not help us come to terms with each other. So may I recommend you come visit us in Bethlehem to see reality here and talk face to face to address these issues in more detail and in more personal way. My email is mazin at qumsiyeh.org Just email me..
4. 

   Sami, the beduin.

   August 10, 2009 // Reply

   Dear Dr. Qumsiyeh,

   I believe that the Israelis (jews in general) have an internal horror to live in pluralistic democratic and secular stae. They insets, all the time, to have a “jewish” state at the time they are denying the natives their right to live on their land.

   A “jewsish” state, by definition is for jews, and accordingly for one race, ie racist, and all the other inhabitant (though they are native even before establishing “Israel”), they dont have the full right to be citizens but a marginalized minority.

   For those who were uprooted and expelled from their homes and their homes were demolished (over 530 Palestinian villages were completely destroyed), they are less human to be jews and dont have the RIGHT TO RETURN. Any Ethiopian, Russian, Somalian or whatever and wherever he was from has the RIGHT TO RETURN but not you dear Dr. Mazin, simply because you are not a “supernatural” Jew. You are just a dirty Christian but not a “pure” jew and accordingly you are less human, if not a beast!!! Disgusting!!!

   I myself, was uprooted from Ashdod and my very house is occupied by the new-comer Russian jews (and you know how many of the Russian immigrant were really jews), but me, who is living just a few kilometers away from my home is forbidden and denied the RIGHT TO RETURN simply because I am not a “supernatural” jew, but just a primitive Palestinians, and as you know (accordingly to the zionist mentality) we, the Palestinian natives are less humans, if not beasts for the “CHOSEN PEOPLE” that finally we were not chosen by God, and we are just goim for them
5. 

   Elizabeth (Israel)

   August 10, 2009 // Reply

   The “right of return” to 4.4 million decedents of Palestinian to Israel would mean that in a few years, Jews will once again become a minority in their country. I know it might be hard for you to see it, but because of the persecution Jews as a minority have undergone outside of Israel, Jews are determined never to become a minority again in their land.
6. 

   Sami, the beduin.

   August 11, 2009 // Reply

   If you wanna make a “clean” jewish state you should make it in a desolate isle, or on the moon but not in Palestine. The zionist project wont thrive here as long as there are freedom-fighters and a regenerating people who would never forget their demolished homes and devastated towns. Let time go on, I can wait and the end is not away ahead, you cant trust power forever… but I would never forget my beloved home in Ashdod !!! You can do whatever you want with us but you can never kill the faith in our land and the hope that one day we are going back, with the gun!!!
7. 

   Michael W.

   August 11, 2009 // Reply

   Mazin,

   You said that the right of return of Palestinian refugees “is not contested”. You are avoiding the conflict here. The truth is that it is contested. That doesn’t mean that your view is wrong. You just can’t avoid the issue by misrepresenting the political conflict. Perhaps mention that it is contested and describe the political environment which one has to meneuver to resolve the issue.

   Sami,

   You wrote:
   

   Israelis (jews in general) have an internal horror to live in pluralistic democratic and secular stae

   Is that so? Even if Israel does describes itself as a “Jewish state”, that doesn’t mean that non Jews do not have civil and political rights equal to the rights of Jewish citizens. The conflict with the Palestinians is not the result of Israeli/Jewish fear of pluralistic democractic and secular government. It is the result of the political environment of the Middle East where groups are separated into ethnic/religious groups. The two largest movements in the ME over the past 90 years were pan-Arab nationalism and Islamism (radical/extremist Islamists). These are hardly inclusive movements. Zionism is not inclusive either, but it’s product – Israel, gives the most political and civil rights to its citizens (including the minority), than its neighbors gives to its own majority. If Israel is so bad, Jordan must be hell, relatively speaking.
8. 

   Mazin

   August 11, 2009 // Reply

   Israel’s first Prime Minister written years before the 1948 war:

   “it must be clear that there is no room in the country for both peoples . . . If the Arabs leave it, the country will become wide and spacious for us . . . The only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western land of Israel (i.e. Palestine since Transjordan is the eastern portion), without Arabs. There is no room here for compromises . . . There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them, save perhaps for Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the old Jerusalem. Not one village must be left, not one tribe. The transfer must be directed at Iraq, Syria, and even Transjordan. For this goal funds will be found . . . And only after this transfer will the country be able to absorb millions of our brothers and the Jewish problem will cease to exist. There is no other solution.” (cited in Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee Problem, Cambridge University Press,1989, p. 27 & Nur Masalha, Expulsion Of The Palestinians, ibid pp. 131-132)

   The book by Nur Masalha is a definitive analysis of this era but one can find similar information in other books by Israeli Jewish historians listed above. Perhaps more significantly is that the first order of business in the newly constituted Israeli “Knesset” was promulgation of a set of laws that are contrary to International law that ensured no refugees are allowed to return (as customarily happens at the end of a war) and that their land is confiscated for use by Jews only (“absentee property” laws). The removal of 75-80% of non-Jews from what became Israel by 1949 was a necessary but not sufficient condition for creating and maintaining a Zionist-defined Jewish state. What the nascent state did subsequently was equally important. Israel has no constitution but promulgated a set of basic laws that govern it essentially “for the benefit of the Jewish people”. These laws recognize members of a particular religion (including converts) as nationals of the state regardless of where they live or their current citizenship. In Israeli law, all Jews are part of Am Yisrael (the people of Israel). To get papers of citizenship all they have to do is show up in the state and claim their automatic citizenship. The closest to this in the last 100 years of world history is Nazi Germany which instituted laws that recognized that all Aryan people whose mother tongue is German are nationals of the third Reich even if they happen to be then citizens of say Poland or Serbia. To my knowledge there is no Christian or Muslim majority country (not even US-backed dictatorial regimes with religious laws like Saudi Arabia) today that recognized that anybody who is Muslim or Christian or convert to those religions could get automatic citizenship. Israel is simply not “Jewish” like there are “Christian” states. No “Christian state” has a national anthem that even comes close to the Israeli one that sings of Jewish hearts yearning for Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel. How would one feel if the US national anthem was about Christians yearning for our manifest destiny of ruling this Christian nation?

   Israel is unique among the nations in not being a country of its citizens but of “Jewish people everywhere”. No other country defines itself as a country for members of a particular religion (including converts) regardless of where they live. No other country has supranational entities that have authority superceding state authority and native people rights. For example, the JNF is not a state agency but it has on its own website the amazing statement that “The Jewish National Fund is the custodian of the land of Israel on behalf of its owners Jewish people everywhere.” 91% of the land (most taken from the 530 Palestinian towns and villages depopulated between 1947-1949) is not privately owned but turned over from the custodian of “absentee property” to the JNF (Jewish Agency before) for lease by Jews. More recently some of this land was turned over for “management” by the Israel Lands authority. I am very familiar with the latter group’s “work” with the Israeli government in reclassifying Palestinian lands (including near my own village) to “Green areas” (or taking over areas classified as military Zones) and then reclassifying them as “residential” and then building Jewish only settlements/colonies on them.

   Another basic law denies refugees the right to return to their lands and confiscates land without compensation (so called “absentee property law”). So far 2/3rds of the native Palestinians are refugees and displaced people (all simply for being of the wrong religion). I say so far because this is a continuing process. Just in the past 4 years alone 35,000 more Palestinians were made homeless by home demolitions and land confiscations.

   Other basic laws define Israel as Jewish-dominated in more hidden ways and result in lack of equality to non-Jews in the state. After the expulsion of 3/4th of the native Palestinians the 1/4th who managed to stay were subjected to Marshal law between 1948-1966. Even after 1966, they were not integrated in the society and remain as foreigners in their own lands. Since they do not get drafted into the army like other Israeli citizens, a number of laws do not specifically give preference to Jews but to those who serve in the army. Further Israeli law considers one fourth of those people (about 300,000 of the 1.3 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship) as “present absentees”. This means that their land and/or homes were confiscated from them and turned to the Jewish Agency/JNF. By international law they are considered internally displaced people (refugees).

   Israel uniqueness extends to hundreds of other ways that other countries do not have access to. For example, countries are divided into those who declared themselves nuclear powers and those that did not and signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Israel is well known to have nuclear weapons (hundreds) but never signed this treaty or agreed to non-proliferation let alone international inspections.

   Another example is the fact that Israel and many in the Zionist movement milked billions of dollars from European governments, individuals, and corporations by claiming Israel and Zionism represent victims of European atrocities. The reality is that the victims (and their relatives) got nothing or a tiny percentage of this money that was used to support the destruction of Palestine. A good study of this is in Norman Finkelstein’s book “The Holocaust Industry.” More atrocious is that Zionism actually owes these victims compensation instead of collecting it on their behalf. After all, many Zionists not only profited from the atrocities but also directly collaborated with the perpetrators.

   Political Zionists of various stripes in the 1930s belonged to the World Zionist Organization (this is still functioning and serves as umbrella for all including “Dovish” Zionist groups). Their response to European Ethnocentric chauvinistic Nationalism was a project to create its own ethnocentric chauvinistic nationalism (at the time ethnic by virtue of Ashkenazi ethnicity, later religious). That explains why in Hitler’s book “Mein Kempf” the only “good” Jews mentioned are the Zionists. He states ironically that: “whatever doubts I had (-about Jews being a separate race and not merely a religion-) were dispelled by the attitude of a segment of the Jews themselves (….) a great movement out of Vienna.. the Zionists” (highlight in original). This also explained why the German Zionist Organization sent letters to Hitler and the Nazi party supporting his program of German Aryan Christian “revival” adding that that is precisely what Zionism wants to do for European Jews by moving them to Palestine and “reviving” a Jewish form of ethnocentric nationalism. That explains why Zionists challenged Socialist Jews (the Bund) and broke the Bund’s (and other progressive) groups’ boycott of Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Eichman was invited to Haifa as a guest of the Haganna (forerunner of Israeli army). The Zionist Organization of Germany was in fact the last group operating in Nazi Germany and openly Jewish (up to 1942, well after Jews and others where being killed). Lenni Brenner books (e.g. Zionism in the Age of Dictators and “51 Documents: History of Nazi-Zionist collaboration”) and Edwin Black (“The Transfer Agreement”) elaborate on some of these issues.

   After Apartheid South Africa, Israel is the only remaining colonial state with an exclusivist/supremacist ideology (Zionism).
9. 

   Michael W.

   August 13, 2009 // Reply

   Mazin,

   I read your comment and I have a few points:

   1. Regarding your opening quote and the book by Masahla, I recommend you read this from Camera. In it, Masahla’s book is referenced and it counters your claim about what Ben-Gurion said. Here is the relevant excerpt:

   hus they claim that the following statement by Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, proved that Israel never really accepted partition of the Palestine Mandate into separate Jewish and Arab states, and was always intent on expelling and dispossessing the Palestinians:

   After the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine. (paper; book, p 93)

   Did Ben-Gurion actually say this? Not quite. The above quote is supposedly from a meeting of the Jewish Agency Executive, the pre-state representative body of the Jews in the Palestine Mandate, and here’s what Ben-Gurion actually said according to the meeting protocol:

   Mr. Ben-Gurion: The starting point for a solution of the question of the Arabs in the Jewish State is, in his view, the need to prepare the ground for an Arab-Jewish agreement; he supports [the establishment of] the Jewish State [on a small part of Palestine], not because he is satisfied with part of the country, but on the basis of the assumption that after we constitute a large force following the establishment of the state – we will cancel the partition [of the country between Jews and Arabs] and we will expand throughout the Land of Israel.

   Mr. Shapira [a JAE member]: By force as well?

   Mr. Ben-Gurion: [No]. Through mutual understanding and Jewish-Arab agreement. So long as we are weak and few the Arabs have neither the need nor the interest to conclude an alliance with us… And since the state is only a stage in the realization of Zionism and it must prepare the ground for our expansion throughout the whole country through Jewish-Arab agreement – we are obliged to run the state in such a way that will win us the friendship of the Arabs both within and outside the state. (from Efraim Karsh, “Falsifying the Record: Benny Morris, David Ben-Gurion and the ’Transfer’ Idea,” Israel Affairs, V4, No. 2, Winter 1997, p52-53)

   In other words, Ben-Gurion was stating exactly the opposite of what Walt and Mearsheimer would have their readers believe.

   In the paper and the book, the authors also “quoted” Ben-Gurion as apparently supporting “brutal” measures to expel Palestinians:

   …the Zionists had to expel large numbers of Arabs from the territory that would eventually become Israel. There was simply no other way to accomplish their objective. Ben-Gurion saw the problem clearly, writing in 1941 that “it is impossible to imagine general evacuation [of the Arab population] without compulsion, and brutal compulsion.” (book p 95)

   But in the paper the authors’ own citation actually undermines their claim. They cite two books for this quote, Expulsion of the Palestinians, by Nur Masalha, and Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris. Now either they never really checked the latter, or they were trying to fool their readers, for this is how Morris actually recounts the quote:

   “Complete transfer without compulsion – and ruthless compulsion, at that – is hardly imaginable.” Some – Circassians, Druze, Bedouin, Shi’ites, tenant farmers, and landless laborers – could be persuaded to leave. But “the majority of the Arabs could hardly be expected to leave voluntarily within the short period of time which can materially affect our problem.” He concluded that the Jews should not “discourage other people, British or American, who favour transfer from advocating this course, but we should in no way make it part of our programme.” (Righteous Victims, p 169)

   In other words, if you take seriously the authors’ own citation, it disproves their allegation. (It should also be noted that, just like Mearsheimer and Walt, Masalha somehow manages to omit that inconvenient part of Ben-Gurion’s statement in which the Israeli leader argues against adopting any policy of transfer.)

   How the authors try in the book to rectify this critical error is revealing. A few lines after the cited paragraph they include the rest of the quotation as recounted by Morris, drop any reference to the obviously unreliable Masalha (note 70 on page 385), and assert with no evidence whatsoever that Ben-Gurion really supported expulsion of the Palestinians but was careful not to say so. In academic circles this is known as proof by “hand waving” – that is, no proof at all.

   2. Regarding your comment:
   

   Perhaps more significantly is that the first order of business in the newly constituted Israeli “Knesset” was promulgation of a set of laws that are contrary to International law that ensured no refugees are allowed to return (as customarily happens at the end of a war) and that their land is confiscated for use by Jews only (“absentee property” laws).

   The truce that ended the 1948 war did not mean an end of conflict when refugees can return. Only when there is an end of conflict, and all issues are settled such as the refugee issue, can you implement end of war articles of international law.

   Also, the land controlled by the State, does not only benefit Jews. In fact, there was a supreme court case where a Jewish land developer sued the government because it leased land at a discounted price to the Bedouins, hence favoring the Bedouins over everybody else. It was a case of affirmative action. The Jewish land developer lost the case hence proving that a Jew in Israel is not favored, and sometimes even disadvantaged because he is a Jew.

   3. Regarding this comment:
   

   These laws recognize members of a particular religion (including converts) as nationals of the state regardless of where they live or their current citizenship. In Israeli law, all Jews are part of Am Yisrael (the people of Israel). To get papers of citizenship all they have to do is show up in the state and claim their automatic citizenship. …

   You are basically wrong. Israel offers citizenship to anyone with a Jewish grandparent. The result of that is that sometimes, people who are devout Christian use this law and move to Israel. But there are Black Jews, Asian Jews, Ashkenazi Jews, Mizrachi Jews, etc. Also, most Israeli Jews are secular, and the government does not care if you are observant or not. So Israel looks at Jews more like of an ethnic group than a religious group. Many states have similar laws allowing people from foreign countries claim citizenship because of their ethnic origins (much of Europe and Japan). Most recently, Spain has allowed people from Cuba to claim Spanish citizenship in the same manner of the Israeli law.

   It is also important to note that Jews abroad can’t get Israeli citizenship because they are not in Israel. It won’t even allow Israelis abroad to vote in Israeli elections hence that does not disadvantage non-Jewish Israelis in Israel. The US does allow citizens to vote from abroad.

   By falsely comparing Israeli immigration laws to that of Nazi Germany, you are saying that its immigration laws are to the far right, in another word, conservative. But the Israeli immigration laws are actually a form of affirmative action, a liberal concept championed by the left. Without this law, black Jews persecuted in Ethiopia would have lived in poverty or would have been killed.

   It is really unfortunate that the oil-rich Arab and Muslim countries, and other wealthy countries, do not let the persecuted, even if it was just Arabs and Muslims, immigrate to their countries and grant them citizenship. Perhaps it is because those countries persecute even their fellow Arabs and Muslims, and does not grant them political rights/ representation in government.

   4. Regarding your comment about the Israeli national anthem – “God Save the Queen” is the national anthem of Great Britain, Canada, and Australia. The Queen is the “Pope” of the Anglican Church. I’ve never heard my Jewish friends from Canada and GB complain about that anthem. Many European countries have the cross on their flag.

   5. Regarding your comment:
   

   Israel is unique among the nations in not being a country of its citizens but of “Jewish people everywhere”.

   I don’t know where you get that from. But from the Israeli Declaration of Independence, it says:
   

   ACCORDINGLY WE, MEMBERS OF THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL, REPRESENTATIVES OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF ERETZ-ISRAEL AND OF THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT, ARE HERE ASSEMBLED ON THE DAY OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER ERETZ-ISRAEL AND, BY VIRTUE OF OUR NATURAL AND HISTORIC RIGHT AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, HEREBY DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL.

   Note that it says “representatives of the Jewish community of Eretz Israel”.

   The EU is a form of supranationalism. Diaspora Jews and Israel have no relationship of that sort. In fact, Diaspora Jews have no political representation in Israeli politics.

   6. Regarding your comment about the JNF:

   JNF is a private entity. It collects money from Diaspora Jews to buy land and build infrastructure in their historical homeland. It is 100 years old. It does not control 91% of Israeli land. That land falls under the Israel Land Authority. JNF does have a relationship with the ILA regarding 15% of that land. Many non-profit organizations have a relationship with the land authorities of their respective states. For example, when a school wants land to build or expand, they need to ask the government for permission, aka zoning laws and regulations.

   7. I contest your classification of refugees.

   8. I agree that non-Jews face discrimination, but the basic law states that minorities shall not be discriminated against. Minorities in the US and Europe are also discriminated against, and they have anti-discrimination laws as well.

   9. Non-Jews can and do serve in the IDF. Just look at one of the generals of the Border Security force. I don’t know what laws you are referring to when you say that people that don’t serve in the IDF suffer. I can give you two examples where people that don’t serve in the IDF are advantaged. a) the anti-zionist ultra-orthodox don’t have to serve, yet they get many social benefits for not doing anything. b) non-Jews can go to subsidized Israeli universities years before their IDF serving Jewish counterparts can.

   10. The only countries that are obligated by international law to nuclear inspections are those that signed the non-proliferation treaty, something that Israel did not do. Israel’s nuclear status is under ambiguity. Perhaps they want you to think that they have nukes.

   11. Regarding your comment about the Holocaust, your claims are completely unsubstantiated. And don’t reference me to a book by the oldest unemployed assistant professor in the world, aka Norman Finkelstein.

   12. The rest of your comment goes into conspiracy world. Though I must note that Edwin Black’s book does not portray Zionists in a negative light. He just shows how difficult the situation was for those under Nazi oppression and the dilemma faced by those who tried to save them. The director of the ADL wrote the afterword for a reprint of the book.

   Lastly, you should not rely on Mein Kampf to make a point against Zionists. It shows how dark you are willing to go to argue against them. It implies dark motivations and inspirations that anyone can pick up on. You are not leading the Palestinians to a productive and healthy path. I do support a Palestinian state along side Israel, but your efforts are destructive of that vision. Hopefully, you don’t want that.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply