More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
MJ Rosenberg

GET UPDATES FROM MJ Rosenberg
 

Israel & Palestine: One Invented Nation or Two

Posted: 12/20/11 03:48 PM ET

The silliest aspect of former House speaker Newt Gingrich's claim that Palestinians are an "invented nation" is that anyone who accepts Israel's legitimacy would endorse it.

The singular triumph of the Zionist movement is that it invented a state and a people -- Israel and Israelis -- from scratch. The first Hebrew speaking child in 1,900 years, Ittamar Ben-Avi, was not born until 1882. His father, the brilliant linguist Eliezer Ben Yehuda, created a modern language for him to speak by improvising from the language of the Bible.

The founder of the Israeli state was Theodor Herzl (1860-1904), an assimilated Viennese writer who was convinced by the Dreyfus trial in France and the horrendous right-wing anti-Semitism that resulted from it that Jews had to get out of Europe.

In 1897, he wrote the book that would essentially inaugurate the Zionist movement. It was called Der Judenstaat (which means the Jews' State or Jewish State) which was his proposal for moving the Jews out of Europe into their own country.

He didn't specify where the Jewish homeland should be. He was more concerned about quickly obtaining territory anywhere for Jews to seek refuge.

Later he decided that Palestine made the most sense because that was where the Jewish people both began and exercised self-determination in ancient times and where there already was a small minority of Jews. But he also spoke of finding a place in Africa or the Americas if Palestine was unavailable.

The reaction to Herzl's idea was primarily that he was a bit crazy. Jews committed to assimilation insisted that Jews were not a nation but a religious faith. Their nationality was French, German, Polish, Iraqi, or American -- not some imaginary Jewish nationality that had not existed for 1900 years.

As late as 1943, during the worst days of the Holocaust, the American Jewish Committee -- which adhered to that view -- resigned from the body created by American Jews to respond to the Nazi catastrophe in response to its "demand for the eventual establishment of a Jewish Commonwealth in Palestine."

Seventy plus years later, it is impossible to argue that the Israeli nation is not as authentic and worthy of recognition as any in the world (more authentic than some, in fact).

The Hebrew language is spoken by of millions of Jews and Palestinians. The Israeli culture is unique, bearing little resemblance to any other in the world. In fact, diaspora Jews have as much in common with Israelis as African-Americans have with Africans.

Israelis are not just Jews who happen to live in Palestine even though the concept of Israel-ness started just over a hundred years ago with nothing but an idea. They are Israelis, entitled to self-determination, peace and security in their own land.

And the Palestinians are every bit as much a nation. If the ultimate definition of authentic nationhood is continuous residence in a land for thousands of years, the Palestinian claim to nationhood is ironclad. They never left Palestine (except for those who either emigrated or became refugees after the establishment of Israel).

Those who deny that Palestinians are a nation base their case on two arguments, both of which are logically incoherent. The first is that Palestinians never exercised self-determination in Palestine; they were always governed by others from ancient times to the present day.

The answer to this is: so what?

Most nation/states in the world were, for long periods of history, under the domination of others. Did the Polish nation not exist between 1790 through 1918 when it was divided up between Russia and Austria-Hungary and erased from the map? Neither Germany nor Italy existed as national entities until the 19th century. Was there no such thing as Italians or Germans? The whole argument is ridiculous, especially when offered by Israelis or Americans (or Canadians, Australians, etc.) whose national existence would have been unimaginable a few centuries ago.

Their second argument is that Palestinians never thought of themselves as Palestinians until Jews started moving into their territory.

Again, so what?

When the European Jews docked in Jaffa, Palestine in the early immigration waves of the late 19th century, there were Arabs waiting at the port. When they purchased land, it was Palestinians who had to move out. And if these Arabs didn't call themselves Palestinians until the Zionist movement began, neither did the Jews call themselves Israelis until 1948. Until then, they were just Jews. But each of the two peoples knew who they were and who the other was.

The bottom line is that today the Palestinian nation is as authentic as the Israeli nation, and vice versa. Those who think either is going away are blinded by hatred. Israelis and Palestinians know who they are. Simply put, the first part of the phrase self-determination is the word self. Both nations have the absolute right to define itself. Newt Gingrich can bloviate all he wants. The facts are facts.

 

Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjayrosenberg

 
 
  • Comments
  • 590
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
kokobin
Against stupidity the gods contend in vain
11:45 AM on 01/02/2012
So where did Hebrews come from and where did they vanish to?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
montecristo5000
06:48 PM on 12/30/2011
The reality is the facts are what we call them. Both Israel and the USA (and Great Britain, Rome, and all other imperial nations in the past) act on the following maxims

"might is right"

"the end justifies the means"

"the truth is what I say it is"

Virulent Zionism depends upon spreading lies about the "always there" existence of Israel, when clearly, there were hundreds of thousands of people living on that land.

By taking that land away from them, changing the place names, denying rights of return, passports, visas, etc. and spreading lies, Israel hopes to efface the truth. They teach schoolchildren that upon the arrival of European Jews into what is now modern Israel, the land was empty - no one was there. When the reality is what would now be called terrorism. Or, in context, theft.

Remember the maxims.

PS, Gingrich is just saluting his AIPAC paymasters. It's called "paying the rent". and "knowing who your boss is".
02:21 PM on 12/27/2011
Zionists lecturing Palestinians about being an "invented people" is rich indeed.

The Zionist project was the brain-chil­d of mostly 19th and early 20th century European Zionists who wanted to create a Jewish state in a land where the overwhelmi­ng majority of its indigenous residents were not Jewish.

Accordingly, it should come as no surprise that the concept of ethnic cleansing (euphemist­ically called "populatio­­­n transfer") was embraced by ALL shades of opinion in the Zionist movement, from the Revisionis­­­t Right to the Labor Left, including the "moderate" Moshe Sharett and the socialist Arthur Ruppin. See:

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story637.html

As stated by Ben Ehrenreich­:

“The problem is fundamenta­l: Founding a modern state on a single ethnic or religious identity in a territory that is ethnically and religiousl­y diverse leads inexorably either to politics of exclusion (think of the 139-square­-mile prison camp that Gaza has become) or to wholesale ethnic cleansing. Put simply, the problem is Zionism.” See:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/16-2

Israel was created by intentiona­­lly displacing the indigenous Palestinia­­ns, and that displaceme­­nt continues to this day, aided and abetted by those who continue to justify it. At least some Zionists are honest about it. See:

http://www.monabaker.com/quotes.htm

And Zionists now lecture the displaced Palestinia­ns about being "invented?"
12:57 PM on 12/27/2011
"The bottom line is that today the Palestinian nation is as authentic as the Israeli nation, and vice versa."

Very true.
05:06 PM on 12/26/2011
There are conspicuous weaknesses in Mr. Rosenberg's argument for a so-called “2-state solution."

First, the legal claims are not equal between a colonial settler population that seized its land by terrorism and the indigenous population it displaced that had lived there continuously for thousands of years. Israel owes an enormous debt of reparation and restitution to the people of Palestine that cannot be simply sidestepped.

International law including the UN Charter and many UN resolutions are clear about this, to which Rosenberg makes no reference.

There is neither equality nor justice for Palestinians in the "2-state solution" under consideration, which ignores Palestinian rights and international law from which Israel has relentlessly acted with impunity enabled by the US under Israel lobby influence. Having once worked for AIPAC, Rosenberg knows this full well.

Rosenberg fails to mention the option of a single, integrated, secular, democratic, constitutionally designed state as once envisioned by the UN. Nearly 90% of Palestinians under occupation and siege stated in a 2009 survey that "the Right of Return AND compensation" is "essential" to any final solution. They rightfully and steadfastly demand JUSTICE, a concept conspicuously absent from Rosenberg's vision.

The cost to Israel will be loss of a Jewish majority and their current system of legal and institutional Jewish supremacy. The benefit will be transformation into a normal, multi-ethnic, true democracy replacing their current democratic pretenses, along with acceptance into the community of nations within which they are now a pariah state.
A Jew with a View
Act justly, love mercy, walk humbly
03:23 AM on 12/23/2011
Continued from previous post.

By the way, many of the people who today are referred to as "Palestinians" were children or Arabs that also immigrated to Palestine at the same time the Jews from Europe immigrated there. There was no litmus test as to the length of time one had to live in Palestine before one was called a "Palestinian".
A Jew with a View
Act justly, love mercy, walk humbly
03:22 AM on 12/23/2011
If you read the British White Papers of 1922 and 1939, these documents do refer to Palestinians but does so in describing those who lived in the land of Palestine, whether they were Jews or Arabs. When these documents differentiate between the Arabs of Palestine and the Jews of Palestine, it refers to the Arabs as "the Arabs of Palestine" not "the Palestinians" as that phrase would also include the Jews. It also recognizes that the Jews of Palestine and the Arabs of Palestine represent two distinct people and therefore "Palestinians" in themselves, were not a distinct group. In reading these documents, it is clear that the goal of the British mandate was to create a bi-national state made up of Arabs and Jews, not Palestinians and Jews. Since both sides rejected the proposals outlined in the 1939 White Paper (the Jews for the proposed limitations with regard to immigration especially as Jewish refugees were increasing due to the War and the Arabs for fear that the Jews would ultimately rule them) the British decided to Partition the remaining land of the Mandate into two countries. Both countries would be Palestinian. One for Jews of Palestine and one for the Arabs of Palestine. The Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected. One became the state of Israel. The other never was created. But Israel, technically is a Palestinian state created for the Jews of Palestine whether they lived there for 2,000 years or were new immigrants.

To be continued
08:46 PM on 12/22/2011
Thanks for your good work, Jay
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:05 PM on 12/21/2011
Israeli treatment of Palestinians, especially the "price-tag" whack-jobs who get away with crimes because Israeli "law" looks the other way, is systemic discrimination and abuse of basic human rights.

Look no further than the Likud regime's racist charter, which is dedicated to the destruction of the peace process and, calls for denying Palestinian human rights.

"Self-Rule

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river

The Palestinians

Declaration of a State
A unilateral Palestinian declaration of the establishment of a Palestinian state will constitute a fundamental and substantive violation of the agreements with the State of Israel and the scuttling of the Oslo and Wye accords. The government will adopt immediate stringent measures in the event of such a declaration.

Settlements

The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."

http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm
09:45 PM on 12/22/2011
Interesting, my reply yesterday which was originally posted on here, has somehow disappeared.

Netanyahu has repeatedly stated publicly an interest in a two state solution West of the Jordan. Abbas refuses to talk on basis on precondition to stop settlement building, a recent excuse. It was the P.A. who were trying to Unilaterally create a state through U.N. ignoring past agreements with Israel. The Likud coalition gov't is against Unilateral move by Palestinians however not against Bilateral peace agreement. The present Likud coalition gov't were first ever Israel gov't to implement a moratorium on settlements which the P.A. dragged their feet till very last minute to agree to talks, however that was because they were never serious about bilateral agreement, as they planned to go to the U.N. back then to by pass any real peace with Israel.
07:27 AM on 12/24/2011
The Likud Charter absolutely rejects a two-state solution. A one binational state with votes for all would b the way to go.
05:48 PM on 12/26/2011
Netanyahu's vision of a "2-state solution" is pretty much things as they are without any real Palestinian sovereignty. He said, "All we have to do is change the word 'Authority' to 'state' and throw them some tokens of sovereignty like minting their own currency." An official of the 1st Netanyahu administration (1996) said, "They can have whatever we decide to leave them. They can call it a state, or call it fried chicken." Naturally, no Palestinian leader would agree to these terms and they are then scapegoated for "failure" of the "peace process" which has been thoroughly exposed as a sham by the Palestine Papers.
Satirist1
All 4 d best in the best of all possible worlds
08:54 PM on 12/21/2011
Beloved leader of Palestinians, Arafat, was an Egyptian foreigner, hired by Egyptians to organize opposition and so after Egyptians defeats against Jewish Palestinians and their Druze Allies.
His claim to be an indigenous Palestinian can be rejected outright as a two-faced propaganda ploy.
Now, Ariel Sharon is a true native Palestinian/Israeli born and raised there, who heroically defended his indigenous land.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
YankeeCanuck
dog
12:41 PM on 12/22/2011
Yeh,Ariel Sharon , born Ariel Scheinermann in British Mandated Palestine to Lithuanian Jewish parents.
Rosin the Bow
Hail to the Victors Valiant
08:27 AM on 12/23/2011
What's your point? Jews aren't equal to Arabs?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:15 AM on 12/23/2011
Ariel Sharon was born in 1928, in what the British called Palestine the Roman name for the geographic region.

Although Jewish, he was considered to be a Palestinian.
The concept of a separate Arab Palestinian people did not come about until the 1960's.

Had he been born in Lithuania, Sharon would have been 5 years old when the Nazis took power, and would very likely have been murdered in a death camp.
08:35 AM on 12/23/2011
Arafats the guy who claimed The temple and jerusalem are Islamic

Similar to Palestinians claiming Jesus was a muslim who preached Islam

Thankfully the Internet swiftly shines a huge light on this Palestinian taquiyya
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
arachne646
Loving # Growing # Knitting
11:34 PM on 12/28/2011
Jerusalem is a city sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims, and until the recent evictions, had room for Arab Israelis and the potential to be a shared Capitol City in a two state peace.

As a Christian I can tell you that Jesus of Nazareth did preach islam, submission to God's will, and so could literally be called an obedient muslim, one who submits.

Perhaps you also need to find out more about the Israeli government's human rights abuses and the non-violent actions of Israeli, Palestinian, and international activists working for peace in Israel/Palestine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BigWillyG
08:42 PM on 12/21/2011
Why does it matter what the people living in this wasteland are called?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NTT
Fighting rants with facts
07:52 PM on 12/21/2011
I feel for "pro-Palestinian" propagandists, I do.
For years, they've pushed the notion of a "Palestinian people". Israel & in general the civilized world accepted it -- in the interest of peace. The argument was: there's a partner (ex-terrorist "reformed" PLO) which will make peace in return for a state. It turns out, however, that PLO isn't "reformed": it may talk "peace" & "non-violence"; it promotes hatred & terrorism. Its goal remains the same -- replacing the Jewish state with an Arab one. Its latest attempt: try & get a state WITHOUT making peace -- a base for more conflict. But when you place yourself in the spotlight, prepare for scrutiny. When you ask for a state, show what entitles you to one. In modern times, only one thing: nationhood. ONLY nations are entitled to self-determination. So now "pro-Palestinian" propagandists have to show how Arabs utterly indistinguishable -- ethnically, linguistically, culturally -- from neighboring Arabs are a distinct "nation". And why this "distinct nation" suddenly "discovered" its name only in the 1960s. And why it "discovered" national aspirations only when Jews started returning to their homeland. And why it completely "lost" those aspirations when living under "Jordanian occupation" & only "rediscovered" them under "Israeli occupation". And why -- offered an independent state for the first time in history, this "nation" quibbles over a few square miles, rather than jumping with joy as Jews did in 1947. Strange "nation"! No name, no distinctive characteristics & "national aspirations" switched on & off
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:06 AM on 12/22/2011
I think you just proved NTT's point. That's really what you come back with, a sign that has the order of cause and affect backwards ?
10:35 PM on 12/21/2011
Amen, bro.
05:11 PM on 12/21/2011
Inj Jafa Jews where met by Palestinians - the Jews of Palestine region. The Arabs of the region where Arabs. The "so whot" is a good argument but tot in this case, Arabs reject the solution.
And "Both nations have the absolute right to define itself"- one was defined for over 3000 years,the other have to but don't do it, and now it is 2011 not 1948. If PA wont do define itself - soon it will be 2020.
04:34 PM on 12/21/2011
Gingrich was simply pandering and vote seeking.
photo
cosmiczulu
let the good times roll
06:54 PM on 12/21/2011
Maybe it's just that the "Palestinians" did not choose to call them selves Palestinians until they saw the Public Relations value in the 1960's. Prior to that they called themselves Syrians or Jordanians or just Arabs.
07:40 AM on 12/24/2011
Nope! They were Filistains, or as the Romans called them, Phillistines.
photo
MelissaGoldman
One moment in time--RIP Whitney
04:26 PM on 12/21/2011
The million dollar question is--if Newt's comments were so off base, why did they strike such a nerve?
Usually, that only happens when someone speaks an uncomfortable truth....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:42 AM on 12/22/2011
or, if like Palin or other GOP clowns they simply
do not know or care about facts......
90%+ of the world strongly disagrees with
statements like Newt's about PA's.....
maybe some are uncomfortable with That ?!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pharcee
No War With Iran
04:51 AM on 12/22/2011
And what would the reaction be if he said the exact opposite? That Israel and its people are made up? Wouldn't that "strike a nerve," as you would say?

I think the reaction would be far greater, but I'm sure that wouldn't matter to you, would it?
07:13 AM on 12/22/2011
I agree, but that's exactly what many so called pro-Palestinian groups and posters on this board have been saying for years. The fact of the matter is the Palestinians exist now. The vast majority of Israelis and Israeli supporters agree they should have a state. On the other hand the pro-Palestinian side has been saying that Israel should have never existed , got more then there share of the land anyway, and based it all on the notion of a Palestinian people that existed as a distinct people from the rest of the Arabs in that region before the mandate period.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Adam Selbst
12:38 PM on 12/22/2011
Sure. But in that case it would be untrue.
It's not that Palestinians didn't exist as people. Merely that they did not exist as a distinct nation. They were a fraction of a whole before. By now identifying as an independent nation, suddenly Israel is taking "all the land" of an indigenous people, instead of the reality, that they are taking a fraction of the land of a much larger group of people spanning Syria and Jordan.