Did Palestinians Exist, or Did They Not? That Is The Question! [Part 5] ... Similarly in 1929, Ben-Gurion also wrote about the Palestinian political national movement: It is true that the Arab national movement has no positive content. The leaders of the movement are unconcerned with betterment of the people and provision of their essential needs. They do not aid the fellah [Arabic for peasant]; to the contrary, the leaders suck his blood, and exploit the popular awakening for private gain. But we err if we measure the [Palestinian] Arabs and their movement by our standards. Every people is worthy of its national movement. The obvious characteristic of a political movement is that it knows how to mobilize the masses. From this prospective there is no doubt that we are facing a political movement, and we should not underestimate it. A national movement mobilizes masses, and that is the main thing. The [Palestinian] Arab is not one of revival, and its moral value is dubious. But in a political sense, this is a national movement. (Shabtai Teveth, p. 83) In 1923, Zeev Jabotinsky wrote of how Palestinians really felt about their attachment to Palestine: They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true favor that Aztec looked upon Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie. Palestine will remain for the Palestinians not a borderland, but their birthplace, the center and basis of their own national existence. (Righteous Victims, p. 36) Similarly, Zeev Jabotinsky also wrote in 1923: The Arabs loved their country as much as the Jews did. Instinctively, they understood Zionist aspirations very well, and their decision to resist them was only natural [....] There was not misunderstanding between Jew and Arab, but a natural conflict. [....] No Agreement was possible with the Palestinian Arab; they would accept Zionism only when they found themselves up against an iron wall, when they realize they had no alternative but to accept Jewish settlement. (America And The Founding Of Israel, p. 90) In 1926 Zeev Jabotinsky wrote of the national struggle between the two conflicting, but justified Jewish and Palestinian national movements: The tragedy lies in the fact that there is a collision here between two truths [....] But our justice is greater. The Arabs is culturally backward, but his instinctive patriotism is just as pure and noble as our own; it can not be bought, it can only be curbed.... force majeure. (Righteous Victims, p. 108) In the early 1930s, Ben-Gurion finally admitted the mistake of trying to bribe or buy the Palestinian national movement, rather than working with it, he stated in a Mapai forum: We have erred for ten years now .... the crux is not cooperation with the English, but with the [Palestinian] Arabs. By this he meant not merely a relationship of friendship and mutual aid, but political cooperation, which he called the cornerstone of the Arab-Jewish-English rule in Palestine. Lets not deceive ourselves and think that when we approach the [Palestinian] Arabs and tell them Well build schools and better your economic conditions, that we have succeeded. Lets not think that the [Palestinian] Arabs by nature are different from us. In the heat of the argument, Ben-Gurion said to one of his critics and asked: Do you think that, by extending economic favors to the [Palestinian] Arabs, you can make them forget their political rights in Palestine? Did Mapai believe that by aiding the Palestinian Arabs to secure decent housing and grow bumper crops they could persuade the Palestinian Arabs to regard themselves as complete strangers in the land which is theirs? (Shabtai Teveth, p. 114)
Posted on: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 19:17:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015