The invented Palestinians Posted on December 16, 2011 by Markus U.S. Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich caused a storm of indignation in the last week, when he declared that there would be no Palestinian people. Gingrich, who is ahead in the race for the Republican candidacy in recent polls, said: I think we have invented a Palestinian people, who are Arabic in fact Arabs and historically. The main negotiator of the Palestinian Authority (PA), Saeb Eerkat, responded by saying that this was racist comment Ive ever heard. PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad described Gingrichs comments as totally unacceptable distortion of historical truth ... The Palestinian people inhabited the land since the beginning of history. People like Gingrich, the history must look. But Gingrich, who has a Ph.D. in modern European history, not more in his response the next day back: Is what I said factually correct? Yes. Is it historically true? Yes. Someone should have the courage to tell the truth. Gingrich comment has not only the Palestinian Arabs, but also political circles in Western countries hard hit, since the existence of a Palestinian people serves as the basis for the support of the two-state solution. Therefore, the topic has the media, the bloggers and the Internet world busy in the last days. Contrary to Gingrichs statement is expected. The two-state solution based on the assumption of the claim that a Palestinian people exists, the country, the nation and the holy places were robbed. If there was never such a nation, Jerusalem was never a Palestinian capital, there was never a Palestinian king or sultan or president, never a typical Palestinian culture, never a specific Palestinian territory, never Palestinian national poet, never a glorious past, then the legitimacy of the Palestinian Falls now severely damaged. However, much of the recent debate was a futile exercise, since the parties have never agreed on definitions. For example: What is a nation? What is a nation? What is a State? Are the definitions are identical or they overlap? How can a people, a nation or a state will come into being? Is this an ethnic issue or is it a cultural and linguistic problem? Does age of the people involved? Is it a matter of common history? Is it a question of political decisions? Is it the result of industrialization and the common interests between the inhabitants of a certain area? There are divided opinions among the scholars on these issues. And probably the answer is that it is a combination of all the above things with different weights. In the current context, however, it is to clarify certain facts in order to take an informed position can. Gingrich said that Palestinians are an invented people - and in this matter, as there can be no doubt he is right. The Palestinians are a recent invention of the last hundred years. But you can ask yourself: Whats with the United States or the Americans? The United States is a country with many peoples, so many ethnic groups. It is an artificial or contrived construction. You could also ask: What is the difference between Norway and Sweden? They have specific territorial boundaries, but there are ethnic differences? Were not these nations, peoples and cultures invented? Only that was about 1,000 years ago. The fact is that culture is a developmental process. This also applies to the national identity, although this usually takes longer than the personal identity. In principle, all Arab states are inventions of the last century, European inventions by the colonial powers. There was, for example, no Jordanians in the 18th century. Both the Palestinians and all other citizens of the British Mandate, Jews and Arabs, were named during the British Mandate Palestinians. At this time, the conflict between Jews and Arabs increased. So if the Palestinians as we know it today existed at that time, how could the British then use this expression for both groups? But at that time there were no Palestinians and the local Arabs were also strongly against this notion. He was regarded as a European and colonial invention. Why also called the UN Partition Plan of 1947 for the establishment of a Jewish and an Arab state, then why not Jewish and Palestinian? The answer is obvious, there were no Palestinians - there were Arabs. The Arabs of British Mandate Palestine were not considered a separate entity as a people, but as a part of the Arab people (among the Arabs there is diversity, but that can be left aside in this discussion). In the debate by Gingrichs comment was claimed that Israel is an invented nation, ie a modern invention. Considering the state of Israel - yes, it was invented in 1948 - or rather reinvented. But when we speak of the Jewish nation in the sense of a people, then they are not a modern invention. The Jews are an ancient people - known for thousands of years, no matter where they lived - as a separate unit with a separate culture, language and religion. This can be of the Palestinians do not say. If we asked live person, for example, Galileo Galilei or other early 17th century, what he thought of the Palestinians, he would not have understood the question. There was no such thing. We could ask him on the other hand, what he thinks of the Jews, and he would probably have a clear opinion - one way or another. The same goes for all the centuries in history. If we asked on the other side by the Arabs instead of the Palestinians, the answer would be different: There is the Arab people for centuries and the Palestinian Arabs are part of this ancient people. The invention of a people and a nation is the result of many factors, among which the ethnic factor is dominant. However, although the problem of the invention is important to understand what is at stake - more importantly perhaps is the reason for this invention. When we speak of the Palestinian Arabs, the emergence of a Palestinian identity can be traced back almost exactly to two events in 20s, but only after the establishment of Israel and especially after the Six-Day War in 1967, this identity has in the normal people foothold. The motivation behind the invention of this identity was to fight Zionism. In the 20 years of struggle in the form of attacks on Jewish settlers and Jewish property was held. After the war in 1948, the Arab states refused to accept the Palestinian Arab refugees, to use as a weapon against Israel. The suffering of these Palestinian Arabs in the last 50 years has resulted in a large part to the birth of the Palestinian identity. So are the Palestinians an invented people? Absolutely - like many others! But the more important question is: Is the Palestinian identity is a legitimate identity? And at this point abound huge question mark. The main objective of the establishment of the Palestinians was and is apparently to fight to this day, to fight Zionism Israel (Of course this is not true for all who call themselves Palestinians, but here we are talking about the phenomenon of Palestinian identity) . Given the historical existence of the Jews and presence in the Land of Israel and in light of the suffering that they went through the centuries in the Diaspora, just because they were Jews returning to their ancient homeland is a just cause. This was also recognized by the international community and the establishment of a Jewish state in the biblical Israel was supported by the force of international law in San Remo in 1920. The Jews are not residents or settlers of Israel: return to the only place she ever really called home. The creation of a nation of Palestinians, with the aim to thwart the return of the Jews, therefore, is not a legitimate reason. An important observation must be added: The fact that the Palestinian identity is created to be used as a weapon against Israel, not of course mean that the individual rights of Palestinian Arabs are denied. You have as well as the Jews and individual human rights that live there. Israel recognizes this and works according to accepted democratic rules. But the question is whether the Palestinian Arabs have the right to a state? The above is a big question mark on the topic of legitimacy of a Palestinian state. The excitement in the wake of Gingrichs statements show that the idea of a Palestinian people has not yet set - not even in the minds of those who advocate the establishment of a Palestinian state. There are a lot of political maneuvering on this controversial topic. Although many attacked Gingrich for his statement, interestingly, just something substantial against his statements were put forward. But its hard to see how the simple reinterpretation of historical facts and supporting illegitimate claims can help to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
Posted on: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 06:53:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015