Why Palestinians don’t recognize Israel as a Jewish state

[$@rJen]

Why Palestinians don’t recognize Israel as a Jewish state

What would happen if Palestine officially recognized Israel as a Jewish state? Would it turn the Arab and Islamic worlds upside down? Or would the mother of all wars erupt, scorching the planet with nuclear weapons? Only God knows the answer to the second question.

Many people do share the conviction that the end of the world is drawing near, providing as evidence a plethora of indicators foretelling the impending eruption of a nuclear third World War.Not everyone has to believe in this hypothesis, so it’s best we leave the realms of the unknown and return to reality.

The response of the Arab and Islamic worlds to Palestine officially recognizing Israel as a Jewish state—if there is any response at all—would probably result in nothing more than some street protests and some loud shouting. Some angry Arabs might put on a show of force, some would issue statements denouncing the decision or might publish articles or poems threatening Israel and Palestinian officials with future acts of revenge.

Once again, Israel has played a crafty trick by asking the Palestinian Authority to recognize it as a Jewish state, in a bid to spark reactions in Palestine and across the Arab world, as well as among other Muslims who support the Palestinian cause. This, of course, would play into Israel’s hands, since it is not serious about achieving true peace.

Bakir Oweida
I doubt any such reactions would affect Palestine’s hypothetical decision to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

Israel's duplicity
Would it be an exaggeration to say that Israeli politicians—from the founding generation to today’s shifty Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu—have built their policies on the assumption that if Palestinians rejected taking part in any peace process or political settlement it would thereby absolve Israel in the world’s eyes?

History shows that Israel has always met Palestinian overtures with maneuvers. Tel Aviv’s duplicity has hinged on the international community’s submission to Israeli arrogance, as much as it has on capitalizing on a Palestinian deference borne out of an entrenched fear of provoking Israel.

Once again, Israel has played a crafty trick by asking the Palestinian Authority to recognize it as a Jewish state, in a bid to spark reactions in Palestine and across the Arab world, as well as among other Muslims who support the Palestinian cause. This, of course, would play into Israel’s hands, since it is not serious about achieving true peace.

It has been said, and will be said again, that such a recognition on the part of the Palestinian Authority would open the door for Tel Aviv to expel Palestinians from Israel into Jordan, as an “alternative homeland.”

Meaningless sentiment
Although that expression has been repeated since the Six-Day War of 1967, it has proven empty and meaningless. To begin with, Israel originally failed to send Palestinians to Jordan because its backers in major world capitals did not allow it to do so. With transformations taking place around the world, how could Israel get the permission to evacuate Palestinians from their country?

Even more, how could anyone assume that 1.5 million Palestinians, who have been standing firm since the establishment of Israel, lack the determination to stand their ground and just quietly flee to Jordan in the face of Israeli violence and threats of ethnic cleansing?

On the other hand, little is said about the Palestine Liberation Organization officially recognizing the state of Israel according to the pre-1967 borders. Moreover, the Palestinian side accepting an Israeli demand is in itself a condemnation of Israel, rather than a redefining act for Palestine. After all, Palestine remains a place where believers of all the heavenly religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam—can live in peace.

The Palestinian Authority will not expose this deceptive Israeli mentality by exposing its racism during this age of the globalization. By giving in to Israeli demands for its recognition as a Jewish state, Palestine would prove that it is just another entry in the Israeli record that began when the founders of Israel claimed to have established a secular state.

Have the Palestinians figured out this trick? They most certainly have, but they fear provoking their longstanding enemy with a surprise move. It is therefore no wonder that Palestinian territories continue to shrink while Israeli settlements expand, thanks to John Kerry’s initiative, just the latest in a series started by William Rogers, a former U.S. politician, in 1970.

This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Jan. 25, 2014.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...on-t-recognize-Israel-as-a-Jewish-state-.html

 

[elis]

Ask rather why Israhell was created in 1948 and deprive the palestinians of all their fundamental rights

 

[V. Makarov]

you cant go in someone's house,take it over and ask them to recognize them as the owner of that house...doesn't make sense.Till there are modest men from Palestine and from all over the Muslim world,there cant be a recognized Jewish state israel.The question still arises about the role of Muslim countries in the freedom of Palestine.This is just because of the corrupt and non-practical leadership of Muslim countries now

 

[Solomon2]

Ask rather why Israhell was created in 1948 and deprive the palestinians of all their fundamental rights

Clear your mind: the Arabs of Palestine were not "deprived of all their fundamental righs" by the Jews' return and the creation of Israel. The terms of the Treaty of Sevres and the British Mandate were clear: while it envisioned Palestine as the Jewish National Home the civil and property rights of the Arabs were to be respected within Palestine by the Jews, and the civil and property rights of Jews were to be respected outside Palestine by the Arabs. It wasn't that much different from the other post-WWI arrangements dividing fallen empires into nation-states, save that in the Palestine Mandate the nationalities (Arab and Jew) were not separated.

The Jews kept to the terms scrupulously: before '48 Jews resettled only on land purchased from Arabs or "state lands" that once belonged to the Ottomans but were never owned by Arabs. (Indeed, the Brits wouldn't have permitted any other form of settlement.)

By contrast, the Arabs began kicking Jews out of their nascent states almost immediately, starting with the British-invented state of Transjordan in the 1920's, by which means Britain hacked 70% of the Mandate territory away from Jewish resettlement. Far from treating the Jews of Transjordan justly, they were immediately pushed across the River and their property distributed to Hussein's followers to help cement his rule. The British did nothing to enforce the terms of the Mandate that the Arabs violated. This treatment of Jews became the model for Iraq, Syria, Egypt, etc. (Lebanon is a partial exception, as its Jews departed but at least some still retain property ownership there and even collect rents.) Noting the experience of their cousins at successfully enriching themselves by the Jews' sufferings, the Arabs of Palestine had become firmly antisemitic by 1921, when the visiting Churchill was surrounded by a crowd of 150,000 Arabs shouting, "Death to the Jews!"

So what happened in 1948? After WWII Nazi-allied leaders were rounded up and imprisoned, save for those in Palestine: these remained free, or were allowed to escape. A terror campaign against the Jews of Palestine began, often engaging entire villages against Jewish settlements. The British, supposedly unable to cope, abandoned their responsibilities and departed. The Jews could either unite to defend themselves as a state, or die. The Jews chose statehood to live. The armies of the surrounding Arab states (save Lebanon) then invaded.

As residents in the Mandate region that fell under Israeli rule, the Arabs retained the same civil and property rights they had before; they also retained the same obligations. The Arabs that declared they would not cooperate with the state, or demonstrated such a stance by fleeing to the enemy camp, surrendered their civil and property rights under Ottoman Law and practice. The Arabs that accepted Israel and remained retained their property and civil rights - Israel is over 20% Arab. (By contrast, the Jewish population of Arab states is miniscule.)

The Arabs who revolted and fled and their descendants have been cynically groomed to Israel-hatred and aggression for over sixty years now: the rulers of Arab states seek to blame everything on the Jews to retain control, while most of the rest of the world wants to butter up the Arabs - at first for their oil and geopolitical influence, later out of fear of terrorism. The U.N. - pressed mostly by the British - established the UNRWA that foments this hate through welfare and miseducation. (UNRWA's creation was justified under the principle that the guarantors of the Mandate had a responsibility to the social welfare of the residents of Palestine - a "right" granted to Arabs that the Brits and others never saw fit to apply to the Jews.)

Furthermore, after independence and again after the Six-Day War, the Arab states evicted their Jewish populations, who had no choice but to flee to Israel. Israel's population rose from 600,000 or so to 1.3 million within a few years. The purpose wasn't just to steal the Jews' property, but to starve Israel to death as the land couldn't support the new, larger population and the Arabs blocked trade. (Of course, many of these refugees were resettled on land formerly owned by Arabs.)

So what were the "fundamental rights" that Israel deprived the "Palestinians" of? Their "right" to murder the Jews? Their right to property their ancestors sold to Jews? Their right to property that never belonged to them in the first place?

Hence the importance of the Arabs recognizing Israel as the Jewish state: it must mean the Arabs surrender the idea that they are entitled to anything more from the Jews. What the "Palestinians" have received from the world - including Israel - is charity. That is not a right. The rights their ancestors had to land and property in Israel were surrendered by their revolt, and their descendants don't have the right to return, any more than the Germans have the right to return to Danzig, or the French to Haiti, or the Brits to Calais, etc.

Ultimately, the Arabs have to accept defeat in their efforts to exterminate the Jewish State, then move on. That is the path to peace of prosperity. This can best be cemented by "land for peace" - enlarging the State of Israel/area of Jewish resettlement to account for the fact that so many Jews were expelled from Arab lands, as this was not envisioned in the peace arrangements of the 20th century.

The wrongs committed upon the Palestinian Arabs by the surrounding Arab States and even the West should be paid for - but not by the Jews.

you cant go in someone's house,take it over and ask them to recognize them as the owner of that house...

Except that's not what happened. You're not excused for propagating false analogies.

 

[AUz]

lol...Does india recognize Pakistan as an "Islamic" state? How about U.S recognizing Saudi Arabia as an "Islamic Sharia State"?

Guess what? NO ONE in the world recognize others on the basis of "jewish state, christian state, Hindu state, islamic state, blah blah" ...You just can not do that under International Law.

Under International Law, a "state" is just a "state"--with same benefits and responsibilities as all other states.

States individually can define themselves in whatever way they want...secular..Islamic republic..christian as state religion etc etc....but states just recognize other states as "states" and thats it.

It is yet another plot of the colonists to keep colonizing Palestinian people.

Israel can ask Palestinians to recognize Israel as a state in return of Israel's withdrawal from West Bank, Gaza, and E.Jerusalem..but to ask Palestinians to recognize Israel as a "Jewish" state is nothing but obvious tactics of continuing the occupation.

I wonder what Hasbara expert @Solomon2 has to say about it.

 

[hussain0216]

The jews come, steal the land of the Palestinians and demand the land be recognised as Jewish,, what B.S

If the Palestinians accept israel as a jewish state it is accepting its people who were thrown off the land have no right of return and the jews have ownership of the land.

That should neve happen, there are too many muslims across the entire area's of israel to be a jewish state

 

[elis]

Clear your mind: the Arabs of Palestine were not "deprived of all their fundamental righs" by the Jews' return and the creation of Israel. The terms of the Treaty of Sevres and the British Mandate were clear: while it envisioned Palestine as the Jewish National Home the civil and property rights of the Arabs were to be respected within Palestine by the Jews, and the civil and property rights of Jews were to be respected outside Palestine by the Arabs. It wasn't that much different from the other post-WWI arrangements dividing fallen empires into nation-states, save that in the Palestine Mandate the nationalities (Arab and Jew) were not separated.

The Jews kept to the terms scrupulously: before '48 Jews resettled only on land purchased from Arabs or "state lands" that once belonged to the Ottomans but were never owned by Arabs. (Indeed, the Brits wouldn't have permitted any other form of settlement.)

By contrast, the Arabs began kicking Jews out of their nascent states almost immediately, starting with the British-invented state of Transjordan in the 1920's, by which means Britain hacked 70% of the Mandate territory away from Jewish resettlement. Far from treating the Jews of Transjordan justly, they were immediately pushed across the River and their property distributed to Hussein's followers to help cement his rule. The British did nothing to enforce the terms of the Mandate that the Arabs violated. This treatment of Jews became the model for Iraq, Syria, Egypt, etc. (Lebanon is a partial exception, as its Jews departed but at least some still retain property ownership there and even collect rents.) Noting the experience of their cousins at successfully enriching themselves by the Jews' sufferings, the Arabs of Palestine had become firmly antisemitic by 1921, when the visiting Churchill was surrounded by a crowd of 150,000 Arabs shouting, "Death to the Jews!"

So what happened in 1948? After WWII Nazi-allied leaders were rounded up and imprisoned, save for those in Palestine: these remained free, or were allowed to escape. A terror campaign against the Jews of Palestine began, often engaging entire villages against Jewish settlements. The British, supposedly unable to cope, abandoned their responsibilities and departed. The Jews could either unite to defend themselves as a state, or die. The Jews chose statehood to live. The armies of the surrounding Arab states (save Lebanon) then invaded.

As residents in the Mandate region that fell under Israeli rule, the Arabs retained the same civil and property rights they had before; they also retained the same obligations. The Arabs that declared they would not cooperate with the state, or demonstrated such a stance by fleeing to the enemy camp, surrendered their civil and property rights under Ottoman Law and practice. The Arabs that accepted Israel and remained retained their property and civil rights - Israel is over 20% Arab. (By contrast, the Jewish population of Arab states is miniscule.)

The Arabs who revolted and fled and their descendants have been cynically groomed to Israel-hatred and aggression for over sixty years now: the rulers of Arab states seek to blame everything on the Jews to retain control, while most of the rest of the world wants to butter up the Arabs - at first for their oil and geopolitical influence, later out of fear of terrorism. The U.N. - pressed mostly by the British - established the UNRWA that foments this hate through welfare and miseducation. (UNRWA's creation was justified under the principle that the guarantors of the Mandate had a responsibility to the social welfare of the residents of Palestine - a "right" granted to Arabs that the Brits and others never saw fit to apply to the Jews.)

Furthermore, after independence and again after the Six-Day War, the Arab states evicted their Jewish populations, who had no choice but to flee to Israel. Israel's population rose from 600,000 or so to 1.3 million within a few years. The purpose wasn't just to steal the Jews' property, but to starve Israel to death as the land couldn't support the new, larger population and the Arabs blocked trade. (Of course, many of these refugees were resettled on land formerly owned by Arabs.)

So what were the "fundamental rights" that Israel deprived the "Palestinians" of? Their "right" to murder the Jews? Their right to property their ancestors sold to Jews? Their right to property that never belonged to them in the first place?

Hence the importance of the Arabs recognizing Israel as the Jewish state: it must mean the Arabs surrender the idea that they are entitled to anything more from the Jews. What the "Palestinians" have received from the world - including Israel - is charity. That is not a right. The rights their ancestors had to land and property in Israel were surrendered by their revolt, and their descendants don't have the right to return, any more than the Germans have the right to return to Danzig, or the French to Haiti, or the Brits to Calais, etc.

Ultimately, the Arabs have to accept defeat in their efforts to exterminate the Jewish State, then move on. That is the path to peace of prosperity. This can best be cemented by "land for peace" - enlarging the State of Israel/area of Jewish resettlement to account for the fact that so many Jews were expelled from Arab lands, as this was not envisioned in the peace arrangements of the 20th century.

The wrongs committed upon the Palestinian Arabs by the surrounding Arab States and even the West should be paid for - but not by the Jews.

Except that's not what happened. You're not excused for propagating false analogies.

You look so passionated by your cause

 

[Archdemon]

The jews come, steal the land of the Palestinians and demand the land be recognised as Jewish,, what B.S

If the Palestinians accept israel as a jewish state it is accepting its people who were thrown off the land have no right of return and the jews have ownership of the land.

That should neve happen, there are too many muslims across the entire area's of israel to be a jewish state

It will be taken care of.

 

[Falcon29]

It will be taken care of.

You're a loon closet warrior.

lol...Does india recognize Pakistan as an "Islamic" state? How about U.S recognizing Saudi Arabia as an "Islamic Sharia State"?

Guess what? NO ONE in the world recognize others on the basis of "jewish state, christian state, Hindu state, islamic state, blah blah" ...You just can not do that under International Law.

Under International Law, a "state" is just a "state"--with same benefits and responsibilities as all other states.

States individually can define themselves in whatever way they want...secular..Islamic republic..christian as state religion etc etc....but states just recognize other states as "states" and thats it.

It is yet another plot of the colonists to keep colonizing Palestinian people.

Israel can ask Palestinians to recognize Israel as a state in return of Israel's withdrawal from West Bank, Gaza, and E.Jerusalem..but to ask Palestinians to recognize Israel as a "Jewish" state is nothing but obvious tactics of continuing the occupation.

I wonder what Hasbara expert @Solomon2 has to say about it.

Couldn't have said it any better my friend.

 

[Ahmad1996]

Clear your mind: the Arabs of Palestine were not "deprived of all their fundamental righs" by the Jews' return and the creation of Israel. The terms of the Treaty of Sevres and the British Mandate were clear: while it envisioned Palestine as the Jewish National Home the civil and property rights of the Arabs were to be respected within Palestine by the Jews, and the civil and property rights of Jews were to be respected outside Palestine by the Arabs. It wasn't that much different from the other post-WWI arrangements dividing fallen empires into nation-states, save that in the Palestine Mandate the nationalities (Arab and Jew) were not separated.

The Jews kept to the terms scrupulously: before '48 Jews resettled only on land purchased from Arabs or "state lands" that once belonged to the Ottomans but were never owned by Arabs. (Indeed, the Brits wouldn't have permitted any other form of settlement.)

By contrast, the Arabs began kicking Jews out of their nascent states almost immediately, starting with the British-invented state of Transjordan in the 1920's, by which means Britain hacked 70% of the Mandate territory away from Jewish resettlement. Far from treating the Jews of Transjordan justly, they were immediately pushed across the River and their property distributed to Hussein's followers to help cement his rule. The British did nothing to enforce the terms of the Mandate that the Arabs violated. This treatment of Jews became the model for Iraq, Syria, Egypt, etc. (Lebanon is a partial exception, as its Jews departed but at least some still retain property ownership there and even collect rents.) Noting the experience of their cousins at successfully enriching themselves by the Jews' sufferings, the Arabs of Palestine had become firmly antisemitic by 1921, when the visiting Churchill was surrounded by a crowd of 150,000 Arabs shouting, "Death to the Jews!"

So what happened in 1948? After WWII Nazi-allied leaders were rounded up and imprisoned, save for those in Palestine: these remained free, or were allowed to escape. A terror campaign against the Jews of Palestine began, often engaging entire villages against Jewish settlements. The British, supposedly unable to cope, abandoned their responsibilities and departed. The Jews could either unite to defend themselves as a state, or die. The Jews chose statehood to live. The armies of the surrounding Arab states (save Lebanon) then invaded.

As residents in the Mandate region that fell under Israeli rule, the Arabs retained the same civil and property rights they had before; they also retained the same obligations. The Arabs that declared they would not cooperate with the state, or demonstrated such a stance by fleeing to the enemy camp, surrendered their civil and property rights under Ottoman Law and practice. The Arabs that accepted Israel and remained retained their property and civil rights - Israel is over 20% Arab. (By contrast, the Jewish population of Arab states is miniscule.)

The Arabs who revolted and fled and their descendants have been cynically groomed to Israel-hatred and aggression for over sixty years now: the rulers of Arab states seek to blame everything on the Jews to retain control, while most of the rest of the world wants to butter up the Arabs - at first for their oil and geopolitical influence, later out of fear of terrorism. The U.N. - pressed mostly by the British - established the UNRWA that foments this hate through welfare and miseducation. (UNRWA's creation was justified under the principle that the guarantors of the Mandate had a responsibility to the social welfare of the residents of Palestine - a "right" granted to Arabs that the Brits and others never saw fit to apply to the Jews.)

Furthermore, after independence and again after the Six-Day War, the Arab states evicted their Jewish populations, who had no choice but to flee to Israel. Israel's population rose from 600,000 or so to 1.3 million within a few years. The purpose wasn't just to steal the Jews' property, but to starve Israel to death as the land couldn't support the new, larger population and the Arabs blocked trade. (Of course, many of these refugees were resettled on land formerly owned by Arabs.)

So what were the "fundamental rights" that Israel deprived the "Palestinians" of? Their "right" to murder the Jews? Their right to property their ancestors sold to Jews? Their right to property that never belonged to them in the first place?

Hence the importance of the Arabs recognizing Israel as the Jewish state: it must mean the Arabs surrender the idea that they are entitled to anything more from the Jews. What the "Palestinians" have received from the world - including Israel - is charity. That is not a right. The rights their ancestors had to land and property in Israel were surrendered by their revolt, and their descendants don't have the right to return, any more than the Germans have the right to return to Danzig, or the French to Haiti, or the Brits to Calais, etc.

Ultimately, the Arabs have to accept defeat in their efforts to exterminate the Jewish State, then move on. That is the path to peace of prosperity. This can best be cemented by "land for peace" - enlarging the State of Israel/area of Jewish resettlement to account for the fact that so many Jews were expelled from Arab lands, as this was not envisioned in the peace arrangements of the 20th century.

The wrongs committed upon the Palestinian Arabs by the surrounding Arab States and even the West should be paid for - but not by the Jews.

Except that's not what happened. You're not excused for propagating false analogies.

Okay first of all you should make your mind clear. Jews immigrated to Israel before that the population of Jews didn't even make more than 10% of Palestine. Then they started taking land that didn't belong to them. Now they are asking to recognize them as Jewish State on what basis and also yeah this is all the fault of British and the Americans and you can't deny it.

 

[Archdemon]

You're a loon closet warrior.



Couldn't have said it any better my friend.

Arent we all here?

 

[Falcon29]

Arent we all here?

Nope.

 

[Mugwop]

It will be taken care of.

What's that suppose to mean?