47.8 F
New York
Thursday, March 28, 2024

Inventing “Palestine” at the Oscars

Related Articles

-Advertisement-

Must read

Those who advocate the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state in Israel’s back yard have worked hard, for many years, to create the impression that such a state is inevitable. Readers of the New York Times have surely noticed how often columnists such as Thomas Friedman write things along the lines of “everyone knows that a Palestinian state will be created.” Of course “everyone” doesn’t know that, but conjuring an air of “inevitability” promotes the goal.

Sometimes the statehood advocates even pretend that a state of “Palestine” already exists, even though it obviously does not. Their idea is to wear down the opposition, to make us feel as if we are wasting our time and energy when we point out the dangers of Palestinian statehood. Now film professor Eric A. Goldman has joined the pro-Palestine campaign.

Goldman, whose reviews of movies appear in various Jewish newspapers, recently authored a review of “Omar,” which he reported was “submitted by Palestine” for an Oscar. Goldman also referred to “today’s events in Palestine” and “the politically charged atmosphere of today’s Palestine.”

“Omar” lost at the Academy Awards to the Italian entry “The Great Beauty” directed by Paolo Sorrentino.

In the real world, however, there is no such “atmosphere,” and no such “events,” because no state of “Palestine” exists. In fact, there has never been an independent state of “Palestine” at any time in history. The term “Palestine” did not even exist until around the year 100 CE, when the Romans decreed it as a way of trying to stamp out memories of Jewish connections to the area. The Muslims who invaded the Land of Israel in five centuries later didn’t call themselves “Palestinians.” The various rulers who controlled the land during the years when most Jews were exiled didn’t call it “Palestine,” either.

Arab residents of the area during the British period considered themselves Syrians, and said so. “Southern Syria” (Suriya al-Janubiya) was the name of a leading Palestinian Arab newspaper in the 1920s. The local Muslim-Christian Association, at its 1919 congress, urged the Paris Peace Conference to consider Palestine “a part of Arab Syria.” When the notorious Haj Amin el-Hussein (later known as the Grand Mufti) instigated his first riots, in 1920, they were riots demanding the unification of Palestine with Syria. Even Arab nationals living in far-off San Salvador, identifying themselves as “Syrian Palestinians,” issued a call, in 1919, for “no separation between Syria and Palestine.” The headquarters for the Palestinian Arab riots that began in 1936 called itself “The General Command of the Arab Revolt in Southern Syria (Palestine).” One of its leaders, Arif Abd ar-Raziq, used the title “Commander-in-Chief of the Rebels in Southern Syria.” It was only when Israel was established in 1948 that they began using the term “Palestine” as a way of attacking Israel’s legitimacy.

There are many good reasons to oppose creation of Palestinian state in the Judea-Samaria (West Bank) territories.

For one thing, creation of a state there would reduce Israel to just nine miles wide at its vulnerable midsection. In a war, an Arab tank column would be able to cut Israel in two in a matter of minutes. Even short of war, life could become unbearable: airplanes landing or taking off from Ben-Gurion Airport would be within striking distance of an individual terrorist with a shoulder-fired rocket.

A second problem is that creation of a Palestinian state there would place some of the holiest sites in Judaism, such as the Cave of the Patriarchs (in Hebron) and the Tomb of Rachel (in Bethlehem) under the sovereignty of a hostile Arab state. This would be a repudiation of 2,000 years of Jewish longing to return to the ancient Land of Israel. Our prayers and traditions do not speak of returning to Tel Aviv or Haifa; they speak of the many religious sites in Judea and Samaria.

A third issue is that creating a Palestinian state would involve the mass, forced expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Israelis from those areas. That could provoke all-out civil strife in Israel. Recall how Israel was torn apart over the expulsion of a much smaller number of Israelis (about 10,000) from Gaza.

Those who believe that, nonetheless, such a state should be created will continue to make their case. That is part of the give-and-take of debate in a free society. But pretending that the state of “Palestine” already exists, in order to advance that cause, is simply dishonest.

(Mr. Phillips is president of the Religious Zionists of America, Philadelphia Chapter; Mr. Korn, the former executive editor of the Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia, is chairman of the RZA – Philadelphia / http://www.phillyreligiouszionists.org/)

 

balance of natureDonate

Latest article

- Advertisement -