6 comments for ”Nakba Law: Inside Pandora’s Box“

    
  1. If indeed you write correctly that a fundamental part of the Nakba message is the full implementation of the Right of Return: Why on earth would a government pay for an event that calls for its destruction? How does this relate to democracy? Where can you find a parallel to show that it’s a “just” action?
    Regardless of whether or not one agrees with your politics, you seem to be mixing up your political agenda and the meaning of democracy

  2. 
  3. What utter tosh – the reason that the Nakba day was set at independence day is not because Arabs were let out at that day. If it was, they’d be using the Hebrew date! It is to declare Israel’s founding itself as a catastrophe. Unsurprisingly, the state is not too happy about this.

  4. 
  5. MAX and Y,
    You are ok with Russian Jews and Polish Jews and Australian Jews “returning” to a land where they have never lived nor have their parents, grandparents or grand-grandparents ever lived, none of their ancestors lived in this land in the last 1000-2000 years, they don’t speak Hebrew or Arabic, yet they have the “right” to settle there in homes that were stolen from the natives? At the same time you deny the right of return to those who were kicked out in 1947-48 or 1967, those who still have the deeds and keys to their homes?

  6. 
  7. Optimist, it’s not me, it’s the legal situation.
    The “Jewish Question”: Palestine was defined in the 1st half of the 20th century as the Home for the Jewish people by the then international legal and power system; the Arabs living there were supposed to stay and become citizens with full rights. Not very different from what happened to the residents of French Louisiana, Alaska… – a separation of national and human aspects – very common in those times (see the creation of Jordan as a close-by example).
    For the 2nd part, it’s the standard world practice: the Arabs attacked the nascent state and lost. Are you aware of any precedence where the losing aggressor was allowed back as if nothing has happened, in effect saying “please try again, you may be luckier next time”?
    .
    Interestingly, you fail to mention in your post the largest Jewish group in Israel, those 800,000 refugees from Arab states and their descendents. Ignorance or explicit decision?
    .
    Wars mean tragedies, typically more so to the loser. In this case the loser was the instigator (twice!), now trying to re-write history and claim to be a victim, sacrificing the people for the sake of politics.
    Are you aware of the fact that The Arab League didn’t allow its members to integrate the refugees? That the UN has created a dedicated organization for these people, giving them more money than any other group and granting them the refugee status as an inherited right? No wonder this saga and tragedy goes on…
    .
    I’m all for a 2-state solution with the rights guarantees to both sides, not for a twisted and hypocritical “narrative”, replacing facts with pathos and romanticism.

  8. 
  9. Oh, sock it, “optimist”. The Palestinians are right now claiming a non-time-limited, ancestrally passed, right of “return”. They have therefor no right whatsoever to complain that someone else (who happened to have more ancient roots there) makes the same claim. The Palestinian can’t claim to have been here first, last, they can’t claim to Law (at least within green line, and I’d say also outside it), and they definitely can’t claim to want to live in peace. The entire Palestinian argument deserves nothing but contempt.

  10. 
  11. Good logic, Y., though I see the Jewish history rather as an explanation to the affinity of the jewish people to the land of Israel.
    For its legal claim, I see the decision of the Council of the League of Nations drafted on 24 July 1922 that came into effect on 26 September 1923.
    This decision, which reduced the size of the Jewish Home according to the original Balfour declaration in order to make place for a new Arab state (Jordan), has been subsumed by the UN under Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.
    No such legal claim exists for a Palestinian state, though I think that they should get one.



Leave a comment