+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Ending the occupation would undo Israeli identity as we know it

Bringing an end to 50 years of military rule over the Palestinians will undoubtedly change the face of Israeli society as we know it. Let’s welcome that change with open arms. 

By Inna Michaeli

Thousands of young Jewish boys wave Israeli flags as they celebrate Jerusalem Day at the Western Wall, May 17, 2015. (Flash90)

Thousands of young Jewish boys wave Israeli flags as they celebrate Jerusalem Day at the Western Wall, May 17, 2015. (Flash90)

The argument that opposing the occupation does not contradict a love for Israel has been heard over and over in the Israeli Left for years. This isn’t just a matter of PR — it is the personal experience of many Israelis.

The problem, however, is that it does not manage to convince the public at large. But what if the public has good reason not to be convinced?

Take for example the unbridled attacks on B’Tselem Executive Director Hagai El-Ad following his appearance before the UN Security Council. B’Tselem and El-Ad responded to the attacks by arguing that the organization speaks specifically about the occupation. Others sought to strengthen El-Ad’s public legitimacy as someone who is “pro-Israel, anti-occupation,” including high-ranking members of the military establishment who knew El-Ad as an outstanding soldier during his service in a prestigious field intelligence unit. It is doubtful, however, if they could ever convince the public that El-Ad’s opposition to the occupation is patriotic.

So why is it so difficult for the Israeli public to accept the “pro-Israel, anti-occupation” formula?

I believe this formula is not as simple as it appears. It presumes a fantasy in which Israel can end its rule over the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and continue to exist just as it does today.

But taking over Palestinian land and lording over every aspect of Palestinian daily life is too deeply rooted in Israelis’ day-to-day experience, as Mairav Zonszein wrote recently. In fact, we have no idea what Israeli society really looks like — or what Israelis themselves look like — without the occupation.

The array of national myths and beliefs that allow continual military rule over Palestine and the Palestinians is at the basis of Israeli identity. It is in our national memory and narratives, which tell us who we are, which justify how and why we arrived at this point. It is everything we learned at school.

We learned about an Eretz Israel (the Land of Israel) bereft of destroyed Palestinian villages covered by pine and eucalyptus trees. We learned about making the desert bloom, about a “land without a people for a people without a land.” We learned about the most moral army in the world; about a tiny country surrounded by enemies; how “they fled”; the myth of the Zionist pioneers.

A youth sits near a cross overlooking the surrounding countryside in the displaced Palestinian village of Iqrit in northern Israel, April 21, 2014. Iqrit's original inhabitants were forcibly evacuated in the Nakba of 1948. Though the Israeli high court granted the residents, who are Palestinian citizens of Israel, the right to return to their homes in 1951, the military destroyed the village and has since prevented their return. Only the village's church and cemetery remained intact, and are still used by village residents while they campaign for a full return.

A youth sits near a cross overlooking the surrounding countryside in the depopulated Palestinian village of Iqrit, northern Israel, April 21, 2014. (Activestills.org)

We learned about our undisputed, inherent moral superiority over the Arabs. We imbibed a contradictory understanding of religion (“There is no God, but he promised us the land”) and the Holocaust (which happened because we didn’t have an army, of course). I cannot even promise that the most ostensibly innocent elements of Israeliness will still exist after the occupation: Menashe Kadishman’s sheep, Eyal Shani’s cauliflower, Ori Shavit’s carrot sausages.

Embracing the fear

An end to military rule in the West Bank and Gaza poses a real threat to Israeli society, so it is no wonder that people are no longer buying the “pro-Israel, anti-occupation” mantra. Even so much as recognizing the existence of the occupation — without even calling to end it — undermines the way Israelis see reality. In order for Israel and Israelis to continue existing as is, the occupation must be maintained and silenced.

In the best case scenario, ending the occupation will allow us to cope with up the Nakba and its consequences. In the best case scenario, the end of the occupation will bring about the end of Israel and Israeli identity as we know them — toward building a healthier society and a collective identity that is built less on crimes and lies.

I suggest we begin to take this threat seriously, and welcome it with open arms. Let’s begin by recognizing the need to decolonize our society and dismantle the foundations of our very identity as Israelis. We must come to terms that without the occupation we will be different people. We will be a different society. Let us recognize that this will be a very scary process. We always fear the unknown, especially when it comes to our existence as people or as a society.

The occupation will not last forever, and change is inevitable. I believe that the prospect of a new identity should not only serve as a source of anxiety and fears, but also a real political horizon to aspire to.

Inna Michaeli is a feminist activist, a PhD student of Sociology at the Humboldt University of Berlin, and a blogger at Local Call, where this piece was first published in Hebrew. Read it here.

Newsletter banner

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. Carmen

      “In the best case scenario, the Nakba and its results will continue to threaten Israel, even after the occupation comes to an end. In the best case scenario, the end of the occupation will bring about the end of Israel and Israeli identity as we know them — toward building a healthier society and a national identity that is built less on crimes and lies.”

      The occupation should have never happened for sure, but 50 years? What kind of jew would accept this for themselves or their loved ones. I’m hoping and praying for a better, happier and healthier future for all of us.

      Yes, I know, ‘blah, blah, blah’. Feel sorry for those who see it that way.

      Reply to Comment
    2. AJew

      “Ending the occupation would end Israeli identity”

      Only if we end it the way stupid suicidal people advocate that we should end it. By allowing unbridled right of return. Here is how one of those people advocated it on another thread:

      “Will it fully recognize the Palestinian people’s right to return to the land from which they were and continue to be expelled?”

      In a non real make believe land, known as coo-coo land, also known as lah-lah land, where there are pink elephants and flying pigs, such an act would bring about a noble society with everyone living in love with respect and love with their neighbors and singing kumbayah.

      Sigh but then some of us pinch ourselves and wake up to reality. We realise that to try such an experiment for the Jewish people of Israel would be a bridge too far and highly risky. Heck if it would have a reasonable chance of working, it might even worth the risk. But if not, then the consequences for the Jews of Israel would be devastating. Think Syria X 1000. Think about the treatment by Arabs of Yazidis, of Assyrians and Christian minorities and multiply it by a thousand. Think about history. Who started massacring who? In 1929 there was no occupation but Arabs massacred the Jews of Hebron.

      So for sane Israelis do a risk benefit analysis and we always come to the same conclusion. The occupation can end only one way. When the Arabs accept the Jewish state of Israel (which can have an Arab minority) and truly agree to the two state solution. An Arab state living peacefully next to a Jewish state. That is when the occupation will end. Not before. Because there is no earthly reason why the only acceptable solution for the Palestinian Arabs is the one state solution with an Arab majority. Their mere insistence on it strengthens our suspicion about their intentions. Why? Ecause If they say they are capable of kumbayah in a one state solution then kumbayah should also be possible with a two state solution. And that would be less risky for us.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Bruce Gould

      @AJew (from AnotherJew) – even mainstream, Jewish, pro-Israel, Zionist, Holocaust remembering journalists are now saying the two-state solution is just about dead:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/opinion/sunday/why-israel-still-refuses-to-choose.html?_r=0

      One state or apartheid?
      No none forced the Jewish State to build settlements on every square inch of land mentioned in the Old Testament, and now they will have to live with the consequences.

      Reply to Comment
      • AJew

        Whatever. Don’t you worry about us Bruce. Don’t worry about the Palestinian Arabs either.

        We will both survive and thrive when the Arabs regain their collective sanity and stop trying to supress OUR national aspirations. After that, they will have plenty of good options. Right now I liken their attitude to a person who tries to cut off his nose to spite his face. No future in that. They are bound to realise that sooner or later then all will be good.

        As for what some stupid Jews say, never mind about that either. We too have our share of stupid defeatist people, just like everyone else. No future for us in listening to them.

        Reply to Comment
        • Ben

          “Whatever….”. Pure bluster. You have no good answer to what Buce Gould and Roger Cohen are saying. Nada. Zip.

          Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            Yeah, right. The only good answer according to Ben is parroting robotically the following:

            “Arabs good, Israel bad….occupation, occupation, occupation…. poor innocent victimised Palestinians….eeeeevil Israel everything is Israel’s fault”

            Till our eyes glaze over.

            Reply to Comment
    4. Danchu

      Did anyone even bother to edit this peice before it was published?? Too many typos, spelling and grammar errors to be taken seriously. Fix up 972

      Reply to Comment
    5. Itshak Gordin Halevy

      She forgets one important fact: for many of us reading the holy Torah, Judea and Samaria (Yehuda and Shomron) are a part of the historical, national and religious heritage of the Jewish People. If you forget this element your analysis becomes false.

      Reply to Comment
      • carmen

        “Judea and Samaria (Yehuda and Shomron) are a part of the historical, national and religious heritage of the Jewish People. If you forget this element your analysis becomes false”.

        that’s not an argument that can be taken seriously at all. If you rely on this, your analysis is ridiculous.

        Reply to Comment
        • Itshak Gordin Halevy

          Carmen, The Torah is for us Jews the main thing. Ignoring it is a bad mistake. That is why we will never leave any part of Eretz Israel. That is why we build Jewish cities in Yehuda and Shomron. For your information our birth rate is now much higher than the “Palestinian” one. Do you know, Carmen, that there has never been any Palestinian State? Do you know that nobody heard about any “Palestinian people” before the 60′?

          Reply to Comment
          • carmen

            “For your information our birth rate is now much higher than the “Palestinian” one. Do you know, Carmen, that there has never been any Palestinian State? Do you know that nobody heard about any “Palestinian people” before the 60′?”

            ‘Palestine’ is an ancient name, for a land of many cultures – Mondoweiss
            mondoweiss.net/2013/06/palestine-ancient-cultures

            Higher birth rates? I’d attribute that to a lack of food insecurity, adequate and safe housing, clean drinking water, quick and easy access to health care, and the IOF not spraying your crops, but I imagine you would disagree. I’ve got a clearer picture of what you believe are facts, and those ‘facts’ are contingent upon the elimination of the people who were here before you were. Negating the existence of a people, their history and their ties to the land that is coveted by the other, in this case yourself, has historically been the cornerstone of many genocides.

            Reply to Comment
          • Carmen

            Just a quick question Itshak – why would you compare zionist birth rates to a nonexistent people?

            This is such a silly thing that some zionists like to do – exclaim “there is no such thing as Palestinian people”, then very quickly exclaim how much better they are than the people that say don’t exist. PFW.

            Reply to Comment
    6. R5

      I wonder when NGOs and universities will stop wasting money on the SJW hivemind. Eventually these people have to leave the cult and get real jobs right?

      Reply to Comment
    7. Ben

      It is so interesting you use the words “hive mind” and “cult.” Those words very much describe the Israeli mindset that Inna Michaeli captures very well. “Hive mind” and “cult” are what every sentence of Michaeli’s article suggests.

      “…Even so much as recognizing the existence of the occupation — without even calling to end it — undermines the way Israelis see reality. In order for Israel and Israelis to continue existing as is, the occupation must be maintained and silenced… ”

      The Scientologists are rather like this. And they are similarly ruthless towards those they perceive as being their enemies. In my opinion there is actually a third term that the Israeli right wing settler establishment shares with Scientology: “organized crime.”

      Reply to Comment
      • AJew

        ” words very much describe the Israeli mindset”

        And this man, Ben, calls others racists. Let me try and turn around what he says the other way:

        ” words very much describe the Arab mindset”

        To be truthful, I have used such expressions with regards to Arabs. And Ben immediately took the trouble, he pointed the finger at me and called me a racist.

        It seems, as usual, Ben is being hypocritical. What he condemns in others, he permits himself and his clients (the Arabs) to do. Go figure.

        Reply to Comment
        • Ben

          Are you *trying* to make it easy for me to demonstrate your unconscious, ingrained and inveterate racism, and/or your lazy Israeli assumptions?

          I say “the Israeli,” you say “the Arab”.

          I don’t say “the Jewish,” you don’t say “the Palestinian.”

          Think about it think about it think about it.

          To be truthful, you have (constantly) used such expressions with regards to Arabs. And I have not used such expressions with regards to Jews.

          Q.E.D.

          Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            You actually did. You called Judaism a primitive tribal religion.

            But even if we put that aside. Even if you just generalise about Israelis (“Israeli mindset”) that is as racist as me referring to Arabs. Unless you think all Israelis look alike?

            Think about it, think about it, think about it.

            And stop being so blinkered. Either apply your own standards to yourself or shut the f….k up instead of criticising others for what YOU allow yourself to say!

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Israeli is a race not a nationality now? Glory be. Well, why didn’t you say so? So you don’t need formal affirmation from the Palestinians that you live in “a Jewish State,” you already live in “the Israeli State of the Israeli People.” I’m sure you’re relieved. So please notify your Foreign Ministry that they can now designate “Israeli” nationality on the passports, a bit more like all normal countries, sort of, and dispense with the racial sub-categories of “Jewish” and “Arab.” Because why make racial-subtype distinctions within the Israeli Race on passports when you can be racial with just “Israeli” and meanwhile the outside world will not even know how racial you’re being they will just think you are referring to nationality. Good on you mate. Very swift.

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            This is how the UN defines racial discrimination:

            “the term “racial discrimination” shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.”

            See the word “NATIONAL”, Ben? Of course you do. So, according to the UN, you practice racial discrimination when you lump all Israelis under one umbrella.

            So my advice to you is to:

            1. Either stop preaching to others.

            2. Or if you don’t stop, then live up to your own standards.

            Otherwise you are a hypocrite Ben!

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            “So you don’t need formal affirmation from the Palestinians that you live in “a Jewish State,”

            What is wrong with a Jewish state? It isn’t any different than a Christian or a Muslim state and there are hundreds of those.

            But your Palestinians chose to make war on the Jewish state precisely because it was to be a Jewish state.

            So in order for us to at least to begin to believe that the war of the Palestinian Arabs is about to end on the Jewish state, they need to formally affirm that they now recognise the Jewish state.

            Honestly Ben, this isn’t a difficult or illogical concept. Even someone with your intellect should be able to grasp it.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            You’re digging yourself deeper, Gustav. In time honored fashion. So…….if Israeli is a “race” then why can’t it be recognized as the Nation State of the Israeli People? Just answer the question. Don’t be shy.
            And to ask the same question in reverse fashion: why is it that Israel has steadfastly refused to designate “Israeli” as the nationality of the holders of its passports? No other country does this like this. So who exactly is being racist? Hmmmmmm?

            Since I do not think “Israeli” equals “a race” but is a nationality that clearly transcends race, and because I not do I think simply equating race and nationality in this context is anything but posing, for political trickery purposes, as a mindless simpleton who cannot make basic distinctions, I think it utterly laughable, at face value, that you stubbornly persist in telling me that my referring to the “Israeli mindset” is “racist.” At least try to be minimally plausible and not maximally transparent. What a joke.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Typo correction: “I not do I think” = “I do not think that”

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            Who said Israeliness is a race? Even Jewishness is not a race. Try and comprehend instead of being so desperate to peddle your prejudices, Ben.

            1. Isaraeliness is a nationality.

            2. Jewishness is an ethnicity.

            3. Arabness is an ethnicity too.

            The UN definition for racial DISCRIMINATION applies to both ethnicity and nationality. Read my earlier post which quotes those exact words.

            Let me guess. Ben will now ask a simpleton’s question. He will ask, how can racial discrimination apply to groups of people who are not a race?

            But think about it, think about it, think about it (I am immitating Ben 😜)

            If the UN definition of racial discrimination would not apply to discrimination based on nationality, then it souldn’t apply to ethnicity either because ethnicity is not a race. So one could not be accused of racism if one would make generalised slurs against Arabs or Jews either.

            It is a simple concept though. The intention of the UN is to stop discrimination against ANY group of people based on misconceived generalisations. Ben on the other hand thinks that discrimination against religious groups, selected nationalities, selected ethnicities is ok because those groups of people are not of a singular race. And Ben thinks of himself as a just and fair humanist. Go figure.

            Reply to Comment
          • Carmen

            “….Palestinians chose to make war on the Jewish state precisely because it was to be a Jewish state.”

            And your jewish terrorists and their enablers chose to steal Palestine to create a jewish ethnocentric theocracy with the goal of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and a slow, 70 year genocide of the indigenous Palestinian.
            Who wouldn’t fight to protect their people and their lands?

            And what’s exactly wrong with that?

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            Oh no, not the boring lady again with her one sided polemics.

            One can only steal something if that something belongs to someone else. Palestine did not belong to the Arabs. Certainly not ALL of Palestine. The land they called Palestine used to belong to Jews before the Arabs came to the scene and stole it from thieves who stole it from us. There is overwhelming archaelogical and written history to verify this fact. In fact even the Quran says that this land is the land of the Jews.

            Reply to Comment
          • carmen

            “Oh no, not the boring lady with the one-sided polemics”. Well, it takes one to know one. 🙂

            Anyway, ancient history and stories from the bible doesn’t trump modern history, no matter how long you hold your breath and stamp your feet. Actually, its exactly like saying a plot of land in say Mississippi or Shropshire or Dublin or anywhere, was in your family 200 years ago, or however many years ago and you show up at the door of the current owner’s home on that land that used to be in your family and tell the current owners ‘this land belonged to me, my departed family lived here X years ago – now git’. Seriously, that’s all it boils down to. As far as ancient history – can you trace your family to the ancient hebrews? Maybe you’re assyrian, egyptian, hittite, jebusite or philistine? You don’t know and can’t prove any rights to the land of a family that’s lived on it, worked it and loved it for centuries up to this time.

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            ” show up at the door of the current owner’s home”

            Current owners home? Around 1850 when the first wave of European Jewish refugees showed up, Palestine was not a sovereign Arab country. The legal owners were the Ottoman Turks. Altogether there were no more than about 350,000 people some of whom were Jews. Overall, the Jews were a minority but in Jerusalem there was a Jewish majority.

            The European Jews who were refugees fleeing persecution, did not say to the locals: “now git'”, they bought land with money donated by rich Jews such as the Rotschilds. It is the Arabs who tried to say to the Jews git’ because the Arabs had a sense of entitlements to all the land. But a SENSE of entitlement does not mean ACTUAL entitlement to ALL the land does it Carmen? Some of it maybe, but to all of it? Nah!

            As for ancient history. We are now in 2016 and the 1850s are long gone. Even 1948 is long gone. So can we too use your logic, Carmen, and say that we have been here for a long time so you can’t come along and tell us git’ because if you keep on doing it, we will make YOU git’. Got it?

            Reply to Comment
          • carmen

            “So can we too use your logic, Carmen, and say that we have been here for a long time so you can’t come along and tell us git’ because if you keep on doing it, we will make YOU git’. Got it?”

            No, YOU can’t use my logic Gustav/Achoo, but that won’t stop you from blustering.

            🙂 🙂 🙂

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            “No, YOU can’t use my logic Gustav/Achoo, but that won’t stop you from blustering.”

            Have it your way but remember this: Either it works for both of us or it works for neither of us. Pick your choice. Either way, I made my point. You cannot claim that the Jewish state has no right to exist.

            Of course if you choose to claim it, I’ll just cite your own logic at you to prove that you disagree with yourself.

            😜😜😜

            Reply to Comment
          • Carmen

            Really? You haven’t any claim to the logic I used anymore than you have any right to the land you’re squatting on. Period.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            “… they bought land with money …”

            “The standard Zionist position is that they showed up in Palestine in the late 19th century to reclaim their ancestral homeland. Jews bought land and started building up the Jewish community there. They were met with increasingly violent opposition from the Palestinian Arabs, presumably stemming from the Arabs’ inherent anti-Semitism. The Zionists were then forced to defend themselves and, in one form or another, this same situation continues up to today.

            The problem with this explanation is that it is simply not true, as the documentary evidence in this booklet will show. What really happened was that the Zionist movement, from the beginning, looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the indigenous Arab population so that Israel could be a wholly Jewish state, or as much as was possible. Land bought by the Jewish National Fund was held in the name of the Jewish people and could never be sold or even leased back to Arabs (a situation which continues to the present). …

            Didn’t the Zionists legally buy much of the land before Israel was established?

            “In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine…After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs.
            Thus when the partition plan was announced in 1947 it included land held illegally by Jews, which was incorporated as a fait accompli inside the borders of the Jewish state. And after Israel announced its statehood, an impressive series of laws legally assimilated huge tracts of Arab land (whose proprietors had become refugees, and were pronounced ‘absentee landlords’ in order to expropriate their lands and prevent their return under any circumstances).” …”

            http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            “Jews bought only 6% of the land”

            And who owned the remaining 94% of the land?

            Propagandists who constantly bring up this 6% statistic hope that people would be misled into thinking that the remaining 94% of the land belonged to Arabs.

            Of course, NOTHING IS FURTHER from the truth. Most of the remaining land was crown land. In other words, most of the remaining 94% of the land was NOT Arab owned.

            As for what happened later with the refugees? All wars create refugees. The Arabs wanted war? They rioted and attacked Jews? Ok then, the result of it was refugees. And there were Jewish refugees too. Not just in Palestine but from the rest of the Arab world too. About 1million Jewish refugees altogether. A lot of whom (most of them) ended up in Israel.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            The “crown land” evasion does not negate the points made about illegality and organized dispossession. As for the refugee issue that you always want to trade on in the occupation bazaar:

            “Dr. Yehouda Shenhav, professor of sociology and anthropology at Tel Aviv University and of Iraqi heritage: “Any reasonable person, Zionist or non-Zionist, must acknowledge that the analogy drawn between Palestinians and Mizrahi [Arab] Jews is unfounded. Palestinian refugees did not want to leave Palestine….Those who left did not do so of their own volition. In contrast, Jews from Arab lands came to this country under the initiative of the State of Israel and Jewish organizations.” (Ha’aretz, 8 October 2004)

            Avi Shlaim, eminent Israeli historian born into an affluent and influential Jewish family in Baghdad: “We are not refugees, nobody expelled us from Iraq, nobody told us that we were unwanted. But we are the victims of the Israeli-Arab conflict.” (Ha’aretz, August 11, 2005)
            Ran Cohen, member of the Knesset: “I am not a refugee….I came at the behest of Zionism, due to the pull that this land exerts, and due to the idea of
redemption. Nobody is going to define me as a refugee.” (Ha’aretz, 8/10/04)

            Yisrael Yeshayahu, speaker of the Knesset: “We are not refugees. [Some of
us] came to this country before the state was born. We had messianic aspirations.”

            Shlomo Hillel, former minister and speaker of the Knesset: “I don’t regard the departure of Jews from Arab lands as that of refugees. They came here because they wanted to, as Zionists.”

            Also, any legitimate grievances Arab Jewish emigrants may have with Arab governments can be pursued through international law. It must be noted, however, that whereas the expulsion of well over one million Palestinians from Palestine between late 1947 and 1967, was carried out by Jewish forces (e.g., Irgun, Sternists, Haganah) and the IDF, Palestinians played no role whatsoever in the departure of Jews from Arab countries. In short, apples and oranges.”

            -David on March 10, 2013 at 12:24 pm
            https://bbcwatch.org/2013/03/09/bbc-world-service-promotes-gilad-atzmon-again/

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            Always self referencing huh? How can one argue with the likes of Shlaim and his pals? They are a bit like journalist on Der Sturmer quoting der Fuhrer as their source of proof. Or the ones in Pravda quoting Lenin and Stalin.

            Suggestion: try some non extreme leftist non pro Palestinian sources. Then you might have a shred of credibility.

            Reply to Comment
          • AJew

            Here is what my sources say about the expulsions of the various Jewish communities from Arab countries:

            “In 1945, roughly 1 million Jews lived peacefully in the various Arab states of the Middle East, many of them in communities that had existed for thousands of years. After the Arabs rejected the United Nations decision to partition Palestine and create a Jewish state, however, the Jews of the Arab lands became targets of their own governments’ anti-Zionist fervor. As Egypt’s delegate to the UN in 1947 chillingly told the General Assembly: “The lives of one million Jews in Muslim countries will be jeopardized by partition.” The dire warning quickly became the brutal reality.

            Throughout 1947 and 1948, Jews in Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, Syria, and Yemen (Aden) were persecuted, their property and belongings were confiscated, and they were subjected to severe anti-Jewish riots instigated by the governments. In Iraq, Zionism was made a capital crime. In Syria, anti-Jewish pogroms erupted in Aleppo and the government froze all Jewish bank accounts. In Egypt, bombs were detonated in the Jewish quarter, killing dozens. In Algeria, anti-Jewish decrees were swiftly instituted and in Yemen, bloody pogroms led to the death of nearly 100 Jews.”

            http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/talking/jew_refugees.html

            Reply to Comment
    8. AJew

      “So please notify your Foreign Ministry that they can now designate “Israeli” nationality on the passports, a bit more like all normal countries, sort of, and dispense with the racial sub-categories of “Jewish” and “Arab.”

      I don’t have to. Israeli passports of today don’t identify the holder as Jewish or Arab. It identifies them as Israeli.

      Honestly Ben, don’t you know anything?

      Reply to Comment
    9. Ben

      Correction: Compulsory ID cards and a whole range of government documents, not passports, is what I meant to say. Same basic issue. Israel refused to recognize an Israeli nationality at the country’s establishment in 1948, making an unusual distinction between “citizenship” and “nationality.”

      I know this will infuriate you, Gustav, such is your ingrained entitlement:

      https://www.google.com/amp/mondoweiss.net/2013/10/recognize-nationality-endanger/amp/

      “Israel remains the only country on earth, as far as I am aware, that does not recognize its own nationality, does not recognize a major part of its citizenry, the indigenous Palestinian citizens of the state, as nationals of the state, but recognizes foreigners who share the majority’s religion as nationals!
      Only decades of Israeli propaganda, mainly manufactured by complicit academia and propagated by pliant journalism serving Zionism, could have covered up this profound and blatant pillar of Israeli apartheid from world public opinion.
      Imagine if France, say, would not recognize its non-Catholic citizens as French nationals and would extend French nationality to all Catholics around the world, privileging them over its own citizens who are not Catholic. And of course French Catholics are not colonial settlers who gained hegemony and demographic majority through the systematic ethnic cleansing of the non-Catholic indigenous population of the land!”

      Reply to Comment
    10. Ben

      Here’s your “discrimination” flimflammery usefully dissected. Sorry. This has been an illuminating back and forth. I’m grateful to you:

      http://972mag.com/denying-israeli-nationality-only-perpetuates-discrimination/81597/

      “…The idea of a “nation” used to mean a society made up of one ethnic group. But many new states were created in modern times alongside the creation of countless new nations that were not solely composed of people one ethnic origin or religion. Following the establishment of the United Nations, the principle meaning of “nation” came to include all of a state’s citizens, regardless of ethnic origin or religion….”

      Reply to Comment
    11. AJew

      How sloppy of Ben. He made an outlandish allegation about what is written in Israeli passports. Now he is angry that he has been caught out and he is telling us that:

      “Correction: Compulsory ID cards and a whole range of government documents, not passports, is what I meant to say. Same basic issue. Israel refused to recognize an Israeli nationality at the country’s establishment in 1948, making an unusual distinction between “citizenship” and “nationality.”

      But first of all that is no longer true either. Our Teudat Zehut (id card) no longer includes information about the ethnicity of the holder.

      It used to. It used to because of what we perceived as useful security measures in war time it is useful to know which of our citizens are of the same ethnicity as the ehnicity with which we are at war with. How shocking says Ben. But all countries take security measures during times of war. During WWII America interned it’s Japanese and German naturalised citizens into camps.

      As for the following nonsense of Ben’s that Israel:

      “does not recognize a major part of its citizenry, the indigenous Palestinian citizens of the state, as nationals of the state”

      Utter BS. 20% of Israel’s citizens are Arab. And by law they have the same rights as Jewish citizens even though a lot of the Arab citizens (not all) align themselves with our enemies.

      Having said that. Is there informal discrimination in Israel? Of course there is. Especially since we are still at war with the Palestinian Arabs because they refuse to sign a peace deal. But is there a country on this planet which does not have discrimination even during peace time? Definitely not. Anyone who claims otherwise has an ulterior agenda. Is discrimination wrong? Of course it is. That means ALL discrimination is wrong. Even discrimination by Arabs against Jews not just by Jews against Arabs. And indeed, Israel has a law which forbids discrimination which has been successfully used by our Arab citizens to reverse such modes of behavior. The only exception to what I said above is our immigration law which allows unrestricted Jewish immigration to Israel. No apologies for that though because this is the only Jewish country in the world. The whole reason for it’s establishment was to ensure that this place would give shelter to the Jewish people from persecutions to which we were subject to as minorities. Yes, in Arab countries too. So we are not going to let this country too to become another place where Jews would be a minority. It would reverse the whole purpose of why this country was created. We are not going to let that happen, even though it infuriates the Jew hating Ben’s of this world.

      That’s it from me. Ben has again managed to side track this discussion from what it started. It started as Ben’s clearly racist comment against the Israeli people which as usual, he denies but which I proved (read my previous posts). Ben is now desperately trying to deflect from what even he must realise now about having put his foot in his mouth.

      Over and out.

      Reply to Comment
      • Ben

        Oh nonsense. Again. You’re just picking nits. Anything but confront the real issues. Was that Supreme Court decision reversed? I always know you’ve reached the end of the line when you pull out the “we are at war” excuse.

        Reply to Comment
        • AJew

          “War excuse”

          Contrary to Ben’s claims, he knows nothing (as he demonstrated with his ignorant posts above).

          Aaaaaaaand, the only thing that he proved is his extreme bias and bigotry.

          I just had to respond once more. But that’s it now. Again he managed to bore me 🙀

          Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            I say “the Israeli,” you say “the Arab.”

            I don’t say “the Jewish,” you don’t say “the Palestinian.”

            Q.E.D.

            Reply to Comment
    12. AJew

      “You haven’t any claim to the logic I used”

      I see. You kinda patented your logic right? Only you have the right to use it?

      Ahhhh ok 😂

      Reply to Comment
    13. Click here to load previous comments

The stories that matter.
The missing context.
All in one weekly email.

Subscribe to +972's newsletter