On what moral basis were Palestinians "obligated" to accept partition?
https://x.com/nxt888/status/2055735505707565412
"Palestinian suffering is historically brought upon by themselves."
This sentence is the most revealing thing you have written in this entire exchange.
Not because it is uniquely callous. It is a commonly held position.
But because it exposes, with unusual clarity, the foundational move that your entire argument has been making from the beginning.
It assigns agency and therefore responsibility entirely to the Palestinians, and strips agency and therefore responsibility entirely from the Zionist movement, the British colonial government, the United States, and the international community.
The Palestinian population did not bring upon themselves the Balfour Declaration, which was issued without their consent.
They did not bring upon themselves the British Mandate policy of facilitating Jewish immigration against their expressed political objections.
They did not bring upon themselves the UN partition plan, which was voted on by a body in which they had no representation.
They did not bring upon themselves Plan Dalet, which was adopted by the Haganah two months before Arab armies entered.
They did not bring upon themselves the expulsions at Lydda, at Haifa, at Jaffa, documented by Israeli historians, including Benny Morris, who names the commanders and describes the orders.
What they did was resist.
And you have classified resistance to dispossession as the cause of the dispossession.
That is not history.
That is the logic every colonial power has used about every colonized population that refused to accept its own elimination quietly.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home