8 Comments
User's avatar
EKB's avatar

You do forget the actual attempted outcome, which was partition, like between India and Pakistan. The difference is that the Jews said yes and the Arabs said no.

There was no Kahanism in 1948 and there is very little of it today. Equating that ideology with islamism is disingenuous. There was a huge peace movement in Israel until the 2nd intifada. The people slaughtered on October 7 were the peaceniks. If Israel is turning away from a 2 state solution Palestinians have no one to blame but themselves.

The entirety of Palestinian society rejects the existence of Israel. Always has going all the way back to Grand Mufti Husseini. Look at the polling.

Sure there might have been the Irgun in 1948 but they were not interested in stopping the creation of a Palestinian Arab state. They were only interested in creating a Jewish one and protecting the Jewish citizens from the muftis fedayeen and Arab armies. Sure they bombed the British and innocents died, but they did not become the army of Israel the Haganah did. To understand the Irgun you need to read Jabotinsky. Nothing like islamism.

Expand full comment
John Aziz's avatar

I don't necessarily disagree, but the Kahanists are here today and even in the 1990s they killed an Israeli prime minister who tried to negotiate peace. Before Kahanists there were Jabotinskyites and Irgun. I am not against Israel, I want peace and reconciliation with Israel, but just as I recognise the extremists on my own side who commit terror in the name of Palestinians and I fully disavow and condemn these people, there are some extremists who derailed things on your side too. Honestly I can let all of the extremism go if we can make peace and live together in peace.

Expand full comment
EKB's avatar

Yes the Kahanists exist and they killed Rabin. I'm just saying they are not the majority and never were and I find it incorrect to compare their influence to the islamists.

I have no problem with jettisoning all extremists. Peace would be nice.

Expand full comment
Loftyloops's avatar

"In a world that at the time remained dominated by empires and colonial interests, it was no small thing for a major power to acknowledge, even in limited language, the civil and religious rights of a subject population."

You should look into some other official colonial proclamations. This is not unusual empires always have PR.

Expand full comment
Prospero's avatar

You get a lot of bad faith (or at least bad read) comments accusing you of forgetting this or that but I think you're writing interesting, nuanced, and honest works

Expand full comment
JVG's avatar

It seems to me that the Arabs who remained in Israel post-statehood without attacking their Jewish neighbors do enjoy living side-by-side in peace and citizenship today. That was the fulfillment of the Balfour Declaration.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
May 8
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Uzi Baram's avatar

And with the Oslo Process, it felt (I was in Jerusalem during those days) like we were close, a shift from Jews and Palestinians to those for peace and those against coexistence. It seemed impossible but the impossible becomes possible through words and actions by people of goodwill. Idealistic? Yes. But we are talking of a land of prophets

Expand full comment
JVG's avatar
May 14Edited

This podcast episode by Haviv Rettig Gur gave me a lot of insight on that period and its aftermath:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ask-haviv-anything/id1794590850?i=1000704511936

Expand full comment