As Palestinians Mark 60th Anniversary of Their Dispossession, a Conversation with Palestinian Writer

[mike_c]

As Palestinians Mark 60th Anniversary of Their Dispossession, a Conversation with Palestinian Writer and Doctor Ghada Karmi.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/5/15/as_palestinians_mark_60th_anniversary_of

Today is the sixtieth anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel, what Palestinians call the Nakba, or catastrophe, that resulted in the expulsion and dispossession of over 750,000 Palestinians from their cities and villages. Ghada Karmi is a well-known Palestinian writer and medical doctor from Jerusalem who lives in Britain. She has written several books about Palestinian history and her own experience as a refugee, including In Search of Fatima: A Palestinian Story and, most recently, Married to Another Man: Israel’s Dilemma in Palestine.

/snip/

AMY GOODMAN: The narrative in this country of that period when you left was that the Arab governments called on the Palestinians to leave, not that you were forced out by the Israeli government or, before that it wasn’t Israel, by Jewish settlers.

GHADA KARMI: I can’t believe that anybody still believes this narrative. Is that so? I grew up with this nonsense, and I always used to wonder how sane human beings could actually believe that people would get up, leave their belongings, leave their home, their land, their livelihood and just walk away because somebody told them to. Now, of course, later—first of all, this was completely untrue. There was no such instruction. It was not—on the contrary, the leaders told the Palestinians to stay put, not to leave, but then they said, look, get the women and children out, evacuate them temporarily, but the men were not allowed to leave.

And, in fact, when we left in that April of 1948, they stopped our taxi. They stopped it. These were militia, Arab militias. And they said, “Where are you going?” And he said, “Look, this is my wife. These are children. I am returning,” which was perfectly true. He said, “I’m returning the next—tomorrow morning. I just have to take them to my in-laws’ house just for safety, and I will be back.” And they took his name and so on.

So, of course, this was all nonsense. But the thing, you know, that used to get me is that you’d say to friends of Israel and devoted friends of Israel—you’d say to them, “OK, supposing—alright, supposing we, the Palestinians, left either because we were told to or because we just felt like it, why were we never allowed back? Why? People go on holiday. They do. They leave their houses, and they go away for a bit. They go and visit somebody. So, does it mean they can’t be allowed back to their homes?” And, of course, they never had an answer for this.

more@link

on edit-- I have to add, this was one of the most compelling stories I've heard recently on Democracy Now! It was one of those stories you sit in your car listening to long after arriving at your destination, which is exactly what I did. The link is to the full transcript-- it is excellent-- and of course one can stream the audio from the site as well.

[subsuelo]

1. Everyone knows Israel stole the land from the native Palestinians

At least every sane person that isn't living in a dreamworld of denial and delusions.

But the fact is - it's 60 years on, Israel exists as a sovereign nation, has every right to exist, and there isn't going back. The U.S. stole the native Americans land - but what's done is done and one can only look to the future to try and rectify the wrongs as fairly as possible.

What is so completely appalling and unjustifiable to me however, is the fact they are still stealing land from the native Palestinians. It hasn't ended yet! The message is clear - what was stolen just wasn't enough. Always more more more. Giving the native population less and less, while all along pouring unneeded fuel of hatred and anger on an already blazing fire. It's just plain stupid - I mean, when will it end? When does Israel say ok we stole enough now, it really is time to cut it out. Or - when does Israel say ok it's time to rectify matters. 200, 300 years from now will Gaza and the West Bank be merely reservation camps? (Isn't that basically what they are now? One state with a couple of large reservation camps?)

Of course what is also appalling is the senseless killings of innocent civilians - so broadly supported by immoral leadership on both sides. They kill us so we kill them. On and on.

But the side with all the power on this thing to really bring about an end is the Israeli side. Of course ending the rocket attacks is important, no doubt to that. But Israel holds all the cards. If it truly wants peace, it can have it. And Israel's leaders know it. There's just one thing remaining on the priority task to accomplish first. Stealing the land.

That's what it comes down to every time.

[msmcghee]

2. Do you have a melody line . .

. . to go with the words. I just about have them memorized. ;)

[subsuelo]

3. Do you have any comment on the topic?

Or just more of the same pointless distractions

[msmcghee]

5. Actually, I addressed this question pretty thoroughly . .

. . in the past. Here's a reprint for your reading pleasure.

********************

The Logical Error Inherent in Blaming One Side or the Other for the Arab Exodus of 1947-1948

. . an error made by almost everyone who discusses this issue.

I know I said I wasn't saying any more about this topic but it's been eating at me and I wanted to discuss this issue in more depth. The underlying question that rises up periodically in this forum and that always gets our juices flowing is "Why did Palestinian Arabs leave the Jewish zone before and during the War for Independence". The agenda, of course, is that by showing that one side or the other bears full responsibility for the exodus, the "right of return" of the Palestinian refugees created by that war can be more easily refuted by Israelis or more justifiably demanded by Palestinians - as the case may be.

As I said in my previous post - there were a variety of reasons. And I still believe that to be true. But there's a fundamental problem with the way the question is set up. One side says that the Arab High Command issued orders or broadcast requests that Arabs go to neighboring Arab states until the conflict was over. The other side says that the Israeli forces threatened them and/or Jewish paramilitary armed bands killed Arab civilians as part of a terror campaign to get them to leave. I think all these things happened - more or less.

The problem is - that even if all those things are true - that does not necessarily mean that any Arab actually packed up their families and left for those reasons - even though each side wants us to believe that is case.

There are several problems with this casus beli reasoning. First, most people are inherently mistrustful of government. I am sure Arabs are no different in this regard than anyone else. Imagine that you lived in a rural village where your family goes back several years - if not several generations. Then you hear (or hear about) some Arab official from another state on the radio saying that you should get out. Or, perhaps you hear about some massacres by Jewish paramilitaries - and your friends are discussing the possibility of leaving. Maybe you heard that either the Arab or Israeli army will be coming through with big guns.

The first thing any person in their right mind is going to think is - yeah right, they want me to leave my home and all my belongings, go to an unknown place where I have no idea how we will be fed or sheltered, there will be a big war that will annihilate all the Jews - and then we can come back to our house and everything is going to be right where we left it. Thanks, but I think I'll take my chances, stay right here with my family, dig the cellar a little deeper, put away some stores, etc.

I think people would ordinarily be very resistant to such rumors. I think the real impetus very likely had more to do with group psychology. Arabs were facing a potentially dangerous unknown. That normally makes people conservative - less willing to take risks - more likely to stick with what they know, familiar territory.

They may have heard Arab commanders telling them to go - maybe not. If they did - they didn't know whether to believe them. They may have heard about Deir Yassin or other paramilitary actions that grew into "massacres" as they were passed along by people on both sides who would benefit from exaggerating the viciousness of the attacks - despicable as they were. But, I suspect they knew that the rumors they heard were probably not that reliable - as is the case with most wartime rumors.

Regardless, I am sure that few of them wanted to leave their home, gardens, orchards and possessions behind. I think what caused the majority of those who left to make that decision to leave - was seeing that first, the wealthier members of Arab society left, long before hostilities started, and then in most cases they probably saw a few key friends, family or elders make that decision. I suspect individually their instinct would have been to stay put. Once they saw others leaving however - once they imagined being left alone to face the unknown - they decided that whether they were going to live or die - their best chance was to stay with their friends and family, those they knew and trusted and did not want to be separated from. They would not want to face this alone.

Once a critical few in each village made the choice to leave the rest would probably decide to go with them. In many villages that happened and that became a mass exodus for 700,000 or so Arabs. For about 100,000, for whatever reasons, those ingredients never came together in that way - a few critical deciders in those villages chose to stay put - and those villages remained and became part of Israel after the war. The evidence seems to show that villages either left completely or stayed completely. There were not many villages that were only partially deserted.

Certainly, there were many individual cases where the motives were compelling enough on their own to cause them to leave or stay put - without considering what their friends, family and elders were going to do. But I think the mass psychology of either fleeing together rather than standing alone against the unknown - or staying and facing the unknown together - was probably the over-riding factor for most Arabs at the time.

I know this will not provide ammunition for those on either side who want to show that either the Israelis or the Arab League alone "caused" the exodus. I think neither of those groups had the power to control the events that followed and led to the exodus. I think the Arab exodus was caused by human nature. It was caused by what happens to humans in war.

[msmcghee]

8. I see that Benny Morris shares my view of this . .

. . that the Arab exodus was mostly the result of the nature of humans caught in war.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/136085?from=rss

Israel at 60 - From Dove to Hawk

A prominent Israeli historian explains why, after decades of research about the Jewish state, he now holds out little hope for reconciliation between Jews and Palestinians .
By Benny Morris | Special Guest Columnist
May 8, 2008 | Updated: 6:23 p.m. ET May 8, 2008


<snip>

My historical account of that event, published a few years later, was greeted with some acclaim by Palestinians and their sympathizers—and much shock by Is­raelis, who had been brought up to believe, or to pretend to believe, that the Palestini­ans had fled their homes four decades earli­er because of orders or advice from their leaders. In certain places, at certain times, there had been such advice and orders, of course. But there had also been Israeli ex­pulsions, as well as the chaos of British withdrawal and economic hardship and anxiety about an uncharted future under Jewish rule. In most places it was the flail and fear of onrushing hostilities that had set some 700,000 Arabs on the roads.

<snip>

[oberliner]

7. Some thoughts on the article and your comments

First, I did find the article to be very informative and interesting. It is always great to get first-hand stories from people who actually lived through these experiences to get as full a picture as possible. I think it would behoove anyone who is interested in this topic to read as many such accounts as they can, from as many different communities and perspectives as possible. More information is always better.

As to your comments, I disagree with the characterization that "Israel stole the land from the native Palestinians" and I do not agree that Israel could have peace if they truly wanted it.

I do, however, believe that Israelis and Palestinians need to sit down and negotiate a peace agreement in the very near future, hopefully with the help of a Democratic American president.

The Geneva Accords, in my view, would make a really good starting point for such negotiations.

[msmcghee]

4. It was compelling because it . .

. . feels good to have one's beliefs affirmed publicly . That's understandable and I'm glad you could find some relief in that. For that reason I won't list all the falsehoods and logical errors.

[Crunchy Frog]

6. Benny Morris is tomorrow.

That should be interesting, as was this.

[mike_c]

9. yep, I'm looking forward to it....

eom