The 76th anniversary of the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine is but ten days away. Any thoughts?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
29 November 1947 - Resolution 181 (II): thoughts?
- Thread starter Jayhawker Soule
- Start date
<joke> The Yemenites voted 'no' and it took them nearly 76 years to figure out how to unleash their rage, until finally the Houthis let fly with some rockets in the current conflict </joke>
Joking aside, I think about how history could have been so much different if the Arabs had simply said: Yes, we agree with the terms. The Jews also weren't happy with the details of the terms, but they were willing to settle, and largely celebrated the results of the vote. My rosh yeshiva z"l used to tell us how he had been a teenager at the time and the next day hitched a ride in the back of a pickup truck, and danced the whole way to his stop. Whatever naysayers and haters say, Israel is a bastion of modernity and has contributed innumerable times to various fields of science, literature, humanities and arts. As an admittedly subjective observer and player, I would say that that vote was one of the most important decisions the UN ever made.
Joking aside, I think about how history could have been so much different if the Arabs had simply said: Yes, we agree with the terms. The Jews also weren't happy with the details of the terms, but they were willing to settle, and largely celebrated the results of the vote. My rosh yeshiva z"l used to tell us how he had been a teenager at the time and the next day hitched a ride in the back of a pickup truck, and danced the whole way to his stop. Whatever naysayers and haters say, Israel is a bastion of modernity and has contributed innumerable times to various fields of science, literature, humanities and arts. As an admittedly subjective observer and player, I would say that that vote was one of the most important decisions the UN ever made.
The zionists managed a very impressive feat! They were faced with opposition of many kinds, and they successfully used what support they could gather from here and from there.
If I understand correctly from the article the shape of the partition is complicated by British interests in preserving a route between Iraq and the Suez Canal. Its one of those questions one immediately wonders about when looking at the map partition. That is footnote-d in this article by footnote #139 taken from this 2004 biography: Yigal Allon, Native Son. Israel does not directly border Iraq, but Jordon borders Iraq. Israel borders Jordan. The comment suggests British value a route through Jordan and newly created Israel to the Suez channel. The British were interested at the time in oil in Iraq among other things. (see Iraq–United Kingdom relations - Wikipedia) This is perhaps one of the less mentioned factors influencing the shape of the partition.
My main thoughts on it are twofold:
- The actions of Zionist militias and, later, Israel since the 1947 partition, including the Deir Yassin massacre and the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes during the Nakba, have deeply reinforced some of the concerns Arabs had about the original plan and the possibility—now reality—of Israel's expansionism.
- The only way forward is to prioritize the present and its circumstances, albeit without forgetting or sidelining the past. I hope to see a realistic and fair two-state solution become a reality within my lifetime, and I realize that it would most likely be a gradual process, not an overnight transformation or a push of a button.
Yes, the Deir Yassin massacre was unconscionable, and the List of killings and massacres in Mandatory Palestine (including the 1929 Palestine riots) is painfully sobering. So, too, the Nakba, the 1936-1939 Arab revolt, the resulting White Paper of 1939, and many aspects of the Jewish exodus from the Muslim Middle East.
My hope, however, was to create a thread that allowed for an informed discussion of the Partition Plan.
Understandable. Admittedly, I believe I'm currently too limited both in mental energy and time to give this specific subject its due in terms of further reading, thinking, and posting about it, hence my general and quite summarized response (which I realize is probably inadequate).
In the meantime, I hope you and yours are doing well, at least as much as possible given the circumstances. Wishing you salaam/shalom, as always.
Any particular aspect? Some pointers for discussion would be appreciated.
I think the rejection of the partition plan is often invoked in modern argument as victim-blaming, as though the Nakba and modern occupation could've been avoided if those troublesome and uncooperative Arabs had just taken the gracious partition wherein they gave up the bulk of their land.
I'm open to a nuanced conversation about the partition plan, and while I trust your intentions as the original poster, I'm doubtful it will be found here.
I'm open to a nuanced conversation about the partition plan, and while I trust your intentions as the original poster, I'm doubtful it will be found here.
Yes.
At the same time the partition plan, along with the antecedent Shoah, serves as important context. The discussion of this pivotal history does not deserve to be dismissed or deprecated as largely a contrivance for victim-blaming.
My motivation for starting this particular thread was to partially address the many
'yes, but before that, they ..."
responses to every Israel-Palestine outrage. Perhaps I had a better option, but none came to mind.
I have nothing except to sigh at the level of rage and hatred in the region of which 1947 was a prime example. "Yes before that they" is a phrase of revenge and entitlement which is by its nature endless.
Fair enough. Are you aware of any decent reading on the subject?
Reading the stuff from the UN is rather dry.
Wikipedia is convenient. My go-to source is (and has been) Howard M. Sachar's
but it's an 1131 page tome exclusive of its extensive bibliography and index.
Ponder This
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the UN was unwise to affirm a partition plan not mutually agreed upon by the parties affected.
Also, looking at the 1947 map, I wonder if failure wasn't a natural outcome of the design. They chopped everything up into pieces! The 1947 map looks like a try at a one-state solution with provinces and a capital and not a try at a two state solution. If they wanted a two-state solution, then the very least they could've done would've been to make sure that both the Jewish state and the Palestinian state were internally connected instead of chopping each into three disconnected pieces. Usually states get split into North-South or East-West, with each of the two states remaining internally connected. They don't usually get chopped up into a total mess like the 1947 map.
Perhaps flaws inherent to the plan from the very beginning have contributed to the problems there today.