Editer l'article Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog
26 mars 2009 4 26 /03 /mars /2009 13:06
Palestinians Who Helped Create Israel

by Daniel Pipes
Jerusalem Post
March 26, 2009


Send Comment RSS

Palestinians have so loudly and for so long (nearly a century) rejected Zionism that Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, Yasir Arafat, and Hamas may appear to command unanimous Palestinian support.

But no: polling research finds that a substantial minority of Palestinians, about 20 percent, is ready to live side-by-side with a sovereign Jewish state. Although this minority has never been in charge and its voice has always been buried under rejectionist bluster, Hillel Cohen of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has uncovered its surprisingly crucial role in history.

He explores this subject in the pre-state period in Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917–1948 (translated by Haim Watzman, University of California Press); then, the same author, translator, and press are currently preparing a sequel, Good Arabs: The Israeli Security Agencies and the Israeli Arabs, 1948–1967, for publication in 2010.

In Army of Shadows, Cohen demonstrates the many roles that accommodating Palestinians played for the Yishuv, the pre-state Jewish community in the Holy Land. They provided labor, engaged in commerce, sold land, sold arms, handed over state assets, provided intelligence about enemy forces, spread rumors and dissension, convinced fellow Palestinians to surrender, fought the Yishuv's enemies, and even operated behind enemy lines. So great was their cumulative assistance, one wonders if the State of Israel could have come into existence without their contribution.

The mufti's absolute rejection of Zionism was intended to solidify the Palestinian population but had the opposite effect. The Husseini clique's selfishness, extremism and brutality undermined solidarity: using venomous language and murderous tactics, declaring jihad against anyone who disobeyed the mufti, and deeming more than half the Palestinian population "traitors" pushed many fence-sitters and whole communities (notably the Druse) over to the Zionist side.

Consequently, Cohen writes, "As time passed, a growing number of Arabs were willing to turn their backs on the [rejectionists] and offer direct assistance to the British or Zionists." He calls collaboration with Zionism "not only common but a central feature of Palestinian society and politics." No one before Cohen has understood the historical record this way.

He discerns a wide range of motives on the part of the Yishuv's Palestinian allies: economic gain, class or tribal interests, nationalist ambitions, fear or hatred of the Husseini faction, personal ethics, neighborliness, or individual friendships. Against those who would call these individuals "collaborators" or even "traitors," he argues that they actually understood the situation more astutely than Husseini and the rejectionists: accommodationists presciently realized that the Zionist project was too strong to resist and that attempting to do so would lead to destruction and exile, so they made peace with it.

By 1941 the intelligence machinery had developed sophisticated methods that sought to utilize every contact with Palestinians for information gathering purposes. Army of Shadows highlights that the Yishuv's advanced social development; what Cohen terms the "deep intelligence penetration of Palestinian Arab society" was a one-way process – Palestinians lacked the means to reciprocate and penetrate Jewish life.

Along with the development of a military force (the Haganah), a modern economic infrastructure, and a democratic polity, this infiltration of Palestinian life ranks as one of Zionism's signal achievements. It meant that while the Zionists could unify and go on the offensive, "Palestinian society was preoccupied with internal battles and was unable to mobilize and unify behind a leadership."

Cohen is modest about the implications of his research, specifically arguing that Palestinian assistance was not "the main cause" of the Arab defeat in 1948-49. Fair enough, but the evidence he produces reveals the crucial role of this assistance to the success of the Zionist enterprise in the period of his first volume. Interestingly, while that assistance remains important to the Israel Defense Forces today (how else could the IDF foil so many West Bank terrorist attempts?), the State of Israel deploys far greater resources than the Yishuv, making Palestinian assistance much less central today.

Cohen also confirms the key fact that not all Palestinians are the enemies of Israel – something I have documented for more recent times. This offers cause for hope; indeed, were the 20 percent of Palestinians who accept Israel expanded to 60 percent, the Arab-Israeli conflict would close down. Such a Palestinian change of heart – and not more "painful concessions" by Israel – should be the goal of every would-be peacemaker.

Related Topics: Arab-Israel conflict & diplomacy, History, Palestinians

Send Comment RSS

I bought my first television set to watch Anwar Sadat visit Israel in November 1977 and for the next year and a half avidly and hopefully followed developments until the Egyptian and Israeli governments finally stumbled their way to signing a treaty thirty years ago today.

But I have long since given up on the treaty. In a 2006 article, "Rethinking the Egypt-Israel 'Peace' Treaty," I deemed it a "failure" for having been based on multiple fallacies and wishful predictions that:

  • Sadat, Carter, and Begin with great but mistaken expectations.

    Once signed, agreements signed by unelected Arab leaders would convince the masses to give up their ambitions to eliminate Israel.
  • These agreements would be permanent, with no backsliding, much less duplicity.

  • Other Arab states would inevitably follow suit.

  • War can be concluded through negotiations rather than by one side giving up.

Given my own dim view of the treaty, I watch with interest what other observers have to say about it this week, on the occasion of its anniversary. Here is a small sampling of what others are writing:

  • The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs: "Even today, the peace treaty is considered a watershed event in the geopolitical situation in the Middle East, opening the gateway to peace between Israel and the Arab world, and ushering in a new agenda of diplomatic relations in the region."

  • The Israel Project: "Israel waited 30 years for an Arab leader to show the courage and vision to make peace. Sadat then went to Jerusalem and now Israel and Egypt have enjoyed 30 years of peace."

  • Zvi Mazel, a former Israeli ambassador to Egypt: "The cold peace and escalating incitement against Israel and the Jews are not conducive to optimism. And yet peace has endured for 30 years, surviving acute crises. Does this mean it will go on? Is the will for peace going to be stronger than the vociferous opposition in Egypt? We cannot and should not be blind to the unpredictability which is one of the characteristics of the region, yet there are grounds for cautious optimism."

  • Kenneth Stein, professor at Emory University and a long-time aid to Jimmy Carter: "The treaty demonstrated that Middle East leaders, and not just foreign powers, have the power to transform regional politics."

As these quotes suggest, the general take on the treaty is positive. That's unfortunate, for if one misunderstands the 1979 treaty, its repetition becomes the more likely. (March 26, 2009)

Related Topics: Arab-Israel conflict & diplomacy, Egypt


#913: Pipes discusses "Palestinians who helped create Israel" in Jer. Post
Partager cet article



  • : Le blog de Gad
  • : Lessakele : déjouer les pièges de l'actualité Lessakele, verbe hébraïque qui signifie "déjouer" est un blog de commentaire libre d'une actualité disparate, visant à taquiner l'indépendance et l'esprit critique du lecteur et à lui prêter quelques clés de décrytage personnalisées.
  • Contact


English German Spanish Portuguese Italian Dutch
Russian Polish Hebrew Czech Greek Hindi


Magie de la langue hébraïque

A tous nos chers lecteurs.


Ne vous est-il jamais venu à l'esprit d'en savoir un peu plus sur le titre de ce blog ?

Puisque nous nous sommes aujourd'hui habillés de bleu, il conviendrait de rentrer plus a fond dans l'explication du mot lessakel.

En fait Lessakel n'est que la façon française de dire le mot léhasskil.

L'hébreu est une langue qui fonctionne en déclinant des racines.

Racines, bilitères, trilitères et quadrilitères.

La majorité d'entre elle sont trilitères.

Aussi Si Gad a souhaité appeler son site Lessakel, c'est parce qu'il souhaitait rendre hommage à l'intelligence.

Celle qui nous est demandée chaque jour.

La racine de l'intelligence est sé'hel שכל qui signifie l'intelligence pure.

De cette racine découlent plusieurs mots

Sé'hel > intelligence, esprit, raison, bon sens, prudence, mais aussi croiser

Léhasskil > Etre intelligent, cultivé, déjouer les pièges

Sé'hli > intelligent, mental, spirituel

Léhistakel > agir prudemment, être retenu et raisonnable, chercher à comprendre

Si'hloute > appréhension et compréhension

Haskala >  Instruction, culture, éducation

Lessa'hlen > rationaliser, intellectualiser

Heschkel > moralité

Si'htanout > rationalisme

Si'hloul > Amélioration, perfectionnement


Gageons que ce site puisse nous apporter quelques lumières.

Aschkel pour Lessakel.



Les news de blogs amis