"The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappé;
Oneworld Publications, 2006.
Among many Israeli academics and Western revisionists, it has become
fashionable to examine Israel's war of independence from an Arab perspective in
which Jews were the aggressors and Arabs the victims.[1]
This trend began in 1989 with works by Ben-Gurion University professor Benny
Morris[2]
and Oxford University professor Avi Shlaim,[3]
and developed further with the writings of the late Hebrew University
anthropologist Baruch Kimmerling,[4]
Neve Gordon[5]
at Ben-Gurion University, and Meron Benvenisti,[6]
a political scientist who served as deputy mayor of Jerusalem between 1971 and
1978.
Many of these so-called New Historians and their fellow travelers may
have embraced the notion of reverse victimization in order to rationalize the
unexpected survival of Israel in the 1948 and 1967 wars. They present every
massacre of Jews as an understandable response to a Jewish offense, for example
portraying both the April 13, 1948 Mount Scopus convoy massacre and the May 15,
1948 murders of fifty Jews who had surrendered to the Arab Legion at Gush
Etzion as an Arab reprisal for the April 9-11, 1948 Irgun attack on the Arab
village of Deir Yassin.[7]
Pappé's PolemicsIlan Pappé has now seized on what the New Historians started and brought it to new heights by promoting revisionist arguments that place exclusive blame on early Zionists for victimizing Arabs and destroying opportunities for peace and reconciliation. Indeed, it has become the strategy by which Pappé has salvaged his turbulent career: He left Haifa University in 2007 after the exposure of his research errors undercut his master's thesis and his endorsement of the British boycott of Israeli universities prompted the president of the university to call for his resignation.[8] From his new position at the University of Exeter, he has promoted his 2006 book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine,[9] which argues that even prior to Israel's independence, Zionist officials plotted to expel Arabs from Palestine.
Pappé's thesis is that Israel's founding prime minister, David
Ben-Gurion, working with the Zionist leadership in Palestine, made special
preparations for ethnic cleansing known as Plan D. This plan envisioned the
conquest by the Haganah—the Mandate-era precursor to the Israeli army—of areas
occupied by Arabs but allotted by the United Nations to the Jewish state.
Pappé's evidence for a Zionist plan to cleanse Palestine of its Arab
population derives from his interpretations of the Haganah archives and the
Israel State Archives files. Among the evidence Pappé finds damning are Haganah
intelligence surveys of Arab villages, including information on the number of
armed men, the mukhtars (village or neighborhood headmen), and any
anti-Zionist activities.[10]
Pappé uses the presence of such lists to suggest parallels between Jewish
suffering during the Holocaust and Palestinian Arab suffering as a result of
Israel's creation.[11]
Pappé also argues that Jewish forces, whether Haganah, Irgun, or the
Lehi group, which sought to evict the British from Palestine, attacked Arab
villages prior to the May 15, 1948 Israeli declaration of independence. He
writes:
On a cold Wednesday afternoon, 10 March 1948, a group of eleven men,
veteran Zionist leaders together with young military Jewish officers, put the
final touches to a plan for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. That same
evening, military orders were dispatched to the units on the ground to prepare
for the systematic expulsion of the Palestinians from vast areas of the country
… When it was over, more than half of Palestine's native population, close to
800,000 people, had been uprooted.[12]
This passage, characteristic of so much of Pappé's book, is a cynical
exercise in manipulating evidence to fit an implausible thesis. Yigal Yadin,
the chief of operations of the Haganah, adopted Plan D on March 10, 1948, as
part of preparations for the onset of open warfare between Arabs and Jews in
Palestine that the Arabs themselves were promising would follow a declaration
of statehood. Morris described it as "a blueprint for securing the
emergent Jewish state and the blocs of settlements outside the state's
territory against the expected [Arab] invasion on or after 15 May,"[13]
but recognized that "Plan D was not a political blueprint for the
expulsion of Palestine's Arabs."[14]
Pappé does not agree and says that new material from Israeli military
archives, a reassessment of older material, and Palestinian oral history
suggest that the plan was far more nefarious.[15]
But Pappé, in this example as in many others, is blinded by his need to fit
events into a preferred narrative, and what little new evidence he includes does
not persuade when considered in the context of historical events—a context that
Pappé rigorously obscures.
The Importance of Context
Pappé would have his readers believe that in the years before the
Israeli declaration of statehood, the Arabs living in Mandatory Palestine were
lacking in the hostility to Jews that made Jewish war-planning necessary. To
take just one time period, between the U.N. General Assembly vote to partition
Palestine on November 29, 1947, and Israeli independence almost six months
later, Arab irregulars killed 1,256 Jews in Palestine[16]—almost
all of whom were civilians. Pappé might be onto something if Plan D had been
drafted in the absence of Arab violence against Jews, or if the Arab states
surrounding Palestine were not so serious about answering the declaration of a
Jewish state with a war of annihilation. But inconveniently for Pappé, those
were the realities of the time—realities that undermine the thesis of his book.
The Palestine Post provides a detailed window into the period.
Between 1932 and 1948, the paper, which would later change its name to The
Jerusalem Post, was Mandatory Palestine's newspaper of record. An
English-language daily, it catered both to Palestine's British administrators
and the relatively small number of Jewish residents in Palestine who spoke
English. It was not always sympathetic to Zionists, especially not to those who
resorted to force of arms, and often sided editorially with the British against
the Irgun and Stern Gang. For instance, on February 20, 1948, it headlined a
story about an Irgun attack on British servicemen, "Terrorists Murder
Soldier in Jerusalem."[17]
And rather than ignore the Arab population, The Palestine Post perhaps
overemphasized their claims. Analysis of the newspaper's casualty reports shows
that between November 1947 and May 1948, it over-reported Arab casualties
threefold when its figure of over 3,500 is compared to British Mandatory
statistics.[18]
The editors of The Palestine Post did not know how history would be
written, and there is every reason to believe the reports between November 29,
1947, and May 15, 1948, sought to depict events accurately.
Nor should historians ignore context, as Pappé willfully does. Those who
read The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine will not learn that in the first
week after the passage of the U.N. partition plan, Arabs murdered 62 Jews. In
the following month, Arabs killed an additional 200. By March 1, 1948, 546 Jews
had been murdered and, by Ben-Gurion's declaration of independence, the total
was over 1,000.[19]
Arab paramilitaries, militias, and terrorists besieged Jerusalem and cut the
Jewish neighborhoods' water supplies and surrounded Jewish villages in the
Negev. Arab snipers attacked Jews in Haifa and other mixed villages.[20]
A sniper from Beit Dajan shot a 14-year-old girl,[21]
and Arab fighters attacked more than a dozen kibbutzim between December 1947
and March 1948.[22]
Massacres were common: Arab rioters killed 39 Jews at Haifa's oil refinery on
December 30, 1947, and two weeks later Arab irregulars killed 35 Jews trying to
reach Gush Etzion. On February 1, 1948, an Arab terrorist blew up The
Palestine Post building and, three weeks later, a terrorist's bomb killed
44 Jews on Jerusalem's Ben Yehuda Street. Massacres continued for weeks both
inside Palestine and in the neighboring states.[23]
On March 21, the bodies of 11 missing Jews were found; three had been burned.[24]
Local Arab villagers or Bedouins may have precipitated the autumn 1947 violence,[25]
but by spring 1948, Arab volunteers from Iraq and Syria were increasingly
participating.[26]
On April 11, 1948, for example, Egyptian members of the Muslim Brotherhood
attacked Kfar Darom near Gaza City.[27]
In this context—a state of low-level terrorism and violence that Pappé,
given the narrative he wishes to promote, is loath to disclose—it is not the
least bit curious that Zionist leaders in Palestine were developing plans to
defend themselves in the case of the outbreak of full-scale war. It would
indeed be strange if Jewish strategists were not doing so.
The Real "Plan D"While no scholar disputes that Zionist leaders adopted Plan D, Pappé's argument—that Plan D is evidence of a desire to conduct ethnic cleansing and constituted a war crime—is a leap of logic. The reality of that time period is one in which Jewish leaders were faced with problems far more urgent and existential than altering the ethnic makeup of certain territories. On the same day that the Zionist leadership adopted Plan D, British Mandate authorities admitted that Fauzi el-Kaukji, leader of the Arab Liberation Army, was in Palestine operating in Samaria.[28] Snipers attacked Jews in Haifa, and Arabs launched mortar attacks on Tel Aviv. There were reports that British forces were evacuating.[29] The Zionist decision to seize land to deny Arab attackers strategic territorial advantages was inevitable and motivated by legitimate military considerations. Villages such as Ishwa and Jaffa hosted foreign fighters from Iraq, Syria, and even Yugoslavia,[30] and thereby, sacrificed their status as noncombatant areas.
The decision to implement Plan D had little effect on the Arab forces,
which continued their assault on all parts of the Jewish yishuv (the pre-1948
Jewish community in Palestine).[31]
As Arab forces tried to isolate and eradicate pockets of Jews, Jews traveled in
convoys that often became the focus of Arab ambushes,[32]
some of which involved more than 500 Arabs.[33]
Major Plan D operations, such as Operation Nachson to open the road to besieged
Jerusalem, began on April 6, just five weeks before Israel's independence.
Nor do the lists that Pappé finds so damning provide conclusive evidence
of malfeasance. Cobbled together over the course of the decade before Israel's
independence, the Haganah lists were not a blueprint but rather an intelligence
assessment. In 1943, the Palmach (the Haganah's regular fighting force) and the
Haganah Intelligence Service began to survey villages in order to evaluate
their capabilities should hostilities erupt. Jewish pilots also conducted
aerial surveys.
These intelligence assessments were so parochial that, today, they could
serve as a resource for research into Arab village life of the Mandate period.
One representative Haganah intelligence report surveys the hamlet of Beit Umm
el-Mais near Jerusalem and reveals that the sons of Hasan al-Jura moved to the
ruins of the village around 1905, that the village consisted of one clan, and
that its residents were illiterate and had no connections to nearby kibbutzim.
The only terror suspect was Ismail Hamdan, who was involved in the 1936-39 Arab
revolt. The village possessed 11 modern rifles divided among 25 men.[34]
Another Haganah report noted that the nearby village of Beit Thul was 300 years
old, possessed 400 sheep, and that Arab nationalists persecuted members of the
village during the revolt.[35]
Nor were the Zionists the only ones to make such assessments. The
British kept similar intelligence about kibbutzim and Arab villages alike,
especially during the Arab Revolt, noting items such as the presence of
weaponry and the extent of illegal immigration.[36]
Such British lists are evidence of military preparedness and routine
intelligence collection, not evidence of plans to ethnically cleanse the Jewish
population. Moreover, the Haganah files may have saved Israeli lives by
portraying an accurate picture of Arab defenses and probably saved Arab lives
by enabling the Israel Defense Forces to avoid collateral damage.
As a work of scholarship, Pappé's book falls short, and it does so in a
particularly damning way. He ignores context and draws far broader conclusions
than evidence allows by cherry-picking some reports and ignoring other sources
entirely. He does not examine Arab intentions in the five months between the
U.N. endorsement of Palestinian partition and Israel's independence, nor does
he consider the widespread public statements by Arab officials in Palestine and
in neighboring states declaring their goal of eradicating the Jewish presence
in Palestine.[37]
It is obvious why a polemicist such as Pappé would cleanse—so to speak—his
narrative of any such references: To avoid doing so would strike at the core of
the reality that he wishes to foist upon his readers, one which precisely
inverts the historical record and turns a coordinated Arab attempt at
ethnically cleansing Palestine of its Jews into a Jewish attempt at ethnically
cleansing Arabs.
Pappé's writings may win plaudits among his new British peers, whose
disdain for the state of Israel is legendary. But his disregard for the
obligations of the historian and his indifference to academic integrity condemn
his work to the realm of the polemic, not scholarship.
*Seth J. Frantzman is a doctoral candidate in historical geography at
the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His blog is available at http://journalterraincognita.blogspot.com/
[1] For background on
the New Historians, see Efraim Karsh, "Rewriting Israel's History," Middle
East Quarterly, June 1996, pp. 19-29.[2] Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee Problem (London: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
[3] Avi Shlaim, Collusion across the Jordan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988).
[4] Baruch Kimmerling, Politicide (New York: Verso Books, 2006).
[5] Neve Gordon, Torture: Human Rights, Medical Ethics and the Case of Israel (London: Zed Books, 1995).
[6] Meron Benvenisti, Sacred Landscape: The Buried History of the Holy Land since 1948 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002).
[7] Shlaim, Collusion, p. 164; Walid Khalidi, All That Remains: The Palestinian Villages Occupied and Depopulated by Israel in 1948 (Washington, D.C.: Institute for Palestine Studies, 2006), p. 571; Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, O Jerusalem (Chelmsford, U.K.: Grafton Books, 1982) p. 266; Hillel Cohen, author interview, Rothberg International School of the Hebrew University, Nov. 13, 2005; Benny Morris, Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001 (New York: Vintage, 2001), pp. 209, 214.
[8] Ha'aretz (Tel Aviv), Apr. 26, 2005.
[9] New York: Oneworld Publications, 2006.
[10] Pappé, Ethnic Cleansing, pp. 17-22.
[11] Ibid., pp. xiii, xvii, 235.
[12] Ibid., pp. xii-xiii.
[13] Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 163-4.
[14] Ibid., p. 164.
[15] "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," interview with Ilan Pappé, ZNET, Oct. 3, 2006, accessed Aug 3, 2007.
[16] The Palestine Post (Jerusalem), May 6, 1948.
[17] The Palestine Post, Feb. 20, 1948.
[18] The Palestine Post, May 6, 1948; British mandatory figures published in The Palestine Post, Nov. 29, 1947 to May 1, 1948.
[19] The Palestine Post, Jan. 2, 7, 27, Feb. 2, Mar. 2, Apr. 1, May 1, 1948.
[20] The Palestine Post, Dec. 9, 11, 1947.
[21] The Palestine Post, Mar. 21, 1948.
[22] The Palestine Post, Dec. 1947 through Mar. 1948; David Tal, War in Palestine, 1948: Strategy and Diplomacy (London: Routledge, 2004), pp. 57-123.
[23] See, for example, Marina Benjamin, Last Days in Babylon (New York: Free Press, 2006), pp. 151-2; for Libya, see Joseph B. Schechtman, On Wings of Eagles: The Plight, Exodus, and Homecoming of Oriental Jewry (New York: A.S Barnes and Company, 1961), p. 138; for Egypt, see Michael M. Laskier, The Jews of Egypt, 1920-1970: In the Midst of Zionism, Anti-Semitism, and the Middle East Conflict (New York: New York University Press, 1993), pp. 126, 187.
[24] The Palestine Post, Mar. 21, 1948.
[25] The Palestine Post, Dec. 14, 1947.
[26] The Palestine Post, Apr. 19, 1948; Tal, War in Palestine, 1948, p. 20.
[27] The Palestine Post , Apr. 12, 14, 1948.
[28] The Palestine Post, Mar. 11, 1948.
[29] The Palestine Post, Mar. 5, 8, 9, 1948.
[30] The Palestine Post, Mar. 23, 1948; Emilio Traubner, "Sarajevo to Tel Aviv," The Palestine Post, Dec. 3, 194
[31] The Palestine Post, Mar. 19, 1948.
[32] The Palestine Post, Mar. 23, 1948.
[33] The Palestine Post, Mar. 19, 1948.
[34] "Beit Um Al Mies," Village Survey Project of the Shai, Haganah Archives, Tel Aviv, 105/378.
[35] "Beit Thul, May 22, 1943, Village Survey," Haganah Archives, 105/95 A 150.
[36] "General Sir Al Cunningham to Secretary of State for the Colonies: Weekly Intelligence Appreciation, 13 March 1948," Public Record Office, London, CO 537/3869.
[37] Martin Gilbert, The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict (New York: Routledge, 2006), p. 37; Zvi Elpeleg, The Grand Mufti: Hajj Amin al-Hussaini (Portland: Frank Cass, 1993), pp. 66-9.
No comments:
Post a Comment