His latest article, "Why "Invent" The Palestinians?', written in the wake of the furore over Newt Gingirch's description of the Palestinians as an "invented" people, constitutes a masterly and most accessible overview of the historical reality to which Gingrich referred.
The peg on which Robert Reilly hangs his analysis is this remark of Elliott Abrams, a former deputy national security adviser in the Bush administration:
"There was no Jordan or Syria or Iraq, either, so perhaps he [Gingrich] would say they are all invented people as well, and also have no right to statehood. Whatever was true then, Palestinian nationalism has grown since 1948, and whether we like it or not, it exists."Observes Reilly:
"This critique seems to confuse two things. Palestine, of course, has never been a state. In 1920, Palestine was carved out as a territory by the British, against the wishes of the Arabs living there who thought of themselves as inhabitants of Greater Syria. When it was within their power the Arabs never thought to create Palestine as a country, nor did the Ottomans. Were it to become one, it would have to be "invented," just as have been all other states, like Jordan, Syria or Iraq, all of which are 20th-century creations. In this respect, Abrams is correct.However, states are human constructs; peoples are not. Peoples exist according to ethnic and linguistic distinctions. For instance, the Kurds are a distinct people, as are the Berbers. So are the Arabs. They were not "invented"; they simply are. Ignore them at your peril. Their existence, however, does not translate automatically into a right to Kurdish, Berber or Arabic statehood. For that, other things are needed, including viability.Never having possessed a state, do the Palestinians nonetheless exist as a people? Are they distinct linguistically or ethnically from the sea of Arabs in which they live? The answer is no. In this Gingrich is right. There is no such thing as a Palestinian people and to speak of them as such is clearly an "invention." The real question that needs to be asked is why have they been "invented"? The answer to this can be suggested by an analogy that removes us from the immediate passions of the Middle East in order to see this situation more clearly.'Read the rest of his splendid article here
(Hat tip: B.L.)
His argument is self-defeating, because he's right that there is really no Iraqi people or Jordanian people anymore than there is a Palestinian people. In fact Iraq might do better if it was allowed to split up into Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd countries. Arab Muslim Jordan was originally supposed to be part of Israel, and still should be, and the MUSLIM ARABS there and in the JEWISH STATE OF ISRAEL need to resettle in some of the millions of sq. mi. of Arab territory and LEAVE POOR OUTNUMBERED SURROUNDED ISRAEL ALONE.
ReplyDeleteOne day I hope to see an Israel that stretches from the Nile to the Euphrates and has at least 200-300 million Jewish people living in it as a shining light in the mad darkness of the Muslim World. If the Allah Akbars would lower their hate shields and listen, the Jews might teach them a better way to live.
Scope Israel's history free in your browser with the Historyscoper this year and master all the key facts that prove that Israel rightfully belongs to the Jews not the Arabs, even without holy books brought into the debate:
http://tinyurl.com/jerusalemhistory
Keep up with the serious Islam Watchers:
http://tinyurl.com/islamwatch
Yes Daphne... splendid indeed, but nothing we didn't already know.
ReplyDelete200 -300 million Jews. Oy Gevelt. 200-300 million opinions. If only 12 million of us creates so much hatred I dread to think with these numbers.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments, TLW, Shirlee, Steve.
ReplyDeleteClogger is playing up and won't let me comment on comments as usual!
Daphne.