IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

“I doubt if any conflict over a disputed territory has generated as many proposals, drafts, plans, accords and agreements as the Arab –Israeli Conflict.

Viewed in historical perspective it appears Jews and Arabs met to forestall a conflict of interests at a time when it was far from clear who they were representing and who could ratify and implement the agreements they reached.

It has been argued that peace plans were being discussed more than ninety years before the present intractable "Conflict." Understandings and plans were drawn up long before there was a significant Jewish presence in Palestine (the region known later as Mandatory Palestine) and before the indigenous Arabs in that region realised that they constituted a separate national entity.”

I quoted this text in a preamble to an assessment/observation of the Arab-Israel Conflict in a post I wrote 13 years ago.

It relates to an early accord reached between Feisal bin al-Hussein bin Ali al-Hashemi, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann. However, viewed in retrospect, “The Feisal - Weizmann Agreement signed in January 1919 is no more than an historical footnote.

 "The two main branches of the Semitic family, Arabs and Jews, understand one another, and I hope that as a result of interchange of ideas at the Peace Conference, which will be guided by ideals of self-determination and nationality, each nation will make definite progress towards the realisation of its aspirations."

Feisal bin al-Hussein bin Ali al-Hashemi made this observation in 1919 shortly before the Paris Peace Conference. Feisal had concluded a series of meetings with Chaim Weizmann and was seeking international support to set up a Pan-Arab nation.

Feisal's seemingly pro-Zionist sentiments were expressed in another remark he made about the same time. "The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement."

However, a letter in the British Foreign Office archives, declassified at a later date, reveals that Feisal was "coached."

British diplomat Mark Sykes had written to Feisal about the Jewish people "...this race, despised and weak, is universal and all powerful and cannot be put down." Under such circumstances, the secret British communication contended, Feisal would be well advised to cultivate the Zionist movement as a powerful ally rather than to oppose it. In the event, Weizmann and Feisal established an informal agreement under which Feisal would support dense Jewish settlement in Palestine while the Zionist movement would assist in the development of the vast Arab nation that Feisal hoped to establish.

Weizmann first met Feisal in June 1918, during the British advance from the South against the Ottoman Empire in World War I. As leader of an impromptu "Zionist Commission", Weizmann travelled to southern Transjordan for the meeting. The intended purpose was to forge an agreement between Feisal and the Zionist Movement to support an Arab Kingdom and Jewish settlement in Palestine, respectively. The wishes of the Palestinian Arabs were to be ignored, and, indeed, both men seem to have held the Palestinian Arabs in considerable disdain. Weizmann had called them "treacherous", "arrogant", "uneducated", and "greedy" and had complained to the British that the system in Palestine did "not take into account the fact that there is a fundamental qualitative difference between Jew and Arab". After the meeting Weizmann reported that Feisal was "contemptuous of the Palestinian Arabs whom he doesn't even regard as Arabs".

However, a secret British-French agreement (the Sykes-Picot Agreement) concluded earlier, left no room for Feisal's pan-Arab ambitions.

After the Paris Conference Feisal returned to Damascus and led a rebellion. against the French. He had himself crowned King of Greater Syria in March 1920. A few weeks later the French deposed him. In an effort to compensate Feisal for his loss the British offered him the Kingdom of Iraq, which he reluctantly accepted.

In July 1933, a few weeks before his death, Feisal went to London where he expressed concern regarding the situation in Palestine. In particular the Arab-Jewish conflict, increased Jewish immigration to Palestine as well as the declining Arab political, social, and economic situation. He asked the British to limit Jewish immigration and land sales, for fear that “otherwise in the near future the Arabs would either be squeezed out of Palestine or reduced to economic and social servitude.”

It seems Feisal's Zionist sympathies were short lived.

Viewed in historical perspective once again, it seems we are no closer to understanding how our neighbours think.

In a recent analysis of public opinion polls in Arab countries conducted by the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University (INSS) the authors endeavoured to comprehend public opinion in Arab countries, while trying to avoid reaching all-inclusive conclusions. They asked: How much is the public in the Arab world worried about the economic situation? the security situation? What percentage would like to emigrate? What are the attitudes toward Israel – and have these attitudes shifted in light of the Abraham Accords.   

An analysis of public opinion polls conducted recently in 14 Arab countries shows that overall, the Arab public is primarily concerned with economic challenges, and regards the Israeli-Palestinian question with marginal interest. Nevertheless, despite normalisation with Israel in many fields, the refusal to recognise the Jewish state and forge relations with it is widespread. and creates potential barriers for regimes regarding formal ties with Israel. It’s important to add that most of the polls were conducted prior to the inauguration of Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition government.

Identifying the mood on what is often referred to as the “Arab street” allows a glimpse, even if it is not free of distortions, into individuals’ opinions regarding their personal situations and their perceptions of their governments’ economic and foreign policies. Some scepticism is in order as to the validity of polls conducted in societies governed by oppressive authoritarian regimes, but in spite of this conundrum or perhaps because of it, polls are almost the only means of assessing public sentiment.

 Now, although the findings of the INSS analysis are important in order to understand the Arab mindset/mindsets, understanding the Palestinian mindset is arguably more important for Israelis.

There’s no dearth of Israeli Arab affairs analysts, both academics and many less qualified “experts.” Take your pick from a range that includes renowned scholars and your next-door neighbour.

Ohad Hemo TV channel 12 reporter on Arab affairs is closely attentive to the Palestinian street. For almost twenty years he has built a broad network of Palestinian ‘contacts’ willing to share their opinions with him. He has met and spoken with Palestinians from all walks of life. His contacts range from the most extreme unrepentant terrorists to pragmatic realists. He has interviewed Palestinians incarcerated in Israeli security prisons and ‘retired’ members of the various Palestinian terrorist organisations both, in Gaza and the West Bank.

Hemo is a recipient of the prestigious Sokolov prize for journalism. After reading his account of the Palestinians, a view from within I believe I am better informed about close neighbours. The book’s title is awkwardly translated as ’Different Territories.’   “On the surface,” would have been a better choice. So far, the book isn’t available in English.

Hemo’s interviews conducted inside Israeli security prisons are particularly enlightening. He writes about security prisoners acquiring a fluent knowledge of Hebrew. Some are avid readers of Hebrew literature including biographies and autobiographies of Zionist political leaders ranging from Ben Gurion to Jabotinsky. 

He doesn’t claim that higher education and library facilities have caused them to moderate their views regarding the Zionist enterprise. Furthermore, some of the ‘retirees’ he talked to said that Israel is too strong to defeat in the foreseeable future. 

I doubt if that admission is reason enough for us to rest on our laurels.

 

Have a good weekend.

 

Beni,              16th of February, 2023.