Majburiy Falastindagi jamoalararo mojaro - Intercommunal conflict in Mandatory Palestine

Majburiy Falastindagi jamoalararo zo'ravonlik
Falastin british.gifga qarshi
1936–39 yillarda Falastindagi majburiy arab qo'zg'oloni paytida arab isyonchilari
Sana1920 yil 1 mart - 1948 yil 14 may
(28 yil, 2 oy, 1 hafta va 6 kun)
Manzil
Majburiy Falastin
Urushayotganlar

Yahudiylarning milliy kengashi (Yishuv )

Arab oliy qo'mitasi (Falastin arablari):

Falastindagi Milliy Jihod Markaziy Qo'mitasi (1937-39)
Jihodchilar guruhlari:

Birlashgan Qirollik Birlashgan Qirollik
British Army.svg bayrog'i Britaniya armiyasi
Falastin politsiya kuchlari
Yahudiy aholi punkti politsiyasi
Yahudiylarning Supernumerary politsiyasi
Maxsus tungi otryadlar

The majburiy Falastindagi jamoalararo mojaro o'rtasidagi fuqarolik, siyosiy va qurolli kurash edi Falastin arablari va yahudiy Yishuv Buyuk Britaniyaning majburiy Falastinda hukmronligi davrida, zo'ravonlik to'kilishidan boshlangan Frantsiya-Suriya urushi 1920 yilda va boshlanishiga qadar 1948 yil Arab-Isroil urushi.

Fon

Usmonli davrida sionistik harakat

Falastindagi yahudiylarning hayoti, 1913 yilda 11-sionistlar kongressida taqdim etilgan Nuh Sokolovskiyning ruscha hujjatli filmi.

Sionistlar rahbarlari va himoyachilari Isroil eridagi sharoitlarni diqqat bilan kuzatib borishdi va u erga doimiy ravishda sayohat qilishdi. Ammo ularning tashvishlari butunlay yahudiylarning istiqomat qilish istiqbollari bilan bog'liq edi. Bu erdagi arab aholisining kelajagi, arab rahbarlariga yahudiylarning farovonligi kabi, ularni qiziqtirar edi. Harakatning shakllanish bosqichlarida, kuchliroq siyosiy kuchlarga ega bo'lgan sionist muzokarachilar (masalan, inglizlar) o'n to'qqizinchi asrning oxirida yarim milliondan ozroq bo'lgan Falastin aholisi haqida jim turishganda, ishtiyoq bilan yozishmalar qildilar.[1]

Ga binoan Anita Shapira o'n to'qqizinchi va yigirmanchi asr sionistlari orasida "Falastindagi arablar Falastinda mavjud bo'lgan ko'plab baxtsizliklardan biri sifatida qaraldi, masalan Usmonli hukumati, iqlimi, moslashish qiyinchiliklari, [...] [T] u sionistik tashkilot o'sha davrda ushbu masalani muhokama qilmagan va bu borada siyosiy yo'nalish ishlab chiqmagan, ammo harakatning aynan shu davrida bunday muhokamalar [...] odatdagidek Xassidiy isyonchilar hovlisida o'tkazilgan o'rganilgan bahs-munozaralar bilan bir xil ahamiyatga ega edi. Masih kelgandan keyin nima bo'lishi haqida. "[2]

Sionistlar arablarning milliy huquqlariga bergan fikrlari, ehtimol, ushbu parcha orqali aniqlangan Isroil Zangvill Birinchi Jahon urushidan keyin yozilgan: 'Arablar yangilangan milliy shon-sharaf yo'lining Bag'dod, Damashq va Makka orqali o'tishini va ular uchun turklardan ozod bo'lgan barcha ulkan hududlarni tan olishlari va qoniqish hosil qilishlari kerak. [...] Ularni ozod qilgan kuchlar, shubhasiz, yana ham oyoq osti qilingan xalqning qayta tiklanishi uchun zarur bo'lgan mayda chiziqdan (Isroildan) xafa bo'lmasliklarini so'rashga haqli. '[3] Shunday qilib, sionistlar boshidanoq Falastindagi arab aholisini katta arab xalqining bir qismi sifatida ko'rishgan.[4]

Menaxem Ussishkin va Ber Borochov, Diasporadagi sionistlar rahbarlari va Anita Shapiraning so'zlariga ko'ra, arablarning haqiqiy munosabatini bilmaganlar, Falastin arablari yahudiylar tomonidan assimilyatsiya qilinishiga ishonishgan. Yahudiylar yanada rivojlanganligi sababli ular mamlakatni rivojlantirishda etakchi bo'lar edilar va arablar o'zlarini yahudiylarning madaniy ta'siriga bo'ysundirib, singib ketadilar. Borochov, shuningdek, arablar "qon va ruhda bizga o'xshash odamlar" ekanligini aytib, barcha Shem avlodlari o'rtasidagi birodarlik tushunchasini uning dunyoqarashining asosi sifatida qabul qildi. Shapiraning so'zlariga ko'ra, ushbu yondashuv arablar sionistik maqsadlarni amalga oshirishga tahdid solmasligi uchun o'zini ishontirish kampaniyasining bir qismi bo'lgan.[5]

Ga binoan Yunus Frankel, ning immigrantlari Ikkinchi Aliyo kuchli dunyoviy va millatchilik axloqiga ega edi. Ammo arablarga bo'lgan munosabat turli shakllarda bo'lgan. Bir qutbda Sitsonizm arablarni zid qilmasligi kerak, deb hisoblagan Yitsak Epshteyn va Rabi Binyamin kabi odamlar bor edi. Epshteyn faqat arablar tomonidan ishlov berilmagan joylarda joylashishni qo'llab-quvvatladi. Rabi Binyamin zamonaviy ta'lim, to'laqonli tenglik va modernizatsiya arablarni yahudiylarning immigratsiyasini qabul qilishga olib keladi, deb hisoblagan. Boshqa qutbda sionistlar o'zlarining maqsadlariga erishish uchun zo'ravon arablar qarshiligini engish kerak deb o'ylaganlar ham bor edi. Brenner "Hozirda [yahudiylar va arablar] o'rtasida nafrat bor va bu kelajakda ham mavjud bo'ladi" deb yozgan. Urushni quruqlikka bog'laydigan mifologiya ular uchun ko'pincha mavzu edi. Masalan, K.L. Silman yozgan:

Biz qonimizni to'kdik va shu erda yashaymiz. Bizning hayotimiz o'tmishning davomi va to'kilgan qon ham shundaydir. Xalq o'z hayotini faqat o'tmish asoslari asosida qurmaydi va qon qonga qo'shiladi

Zerubavelning so'zlariga ko'ra[JSSV? ], yengillikni qo'llab-quvvatlash va arablarga nisbatan yon berishlar bu Galut (surgun) mentalitetiga amal qilish edi. Frankelning fikriga ko'ra, bunday mifologiya Ikkinchi aliyaning siyosiy merosining muhim qismi bo'lgan.[6]

Turklar boshchiligidagi arablarning hujumlariga javoban Falastindagi sionistlar o'zlarining asoslarini o'rnatdilar Xashomer (Guardian), o'zini himoya qiluvchi tashkilot.

Arab millatchiligi va arablarning sionizmga munosabati

Usmonlilar davrida Falastinning arab aholisi asosan 19-asrning aksariyat qismida o'zlarini Usmonli fuqarolari yoki diniy (musulmon yoki nasroniy) deb hisoblashgan.[iqtibos kerak ]

1856 yilda Usmoniylar tomonidan chiqarilgan Xatt-i Humoyun, barcha Usmonli sub'ektlari uchun teng huquqlarni kafolatlash. Shunga qaramay, musulmonlar hanuzgacha yahudiylarga qarashardi zimmis: muhofaza qilinadigan, ammo musulmonlarga bo'ysunadigan odamlar. 19-asr oxirida yahudiylarning immigratsiyasi va er sotib olishlari tufayli ular sionizm Falastinda yahudiylar davlatini tuzmoqchi ekanligini anglaganlarida, bu o'zgardi. Falastinlik nasroniylar ham, musulmonlar ham xavotirda edilar.[7]

1897 yilda Quddusda arablar komissiyasi tuzilib, unga rahbarlik qildi mufti, yahudiylarga er sotilishini tekshirish uchun. Uning noroziligi bir necha yil davomida ushbu savdolarning to'xtatilishiga olib keldi. Yahudiy yer egalari ularni uylaridan quvib chiqargan bo'lsa va zo'ravonlik va qurolli qarshilik yuzaga kelgan bo'lsa, arab dehqonlar odatda norozilik bildirishgan. Ammo, agar dehqonlar qolishlariga ruxsat berilsa, yahudiylarning mulkdorligi qabul qilindi.[8]

Taniqli Qudduslik Yusuf al-Xolidiy Frantsiyaning bosh ravviniga sionizmni amalga oshirish uchun "qo'pol kuch" kerak bo'ladi deb yozgan. Rashid Rida 1902 yilda sionizm yahudiylar uchun oddiy boshpana izlamaganligini, aksincha milliy suverenitetga qaratilganligini aytgan. Naguib Azoury Bayrutdan kelgan maronit nasroniy Falastinda arablar va yahudiylar o'rtasida shiddatli to'qnashuvlar bo'lishini bashorat qilgan.[9]

Keyin Yosh turk inqilobi 1908 yilda bu erda arab millatchiligi tez sur'atlar bilan o'sdi va aksariyat arab millatchilari sionizmni tahdid deb hisoblashdi, garchi ozchiliklar sionizmni zamonaviylikka olib boruvchi yo'l sifatida qabul qilishdi.[10] C. D. Smitning fikriga ko'ra, bu yahudiylarning arablarni ish bilan ta'minlashiga qarshi bo'lgan, arab dehqonlarini yahudiylar tasarrufida qoldirishni qoralagan va Falastindagi alohida yahudiy mavjudotiga qarshi qaratilgan leyborist sionizmning paydo bo'lishi bilan bog'liq edi. Ushbu masalalar yahudiy matbuotida muhokama qilinganligi sababli, ular Falastin arablariga ham ma'lum bo'ldi, ayniqsa Falastin arab matbuoti paydo bo'lgandan keyin. Eng sionistik ikki gazeta Al-Karmil, 1908 yilda Hayfada tashkil etilgan va Filastin, 1911 yilda Yaffada tashkil etilgan, pravoslav nasroniylar tomonidan boshqarilgan. Istanbuldagi Usmoniylar parlamentida Falastin vakillari sionizmga qarshi Usmonlilarning hushyorligini oshirishga chaqirdilar.[9]

Yosef Gorny kitobida yahudiy-arab qarama-qarshiligidagi sionizmning mafkuraviy xususiyatlarini o'rganib chiqdi Sionizm va arablar, 1882–1948. Uning so'zlariga ko'ra, ikkita mafkuraviy savol muhim edi. Birinchisi, Falastin arablari katta arab millatining bir qismi bo'ladimi yoki alohida Falastin milliy birligini tashkil qildimi. Ikkinchisi, sionizm o'z talablarini qay darajada tarixiy huquqlarga asoslashi mumkin edi. Sionizmning "Falastinda o'ziga xos yahudiy milliy jamiyatini barpo etish" maqsadi, uning arablarga bo'lgan munosabatiga ta'sir ko'rsatadigan ba'zi tamoyillarni hurmat qilishini anglatadi. Gorny "istakni" ajratib turadi hududiy kontsentratsiya Falastindagi yahudiy xalqi "," yaratish istagi Yahudiylarning ko'pchiligi Falastinda "yahudiylarning mehnatiga bag'ishlangan ish mustaqil yahudiylar jamiyati uchun dastlabki shart edi" degan e'tiqod "va" ibroniy madaniyatining qayta tiklanishi [millatning qayta tug'ilishining asosiy sharti sifatida).[11]

Falastindagi demografiya[12]
yilYahudiylarArablar
18006,700268,000
188024,000525,000
191587,500590,000
1931174,000837,000
1947630,0001,310,000

Gorny qarama-qarshilik va sionistlarning munosabatiga ta'sir ko'rsatgan bir necha muhim voqealarni ham ajratib ko'rsatdi. 1917 yilgacha Usmonli imperiyasida milliy harakat sifatida sionizmga yo'l qo'yilgan. 1917 yildan keyin Falastin inglizlar tomonidan boshqariladigan mandatga aylandi va yahudiy xalqining Falastindagi milliy vataniga bo'lgan huquqi inglizlar va millatlar ligasi tomonidan tan olindi. 1948 yilda Isroil davlati tashkil etildi. Bir vaqtning o'zida Falastin muammosi yahudiylar, arablar va xalqaro hamjamiyat uchun dolzarb masalaga aylandi. Ushbu davrda demografik muvozanat 1880 yilda har 23 aholida bitta yahudiydan 1947 yilda har uch aholida bitta yahudiyga o'zgargan (jadvalga qarang). Va nihoyat, Gornining ta'kidlashicha, g'arblashtirishning notekis tempi yahudiylar jamiyatiga texnologik va tashkiliy ustunlik berdi. Yahudiy jamiyati asosan shahar, arab jamiyati asosan qishloq edi.[13]

Uning kitobida Sionizm va falastinliklar, Flapan sionizmning arablarga nisbatan siyosatining oltita asosiy kontseptsiyasini ajratib ko'rsatdi: "(1) siyosiy maqsadlarga erishish uchun iqtisodiy va harbiy salohiyatni bosqichma-bosqich oshirish, (2) Yaqin Sharqdan tashqarida bo'lgan buyuk kuch bilan ittifoq; (3) Falastin milliy birligining mavjudligini tan olmaslik; (4) rivojlanmagan hududda sionizmning tsivilizatsiya missiyasi; (5) iqtisodiy, ijtimoiy va madaniy ajratish yahudiylarning milliy hayotini qayta tiklash uchun zarur shartlar sifatida; (6) kontseptsiya "kuchdan tinchlik". "[14]

Norman Finkelshteyn "Arab masalasi bo'yicha [sionistik harakatdagi] strategik kelishuv ajoyib edi". Ushbu konsensusga uchta bino orqali xabar berildi: (1) "sionistlar harakati Falastin arablarining roziligini kutmasligi va izlashi kerak emas"; (2) "sionistik korxonaning muvaffaqiyati bir (yoki bir nechta) Buyuk kuch (lar) ning qo'llab-quvvatlashiga bog'liq edi"; (3) Falastin mojarosi Buyuk kuch (lar) ning manfaatlariga bo'ysunadigan mintaqaviy ittifoq doirasida hal qilinishi kerak ".[15]

Oldingi va'dalarga muvofiq[iqtibos kerak ] Ben-Gurion tomonidan, Isroilniki Mustaqillik deklaratsiyasi "[Isroil] dini, irqi va jinsidan qat'i nazar, uning barcha aholisiga ijtimoiy va siyosiy huquqlarning to'liq tengligini ta'minlaydi" deb ta'kidlaydi.[16]

Buyuk Britaniyani bosib olish ma'muriyati ostida

Turli omillar Birinchi jahon urushidan keyin arablarda qo'rquvni kuchaytirdi.[iqtibos kerak ] Bular orasida 1918 yilda Falastinning yaratilishi va Balfur deklaratsiyasi. Shuningdek, inglizlar sionistlarning rasmiy e'lonlarida ibroniy tilining arab tiliga teng maqomga ega bo'lgan tilga aylanishini, yahudiy hukumati xodimlarining arablardan ko'proq maosh olishini va sionistlarga o'z bayrog'ini ko'tarishga ruxsat berilishini, arablar esa bunday emasligini so'radilar. Falastindagi ko'plab yahudiylar xuddi yahudiy davlatiga erishish yaqinlashgandek harakat qilishdi. Bundan tashqari, 1919 yilda ba'zi yahudiy hujjatlari Falastin arablarini majburan ko'chib o'tishga chaqirdi.[17]

Bir muncha vaqtgacha 1918 yil noyabrda tashkil etilgan va etakchi taniqli shaxslardan tashkil topgan Musulmon-nasroniylar uyushmasi Falastinning etakchi millatchilar forumiga aylandi.[iqtibos kerak ] Yoshroq falastinlik arablar Falastinning umumarab davlatiga qo'shilishini sionistlarning maqsadlarini amalga oshirishning eng yaxshi vositasi deb bildilar. Ular orasida Quddusning bo'lajak muftisi ham bor edi. Haj Amin al-Husseini. Ular Suriyada Falastinga qo'shilishni xohladilar Qirol Faysal. Ular Faysal bilan shubhali edilar, garchi u bilan aniq hamkorlik qilgani uchun Chaim Weizmann va bilan ko'proq aniqlandi Suriya milliy kongressi.[iqtibos kerak ]

The Frantsiya-Suriya urushi 1920 yil martida, butun Levantda Arab Hashimiylar Qirolligini barpo etishga urinish sifatida otilib chiqdi. Bir qator muhim voqealarda urush qo'shni davlatlarga tarqaldi Majburiy Falastin shu jumladan Tel-Xay jangi 1920 yil martda. Keyinchalik, 1920 yil aprelda Amin al-Husayniy va boshqa arab rahbarlari tashabbus ko'rsatdilar 1920 yil Quddusdagi tartibsizliklar bu erda 10 kishi halok bo'lgan va 250 kishi yaralangan. Bir necha ayol zo'rlangan va ikkita ibodatxona yoqilgan. Yahudiylar ushbu hodisalardan ayniqsa hayratda qolishdi va voqealarni pogrom deb hisoblashdi.[18]

Inglizlar Suriyadan frantsuzlarga ketgandan so'ng, 1920 yil iyul oyida Faysalnikiga tegishli Suriyada hukmronlik qilish qulab tushdi va Falastindagi umumiy arablarning umidlari puchga chiqdi.[19]

Mafkura: erga bo'lgan huquq

Sionistik pozitsiyalar

Isroilniki Mustaqillik deklaratsiyasi davlatlar "[1897] yilda Birinchi sionistlar kongressi yahudiy xalqining o'z mamlakatida milliy qayta tug'ilish huquqini e'lon qildi va e'lon qildi. "Va bundan keyin" biz (imzolagan davlatlar) tabiiy va tarixiy huquqimiz tufayli va Birlashgan Millatlar Tashkiloti Bosh Assambleyasining qaroriga binoan. , shu bilan Eretz Isroilda yahudiylar davlati tashkil etilganligini e'lon qiling. "Bu sionizmning" tarixiy huquq kabi odamlar Isroil yurtiga.[20]

Sionizmning siyosiy, mehnat va madaniy sionizmdagi konsensusidagi uchta tendentsiya ham yahudiylarning ko'pchiligini talab qildi. Siyosiy sionizm tarafdorlari milliy rishtalar shaxslarni bog'laydigan eng muhim rishtalar deb ta'kidladilar. Ularning ta'kidlashicha, "yahudiylar" boshqa millatlarga mansub "davlatlar orasida" o'zga sayyoraliklar mavjudligini "tashkil etishgan". Ular buni yahudiylar ko'pchiligiga ega bo'lgan davlat tuzish orqali tuzatishni taklif qilishdi.[21] Finkelshteynning so'zlariga ko'ra, ishchi sionizm bunga yahudiy davlati diasporadagi yahudiy ishchilarining defitsitini o'zgartirish va yahudiylar o'rtasida sog'lom sinf tuzilmasini yaratishning yagona yo'li ekanligini qo'shdi. Madaniy sionizm yahudiy madaniyatini assimilyatsiya qilish va yo'qotish xavfiga qarshi turmoqchi edi. Yahudiylarning ko'pchiligi ular uchun "yahudiy xalqining cheksiz ma'naviy qayta tiklanishi" uchun ma'naviy markazni ta'minlaydilar.[22]

Finkelshteynning so'zlariga ko'ra, "asosiy sionistik harakat Falastinning tub arab aholisiga" Qaytish huquqi "orqali yahudiy davlatini o'rnatishga bo'lgan" tarixiy huquqidan "hech qachon shubhalanmagan" va aslida yahudiy xalqi uchun Isroilga nisbatan keng tarqalgan huquqni da'vo qilgan. , ularning tarixiy vatani va arablarga faqat tasodifiy fuqarolar huquqlariga qo'shilishgan.[23] Sionizm buni ikki "dalil" bilan oqladi: yahudiy millatining Falastin bilan aloqasi, uning tarixidan kelib chiqqan holda noyob bo'lgan, Falastin arablari esa arab millatining bir qismi bo'lgan va shu sababli Falastin bilan alohida aloqasi bo'lmagan. Shuning uchun yahudiylar Falastinga ustunlik huquqiga ega edilar.[24] Masalan, Aaron Devid Gordon ta'limotlari mehnat rahbarlarining asosiy intellektual ilhomini shakllantirgan, 1921 yilda yozgan:

'Eretz Isroil uchun bizning nizomimiz shu paytgacha amal qilgan va har doim ham amal qiladi va bu Muqaddas Kitob [... shu jumladan Injil va Yangi Ahd ...] Bularning barchasi bizdan chiqqan; u bizning oramizda yaratilgan. [...] Va arablar mamlakatda yashagan barcha yillarda nima ishlab chiqarishgan? Bunday yaratilishlar yoki hatto Muqaddas Kitobning o'zi yaratilishi, biz juda bunyodkorlik qilgan erga abadiy huquq beradi, ayniqsa bizdan keyingi odamlar bu mamlakatda bunday asarlar yaratmagan yoki hech narsa yaratmagan. hammasi. "[25]

Ga binoan Zeev Sternhell, "Ta'sischilar ushbu nuqtai nazarni qabul qildilar. Bu sionistlarning so'nggi argumenti edi."

Y. Gornining aytishicha, sionizmning turli tarmoqlari rahbarlari bunday keng huquqni talab qilishgan:

  • Madaniy sionist Ahad Ha'am "yahudiylarning tarixiy huquqlari arablarning Falastindagi yashash huquqlaridan ustun bo'lgan".[26]
  • Teodor Herzl hamrohi Maks Nordau, siyosiy sionist, Falastin yahudiy millatining "qonuniy va tarixiy merosi" ekanligini va Falastin arablari faqat "egalik qilish huquqiga" ega ekanligini e'lon qildi.[27]
  • Devid Ben-Gurion, ishchi sionizmning eng muhim rahbari, yahudiy xalqi Falastinga nisbatan ustun huquqqa ega,[28] Falastin yahudiylar uchun millat sifatida va arablar uchun alohida shaxs sifatida muhim edi va shuning uchun yahudiy xalqining Falastinda to'planish huquqi, bu huquq arablarga tegishli emas edi.[29]
  • Zeev Jabotinskiy, yanada radikal revizionist sionistlar etakchisi, Falastin arab millati egaligidagi erning juda kichik qismi bo'lganligi sababli, "uy qurish uchun katta hududlarga ega bo'lgan xalqdan biron bir erni rekvizitsiya qilish". chunki adashgan xalq odil sudlovdir va agar er egasi xalq buni berishni istamasa (va bu mutlaqo tabiiy bo'lsa), uni majburlash kerak ".[30]

Dissident sionistlar Brit Shalom va Ixud boshqacha o'yladi. Ugo Bergmann 1929 yilda yozgan edi: "bizning raqiblarimiz (asosiy sionizmda) turli qarashlarga ega. Falastin, bizning mamlakatimiz haqida gapirganda, ular" bizning mamlakatimiz "degan ma'noni anglatadi, ya'ni" yo'q " ularning country '[... bu e'tiqod bir davlatda] u erda yashovchi odamlar orasida bir kishiga ko'pchilik huquqi berilishi kerak degan tushunchaga asoslanadi. ",[31] va Ernst Simon tarixiy huquq "arablar uchun emas, balki biz uchun majburiydir" va shuning uchun arablar bilan kelishuv zarur.[32]

Ga binoan Anita Shapira, 1940-yillarning boshlarida yosh yahudiylar "u er ularniki, faqat ularniki edi", deb ishonishdi. Bu tuyg'u qattiq egalik tuyg'usi, u uchun kurashni quvonchli kutish bilan birga bo'lgan ".[33]

Falastin Arab milliy birligini tan olmaslik

Simha Flapanning fikriga ko'ra, sionistik siyosiy fikrlashning asosiy kontseptsiyasi Falastin milliy birligining mavjudligini tan olmaslik edi.[iqtibos kerak ] Uning so'zlariga ko'ra Golda Meirning "Falastinliklar kabi narsa yo'q edi" degan keng tarqalgan e'lonlari Vaytsman tomonidan boshlangan va Ben-Gurion va uning vorislari tomonidan sidqidildan amalga oshirilgan sionistik siyosatning asosi bo'lgan.[34][35] Biroq, Gorny[36] sionistlarning Falastin arablariga nisbatan turli xil munosabatlarini hujjatlashtirgan, bu hodisani Falastin milliy birligining qarama-qarshi bo'lgan taqdirda ham tan olinishini nazarda tutadi.

Ushbu dalil sionistlarning "tarixiy huquq" haqidagi da'vosini qo'llab-quvvatladi: yahudiylar Falastinni o'z millatining vatani deb da'vo qilishlari mumkin edi, Falastin arablari esa buni qila olmadilar.[iqtibos kerak ]

Sionizm orzu qilgan hudud

Sionistlar harakati orzu qilgan er "Eretz Isroil ". Anita Shapiraning so'zlariga ko'ra, bu atama" muqaddas atama bo'lib, hududlarning aniq chegaralariga nisbatan noaniq, ammo egalik huquqini aniq belgilab beradi ".[37] Finkelshteynning so'zlariga ko'ra, Falastin, Transjordaniya, Golan balandligi va Livanning janubiy qismini o'z ichiga olgan erlarni orzu qilgan.[38] Ben-Gurion "xalqimiz ommasini ushbu mamlakatda va uning atrofida to'plashni" xohlashini aytdi.[39] U qabul qilishni taklif qilganida Qabul qilingan takliflar 1937 yilda Falastinning bir qismiga yahudiy davlati kiritilgan Ben-Guryon yigirmanchi sionistik kongressda shunday dedi:

Hozir bizga taklif qilinayotgan yahudiy davlati sionistik maqsad emas. [...] Ammo bu sionistlarni yanada kengroq tatbiq etish yo'lidagi hal qiluvchi bosqich bo'lib xizmat qilishi mumkin. U eng qisqa vaqt ichida Falastinda haqiqiy yahudiy kuchini birlashtiradi, bu bizni tarixiy maqsadimizga olib boradi.[40]

Yahudiylar agentligidagi muhokamada u davlatni yaratish natijasida biz kuchli kuchga aylanganimizdan keyin bo'linishni bekor qilamiz va butun Falastinga tarqalamiz degan gumon bilan yahudiy-arab kelishuvini istashini aytdi. . "[41] U 1937 yilda o'g'li Amosga yozgan xatida Falastinning bir qismidagi yahudiy davlati "oxir emas, balki faqat boshlanish" bo'lganligini yozgan. Bu "mamlakatni qutqarish uchun bizning tarixiy harakatlarimizga kuchli turtki beradi". U "bizning armiyamiz dunyodagi eng zo'rlar safida bo'lishiga shubha qilmasligini va shuning uchun biz o'zimizning arab qo'shnilarimiz bilan kelishilgan kelishuv va o'zaro anglashuv orqali mamlakatning boshqa qismida yashashimizga chek qo'ymasligimizga aminman", deb yozgan edi. yoki boshqa yo'l bilan. "[42]

Da Biltmore konferentsiyasi 1942 yilda Ben-Gurion sionistlarning talabini "Falastindagi yahudiy davlati sifatida emas, balki yahudiy davlati sifatida Falastin sifatida" shakllantirdi.[43] Ushbu konferentsiyada turli xil sionistik va sionistik bo'lmagan yahudiy tashkilotlari tomonidan qabul qilingan Biltmore dasturi "Falastinni Yahudiy Hamdo'stligi sifatida barpo etishga" chaqirdi.

Ben-Gurion 'pozitsiyasi

Devid Ben-Gurion

Falastindagi davlat tuzilishidan oldingi davrda Ben-Gurion asosiy yahudiylarning vakili bo'lgan va mo''tadil sifatida tanilgan. U qat'iyan qarshi edi Revizionist sionist boshchiligidagi harakat Zeev Jabotinskiy va uning vorisi Menaxem boshlanadi. Ben-Gurion yahudiy xalqining "tarixiy huquqiga" kamdan-kam murojaat qilgan Eretz Isroil, ammo yahudiylarning vatanga bo'lgan ehtiyojidan va ishlov berilmagan erlarni joylashtirish va o'zlashtirishning universal huquqidan kelib chiqadigan huquqni ta'kidlashni afzal ko'rdi.[44]

Tevetning so'zlariga ko'ra, ko'p yillar davomida Ben-Gurionning asosiy da'vosi yahudiylarning erga ishlov berish huquqi, ayniqsa Falastinning sakson foizi ishlov berilmaganligi va uni yahudiylarning mehnati bilan yutib olish huquqidir. "Biz Falastinda qurish va qurish huquqiga egamiz". Erga egalik qilish huquqi doimiy ravishda uni ishlashga va uni rivojlantirishga tayyorligidan kelib chiqadi va bu borada yahudiylar va arablar teng huquqlarga ega edilar.[45] Ammo Ben-Gurion yahudiylarning mamlakatni yangilashidan arablar yaxshi natija olishiga ishonishini bildirdi, chunki bu uning arab aholisining yangilanishini ham anglatadi. Tevetning so'zlariga ko'ra, "o'zlarini mamlakatni rivojlantirishga qodir bo'lmagan arablar yahudiylar yo'lida to'sqinlik qilishga haqli emas edilar. 1918 yilda [Ben-Gurion] huquqlar o'tmishdan emas, kelajakdan kelib chiqishini va 1924 yilda u shunday deb e'lon qildi: "Biz arablarning mamlakatni boshqarish huquqini tan olmaymiz, chunki Falastin rivojlanmagan va hali ham quruvchilarini kutmoqda". "Ben-Gurionning aytishicha, arablar" o'zlari yaratgan narsaga va " o'z uylari ".[46]

Ben-Gurion arab falastinliklarning Falastin tuprog'iga qattiq bog'lanib qolganligi to'g'risida realistik nuqtai nazarga ega edi.[iqtibos kerak ] 1938 yilda u shunday dedi: 'Chet eldagi siyosiy bahsimizda biz arablarning bizga qarshi bo'lgan qarshiliklarini minimallashtiramiz. Ammo o'zaro haqiqatni e'tiborsiz qoldirmaylik. [...] O'z erini egallab olishga qarshi kurashadigan xalq bu qadar oson charchamaydi. '[47] Flapanning so'zlariga ko'ra, Ben-Gurionning arablarning his-tuyg'ularini baholashi uni yahudiylarning harbiy kuchini oshirish zarurligi to'g'risida yanada jangari yo'nalishga olib keldi: «Men o'z kuchimizga, o'sib boradigan kuchimizga ishonaman va agar u o'ssa, kelishuv bo'ladi kel ... ".[48]

Tevetning so'zlariga ko'ra, Ben-Gurionning fikriga ko'ra "evolyutsiyani, sionizmni mutlaq adolat uchun harakat sifatida umuminsoniy xabar, tinchlik va bunyodkorlik mehnati harakati sifatida ko'rish mumkin. Uning sionizm haqidagi qayta ko'rib chiqilgan qarashlari, [.. .] bu yahudiylarning yagona tashvishi bo'lgan nisbiy adolat harakati, urush olib borish va kerak bo'lsa, mamlakatni majburan tortib olish uchun tayyorlangan harakat edi. "[49]

Inglizlar 1939 yil Oq qog'oz yahudiylarning Falastinga immigratsiyasi dastlabki besh yil davomida yiliga 15000 kishi bilan cheklanishi va keyinchalik arablarning roziligiga bog'liq bo'lishini belgilab qo'ydi. Shundan so'ng Ben-Gurion inglizlarga nisbatan siyosatini o'zgartirib, shunday dedi: "Falastinda tinchlik o'rnatish" Oq qog'oz "siyosatini to'xtatish uchun eng yaxshi vaziyat emas".[50] Ben-Gurion arablar bilan tinch yo'l bilan hal qilishning imkoni yo'qligiga ishongan va tez orada Yishuvni urushga tayyorlashni boshlagan. Tevetning so'zlariga ko'ra, "Angliya urush harakatlarini qo'llab-quvvatlash uchun Yishuvni safarbar qilish kampaniyasi orqali u" ibroniylar armiyasi "ning yadrosini yaratishga intildi va bu ishdagi muvaffaqiyati keyinchalik sionizmga g'alaba olib keldi. Yahudiy davlati. "[51]

Omma oldida Ben-Gurion sionistik maqsadlarga erishishda kuch zarurligini inkor etgan partiyasining rasmiy pozitsiyasini qo'llab-quvvatladi. Vaytsmandan farqli o'laroq, Ben-Gurion arab falastinliklarining Falastin tuprog'iga qattiq bog'lanishlari to'g'risida realistik nuqtai nazarga ega edi. 1938 yilda u shunday degan edi: "Chet eldagi siyosiy bahsimizda biz arablarning bizga qarshi chiqishini minimallashtirmoqdamiz. Ammo o'zaro haqiqatni e'tiborsiz qoldirmasligimiz kerak. [...] O'z erini egallab olishga qarshi kurashadigan xalq [u] shunchalik charchamang. "[47] Flapanning so'zlariga ko'ra, Ben-Gurionning arablarning his-tuyg'ularini baholashi uni yahudiylarning harbiy kuchini oshirish zarurligi to'g'risida yanada jangari yo'nalishga olib keldi: «Men o'z kuchimizga, o'sib boradigan kuchimizga ishonaman va agar u o'ssa, kelishuv bo'ladi kel ... ".[48]

Epilogida Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, Shabtai Tevet 1936 yilgacha Ben-Gurionning arablarga nisbatan siyosatini quyidagicha baholaydi:

Ben-Gurionning jamoat va xususiy pozitsiyalarini sinchkovlik bilan taqqoslash bu mojaroni yigirma yillik inkor qilish chuqur ishonch emas, balki pragmatizmdan kelib chiqqan holda hisoblangan taktika degan xulosaga keladi. Yahudiylar va arablar o'zaro kelishmovchiliklarni sinfiy birdamlik orqali yarashtirishi mumkin degan fikr, u 1919-1929 yillarda qo'llab-quvvatlagan tushunchani kechiktirish taktikasi edi. Yishuv kuchga ega bo'lganidan so'ng, Ben-Gurion uni tark etdi. 1929-1936 yillarda Ben-Gurion etti yil davomida aytgan kelishuv echimiga bo'lgan ishonch, shuningdek, inglizlarning sionizmni davomli qo'llab-quvvatlashiga qaratilgan taktika edi. Ben-Gurionning arablar masalasiga yondashuvini asoslaydigan yagona haqiqiy ishonch ikki xil edi: Falastinni boshqaradigan kuchni qo'llab-quvvatlash sionizm uchun arablar bilan tuzilgan har qanday kelishuvdan ko'ra muhimroq edi va arablar o'zlarini yahudiylarning mavjudligi bilan yarashtirishadi. uni yo'q qilishga qodir emasliklarini tan olganlaridan keyin.[52]

Ben-Gurion uchun Falastin arablari bilan har qanday kelishuv arablarning sionistik gegemoniyaga bo'ysunishiga asoslangan bo'lishi kerak. Bu arablarning sionistik kuchni tan olishi va arablarning zaifligini keltirib chiqaradi. 1930-yillarda arablar bilan muzokaralarda Ben-Gurion yahudiylarning kuchini ularga ta'sir qilishga urindi, masalan. yahudiy davlatini, shu jumladan Transjordaniyani chaqirish orqali.[53]

Vaytsmanning pozitsiyasi

Yilda Chaim Weizmann Nazarida Falastin yahudiy edi, arab emas;[54] ammo, Vaytsman davlat adolat va arablar bilan yashashga asoslangan bo'lishi kerak deb hisoblar edi.

1918 yilda Vaytsmann Falastinda boshliq sifatida sayohat qildi Sionistik komissiya Arab va Falastin-Arab rahbarlari, shu jumladan bo'lajak muftiy bilan uchrashdi al-Husayniy. U birinchi navbatda inglizlar bilan, ba'zan esa falastinlik bo'lmagan arablar bilan siyosiy echimlarni muhokama qilishni afzal ko'rdi, ammo u falastinliklarning o'zi bilan muzokaralarga qarshi chiqdi.[55] Ga binoan Jehuda Reynxars, u o'z sa'y-harakatlarini Xuseynlar oilasining Pan-Arab rahbariyatiga qaratdi, chunki ular (dastlab) Falastin arablari rahbarlari bilan biron bir kelishuvga erisha olmagan paytda sionistlarning yordami evaziga turar joyga borishga tayyor edilar.[56]

Vaytsmann falastinliklarning boshqa arab mamlakatlariga ko'chishi axloqsiz edi degan fikrni rad etdi (1923 yil ostida) Lozanna shartnomasi, Turklar va yunonlar o'zaro transfer kelishuviga kelishib olishgan). Flapanning so'zlariga ko'ra, bu fikr uning xayolida edi, garchi u buni jamoat oldida aytmagan bo'lsa. Ammo 1930 yilda u inglizlarni Transjordaniyaga falastinliklarni ko'chirish to'g'risida o'ylashga undadi.[55]

Flapanning so'zlariga ko'ra, Vaytsman siyosiy echimini birinchi navbatda inglizlar bilan, ba'zida esa falastinlik bo'lmagan arablar bilan muzokara qilishni afzal ko'rgan, ammo u falastinliklarning o'zi bilan muzokara olib borishga qarshi bo'lgan. 1920-yillarning boshlarida u bu urinishlarga qarshi keskin chiqdi Yahudo Leon Magnes arablar bilan vositachilik qilish. Magnesning taklifiga mutanosib ovoz berish yo'li bilan tuziladigan Falastin davlati kiritilgan. Vaytsmann Falastinda vakillik institutlarini tashkil etishga qat'iy qarshi edi.[55] Gornining so'zlariga ko'ra, Vaytsmann "Falastin arablarini Falastinning kelajagi bo'yicha muzokaralarda sherik deb bilmagan".[57]

Ga binoan Artur Ruppin, ilgari Yahudiy agentligi, Vaytsmann va boshqa sionist rahbarlar arablar savolining mohiyati va ahamiyatini anglay olmadilar. 1936 yil may oyida Ruppin Agentlikka shunday dedi: "Doktor Vaytsmann menga Balfur deklaratsiyasini qanday qabul qilganini aytib berdi. Men undan:" Va aslida arablar masalasida nima deb o'ylaysiz? " u javob berdi: "Inglizlar bizga u erda yuz minglab qora tanlilar borligini aytishdi va bu hech qanday ahamiyatga ega emas". Bu menga shuni ko'rsatadiki, o'sha paytda bizning rahbarlarimiz arablar masalasida hech qanday ma'lumotga ega emas edilar va hatto keyinchalik bu savolni chetga surib qo'yishdi. "[58]

Jabotinskiyning pozitsiyasi

Zeev Jabotinskiy, rahbari Revizionist sionistlar, arablar sionizm masalasida mutlaqo ahamiyatsiz deb o'ylashdi, faqat dushman sifatida. Uning fikriga ko'ra, arablar bilan ziddiyat tabiiy va muqarrar edi va sionistlar arablarga yahudiy qudratining "temir devori" bilan duch kelmaguncha uni hal qilib bo'lmaydi.[59] Shunga qaramay, Jabotinskiy yahudiy davlatida yashovchi arablar uchun teng huquqlarni qo'llab-quvvatladi.[60]

Ikki milliy davlatchilik kontseptsiyasi

Shuningdek qarang: Brit Shalom (siyosiy tashkilot) va Bir davlatning echimi § Tarixiy rivojlanish

Sionistlarning ozchilik qismi, shu jumladan sotsialistik sionistlar harakati Xashomer Xatzayr, ikki millatli davlatni yaratishga intildi. Biroq, bu yondashuv arablarga ham, yahudiylarga ham yoqmadi.[iqtibos kerak ]

"Transfer g'oyasi"

Shuningdek qarang: 1948 yil Falastinning ko'chib ketish sabablari § Transfer g'oyasi

"Transfer g'oyasi" sionizmning maqsadlari uchun Falastin arablarini Falastindan yoki Falastinning bo'lajak yahudiy qismidan ko'chirish ehtimoli to'g'risida o'ylashga ishora qiladi. Sionistik tashkilotlar 1937 yilga nisbatan uni plenumda muhokama qildilar Peel tavsiyalar. 1980-yillardan beri tarixiy munozaralarda u ko'pincha bilan bog'liq ravishda muhokama qilingan 1948 yil Falastinning ko'chishi. Ushbu nazariya tarafdorlari 1948 yil Falastinni tark etishining harakatlantiruvchi kuchi sionistlar rahbarlarining " Yahudiy davlati kuchli arab aholisi bilan omon qololmadi va bu a aholi ko'chishi eng foydali bo'ladi.

Isroil tarixchisining so'zlariga ko'ra Benni Morris, "aksariyat sionizmning aksariyat etakchi rahbarlari, hech bo'lmaganda harakatning dastlabki o'n yilliklaridagi transfer g'oyasini qo'llab-quvvatlashlarini bildirdilar. To'g'ri, mavzu sezgir bo'lgani uchun ular buni tez-tez yoki odatda jamoatchilik oldida bayon qilmaganlar."[61] Isroil tarixchisi va sobiq diplomat Shlomo Ben-Ami shunday deb yozgan edi: "Transfer falsafasi Yishuvning asosiy rahbarlari ongi va tafakkurida marginal, ezoterik maqola emas edi".[62]

Gorniyning fikriga ko'ra, aksariyat sionistlarning an'anaviy qarashlariga ko'ra, Falastinlik arablarning ommaviy ravishda tark etilishi "Arab masalasi" ning kerakli echimi edi.[63]

Norman Finkelshteyn transferistik fikrlash sionistik fikrlashning yadrosiga yaqin ekanligini ta'kidlaydi. Uning so'zlariga ko'ra, sionistlarning butun Falastinga bo'lgan keng huquqi haqidagi da'vosi va yahudiylarga "tegishli" bo'lgan jamiyatni barpo etish istagi bilan birga "yahudiy bo'lmaganlarni eng yaxshi holatda keraksiz holatga keltiradigan va osonlikcha qarz beradigan radikal eksklyuzivistik mafkura paydo bo'ldi". aholini ko'chirish va chiqarib yuborishni ma'qullaydigan sxemalar. " Shunday qilib, "sionizmning butun Falastinga [...] da'vosi Falastinda har qanday arab mavjudligini shubha ostiga qo'ydi."[64]

Teodor Herzl transfer g'oyasini qo'llab-quvvatladi. Falastindagi erlar Falastin arablaridan muloyimlik bilan olib qo'yilishi kerak edi va ular chegara bo'ylab "beemerkt" (yashirin ravishda) ishlov berilishi kerak edi, masalan. ularni ish bilan ta'minlashdan bosh tortish orqali.[65] Herzl tomonidan Yahudiy-Usmonli yer shirkati (JOLC) uchun nizom loyihasi JOLCga o'z egalariga Usmonli imperiyasining boshqa joylarida taqqoslanadigan erlarni berish orqali Falastinda er olish huquqini berdi. Valid Xolidiyning so'zlariga ko'ra, bu Herzlning "muhojir mustamlakachiga yo'l ochish uchun Falastinni topshirganligi haqidagi muloyim taxminidan" dalolat beradi.[66]

Ga binoan Nur Masalha, "bo'linish rejasining mag'lubiyati hech qanday tarzda Ben-Gurion lagerining qarorini pasaytirmadi […] mahalliy aholini yo'q qilish bo'yicha ishlarni davom ettirish"[67] 1937 yil noyabrda, ko'chirishning amaliy jihatlarini tekshirish uchun Aholini o'tkazish bo'yicha qo'mita tayinlandi. Unda xarajatlar tafsilotlari, falastinliklarni ko'chirishning aniq joylari va ularni o'tkazish tartibi muhokama qilindi. Erga bo'lgan ehtiyojni hisobga olgan holda, qishloq aholisi shahar aholisi oldiga ko'chirilishi kerak va qishloq qishloq uslubi bilan eng yaxshi bo'ladi degan xulosaga keldi.[68] 1938 yil iyun oyida Ben-Gurion JAEdagi kayfiyatni sarhisob qildi: "Men majburiy transferni qo'llab-quvvatlayman. Unda axloqsiz narsalarni ko'rmayapman". Angliyaliklar buni amalga oshirishni istamasliklari to'g'risida, erlarni ekspluatatsiya qilish Falastinning ko'chib ketishini tezlashtirishning asosiy mexanizmi sifatida qaraldi. Qolgan falastinliklarga katta miqdordagi yer egaliklari qoldirilmasligi kerak.[69]

"Transfer g'oyasi" ning roli 1948 yil Falastinning ko'chishi munozarali. Bugungi kunda tarixchilar tomonidan yahudiylarning harbiy hujumlari qochqinning asosiy sababi bo'lganligi keng e'tirof etilgan bo'lsa-da, bu maqsadda norasmiy siyosat bo'lganmi yoki yo'qmi, hali ham muhokama qilinmoqda. 1948 yilgacha bo'lgan Yishuvdagi "ko'chirish tafakkuri" harbiy rejalashtirish jarayonida, shuningdek, harbiy rahbarlar va askarlarning urush paytida falastinliklarga bo'lgan munosabatida muhim rol o'ynagan bo'lishi mumkin.[iqtibos kerak ]

Falastin arablarining pozitsiyalari

Shuningdek qarang: Falastin millatchiligi, Islomda dunyoning bo'linishlari va Himoyaviy Jihod

Falastin arablari rahbariyati o'zlarining inglizlarga milliy va siyosiy huquqlarini so'rab, vakillik hukumati kabi talablarini bir necha dalillarga asosladilar:[70]

  • Iroq, Suriya va Livan bilan birgalikda Falastin a A sinfidagi mandat Millatlar Ligasi. 22-moddaga binoan A sinfidagi mandatlar hisoblangan joylar edi[71] Millatlar Ligasi Paktining "... o'zlarining mustaqil davlatlari sifatida mavjudligini vaqt o'tishi bilan majburiy ravishda ma'muriy maslahat va yordam berish sharti bilan vaqtincha tan olinishi mumkin bo'lgan rivojlanish bosqichiga erishdilar. stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory." By 1932 Iraq was independent, and Syria, Lebanon and Transjordan had national parliaments, Arab government officials up to the rank of minister, and substantial power in Arabs hands.[72]
  • British promises during World War I. The McMahon-Hussein yozishmalari had promised Arab self-determination in purely Arab areas. However McMahon had kept it deliberately vague whether Palestine was part of these areas.[73]

Rejection of Jewish Yishuv and Jihad

The Islamic religious thought also had an influence on Palestinian positions, especially during the 1930s, leading to religious interpretation of the struggle against the British and the Jewish Yishuv. Among Islamists the issue was the application of Dar al-Islom for Palestine, as a term by Muslim olimlar to refer to those countries where Muslims can practice their religion as the ruling sect and where certain religions (Yahudiylik, Nasroniylik va Sabianizm ), are to be tolerated. Garchi defensive Jihad became popular among some Palestinian militants in the 1980s, the role model for this phenomenon appeared as early as the 1930s, with early Islamic militant groups such as the Black Hand (led by Suriyalik Islomchi Izaddin al-Qassam ) aiming to liberate Palestine from Christians and Jews within the context of Jihad.

Amin al-Husayniy

Muhammad Amin al-Husayniy

Robert Fisk, discussing the difficulties of describing al-Husseini's life and its motivations, summarized the problem in the following way:

'(M)erely to discuss his life is to be caught up in the Arab–Israeli propaganda war. To make an impartial assessment of the man's career—or, for that matter, an unbiased history of the Arab–Israeli dispute—is like trying to ride two bicycles at the same time.'[74]

Filipp Mattar suggests that in 1939 al-Husseini should have accepted the favorable 1939 yilgi oq qog'oz, or compromise with the Zionists. But the Mufti adapted a strategy of active and futile opposition and rejection, which contributed to the ultimate defeat of the Palestinians.[iqtibos kerak ]

Piter Novik has argued that the post-war historiographical depiction of al-Husseini reflected complex geopolitical interests that distorted the record.

'The claims of Palestinian complicity in the murder of the European Jews were to some extent a defensive strategy, a preemptive response to the Palestinian complaint that if Israel was recompensed for the Holocaust, it was unjust that Palestinian Muslims should pick up the bill for the crimes of European Christians. The assertion that Palestinians were complicit in the Holocaust was mostly based on the case of the Mufti of Jerusalem, a pre-World War II Palestinian nationalist leader who, to escape imprisonment by the British, sought refuge during the war in Germany. The Mufti was in many ways a disreputable character, but post-war claims that he played any significant part in the Holocaust have never been sustained. This did not prevent the editors of the four-volume Holokost entsiklopediyasi from giving him a starring role. The article on the Mufti is more than twice as long as the articles on Gebbels va Ko'rish, longer than the articles on Himmler and Geydrix combined, longer than the article on Eichmann—of all the biographical articles, it is exceeded in length, but only slightly, by the entry for Hitler.'[75][76]

Gilbert Achkar sums up al-Husseini's significance:

"One must note in passing that Amin al-Husseini's memoirs are an antidote against Holocaust denial: He knew that the genocide took place and boasted of having been perfectly aware of it from 1943 on. I believe he is an architect of the Nakba (the defeat of 1948 and the departure of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who had been driven out of their lands) in the sense that he bears a share of responsibility for what has happened to the Palestinian people."[77]

Links with Nazi Germany

In 1933, within weeks of Hitler's rise to power in Germaniya, the German Consul-General in Falastin, Heinrich Wolff,[78][79] sent a telegram to Berlin reporting al-Husseini's belief that Palestinian Muslims were enthusiastic about the new regime and looked forward to the spread of Fascism throughout the region. Wolff met al-Husseini and many sheikhs again, a month later, at Nabi Muso. They expressed their approval of the anti-Jewish boycott in Germany and asked Wolff not to send any Jews to Palestine.[80]

The Mufti collaborated with the Germans in numerous sabotage and commando operations in Iraq, Transjordan, and Palestine, and repeatedly urged the Germans to bomb Tel Aviv[81] and Jerusalem 'in order to injure Palestinian Jewry and for propaganda purposes in the Arab world', as his Nazi interlocutors put it. The proposals were rejected as unfeasible.[iqtibos kerak ] The Italian Fascists envisaged a project to establish him as head of an intelligence centre in North Africa, and he agreed to act as commander of both regular and irregular forces in a future unit flanking Axis troops to carry out sabotage operations behind enemy lines.[82] Operation ATLAS was one such joint operation.

Nashashibi klani

The Nashashibi family was considered to be politically moderate compared to the more militant views of the Husayni family. The Nashashibis favoured political, rather than violent, opposition to the British mandate and Zionism.[83] They were also willing to compromise in some areas that many Palestinians were not. For example, the Nashashibi family favoured the partition proposed by Britain in 1937 and reservedly accepted the 1939 White Paper, though they backtracked when attacked by political opponents. Similarly, the Nashashibi also favoured Arab participation in the Legislative Council proposed by the British mandate, which would feature representatives of the various religious groups in Palestine at the time.

Raghib Nashashibi, the head of the Nashashibi clan at the time, was an influential political figure throughout the British Mandate period, and beyond. He was appointed Mayor of Jerusalem in 1920 by the British, and helped form the Palestinian Arab milliy partiyasi 1928 yilda va National Defence Party 1934 yilda.[84] In 1936, he joined to the Arab oliy qo'mitasi, formed on the initiative of Amin al-Husayniy, of the rival al-Husayni clan; however, Raghib and the clan-controlled National Defence Party soon withdrew from the committee.

Generally, the Nashashibi family and their political followers advocated compromise with Zionists and the British authorities. This fell in stark contrast to the views of the Husaynis, who advocated a total rejection of the Balfour Declaration policy.[84] The Palestine Arab Party, formed in 1935 by the Husayni's in response to the formation of Nashashibi's National Defense Party, believed in the maximalist dissolution of the Jewish National Home and creation of a solely Arab government.[85] The Nashashibis, however, felt that Arabs were most likely to achieve their political goals by working within the Mandate system, rather than fighting against it.[86]

Throughout the British mandate period, the Husayni and Nashashibi clans were the two most powerful Arab families in Palestine and they constantly competed for power. While the two families did not differ on their long-term goals (stopping the influx of European Jews and preserving the Arab Palestinian state), they disagreed on the best way to achieve those goals. The Husayni family rejected the British mandate and Zionism as a whole, while the Nashashibis felt that the best approach was through political compromise.

Politics in Palestine as a whole largely diverged along the rift created by these two families. This produced a level of factionalism among Palestinian Arabs that often crippled them in fighting Sionizm. Additionally, partisan bickering often resulted in one family blocking the policies of the other family that genuinely may have been in the national interest. Unfortunately for Palestinian Arabs, their ability to effectively negotiate was often hindered by their inability to present a united front on the issue of Zionism.

Pro-Zionist parties

In 1920, the pro-Zionist Muslim National Associations was established by the mayor of Hayfa, Hassan Bey Shukri va shayx Musa Hadeib, head of the farmers' party of Mt. Xevron.[87][88][89] In July 1921, Shukri sent a telegram to the British government, declaring support for the Balfur deklaratsiyasi and Jewish immigration to Britaniya mandati Falastin:

We strongly protest against the attitude of the said delegation concerning the Zionist question. We do not consider the Jewish people as an enemy whose wish is to crush us. On the contrary. We consider the Jews as a brotherly people sharing our joys and troubles and helping us in the construction of our common country.[87]

Asad Shukeyri, a pro-Zionist Muslim scholar (‘alim) of the Akr area widely known for his opposition to the Palestinian Arab national movement, followed the same tendency. He met routinely with Zionist officials and had a part in pro-Zionist Arab organizations, publicly rejecting Haj Amin al-Husseini's use of Islam against Zionism.[90][91]

Social and economic separation

Arablarni boykot qilish

Qo'shimcha ma'lumotlar: Arablarning umumiy ish tashlashi (Majburiy Falastin)

Zionism's 'Conquest of Labour'

Shuningdek qarang: Ibroniycha mehnat

In 1932 Ben-Gurion wrote:

We who came here over the past fifty years could not be absorbed in the economy existing, but were obliged to create new sources of livelihood. We did not settle in Arab villages or in the occupied towns, but founded new settlements and build new urban quarters and suburbs. We did not look for work in Arab vineyards and groves, nor in Arab shops and factories; we planted and erected our own. We came not as immigrants but as settlers, not to ancient Palestine, but to a new land we made ourselves.[92]

The struggle for 'Jewish labour', for Jews to employ only Jews, signified the victory of Jewish labour in creating a new society.[93] This struggle was constantly pushed by the leaders of the second Aliyo (1904–1914), who founded labour Zionism and in the 1930s became the leaders of the Zionist movement.[94][95] Shortly after his arrival in Palestine in 1906 Ben-Gurion noted that a moshava, a private Jewish agricultural settlement, employed Arabs as guards. He asked himself: "Was it conceivable that here too we should be deep in Galuth (exile), hiring strangers to guard our property and protect our lives?".[96] Soon Ben-Gurion and his companions managed to amend this situation. According to Teveth in these early years Ben-Gurion developed the concept of 'Avodah Ivrit', or 'Jewish labour'.[97]

The leaders of the second Aliyah agreed that Jewish labour was vital for the national revival process as they were convinced that Jews should 'redeem' themselves by building with their own hands a new type of Jewish society. They also thought the use of Arab labour could create a typical colonial society, exploiting cheap, unorganised indigenous labour, and would hamper further Jewish immigration. Finally they considered manual labour a good therapy for Jews as individuals and as a people. In Ben-Gurion's opinion Jewish labour was "not a means but a sublime end", the Jew had to be transformed and made creative.[98][99][100]

In 1907 Ben-Gurion called for Jewish labour on lands owned by the Jewish National Fund.[101] There were difficulties here, because Arabs were prepared to work long hours for very low wages, and most Jewish immigrants preferred to settle in the cities. In this context occurred the development of the concept of the Kibbutz, 'the co-operative settlement based on self-labour and motivated by Zionist ideals'.[102] In a summary made in 1956 Ben-Gurion said the Kibuutz movement was not started because of some socialist theory, but as an effective way to "guarantee Jewish labour".[103]

Around 1920 Ben-Gurion began to call for Jewish labour in the entire economy, and labour Zionism started striving for an absolute segregation of the Jewish and Arab national communities. In this way 'Jews and Arabs [...] would live in separate settlements and work in separate economies'.[104] Ben-Gurion used the 1929 riots and the 1936 general strike as opportunities to further enforce his drive for Jewish labour.[105][106] 1930 yilda Umid qilamanki Simpson hisoboti blamed the Jewish labour policy for the grave unemployment in the Arab sector.[107] According to Flapan in 1933 the Histadrut launched its first campaign to remove Arab workers from the cities. In many cases the removal of Arab workers 'took the form of ugly scenes of violence'. Reports of this in the Jewish and Arab press 'created an atmosphere of unprecedented tension'.[108] According to Flapan this forceful eviction of Arab workers and the 'acrimonious propaganda' which accompanied the operation amplified Arab hostility and ultimately precipitated the outbreak of the Arablar qo'zg'oloni 1936 yilda.[109]

In 1947 the UN Special Commission on Palestine summarized the situation:

The economic life presents the complex phenomenon of two distinctive economies—one Jewish and one Arab, closely involved with one another and yet in essential features separate. [...] Apart from a small number of experts, no Jewish workers are employed in Arab undertakings and apart from citrus groves, very few Arabs are employed in Jewish enterprises [...] Government service, the Potash company and the oil refinery are almost the only places where Arab and Jews meet as co-workers in the same organization. [...] There are considerable differences between the rates of wage for Arab and Jewish workers in similar occupations.[110]

The conflict (1921–1948)

Qo'shimcha ma'lumotlar: Timeline of intercommunal violence in Mandatory Palestine

From the Zionist point of view the Arabs would naturally object to Zionism, but that was a problem for the British to solve, and not for the Jews. As the terms of the mandate required, the British should keep the Arabs from becoming a political or even a military threat to Zionist goals. Therefore, for the Zionists British policy was more important than Arab policy.[111]

Arab opposition was of course known to the Zionists. Ben-Gurion said in 1918: "We as a nation want this country to be ours; the Arabs, as a nation, want this country to be theirs". Resistance was to be expected. Jabotinsky said in 1921: "I don't know of a single example in history where a country was colonised with the courteous consent of the population".[112]

According to Flapan, one of the basic concepts of mainstream Zionism with regard to the Arab Palestinians was economic, social and cultural segregation as a means to create a Jewish national life. Especially the struggle for "100 per cent of Jewish labour" in the Jewish sector of the economy occupied the energies of the labour movement for most of the Mandatory years and contributed more than any other factor to the territorial, economic and social separation between Jews and Arabs.'[113] According to C. D. Smith the Zionists did not intend to create a joint society with the Arabs, no matter how difficult this might be.[53]

Although the establishment of a Jewish majority or a Jewish state in Palestine was fundamentally at odds with the aspirations of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine, Zionists did not doubt their right to establish a Jewish majority in Palestine. Zionists justified this by referring to the 'unique' historical bond of the Jewish nation with Palestine, while the Arabs of Palestine were part of the Arab nation and therefore had no special bond with Palestine. Many Zionists claimed a 'preemptive right' to Palestine, the Jews had a right as a Nation, the Arabs only as individuals.[24][114]

1921 yil Yaffa g'alayonlari

1921 yil may oyida, riots broke out in Jaffa, particularly around the Red House whose inhabitants were massacred. The riots were initially triggered by a 1-may kuni; halokat signali o'rtasida to'qnashuv Mopsim va Ahdut HaAvoda, but quickly led to clashes between Jews and Arabs.[115] 95 people were killed and 219 injured. As a consequence of the events, thousands of Jewish residents fled from Jaffa to Tel Aviv. A climate of mutual suspicious and hatred arose and grew.[116]

1921–1929

In 1922, the British offered the Arabs to be represented in an official council. This council would exist of the High Commissioner and ten government officials, eight Muslims, two Jews and two Christians. The latter twelve would be elected by the population. However both Muslim and Christian Arabs decided to boycott the elections because the council was specifically denied the right to discuss matters pertaining to Jewish immigration.[117] In 1923 and later Herbert Samuel proposed councils with equal compositions but with their members appointed by the High Commissioner. The Arabs refused again. According to C. D. Smith, for Arabs to accept would have meant a recognition of the Balfur deklaratsiyasi, the mandate, which included the Balfour Declaration, and consequently a Jewish right to immigration, which would undermine their claim of self-determination.[118]

1929 yilgi tartibsizliklar

Religious tensions over Western Wall, an international economic crisis and nationalist tensions over Jewish immigration led to the 1929 yil Falastinda tartibsizliklar. In these religious-nationalist riots, Jews were massacred in Hebron and the survivors were expelled from the town. Devastation also took place in Xavfsiz va Quddus. This violence was mainly directed against the non-Zionist orthodox communities; Zionist communities were able to defend themselves and had established defence organizations. As a result, the orthodox community in Palestine was increasingly dependent on Zionist support.

According to C. D. Smith the British adherence to the terms of the mandate meant that there was no political way for the Palestinian Arabs to counter the loss of their country. "Eventually violence became the only recourse."[119]

The Arab Revolt

Boycott and revolt

The 1936 revolt was influenced by the Qassamite rebellion following the killing of Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam 1935 yilda, shuningdek Haj tomonidan e'lon qilingan Muhammad Amin al-Husayniy of 16 May 1930 as 'Palestine Day' and calling for a General Strike.[iqtibos kerak ]

The umumiy ish tashlash zo'ravon qo'zg'olonni boshlagan holda 1936 yil apreldan oktyabrgacha davom etdi. Qo'zg'olon ikki alohida bosqichdan iborat edi.[120] Birinchi bosqich asosan shahar va elita tomonidan boshqarilgan Oliy Arab qo'mitasi (HAC) va asosan ish tashlashlar va siyosiy norozilikning boshqa shakllariga qaratilgan edi.[120] 1936 yil oktyabrga kelib ushbu bosqich inglizlar tomonidan mag'lubiyatga uchradi fuqarolik ma'muriyati ning kombinatsiyasidan foydalangan holda siyosiy imtiyozlar, xalqaro diplomatiya (hukmdorlari ishtirokida Iroq, Saudiya Arabistoni, Transjordaniya va Yaman[121]) va tahdid harbiy holat.[120] The second phase, which began late in 1937, was a violent and peasant-led resistance movement that increasingly targeted British forces.[120] Ushbu bosqichda isyon shafqatsizlarcha bostirildi Britaniya armiyasi va Falastin politsiya kuchlari, using repressive measures that were intended to intimidate the Arab population and undermine popular support for the revolt.[120]

Buyuk Britaniyaning butun qo'zg'olonni qamrab olgan rasmiy ma'lumotlariga ko'ra, armiya va politsiya jangda 2000 dan ortiq arabni o'ldirgan, 108 nafari osilgan,[122] va 961 kishi "to'da va terroristik harakatlar" deb ta'riflaganliklari sababli vafot etdi.[121] Britaniya statistikasini tahlil qilishda, Valid Xolidiy arablar uchun 19 792 talafotni taxmin qilmoqda, ularning 5,032 nafari halok bo'lgan: inglizlar tomonidan 3 832 kishi va "terrorizm" tufayli 1200 kishi o'lgan va 14 760 kishi yaralangan.[121] Voyaga etgan erkakning o'n foizidan ko'prog'i Falastinlik arab 20 dan 60 gacha bo'lgan aholi o'ldirilgan, yaralangan, qamalgan yoki surgun qilingan.[123] Sonining taxminlari Falastin yahudiylari o'ldirilgan 91 yoshdan[124] bir necha yuzga.[125]

The Arab revolt in Palestine was unsuccessful, and its consequences affected the outcome of the 1948 yil Falastin urushi.[126] Bu Britaniya mandatiga o'xshash davlatgacha bo'lgan sionistik militsiyalarni hal qiluvchi qo'llab-quvvatlashga olib keldi Xaganax, whereas on the Palestinian Arab side, the revolt forced the fleeing into exile of the main Palestinian Arab leader of the period, the Quddusning bosh muftiysi Haj Amin al-Husseini va uning sheriklari.

Peel komissiyasi

In 1937, in a reaction to a half year revolt by Palestinian Arabs, the British Peel komissiyasi proposed partition as a solution of the problems. The commission recommended that the Jews should get about twenty percent of Palestine, and that the 250,000 Palestinian Arabs living in this part should be transferred. According to the plan "in the last resort" the transfer of Arabs from the Jewish part would be compulsory.[127] According to Masalha the transfer part of the plan had been suggested to the Peel commission by a Zionist lobby.[128]

The Zionist leadership was inclined to accept the partition part of the plan under the condition of the transfer part.[129] Devid Ben-Gurion accepted it 'on the basis of the assumption that after we build up a strong force following the establishment of the state, we will abolish the partition of the country and we will expand to the whole Land of Israel'[130]

At the twentieth Zionist Congress, held in Zurich in August 1937, the plan was discussed and rejected on the ground that a larger part of Palestine should be assigned to them. The 'in the last resort' compulsory transfer was accepted as morally just by a majority although many doubted its feasibility.[131] Partition however was not acceptable for many.

Darhol muvaffaqiyatli Woodhead komissiyasi, called to "examine the Peel Commission plan in detail and to recommend an actual partition plan". The Woodhead komissiyasi considered three different plans, one of which was based on the Peel plan. 1938 yilda hisobot berib, Komissiya Peel rejasini birinchi navbatda uni arablarni majburan ko'chirmasdan amalga oshirish mumkin emasligi sababli rad etdi (Britaniya hukumati allaqachon rad etgan variant).[132] Ba'zi bir a'zolarning noroziligi bilan Komissiya buning o'rniga Galileyni Buyuk Britaniyaning mandati bilan tark etadigan rejani tavsiya qildi, ammo u bilan Arab davlatining moliyaviy o'zini o'zi ta'minlashning etishmasligi bilan bog'liq jiddiy muammolarni ta'kidladi.[132] Buyuk Britaniya hukumati Woodhead Report-ning nashr etilishini "siyosiy, ma'muriy va moliyaviy qiyinchiliklar" sababli bo'linishni imkonsiz deb hisoblagan siyosat bayonoti bilan hamroh qildi.[133]

1939 yil Oq qog'oz

London Conference, St. James's Palace, February 1939. Arab Palestinian delegates (foreground), Left to right: Fu'ad Saba, Yoqub Al-Guseyn, Musa Al-Alami, Amin Tamimi, Jamol Al-Husseini, Avni Abd al-Hodiy, Jorj Antonius va Alfred Roch. Facing the Arab Palestinians are the British, with Sir Nevill Chemberlen raislik qilish. Uning o'ng tomonida Lord Galifaks va uning chap tomonida, Malkolm Makdonald

The 1939 yilgi oq qog'oz edi a siyosat hujjati tomonidan chiqarilgan Britaniya hukumati ostida Nevill Chemberlen ga javoban 1936-1939 Arab Revolt. (It was also known as the MacDonald oq qog'ozi keyin Malkolm Makdonald, Inglizlar Mustamlakachi kotib who presided over its creation) The paper called for the establishment of a Jewish national home in an independent Palestinian state within 10 years, rejecting the idea of the creation of a Jewish state and the idea of partitioning Falastin. It also limited Jewish immigration to 75,000 for 5 years, and ruled that further immigration was to be determined by the Arab majority (section II). Restrictions were put on the rights of Jews to buy land from Arabs (section III). Further, it promised that only with Palestinian support would Britain allow Jewish state. This greatly upset Zionists because of the increasing persecution of Jews in Europe at the onset of Ikkinchi jahon urushi xususan Germaniyada. (Qarang Yahudiylarni ta'qib qilish )

The White Paper was published as Smd 6019. It was approved by the Jamiyat palatasi on 23 May 1939 by 268 votes to 179.[134]

During WWII (1939–1945)

The 1942 Zionist conference could not be held because of the war. Instead 600 Jewish leaders (not just Zionists) met in a hotel in the Biltmore Hotel in New York and adopted a statement known as the Biltmore dasturi.[135] They agreed that when the war ended all Jewish organizations would fight to ensure free Jewish migration into Mandatory Palestine.

The Biltmore Program called for "Palestine [to] be established as a Jewish Commonwealth". Devid Ben-Gurion, who dominated the conference, formulated the Zionists' demand 'not as a Jewish state in Palestine but as Palestine as a Jewish state'.[43] It was significant in that all US Jewish organizations were now united in agreement on the need for a Jewish state in Palestine.

From the beginning of the forties the Zionist movement stopped paying attention to the 'Arab question'. The reason is that it was expected that any solution, whether a Jewish state in all of Palestine, partition, or an international protectorate, would have to be imposed on the Palestinian Arabs by force, because of their refusal to compromise.[136] According to Teveth a war was 'made inevitable after the Biltmore Plan of 1942 declared Zionism's explicit aim to be a Jewish state, which the Arabs were determined to oppose by force.'[51]

Urushayotganlar

Zionist para-military organizations

Xaganax

After the Jaffa Riots, an organization of Jewish Legion veterans was created, Xaganax (Defence) to defend Jewish communities against rioters.

Irgun

In 1931, following the Revisionist Zionist departure from the Zionist Movement, a group of revisionists left Haganah and founded the Irgun Tzvai Leumi (National Military Organization), also known as Etzel.

Arab para-militaries

Fasa'il

At least 282 rebel leaders took part in the Arab Revolt, including four Christians.[137] Rebel forces consisted of loosely organized bands known as fasa'il[138][139] (qo'shiq: fasil).[138] A rahbari fasil a nomi bilan tanilgan qa'id al-fasil (pl.) quwwa'id al-fasa'il), which means "band commander".[140] The Jewish press often referred to them as "brigands", while the British authorities and media called them "bandits", "terrorists", "rebels" or "insurgents", but never "nationalists".[141] Ursabat (meaning "gangs") was another Arabic term used for the rebels,[142] and it spawned the British soldiers' nickname for all rebels, which was Oozlebart.[141][142][143]

According to historian Simon Anglim, the rebel groups were divided into general categories: mujohidlar va fedayin. The former were guerrillas who engaged in armed confrontations, while the latter committed acts of sabotage.[142] According to later accounts of some surviving rebel leaders from the Galilee, the mujohidlar maintained little coordination with the nominal hierarchy of the revolt. Most ambushes were the result of a local initiative undertaken by a qa'id yoki guruhi quwwa'id o'sha hududdan.[138]

Peace bands

The "peace bands" (fasa'il al-salam) yoki "Nashashibi units" were made up of disaffected Arab peasants recruited by the British administration and the Nashashibis in late 1938 to battle against Arab rebels during the revolt.[144][145] Despite their peasant origins the bands were representative mainly of the interests of landlords and rural notables.[145] Some peace bands also sprang up in the Nablus area, on Karmel tog'i (a stronghold of the Druze who largely opposed the rebellion after 1937), and around Nosira without connection to the Nashashibi-Husayni power struggle.[146]

Natijada

Asosiy maqola: Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi
Land in the lighter shade represents territory within the borders of Israel at the conclusion of the 1948 war. This land is internationally recognized as belonging to Israel.

Shuningdek qarang

Adabiyotlar

  1. ^ McCarthy, Justin (1990). Falastin aholisi: Aholisi tarixi va Usmoniyning so'nggi davri statistikasi va mandat. Kolumbiya universiteti. p. 26.
  2. ^ Anita Shapira, Land and Power; The Zionist Recourse to Force, 1881–1948, Oxfore U. Press, N.Y., 1992. p. 51
  3. ^ Zangwill, Israel, The Voice of Jerusalem, (New York, Macmillan and Company, 1921) p. 110.
  4. ^ Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, p. 11
  5. ^ Anita Shapira, Land and Power; The Zionist Recourse to Force, 1881–1948, Oxfore U. Press, N.Y., 1992. pp. 47–51
  6. ^ J. Frankel, "The Yizkor book of 1911", in Essential Papers on Zionism, tahrir. Reinharz va Shapira tomonidan, 1996, ISBN  0-8147-7449-0, pp. 422–448
  7. ^ C. D. Smith, 2001, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, pp. 28, 43
  8. ^ C. D. Smith, 2001, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, 43-44-betlar
  9. ^ a b C. D. Smith, 2001, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, p. 45
  10. ^ Mohammed Muslih, The Origins of Palestinian Nationalism, New York 1988, chapter 3, See also Yehoshua Porath, The Emergence of the Palestinian–Arab National Movement 1918–1929, kirish.
  11. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, pp. 2–3 (italics from original)
  12. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 5 (italics from original)
  13. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, pp. 1–7
  14. ^ Flapan, 1979, Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 11
  15. ^ Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, 2nd Ed., pp. 17–19
  16. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 307
  17. ^ C. D. Smith, 2001, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, 109-110 betlar
  18. ^ Tom Segev, Bitta Falastin, to'liq, First Holt Paperbacks Editions, 2001, ISBN  978-0-8050-6587-9. Part I, chapter 6 : « Nebi Musa, 1920 », pp. 127–144.
  19. ^ C. D. Smith, 2001, Palestine and the Arab–Israeli conflict, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, 110-112 betlar
  20. ^ Z. Sternhell, 1999, 'The Founding Myths of Israel ...'; Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948; Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati
  21. ^ Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, p. 8
  22. ^ Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, 8-10 betlar
  23. ^ Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, 12-16 betlar
  24. ^ a b N. Finkelstein, 2002, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, 2nd ed., pp. 12–16
  25. ^ Zeev Sternhell, 1998, The founding myths of Israel, pp. 71, 72, ISBN  0-691-01694-1
  26. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, 103, 104-betlar
  27. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 157
  28. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 210
  29. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 218
  30. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 167
  31. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 123
  32. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 197
  33. ^ A. Shapira, 1992, Land and Power ..., p. 275
  34. ^ Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, 11-14 betlar
  35. ^ Parmenter, Barbara M. (6 January 1994). Giving Voice to Stones: Place and Identity in Palestinian Literature. Texas universiteti matbuoti. ISBN  9780292765559 - Google Books orqali.
  36. ^ Gorny, op.cit.
  37. ^ Anita Shapira, 1992, Land and Power, ISBN  0-19-506104-7, p. ix
  38. ^ Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, p. 15
  39. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 216
  40. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs, 1882–1948, p. 259
  41. ^ Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, p. 265
  42. ^ S. Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 188
  43. ^ a b Ben-Gurion cited by Simha Flapan, The birth of the Israel ..., 1987, pp. 23–24
  44. ^ Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 36
  45. ^ Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, pp. 5–6, 36
  46. ^ Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 38
  47. ^ a b Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, p. 141
  48. ^ a b Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, 142–144-betlar
  49. ^ S. Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. viii
  50. ^ S. Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 199
  51. ^ a b S. Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 200
  52. ^ S. Teveth, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, 198-9 betlar
  53. ^ a b C. D. Smith, 2001, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, p. 122
  54. ^ Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, pp. 17–83
  55. ^ a b v Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, p. 70
  56. ^ Jehuda Reinharz, Chaim Weizmann: The Making of a Statesman, Oxford 1993, chapter 7
  57. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs 1882–1948, ISBN  0-19-822721-3, p. 114
  58. ^ Heller, Yosef. Bama'vak Lemedinah, Hamediniyut Hatzionit Bashanim 1936–1948 [The Struggle for the State: The Zionist Policy 1936-1948], Jerusalem, 1984, p. 140, quoting Artur Ruppin 's speech to the Jewish Agency Executive, May 20, 1936. The original speech is believed to have been in German; a copy of the original is held in the Markaziy sionistlar arxivi Quddusda. This passage from the speech was translated into Hebrew. The English translation published here, based on the Hebrew version, is by Yosef Heller for Wikipedia, May 2007.
  59. ^ Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, p. 113
  60. ^ Karsh, Efraim (2005 yil bahor). "Benni Morrisning Xatolar hukmronligi, qayta ko'rib chiqilgan: Post-sionistik tanqid". Yaqin Sharq har chorakda. XII: 31–42. Olingan 15 iyun 2013.
  61. ^ Morris, 2001, p. 41; qarang Nur Masalha, 1992 for a comprehensive discussion
  62. ^ Ben-Ami, Shlomo. Urush izlari, tinchlik jarohatlari: Isroil-Arablar fojiasi. 2005 yil, Vaydenfeld va Nikolson. ISBN  0-297-84883-6.
  63. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987, Zionism and the Arabs 1882–1948, ISBN  0-19-822721-3, 303-304 betlar
  64. ^ N. Finkelstein, 2003, Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, 2-nashr, ISBN  1-85984-442-1, pp. 15, 16
  65. ^ LCM van der Hoeven Leonhard, "Shlomo and David, Palestine, 1907", in From Haven to Conquest, 1971, W. Khalidi (ed.), pp. 118–119
  66. ^ W. Khalidi, "The Jewish-Ottoman Land Company: Herzl's blueprint for the colonization of Palestine", Falastin tadqiqotlari jurnali, Jild 22(2), 1993, pp. 30–47.
  67. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, p. 80
  68. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, pp.93-106
  69. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, p. 117
  70. ^ R. Xolidiy, 2006 yil, Temir qafas, ISBN  0-8070-0308-5, 32, 36 bet
  71. ^ "Avalon loyihasi: huquq, tarix va diplomatiya sohasidagi hujjatlar". 15 Aprel 2016. Arxivlangan asl nusxasi 2016-04-15.
  72. ^ R. Xolidiy, 2006 yil, Temir qafas, ISBN  0-8070-0308-5, 38-40 betlar
  73. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, 62-70-betlar
  74. ^ Fisk 2006, p. 441.
  75. ^ Novick 2000, 157-158 betlar
  76. ^ Zertal 2005 yil, 102-3 betlar.
  77. ^ Achcar & 2010 (b), p. 158
  78. ^ Yaxil, Fridman va Galay 1991 yil, p. 676, n.53
  79. ^ Nikosiya 2000 yil, 87-bet Volfning rafiqasi yahudiy edi va u 1936 yilda iste'foga chiqishga majbur bo'ldi. Xans Dyul uning o'rnini egalladi.
  80. ^ Nikosiya 2000 yil, 85-86 betlar.
  81. ^ Lyuis 1997 yil, p. 311
  82. ^ Elpeleg 2007 yil, p. 68.
  83. ^ Smit, Charlz. Falastin va arab-isroil mojarosi. Oltinchi nashr. 2007. s.111-225.
  84. ^ a b "Javoblar - hayot savollariga javob berish uchun eng ishonchli joy". Answers.com.
  85. ^ Smit, Charlz. Falastin va arab-isroil mojarosi. Oltinchi nashr. 2007 yil.
  86. ^ Nashif, Taysir (1977 yil 6-yanvar). "Mandat davrida Falastin arablari va yahudiylarining etakchiligi". Falastin tadqiqotlari jurnali. 6 (4): 113–121. doi:10.2307/2535781. JSTOR  2535781.
  87. ^ a b Soyalar armiyasi: Falastinning sionizm bilan hamkorligi, 1917–1948 Xillel Koen tomonidan, Kaliforniya universiteti matbuoti, 2009. 15-17, 59-betlar
  88. ^ Shadowplays, Neve Gordon tomonidan, Millat, 2008 yil 24 mart
  89. ^ Chigal haqiqat, Benni Morris tomonidan, Yangi respublika 7/5/08
  90. ^ Soyalar armiyasi: Falastinning sionizm bilan hamkorligi, 1917–1948 Xillel Koen tomonidan. Kaliforniya universiteti matbuoti, 2009. p. 84
  91. ^ Zamonaviy O'rta Sharq ensiklopediyasi, 4-jild, Reeva S. Simon, Filipp Mattar, Richard V. Bulliet. Macmillan Reference USA, 1996. p. 1661
  92. ^ D. Ben-Gurion, 1954, 'ISROILning qayta tug'ilishi va taqdiri', Tomas Yoseloff Ltd., London, p. 42
  93. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, p. 118
  94. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987 yil, Sionizm va arablar, 1882–1948, 3, 70-betlar
  95. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 199
  96. ^ Ben-Gurion, 1959, 'Isroilning qayta tug'ilishi va taqdiri', Tomas Yoseloff Ltd., London, p. 14
  97. ^ Tevet, 1985 yil, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, 8, 11-betlar
  98. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987 yil, Sionizm va arablar, 1882–1948, p. 12
  99. ^ Tevet, 1985 yil, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 44
  100. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, 199, 230-betlar
  101. ^ Tevet, 1985 yil, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 66
  102. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 200
  103. ^ Sternhell, 1999, 'Isroilning asosli afsonalari ...', p. 74
  104. ^ Tevet, 1985 yil, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, 44, 66 bet
  105. ^ Tevet, 1985 yil, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, p. 79
  106. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 231
  107. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 205
  108. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 206
  109. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 207
  110. ^ Flapan, 1979 yil Sionizm va falastinliklar, p. 198; 1947 yilgi BMTning SCOP hisobotiga asoslanib
  111. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, 121, 123-betlar
  112. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, p. 121 2
  113. ^ Simha Flapan, Sionizm va falastinliklar, 1979, ISBN  0-85664-499-4, 11, 199-betlar
  114. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987 yil, Sionizm va arablar, 1882–1948, 103-4 betlar (Ahad Xam), p. 157 (Maks Nordau), 210, 218-bet (Ben-Gurion)
  115. ^ Shindler, Kolin (2012). Isroil va Evropa chap. Nyu-York: doimiylik. p. 39.
  116. ^ Tom Segev, Bitta Falastin, to'liq, Birinchi Xolt Paperbacks nashrlari, 2001 yil, ISBN  978-0-8050-6587-9. I qism, 8-bob: «Yaffa, 1921», 173–201-betlar.
  117. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, p. 114
  118. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, 114, 115-betlar
  119. ^ D. D. Smit, 2001 yil, 'Falastin va arab-isroil mojarosi', 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6, p. 123
  120. ^ a b v d e Norris, 2008, 25.45 bet.
  121. ^ a b v Xyuz, M (2009). "Vahshiylikning baynalmilalligi: Angliya qurolli kuchlari va Falastindagi arablar qo'zg'olonining qatag'oni, 1936–39" (PDF). Ingliz tarixiy sharhi. CXXIV (507): 314–354. doi:10.1093 / ehr / cep002. Asl nusxasidan arxivlandi 2016-02-21.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url holati noma'lum (havola)
  122. ^ Levenberg, 1993, 74-76 betlar.
  123. ^ Xolidiy, 2002, p. 21; p. 35.
  124. ^ Patai, 1971, p. 59.
  125. ^ Morris, 1999, p. 160.
  126. ^ Morris, 1999, p. 159.
  127. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, p. 61
  128. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, 52-60 betlar
  129. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, 60-67 betlar
  130. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, p. 107
  131. ^ Nur Masalha, Falastinliklarni haydab chiqarish, 1992, ISBN  0-88728-235-0, 67-80-betlar
  132. ^ a b "Woodhead komissiyasining hisoboti".
  133. ^ Buyuk Britaniyadagi Buyuk Britaniyadagi hukumatining bayonoti, 1938 yil noyabr oyida Buyuk Britaniyaning buyrug'i bilan parlamentga koloniyalar bo'yicha davlat kotibi tomonidan taqdim etilgan. "Arxivlangan nusxa". Arxivlandi asl nusxasi 2013-11-03. Olingan 2014-11-11.CS1 maint: nom sifatida arxivlangan nusxa (havola)
  134. ^ "Falastin. (Hansard, 1939 yil 23-may)". hansard.millbanksystems.com.
  135. ^ "Sionistlar rahbariyatining Biltmore dasturi - 1942". www.mideastweb.org.
  136. ^ Y. Gorny, 1987 yil, Sionizm va arablar, 1882–1948, ISBN  0-19-822721-3, 280-1 betlar
  137. ^ Koen, 2009, p. 167.
  138. ^ a b v Swedenberg, 2003, p. 125.
  139. ^ Sayigh, p. 669.
  140. ^ Swedenberg, 2003, p. 139.
  141. ^ a b Xorn, 2003 p. 228.
  142. ^ a b v Anglim, 2005, p. 9.
  143. ^ "PALESTINE: Oozlebarts and Cantor". 1938 yil 15-avgust - www.time.com orqali.
  144. ^ Krämer, 2008, p. 291.
  145. ^ a b Gettleman va Sxar, 2003, p. 181.
  146. ^ Morris, 1999, p. 153.

Bibliografiya

  • Finkelshteyn, Norman (2003). Isroil-Falastin to'qnashuvi tasviri va haqiqati, 2-nashr. Verse. ISBN  1-85984-442-1
  • Flapan, Simha, 1979, Sionizm va falastinliklar, Croom Helm London, ISBN  0-85664-499-4,
  • Gorni, Yosef, 1987, Sionizm va arablar, 1882–1948, Clarendon Press, ISBN  0-19-822721-3
  • Kats, Shmuel (1973) Jang maydoni: Falastindagi haqiqat va xayol Shapolskiy pab; ISBN  0-933503-03-2
  • Xolidiy, Valid (1961). Dalet rejasi, Falastinni bosib olishning bosh rejasi. Yaqin Sharq forumi, 1961 yil noyabr.
  • Lokman, Zakari (1996). O'rtoqlar va dushmanlar: Falastindagi arab va yahudiy ishchilari, 1906–1948. Berkli, Los-Anjeles va London: Kaliforniya universiteti matbuoti. ISBN  0-520-20419-0.
  • Morris, Benni (2004). Falastinlik qochqinlar muammosining tug'ilishi qayta ko'rib chiqildi. Kembrij: Kembrij universiteti matbuoti. ISBN  0-521-00967-7
  • Masalha, Nur (1992). Falastinliklarning quvib chiqarilishi: sionistik siyosiy fikrda "ko'chirish" tushunchasi, 1882–1948. Bayrut: Falastin tadqiqotlari instituti. ISBN  0-88728-235-0
  • Pappe, Ilan (2006). Falastinni etnik tozalash. Oksford: bitta dunyo kitoblari. (2006) ISBN  1-85168-467-0
  • Shapira, Anita, 1992, Yer va quvvat; Sionistik majburlash, 1881–1948, Oksford U. Press, N.Y., ISBN  0-19-506104-7
  • Smit, Charlz D., 2001 yil, Falastin va Arab-Isroil mojarosi, 4-nashr, ISBN  0-312-20828-6
  • Sternhell, Zeev (1999). Isroilning asos solgan afsonalari: millatchilik, sotsializm va yahudiy davlatining tuzilishi. Prinston universiteti matbuoti. ISBN  0-691-00967-8
  • Tvet, Shabtai, 1985, Ben-Gurion va Falastin arablari, Oksford universiteti matbuoti, ISBN  0-19-503562-3

Tashqi havolalar

  • Bilan bog'liq ishlar Sionizm Vikipediya manbasida