ByRami G.
Khouri
The
Trump-Netanyahu initiative to formalise Israeli annexation of more Palestinian
territories in the occupied West Bank has been rightly criticised as a new
Balfour Declaration, a Zionist apartheid plan for second class Palestinians
penned in Bantustans, and an audacious display of power by American-Israeli
rightwing fanatics.
The most
frightening aspects of the initiative, however, may relate to older and wider
dimensions that transcend the localised land grab.
The most
dramatic, is how this initiative perfectly mirrors the 1922 League of Nations
Mandate for Palestine that put the United Kingdom in charge of administering
the territory and explicitly working to establish a "national home for the
Jewish people" that the UK pledged to support in its 2 November 1917
Balfour Declaration.
The
Trump-Netanyahu initiative is a 21st century neo-Mandate that aims to cement a
Greater Israel colonial state, and repeats the power relationships, ideological
aims, operational mechanisms, anti-Arab racism, and Zionism-over-Arabism
leanings of 1922.
Also
noteworthy, though not explored in depth here, is the poverty of Palestinian
and Arab leadership. This US-Israeli assault is allowed to happen easily mainly
because most Arab leaders - including the Palestinians since 1993 - have
essentially abdicated core Arab sovereignty of decision-making in favour of
allowing Israel and the US to define key issues on Palestine and wider Arab matters.
The texts
of the 1922 Palestine Mandate and the 2020 Trump-Netanyahu initiative, with
American and Israeli officials' comments in the last three days, include such
profound similarities in their aims, implementing mechanisms, and power
relationships, that we can safely conclude that the colonial period of a
century ago has not ended, at least in Palestine
and the wider Arab region.
The big
picture that connects 1922 with 2020 comprises a few core dynamics and
operational assumptions that were routine for colonial and imperial powers a
century ago, and apparently are still acceptable today in Palestine :
1) Jews and
Zionists then, Israelis and American Zionists today, have greater rights, and
greater priority, in Palestine
than do the indigenous Palestinian Arabs.
2) A major
western power (the UK then, the US today) and a local partner (the Zionist
Organisation then, the State of Israel and its rightwing settler-extremists
today) work hand-in-hand, with international support, to implement the goal of
creating a Jewish homeland then, and a Greater Israel Colonial State today.
This was
the first substantive policy issue mentioned in the opening preamble of the
1922 mandate, immediately after the first paragraph establishing the principle
of mandatory powers appointed via the League of Nations Covenant:
"Whereas
the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be
responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on 2
November 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the
said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish
people…"
3) The
rights of Jews and Zionists around the world to immigrate to the land of Palestine/Israel enjoy priority over the
rights of Palestinian Arabs to remain in their homes, or return to them if they
were driven out or fled in 1947-48 and beyond.
The 1922
mandate spells this out in Article 6: "The Administration of Palestine,
while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population
are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable
conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred
to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands
and waste lands not required for public purposes."
The
reference to the Palestinian Arabs only as "other sections of the
population" is repeated in other ways that clarify both the subjugated
nature of these locals and also their lack of rights, starting with a lack of
their name.
4) The
original mandate's preamble and the Trump-Netanyahu initiative both affirm the
Jewish people's historical links to the land of Palestine .
The 1922 Mandate noted "Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the
historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine , and to the grounds for
reconstituting their national home in that country."
But neither
the old nor the new mandates affirms in any equal force or clarity the parallel
ancient links to the same land by its majority Arab-Muslim-Christian
inhabitants, because they are invisible people in White western eyes, referred
to in the words of the Balfour Declaration as "existing non-Jewish communities
in Palestine ".
Invisible people do not have a name, and thus have no rights either.
5) The
unspoken assumptions of both the original and new mandates see the advanced
western White civilization (UK then, US-Israel today) as superior in their values,
conduct, and rights, to the local Palestinian Arabs whose rights might be
achieved secondarily to those of the Zionists-Israelis in the land, and also to
any Jewish person around the world who wants to come to this land.
6) Major
foreign powers (the UK then,
the US and Israel today)
control the foreign relations of the local population (Article 12 of 1922
Mandate).
7) The
mandatory power (UK then, US
and Israel today) supervises
the arming, training, and activities of the local security forces in Palestine (Mandate
Article 17).
8) The
broad aim of the original mandate and the new one today is to strengthen
Jewish-Zionist-Israeli control of the land, and weaken the Palestinian Arabs so
severely that they either give up hope of a decent life and emigrate, or they
submit to live by the apartheid-like rules and Bantustan-like configurations
that are imposed on them without their having any say in the matter.
9)
Consequently, the original and current mandates view the Palestinians as truant
delinquents who are not eligible for immediate statehood, but need to be
tutored, trained, and prepared to run their own country - if they pass
character tests.
Statehood,
sovereignty, and national rights - even demographic and territorial contiguity
- are not a birthright of Palestinian Arabs, as they are for Jews-Zionists, but
they have to be earned through good behaviour. And actually achieving statehood
is not guaranteed, but merely held out as a possibility if one is compliant,
submissive, and obedient to the mandate's rules.
10) The
original and new mandates specify that White western colonial powers (UK then, US and Israel today) control the money,
borders, guns, resources, trade opportunities, and other basic factors that
define statehood and sovereignty for the Palestinians.
These will
be doled out to the local Arabs in a slow and episodic manner over many
decades, and only after certification of Arab compliance with the colonial
apartheid rules.
11) The
original and new mandates give the UK and Zionist Organisation (then, Mandate
Article 4, and the US, Israel, and American Zionists today) the formal capacity
to engage in defining policies and actions that will help achieve the aims of
creating the Jewish national home then, or expanding the colonial State of Greater
Israel today.
It seems
that the struggle against colonialism in Palestine
and other Arab lands has many more years ahead, if the latest deeds of the
US-Israeli combine are anything to go by. But judging by the arc of Palestinian
and Arab history, one thing is sure: As long as there is colonialism, there
will be resistance.