Yesterday I quoted Richard Falk's piece saying that Israel's crisis in legitimacy recalls the Soviet Union's crisis in the '80s and the French colonial experience in Algeria in the '50s; both regimes held out, he said, and then fell mysteriously, abruptly, unexpectedly. What is the Algeria story? Well in Postwar, Tony Judt's history of Europe since '45, he tells the story in a few sharp and insightful pages (283-289). Buy the book and read the whole section-- meantime, I'm going to sample some of the story below.
History doesn't repeat itself: that is one of the core beliefs of this site. But it's not as if patterns in history don't reassert themselves, and so I read Judt's colonial narrative as a parable about how "unthinkable" change comes to pass when history knocks on the door. The obvious parallels are these: the colonial power this time is the U.S./Israel lobby, that's the power that has to break, just as De Gaulle ultimately compelled the French to yield to history. And the French settlers this time are the Israelis, who have the support of the U.S. and fear abandonment. Or maybe just the Israeli settlers?
Notice, too, that conciliators and moderates come in and out of the picture. But that the moderates in the end don't control the flow of history towards self-determination. And while I've left this part out mostly, the unending Algerian crisis brought down a few French governments-- just as you might say that Middle East policy helped bring Obama to power over McCain (and Clinton to power over Bush I).
My discomfort with the Algeria parallel is that no one wants to see Israel and Palestine become democratic with a lot of violence. This is why American Jews are so conservative; they know the country they're supporting is in the wrong, but they fear for Jewish life, and rationalize any oppression on that basis. And it really is hard to imagine any way that rightwing Israel does take its foot off the neck of the Palestinian population without bloodshed. I suppose the feel-good answer is that history doesn't repeat itself, so we can learn from history and do it differently this time.
Judt:
The idea that Algeria might one day become independent (and thus Arab-ruled, given the overwhelming numerical predominance of Arabs and Berbers in its population) was unthinkable to its European minority.
Accordingly, French politicians had long avoided thinking about it. No French government except Leon Blum’s short-lived Popular Front of 1936 paid serious attention to the grievous mis-rule practice by colonial administrators in French North Africa. Moderate Algerian nationalists like Ferhat Abbas [!] were well known to French politicians and intellectuals before and after World War Two, but no-one really expected Paris to concede their modest goals of self-government or ‘home rule’ any time soon. Nevertheless, the Arab leadership was initially optimistic that the defeat of Hitler would usher in long-awaited reforms...
The government of liberated France showed little concern for Arab sentiment, and when this indifference resulted in an uprising in the Kabylia region east of Algiers in Mary 1945, the insurgents were uncompromisingly crushed…
The Algerian FLN—Front de Liberation Nationale—was led by a younger generation of Arab nationalists who scorned the moderate, Francophile strategies of their elders. Their objective was not ‘home rule’ or reform but independence, a goal that successive French governments could not contemplate. The result was eight murderous years of civil war. Belatedly, the French authorities proposed reforms….
The French army duly undertook a bitter war of attrition against the guerrillas of the FLN. Both sides regularly resorted to intimidation, torture, murder, and outright terrorism ….
By September 1957 [French colonel Jacques] Massau was victorious, having broken a general strike and crushed the insurgents in the Battle of Algiers. The Arab population paid a terrible price, but the reputation of France was irrevocably sullied. And the European settlers remained as suspicious as ever of Paris’s long-term intentions.
In February 1958 the newly installed government of Felix Gaillard was embarrassed by the French air force’s bombing of Sakhiet… The resulting international outcry, and offers of Anglo-American ‘good offices’ to help solve the Algerian imbroglio, led to growing fears among the Europeans of Algeria that Paris was planning to abandon them…
[De Gaulle's] first task, as he understood it, was to restore the authority of government in France. His second and related objective was to resolve the Algerian conflict that had so dramatically undermined it…
Infuriated by what they regarded as evidence of a coming sell-out, officers and settlers in Algeria began planning a full-scale revolt. …The chief victim of the coup was the morale and the international image (what remained of it) of the French Army.
An overwhelming majority of Frenchmen and women, many of them with sons serving in Algeria, drew the conclusion that Algerian independence was not just inevitable but desirable—and for the sake of France, the sooner the better…
[After two years of negotiations, in 1962], the French people voted overwhelmingly to free themselves of the Algerian shackle Two days later Algeria became an independent state.
The section concludes with the ongoing damage: hundreds killed by terrorism, millions of Algerians forced into French exile against their will. And Algeria’s Jews also left the country, some for Israel. I'd just note that many people have been surprised by the pace of change in U.S. attitudes on Israel/Palestine, especially with David Petraeus's recent epiphany about the American interest in the Middle East. Notice that the French people ultimately turned against Algerian colonialism "for the sake of France."
SUDDENLY
Why? Is Algeria is located within the map of France, that France should not yield to history? Palestine (a Roman description) is in, and the map of Israel, that one sane mind cannot question such legal historical territorial claim! What is our sanity to compare imperialist France to Israel who simply insists to reclaim its own ancestral home?
I didn’t realize the Israelites had predominantly Russian and Polish accents. Thanks for the historical insight.
I cannot easily understand why people such as Judt who perhaps dine with milk and honey, wallow with red wine and the best of the European beefs, drive in an aircond limousine, and relatively live in a lifestyle of northern opulence cannot think much better than we are in common third world routine diet of one or two fish, chips of pork, dash of vegetables and a bowl of rice… can lifestyle distort our sense of justice?
There is no ‘ancestral home’. There was an indigenous population of Palestinian Arabs living in the non-state entity known as Palestine, for 100s if not 1000s of years.
They were displaced by European converts to Judaism, who through their religious fundamentalism and nationalism claimed a piece of land by virtue of their religious association.
You have no ties to Palestine, except the mythological.
Self-determination does not belong to a religious group. It belongs to the people of a land.
There was a non-state entity of Palestine from the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It was under the protection of the British Mandate over Palestine. All citizens in Palestine had Palestine marked in their passports and papers. It’s citizens, Jewish, Arab, Christian etc, were all Palestinians.
There was no Israel in Palestine pre-1948. Nor was there ever a state of Israel before 1948. There was once a small Kingdom once, for a brief period in history.
From the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Palestine has been whittled away, but it’s name has not been changed. When TransJordan became a state, what remained under the British Mandate over Palestine, was Palestine. When Israel Declared Sovereignty May 14th 1948, what remained was Palestine. People who live in Palestine are ….Palestinians.
(again, from the excellent talknic, putting down the propaganda and lies)
I’m sure that yonira or someone of like intellect will show up soon and declare that Palestine is responsible for the fate of Algeria’s Jews.
The New York Times did an interesting obituary of Jacques Massu (not Massau), the notorious “victor” in the battle of Algiers, when he died in 2002. According to the obit, “for much of the ensuing 40 years [after his time in Algeria], he was confronted, even haunted, by the tactics of torture systematically used” there. Sincerely or not (he always claimed he wasn’t personally involved), he eventually agreed that France should officially acknowledge and condemn the use of torture. “Morally,” he declared, “torture is something very ugly.”
Something the leaders of the IDF, not to mention the US military, might want to keep in mind…
The obit’s at link to nytimes.com
Jacques Massu among the French, was widely perceived as a cretin.. The popular joke goes like this: General De Gaulle meets Massu with ” Alors, General! Toujours aussi con? ( So General! Always the c..t? ) And Massu replies: A votre service, mon General! ( At your service, General!)
De Gaulle
————
Sorry, it should be ‘de Gaulle’..
Algerian Jews left Algeria after the Algerian National Code granted citizenship only to Muslims.
The Algerian Nationality Code of newly independent Algeria, promulgated in 1963, granted citizenship only to Muslims, requiring that only those individuals whose fathers and paternal grandfathers had Muslim personal status could become citizens of the new state. All Jewish and Christian residents were driven into exile, even though the Jewish community was considered indigenous to Algeria, as it had been in Algeria longer even before Islam and could trace its presence to Roman times, around 2600 years ago starting in the year 586 BCE.
I wonder when these Jews will be compensated and allowed back into the homes they were driven from….
So when can Christians expect their own state, yonira? Where can we found our Christian homeland? Or did you gloss over that part on what you regurgitated at us?
are you stoned Chaos, how does that even make any sense?
It’s called “English” but I suppose they don’t teach that properly in whichever Dakota you’re from.
Also, why is it always about the money with you? You’re like the worst propagator of denigrating Jewish stereotypes just by being here.
whatever you say Chaos, ur a sad person. Can you address the idea of only Muslims getting citizenship in Algeria? Maybe defend Phil’s point that Jews left because of conflict, not because they lost their citizenship in a ‘Muslim only’ country? Can you ever address one of my comments straight on instead of picking something which has nothing to do w/ my argument and feeling like you’re proving something?
If you had any clue with how the world worked, how governments worked, how displaced people were treated, you’d understand that your second comment is ridiculous. but you are clueless about International Relations. Instead you bring out the Jews and money thing and try to blame me for propagating stereotypes.
Yonira, I feel for you honey. The whole world sucks, and if we Jews don’t get to be as sucky as the rest of the world, why, we’re not getting our fair share, are we.
Look Yoni, we are never gonna get our fair share while pantywaists like you pick and choose which particular bit of suckyness we want to avoid, while taking advantage of all who have sacrificed for us. Damn it Yonira, the Stern Gang died for you, and now you want to marry a Gentile.
Without strict religious and political discipline, Zionism will die. Why do you refuse to understand that.
Of course, it would help if there were more real Jews, but you have no intention of helping with that, do you?
When Zionism fails and Israel collapses, leading to a tremendous loss of Jewish life, are you going to go rescue those courageous settlers? I bet you don’t even care about them. All you care about is getting your dick wet and your non-Jewish girlfriend! Ah Shondah, ah Shonda You couldn’t even ride a Jewish motorcycle.
Maybe because you are propagating bad stereotypes about Jews. Seriously, most Jews aren’t cruel, selfish bastards who mock children.
Maybe defend Phil’s point that Jews left because of conflict, not because they lost their citizenship in a ‘Muslim only’ country?
yonira
———————————-
Goodness me! Not again!! They did not lose any citizenship! They had one which is French, granted since 1870! They were welcomed in France as citizens not refugees. Please pause a second and take this fact in!! Otherwise no communication/discussion is possible. It’s like willful deafness and that’s the end of exchange and the beginning of name calling and insults..
Besides, they massively CHOSE to leave and go to France out of the belief that France was the mother protector… I posted the link from Wiki down somewhere, please have a look.
I think you are leaving a big part of history out yonira, not that this is not common for you. The following does not negate the persecution of the Jewish population in Algeria, it just makes some clarifications. Things like the Jewish assistance of the French during their occupation and colonization and prospered, subjugating the Muslim Algerian majority under Vichy rule. The majority of the Jews left for France after the revolution, and a minority left for Israel.
There is always more of a complicated mixture than meets the eye, or than what is presented from propaganda by the prejudiced eye – it does not know anywhere else to go. My recommendation is that you read the literature of those Jews which joined the resistance AGAINST the French in so-called “radical history,” like that which was written by the Algerian Jew’s who supported the FLN and was tortured by the French.
“Israelite compatriots, many Israelites are active in our ranks. Some among them were interned, others are still in prison for their acts in service to the Algerian cause. Algeria’s independence is near; independent Algeria will need you and tomorrow you will need it, for it is your country. Your Muslim brothers honestly and loyally offer you their hand for solidarity coming from your direction. It is your duty to answer.”
In other words yonira, as usual, you don’t know what you are talking about – you are a Zionist robot.
VR,
You are missing the point completely. Let’s say most of Algerian Jews supported the French. Does that in any way justify taking away their citizenship?
Most Israeli Jews support the current occupation of the Palestinians. Does this mean that in your envisioned one state solution it would be ok to take away their citizenship?
Does that in any way justify taking away their citizenship?
eee
—————————-
I’ll repost the answer I posted below in case you haven’t seen it.
No Algerian citizenship was “taken away” from them for a simple reason. They didn’t have one! They were French citizens, a status granted to them in 1870.
its impossible to have a debate on here without ad hominem attacks isn’t VR? I assume you are adult, any possibility you can act like one?
…so you can’t actually refute VR’s points. Noted.
do you think that comment is hypocritical at all Chaos? its your MO. I can’t refute his claims because my knowledge of Algerian history isn’t that great. It certainly sounds like every other story I hear on here about how the Jews were conspiring against their homeland and then whisked away by the all powerful Zionist entity. I guess that story is getting pretty old.
DING! So you are ignorant.
Case closed.
Yoni
Those Algerian Jews you’re referring to part of what is commonly called “Pieds Noirs” I know them well enough ( I lived 32 years in France and I’m a French citizen). The majority did not think of themselves as “lowly” Algerians..They were overwhelmingly ‘Algerie Francaise ‘ if you know the connotations behind such a denomination. Their support for a French Algeria was unconditional. True, not all of them were enthusiastic about the idea of leaving to France, they enjoyed the good life in the colonies. BTW, to think of them as refugees from Algeria is largely mistaken! They’re French citizens enjoying full rights and many WERE compensated by the French gov’t.
Oh no! Not another commenter who actually has personal experience in the matters under discussion! This all started with that darn Shmuel, and now you. No, it’s Phil’s fault for going to Gaza and eating their brainwashing and coercive food!
Don’t you know it’s anti-semantic to oppose hasbarabullshischt with personal experience, principles and facts? How dare you, sir? How dare you!
A large majority of Algeria’s Jews chose to go to France instead of Palestine. It’s very probable that many of them identified themselves with the French pieds-noirs, who also had to leave. After all, one colon is about the same as another.
In 1959, I found myself for a week in Paris without any money (Interesting experience). So I stayed overnight in police stations for free. The St Germain des Pres police station (no longer there) gave me a private cell with its own full length bench and urinal. Unfortunately, they brought in some dozen Algerians rounded up earlier, who disturbed my peace. Then they brought in another round-up of Algerians, who disgreed with the first lot, so the whole goddam cell was full of arguing Algerians, while I was trying to sleep on my bench. (While they were arguing amongst themselves with fury, not a single one attempted, in any way, to take over my ‘private’ space, so the storm didn’t really touch me at all).
The next morning, the police gave me a croissant and coffee for breakfast; I don’t know what happened to the Algerians.
Thanks for sharing that story, Richard. It reminds me of Orwell.
Nice story. Reminds me of free health care (after bicycle mishaps) for Americans doing cycle-vacations in France (1980s?). Sounds like there was no violence between the Algerian factions or from the police. With OPTs, there is exit-time violence to be feared from the settlers who already vent their frustrations on nearby, helpless Palestinians. After ‘peace” there may also be inter-Palestinian violence if there is sufficient dissatisfaction with the terms of the “peace”.
I’m sure you know some ended at the bottom of the Seine, Richard.
Brilliant!
Bet there’s plenty more where that came from, Richard, eh? Heh heh heh.
Richard,
Wow! What sweeping generalizations. How do you know that many of Jews identified with the French, or is that just your prejudice speaking? And even if you are right are you saying this justifies taking away the citizenship of the Algerian Jews?
And even if you are right are you saying this justifies taking away the citizenship of the Algerian Jews?
eee
—————————-
Hmm..An awful misrepresentation. No Algerian citizenship was “taken away” from them for a simple reason. They didn’t have one! They were French citizens, a status granted to them in 1870.
How do you know that many of Jews identified with the French
———————————
From Wikipedia:
“In 1870, the French government granted the Jews French citizenship, under the décrets Crémieux of 1870 . (For this reason, they are sometimes lumped together with the pieds-noirs.) This decision was due largely to pressures from prominent members of the French Jewish community, which considered the North African Jews to be “backward” and wanted to forcefully bring them into modernity. Within a generation, most Algerian Jews had come to speak French rather than Arabic or Ladino, and embraced many aspects of French culture. After WW2, and the subsequent struggle for independence, the great majority of Algeria’s 140,000 Jews left the country for France together with the pied-noirs.
link to en.wikipedia.org
There is a difference between declaring a state Muslim and denying all non-Muslims citizenship. Are these ‘Christian’ European states denying citizenship to non-Christians?
My post (from wiki) is a response to eee’s question (How do you know that many of Jews identified with the French? ) ..It’s a fact that Jews found, rightly or wrongly, an affinity or a semblance of identification with the French colonialists perceived as protectors from the emerging Arab nationalism and anti colonialism. It’s not conspiracy theory to think (it’s documented) that the French Jewish community endeavoured to bring the Algerian Jews to a haven of “civilisation” and ” modernity” a la Francaise/Europeenne
If you want me to say that it’s wrong that the Newly declared Algerian Republic denied non-Muslims, Jews and Christians, a citizenship then I agree. There was incredible animosity between those who supported the “Algerie Francaise” status (largely Jews and Christian or pieds-noirs) and those who fought for their freedom. To blame the victim for wrong things they’ve done, is ok in retrospect but think of it this way. Who’s immune from such practices? Are you aware of how the French resistance exacted revenge on those who collaborated with the Nazi occupiers..Summary execution was the standard fee. Women who “indulged” in the company of German officers ha, publicly, their heads shaven, humiliated, beaten and sometimes executed too.
Mr. eee, I’d be careful if I was you. You are getting awful close to that old “cosmopolitan Jews” blood libel.
Algeria declared a Muslim state. Not unusual, as many European states have declared themselves Christian, and another has declared itself Jewish.
A majority of Algerian Jews preferred to join the general exodus of French pieds noirs or colons back to France. Very few went to Israel.
This is the theme Phil should have picked up from his analysis of the Algerian situation. There is no 8 years coming war (Algerian resistance started at least as early as 1945 with the revolt in Kabylie, and only ended in 1962)
Suddenly, it all collapsed when de Gaulle declared the whole problem was over, and he was getting out. Obama doesn’t have the prestige to do the same.
What is unusual is that neither Israel nor any European state deny citizenship based on religion. One can be an Israeli citizen and a muslim. In Algeria only Muslims could be citizens.
And who’s the last non-Jew to be granted Israeli citizenship, then?
Thats silly Chaos, are you claiming Palestinian Arabs aren’t having babies? If an Israeli, Arab, Christian, or Jew, marries a non-Jew their spouse can become a citizen. Non-Jews can be naturalized.
Good reply Chaos4700. I have to admit that it is difficult for me to converse with someone like eee who argues from ignorance. You and TGIA are much more patient than I am (as TGIA knows from his site).
Basically anyone who doesn’t agree with you is ignorant, isn’t that in itself ignorance?
True or false, yonira — an Israeli citizen marrying a non-Jew cannot extend citizenship to their spouse.
Don’t denigrate yourself, yonira. Your ignorance is all you.
pretty false Chaos, an Israeli who marries a non-Jew can not get married in Israel, but they can extend citizenship to their spouse.
way to gloss over the Palestinian Arab who is both non-Jew and Israeli citizen.
So how do you extend citizenship to a spouse you can’t marry? We can go out and find stories of Israeli-Palestinians shorn from their families by Israel’s apartheid laws, and unable even to marry other Palestinians who don’t already have Israeli citizenship.
Your question was simple, who was the last non-Jew granted Israeli citizenship. I answered that question.
And for the marriage thing, they get married in Cyprus. Then they come back and enjoy Israeli citizenship (I think this is very ridiculous , its one of the many ass backwards laws in Israel)
link to cbs.gov.il
yonira
eee made an assumption( that the Jews were stripped of their Algerian citizen) which was untrue as I demonstrated above and questioned R Parker assertion that Jews identified with the French. Both remarks are mistaken. To think that he was ignorant about this issue as VR said is not far fetched and is not all that big deal when true. .VR is a great fellow. He’s one of those human beings who cannot bear the idea of injustice and suffering inflicted on the Palestinians, among many other things. He’s very passionate , much more than I’ll ever be, but one has to see beyond the trivial and the colourful stuff. He’s extremely knowledgeable and he has amply proven in many instances.
But non-Muslims could become citizens. It was just that as French citizens, they had to apply to become citizens under the 1963 Algerian Nationality Code on one of three grounds:
1. participation in the fight for liberation;
2. exercising the option provided for citizens of French civil status under the Evian agreements;
3. by following the naturalisation procedure.
And then the OAS, backed by many French settlers, launched a terror campaign against the Algerians……….
eee – just like yonira and Richard Witty, you’re ignorant. If you are the best that the “hasbara brigades” has, then Israel doesn’t stand a chance. Perhaps they should send you back to boot camp to repeat basic training. At least go and study some history before you post half-truths here.
Braciole,
The issue in this post which you completely miss or choose to ignore is how likely is there to be a peaceful transition into a one state solution. If Algeria is any example then the chances are zero. Just imagine the Palestinians making the same demands for Israelis to retain their citizenship as the Algerians made of the Jews in Algeria. And that is just one small issue in the transition.
Phil suggests that “years of civil war may lie ahead of us”. Is that not a reason to reconsider the whole one state project?
“The issue in this post which you completely miss or choose to ignore is how likely is there to be a peaceful transition into a one state solution.”
eee
——————–
Sorry but that’s not what I gathered from your two challenges to VR and Richard Parker..
Well then, read them again. My point is simple. Both Parker and VR seem to be justifying the Algerian decision on how to met citizenship post-France. It is hard to imagine Israeli Jews accepting a similar “compromise”. It is just one additional point that indicates that a peaceful transition to a one state solution may be very difficult.
And with Obama likely to put forward a peace plan this fall, it is clear that Israel under duress would most likely unilaterally withdraw to the “Obama borders” than accept a one state solution.
Well they aren’t. You’re putting words in their mouths that aren’t there and it isn’t working, bucko.
Obama can’t even put out a health care reform plan that’s worth the paper it’s printed on. And if past is prologue, the Israeli notion of “unilateral withdraw” is to raze ever single farm, mosque, hospital, school and UN facility in occupied territory and to keep bombing them because, hey, its the American taxpayer that is providing the bombs.
eee
You made the incorrect claim that in Algeria after decolonization, only Muslims could become citizens by law. The truth was more subtle than that but when has any Zionist let the truth get in the way of a good story.
As to your claim that I don’t understand the issue of this post, I do and that is that decolonization is a violent process and but that it is in the end inevitable particularly where a sponsor withdraws its support. However, I don’t think that you do although through your ignorance you pretend to.
Through its continued colonization of the occupied territories, Israel has all but made a two-state solution impossible and even if it was possible, the Israeli expectation of what a two-state solution would look like is totally different to what would satisfy the Palestinians. So that leaves two real options, either the status quo which will almost certainly eventually result in the US withdrawing its support from Israel followed by Israel’s decline into oblivion or a one-state solution which might actually work if Israel is seen to accept it from a position of strength. There is a third option, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians but that would trump the Holocaust.
BTW, there would be one very big difference between a one-state solution in Palestine and Algeria. In Algeria, the French colonists and their hangers-on where a small minority while in a one-state solution in Palestine, the Jews would pretty much have parity with the Palestinians and if the Americans were to offer every Palestinian a Green Card then I expect the Jews would be a majority. If you want a better analogy for the one-state solution, look at Northern Ireland. It is not perfect but de-colonization is becoming irrelevant.
At first I thought this post was about another civil war in the US. Silly me, although it’s coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
This excellent post is another reminder of how easy it is for a bad situation to escalate and worse, for a civilised and democratic country to behave indistinguishably from terrorists.
As if we needed another example
“Notice, too, that conciliators and moderates come in and out of the picture. But that the moderates in the end don’t control the flow of history towards self-determination.”
This is false. In all cases excluding those motivated by fascistic coercion, it is those that are trustable that lead. Those are moderates. Who will trust a fanatic?
The violence theory of history is the idiocy that is worth opposing, by one’s actions.
Witty
Those who kicked the French out of Algeria were no moderates. Their message, the choice, they offered to the French was pretty eloquant an illustration. “La valise ou le cerceuil” (The suitcase or the coffin)..
In other words, Abu Mazen, a ” moderate”, is a joke..His PA is managing the occupation on behalf of the Israelis..The Palestinian people know and feel this. He has no popular support…Saeb Erakat fed up, is looking for other options:
“In a paper written late last year, he suggests ending security co-operation with Israel and nullifying the Oslo Accords – both of which would require Israel to secure the West Bank, instead of having the Palestinians do it for them, and thereby effectively managing the occupation for Israel.”
“Israel confronts its nightmare scenario ”
link to smh.com.au
Another aspect of the Algeria story–from the JewishVirtualLibrary:
“Starting in 1940, under Vichy rule, Algerian Jews were persecuted socially and economically. The Jews averted total destruction through their initiative and participation in the resistance. Their resistance activities helped neutralize Algiers while the Americans landed in the country.”
‘Moderate’ is a rubbery word. You can bend and stretch it like crazy.
Most American Liberals would be considered center-right leaning in countries like Norway, Sweden and indeed even the UK.
In otherwords: “Moderate” by what/who’s standard?
Gotta get THAT clarified/straightened out first.
Look in the mirror, Witty.
And the most wonderful part is how none, not one, of the early Zionists were fanatics who were willing to use violence and political minipulation to get what they wanted. Yes sir, Zionism supplies us Jews with a legacy of moderation we can all be proud of!
And the settlers? Why, you couldn’t meet a more moderate bunch if you tried! Just a boring bunch of folks, minding their own business on their own land.
I remember reading bits about the Algerian war in the papers when I was a boy.
Of course, the Algerian case was a bit different from the Palestinian case. The Arab Algerians were about 90% of the population, greatly outnumbering the pieds-noirs. The parties in I/P are closer to equal in proportion.
The pieds-noirs, onthe other hand, had support from France, with the French army doing most of the fighting for them. The Israelis are likely to do their own fighting, unless they get the Americans in.
The French were already demoralised by the loss of Vietnam. I’m not convinced that theIsraelis have been demoralised to a similar extent (Hezbollah notwithstanding).
But the violence will probably be no less horrible . Still, the current violence is horrible, and there is no sign it is going to get any better.
It is now time for the U.S. to learn to give up its empire. In 1893 the U.S. invaded and overthrew the government of the Hawaiian Islands. It has occupied it since. In 1898 the U.S. ginned up a fight with Spain to take it’s empire. Since then Haiti, Nicaragua, Iran, Guatemala, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Afghanistan, there are others of course. In the meantime, Great Britain, France, Russia dba Soviet Union, the Austro-Hungarians, Germany and the Turks dba the Ottomans have been relieved of their empires. Some gracefully, some not so. The French may have done the best bad job of it. But the U.S. elites should learn the lesson that the days of empire are over. It seems that each generation of U.S. elites must be taught the same lesson. They must be “retarded”. The lesson will have to be beaten into them. So thanks to the Vietnamese, they gave the U.S. elites the chance to learn. The Iraqis beat the U.S. and now the Afghanis are putting on a graduate level symposium for the U.S. elites.
“It seems that each generation of U.S. elites must be taught the same lesson.”
It’s not the elites who learn a lesson. After all what do they lose? It’s the people who send their children (sure they’ll take your daughters, too, these days) to do the fighting and dieing who get tired of it and learn a lesson.
One lesson of Algeria is that it took a man of the Right, de Gaulle, to cut the knot. He had the prestige and charisma to neutralize most of the right wing/Army resistance to withdrawal and survived it. Even so it was a close run thing. Various left liberal French leaders (Mollet, Mendes-France) couldn’t even try.
Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but another similarity between Algeria and Israel is the dominant authority’s refusal to accept democratic principles. The Algerian military intervened in 1991 when it appeared that the FIS would be successful in federal legislative elections, and Palestinians received the same treatment in 2006 when Hamas won free and fair elections.
Geez, Phil, not you too! There is ALREADY a lot of violence.
I gotta say it again, I really do! The comments here are going from strength to strength. And attracting new and informed commenters all the time. Thanks to you all.
As for Yoni and the rest, well, one must have a grudging admiration for their tenacity, and their willingness to make fools of themselves. Or maybe it’s just his performance anxiety getting the better of him as his nuptials approach.
As for me, I should know better than to comment at any site which will accept me as a commenter!
Pingback: Need Affordable Web Design? | Host Rage