On August 15, 1945, Japan agreed to the unconditional surrender demanded by the Allied Forces in the Potsdam Declaration that was made three weeks earlier. My father and mother were then homeless. Though members of a minor Chinese community in Japan, the American firebombs had not spared their houses. My mother and her classmates stopped practicing defending themselves against the invading American army with sharpened bamboo spears. The news of the preceding three weeks included two atomic bombs, the announcement that the Emperor was no longer divine and the mass suicides in front of the Imperial Palace. The Great Wars finally ended.
The first of two World Wars started between the Hapsburg Empire and Russian-backed Serbia in August, 1914 in the town of Sarajevo, when Gabriel Princip, a Bosnian-Serb anarchist, assassinated Archduke Ferdinand. The theme of a minority population as problem people is a common and recurrent one in history. An anticipated two-months war ended up with the Bolshevik Revolution, the breakup of several empires--the Austrian-Hungarian, Imperial German, and Ottoman--and thanks to Chaim Weizmann, the Balfour Declaration. Never mind the King-Crane Commission and the Hussein-McMahon Letters; if the Poles, Czechs/Slovaks, Romanians can have their own country, why not the European Jews? The Brits have said earlier: We are a Christian country. We don’t want too many non-Christian Jews from Slavic Europe. Let’s give them Palestine instead, now that the League of Nations has given Britain its Mandatory Powers.
Victors define history and thus Sudeten Germans couldn’t be part of the new Germany. No, they had to be a minority population under Czechs. Too bad for Germans. As for the remnants of the Ottomans, Sykes-Picot agreement nicely divided the oil-rich Middle East, ignoring indigenous rights. France and Britain now ruled the Middle East, blocking the Turks, Russians, and the Germans.
In the mean time, a dark-haired ex-corporal from Linz, Austria came to the conclusion that there was something foul in the land: Germany is broke and the Communists are taking over the world. And so, National Socialism rose partly as an anti-Commy effort. In the process, anti-Semitism became mixed up with anti-communism because many communist leaders and intellectuals were secular Jews. Italy must fight Communism, says Il Duce. Imperial Japan must fight Communist Soviets for control of China and free the American-, British-, Dutch-, and French colonies in Asia.
There is nothing like a common enemy to excite the people. Fight Communism and fight Colonialism become part of the mantra. WWII erupted, killing 100 million people including millions of European Jews. Sorting out the resulting mess was a massive challenge.
After V-E Day, the Potsdam Conference (Churchill, Attlee, Stalin, Truman) was held to plan the future. Massive ethnic cleansing was still tolerated then. At least eight million ethnic Germans (some living in Volga regions for hundreds of years) were deported to Germany. It was Poland for the Poles, Czechoslovakia for Czechs/Slovaks etc. etc. European countries were made 98% homogeneous except for Yugoslavia. No more minorities. It took Hitler, Stalin, and the Potsdam Conference to construct the basis of modern Europe. It is in this context that Jewish Israel was born. Having aided in the anti-Axis war efforts, the colonial populations from Indonesia to Africa demanded and obtained independence.
Fast forward 65 years. Israel-Palestine and Kashmir-India are unresolved issues from WWII aftermath. If the Zionists had expelled all the Palestinians in 1947-48 from Israel, we probably wouldn’t be discussing much about Israel. If Kashmir became part of Pakistan, as the demographics indicated in 1947, we probably wouldn’t be talking about it now. And thus, the mess created by the disintegration of colonial empires and ethnic cleansing haunt us now.
Victors dictate what happens after war and creates some absurd situations. Two examples come to mind. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, Taiwan (Republic of China) as represented by Chiang Kai-Shek’s Nationalist government represented China. The Taiwan Lobby (led by powerful Henry Luce of Time-Life) in Congress made sure that this charade continued until Nixon went to Beijing. This was a remnant of the American support for the Nationalist Chinese during WWII against Japan. As corrupt as it was, they were “our” friends. I think of the Palestinian Authority as the modern-day equivalent of Nationalist Chinese. In addition, the Israel Lobby, particularly in Congress, works in a similar way to the Taiwan Lobby.
Finally, did you wonder why an Israeli helicopter crashed recently during a joint military exercise in Romania? Or why Romania just last week declared support for Israel in case of war? Here are some clues: Romanian Jews, on the whole, did better than other European Jews during WW II; and 90,000 Romanian Jews emigrated to Israel at the founding of Israel. Did you know that the first ever female foreign minister in the world was Ana Pauker, a Jewish Romanian born in what is now Moldava? The current Israeli foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, was born in Chishinau, Moldova, and his mother tongue is Romanian. It is no coincidence that Romania is pro-Israel and its influence will be felt more as a member of the EU. History continues to haunt us.
The middle east must not be allowed to go the way of Hiroshima and Nagasaki:
link to youtube.com
‘Fast forward 65 years. Israel-Palestine and Kashmir-India are unresolved issues from WWII aftermath.’
So is the continued occupation of Germany, Japan, Italy, and the UK by U.S. troops — ‘Oh no, we forgot to demobilize!’
Bring the troops home before their paychecks bounce.
US has military presence in 120 countries although none of them would consider themselves as being occupied, other than Iraq and Afghanistan. As America becomes financially broke, we will have to shrink this massive global presence. In reality, it is currently being funded by loans from China anyway.
When gangsters go broke they don’t cut back.
Perhaps, if only Nixon could have gone to China, then only the grizzli gurl Sarah Palin (properly schooled) can go to Palestine? Or maybe that (already schooled) corporate Mormon? But who’d be the new Henry Kissinger?
The pressure will come from EU. Even for China, there was enormous pressure from increasing trade ties between Europe and China, long before US involvement. Nixon had to contain Soviet Union and to end the Vietnam War quickly and that is why there was urgency. American policy will be the last to wake up as far as Israel is concerned.
Romania is on the west edge of the Black Sea.
The Khazar empire was on the northwest of the Black Sea.
Scythia, ancient homeland of the Aryan people, origin of the Persian people, is the region around the Black Sea.
Lieberman may well be an ancient Iranian.
When I studied Romanian at the Army Language School, we learned that there is a saying: being Romanian isn’t a nationality, it’s a profession.
By the way, I suspect Israel is thinking of using Romania as a staging point for an air attack on Iran, via Georgia and Azerbaijan, or at least wants Iran to think it is thinking of it.
Romania is a member of NATO since 2004. Attacking Iran from Romania will mean NATO attacking Iran. I don’t think that is likely although anything is possible.
“If the Zionists had expelled all the Palestinians in 1947-48 from Israel, we probably wouldn’t be discussing much about Israel.”
This is exactly what Benny Morris said, though when he said it, everyone accused him of being pro-ethnic cleansing. Makes one cynical, no? Since no one is calling on the Czechs, Slovaks, or Poles to renounce their states, and since Yugoslavia was a disaster in the 1990s, maybe Israel has a point when it says that the one state solution is a recipe for disaster.
I think the more acceptable conclusion and way to move forward is that ethnically homogeneous nation-states is increasingly anachronistic. EU is moving towards the model of limited sovereignty while most “advanced” countries are increasingly multi-ethnic. One only needs to walk down the streets of New York, London, Paris, or even Tokyo. Yes, there will always be friction between the majority and minority populations but ethnicity-based states can no longer be maintained due to advances in global transportation and communication systems. This is irreversible.
“I think the more acceptable conclusion and way to move forward is that ethnically homogeneous nation-states is increasingly anachronistic. ”
And as I often say when confronted with a utopian argument like this:
First, Israel is less ethnically homogenous than any state in Europe is.
Second, ethnically diverse states are for the most parts such abject failures that it’s surprising you would even make the argument. Yugoslavia was a bloodbath. Rwanda was a bloodbath. Congo is a bloodbath. Sudan is a bloodbath. Chechnya is a bloodbath. Lebanon was a bloodbath. These are all ethnic conflicts. And yes, Israel and the Palestinians fight with one another. You’re advocating throwing the dog and cat in the same back and telling us it will be better.
Third, if you’d like to experiment with non-homogenous states, please start with someplace else other than the world’s only Jewish state. Given our history, Jews do not want to be your guinea pig.
“EU is moving towards the model of limited sovereignty while most “advanced” countries are increasingly multi-ethnic.”
Yes, but that is hardly an example of ethnic diversity. It’s an economic agreement among a lot of white people based on common values (read: Christianity.) And please, Europe is not that multi-ethnic. Look how they’re treating their Muslims. Europe is still overwhelmingly homogeneous, and they got that way through hundreds of years of keeping others out.
“One only needs to walk down the streets of New York, London, Paris, or even Tokyo.”
Or Tel Aviv.
Given the fact that Israel functionally occupies and controls all the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean and virtual parity of population between Jews and Arabs, future is bleak for a Jewish (democratic) state. Furthermore, Israel is very unusual in that Jews from all over the world has automatic right of return while Palestinians don’t. It is simply my opinion that it is simply a question of time that the demographics will overwhelm the Jews in Israel/Palestine. Ethnic cleansing that Israel has been attempting since the 1940′s hasn’t worked well enough. There is very little chance of success in the future. This is simply common sense looking at data. Like it or not, the two state solution is dead and there is no way of “kicking” out the Israeli Arabs in any significant number. THAT cannot be done.
How is expelling the entire population of Palestine not ethnic cleansing?
Modern states (the US as an example) may be multi-ethnic w/o too much trouble (give or take wide anti-Blackism and anti-Hispanicism), but Israel is based on being ancient rather than modern, aspires to religious fundamentalism and Bible-based land-grabbing.
There IS a one-state with mixed (altho immiscible) populations in pre-1967 Israel and in WB. But it is definitely NOT like the US or even EU. It is apartheid and has been properly so called.
Do not mistake recent (right-wing) admissions of the possible benefits of ONE-STATE with a proposal for change. It is not a proposal for change but, rather, a holding action, intended to prolong the status quo.
Why do not the EU (or various South American states) propose, in UNGA, the removal of all settlers and removal of the wall, and propose to the UNGA membership that each state take and continue BDS action until the settle4rs and wall are removed (or until a peace treaty is signed)? Presumably they fail to act through a combination of indifference and fear of US action (or international banking/lending/loan-forgiveness action).
“This is exactly what Benny Morris said, though when he said it, everyone accused him of being pro-ethnic cleansing. Makes one cynical, no?”
Morris was pro-ethnic cleansing and said so. Is making things up part of what you call “debate”?
This is what Benny Morris said–
“So when the commanders of Operation Dani are standing there and observing the long and terrible column of the 50,000 people expelled from Lod walking eastward, you stand there with them? You justify them?
“I definitely understand them. I understand their motives. I don’t think they felt any pangs of conscience, and in their place I wouldn’t have felt pangs of conscience. Without that act, they would not have won the war and the state would not have come into being.” (Morris)
You do not condemn them morally?
“No.” (Morris)
They perpetrated ethnic cleansing.
“There are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide – the annihilation of your people – I prefer ethnic cleansing.” (Morris)
Dennis is claiming that when a crime is successful people lose interest in it. I don’t think he’s right about the Palestinians in 48–if the cleansing had been complete there would just be that many more Palestinians around (unless they’d been killed) to resent what had happened. But Dennis is not saying this would have been morally acceptable. Morris was.
“They perpetrated ethnic cleansing.”
Which was par for the course at that time and, as Morris pointed out, had the job been completed, there would be no conflict today.
“Dennis is claiming that when a crime is successful people lose interest in it.”
That’s exactly what Morris argued, though cynically. History is littered with nation-states taking morally-questionable acts to preserve their nationhood. Only Israel is being held accountable for those acts, thanks to a post-facto definition of morality that is applied by European states and others guilty of much worse crimes in history for which they have not been held accountable.
“History is littered with nation-states taking morally-questionable acts to preserve their nationhood. Only Israel is being held accountable for those acts”
But Israel was not preserving “nationhood”. There was no nation, and no need for a nation. The Zionists planned to take over a chunk of land and drive out the locals in order to create a nation. And that is what they did.
“But Israel was not preserving “nationhood”. There was no nation, and no need for a nation. ”
No need for a nation? Are you kidding? My people went through thousands of years of persecution in part because they did not have a land of their own.
You’re not in a position to decide whether my people are a nation or not. In fact, we are a nation, and whether you agree or not is not my concern. It’s up to my people to decide that, thank you. We’re through with having others decide what we are for us. Been there, done that.
Are you going to tell me that the Americans “were a nation” and were preserving nationhood when they killed millions of Native Americans?
hophmi:
I strongly suggest you read Shlomo Sand’s “Invention of the Jewish People”. In fact, it should be a mandatory reading, given your comments above.
“I strongly suggest you read Shlomo Sand’s “Invention of the Jewish People”. In fact, it should be a mandatory reading, given your comments above. ”
Why? Do you think I care whether some crazy academic denies the history of my people? Sand is neither a Jewish historian nor an ancient history. His book is a political polemic and has been criticized by most scholars in the field, including Anita Shapira, not known for her right-wing views. Moreover, virtually every genetic study disproves long-discredited nonsense about Jews being descended from Khazars.
You like it because it supports the Palestinian narrative, which unfortunately denies the existence Jewish history. The irony is that I claimed something like this about the Palestinians, and how Palestinian national identity is a modern construct and not an ancient one (even though it’s basically true), you’d probably call me a bigot.
I strongly suggest you read any mainstream book about Jewish history. There are plenty available.
Read the book.
What is acceptable appears to change with time. When I went to college, woman were not even allowed to apply till the following year at Caltech. No one seemed to complain much. 150 years ago, we had legalized slavery in the US. As I wrote earlier, the Potsdam Conference in July, 1945 specifically endorsed all ethnic Germans to be deported back to Germany proper. Some of these deported people were descendants of immigrants to Russia from 4-500 years ago. The world didn’t seem to mind much then. Times have changed (thankfully). No large-scale ethnic cleansing is possible and certainly will not be condoned by the world. This is no longer an acceptable solution (I’m not discussing morality here, just what is practiable).