Radical Israeli in u-turn on Palestinians

[Rob]

There is truth in this.

Radical Israeli in u-turn on Palestinians

Ian Katz
Thursday October 3, 2002
The Guardian

The radical Israeli historian who did more than any other to force his country to face up to its responsibility for the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the 1948 war now believes the Middle East might be at peace if David Ben-Gurion had expelled all the Palestinians.
In an about-turn that will horrify his former Iiberal allies, Benny Morris argues in the Guardian that "perhaps, had [Ben-Gurion] gone the whole hog, today's Middle East would be a healthier, less violent place, with a Jewish state between Jordan and the Mediterranean and a Palestinian Arab state in Transjordan". He adds: "Perhaps it was the very indecisiveness of the geographic and demographic outcome of 1948 that underlies the persisting tragedy of Palestine."

Mr Morris's remarks will be highly controversial, both because of his stature as one of Israel's leading so-called "new historians" and because the idea of "transfer" - expelling all Palestinians - has recently gained currency among Israeli rightwingers.

Mr Morris, who once went to jail rather than serve in the Israeli military, shocked many in February when he declared in the Guardian that he no longer believed that a two-state solution could bring peace to the region.

During the 1948 war, initiated by the Jewish state's Arab neighbours, more than 700,000 Palestinians abandoned their homes, many of them driven out by Israeli forces. Around 150,000 remained within Israel's 1948 borders, a population which has now swelled to around one million Israel's total population of six million.

During the late 1980s Mr Morris, who now teaches history at Ben-Gurion University, and a handful of other revisionist scholars used archive material to challenge Israel's prevailing "patriotic history", according to which the Palestinians had left of their own free will. They were bitterly criticised by many on the Israeli right who accused them of offering intellectual aid to the enemy.

Last night Professor Avi Shlaim, another eminent Israeli historian who challenged the orthodoxy, said: "What Israel carried out in 1948 was ethnic cleansing and what Benny is telling us now is that Ben-Gurion should have been more thorough and comprehensive in his policy of ethnic cleansing. Benny seems to have lost his moral bearings."

Prof Shlaim added: "It is very ironic that Benny Morris, who has done more than any other scholar to reveal the full extent of Israel's expulsion of the Palestinians in 1948 has come full circle and is today suggesting that Israel did not expel enough Palestinians in 1948.

"What this boils down to is that Benny Morris seems to have joined the ranks of the Israeli right. The Israeli right has no other solution to the conflict except transfer and Benny seems to be endorsing that policy. "

In his article, Mr Morris says he wonders what Ben-Gurion, Israel's first leader, would have made of Palestinian suicide bombings and "the tone of rejectionism that characterises much Palestinian rhetoric" and he concludes: "Perhaps he would now regret his restraint."

[ibrodsky]

Perhaps he has been personally affected by Arab terrorism --losing a friend or relative. It's hard to cling to asbtract ideas when you see first hand the effects of such profound evil.

Or perhaps seeing Islamist and neoNazi Web sites rushing to quote and cite him has caused him to rethink.

It doesn't matter. By creating ammo for Islamists and kindred neoNazis, the damage has already been done, and nothing he can say now will stop them from using his writing to justify their mass murder. As Philip demonstrates in this forum, there is no slander that terrorists and their supporters won't embrace if just one ostensibly Jewish person states it.

[alexbmn]

no question these imbeciles tried to undermine the moral fabric of israei society and to shatter Israel's conviction thats it is in the right.Well they succeeded.Israel's defeatism and self flagelation brought on the tragedy of Oslo.600 dead do bring reality back in a tough way though.

[ayesha]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Perhaps he has been personally affected by Arab terrorism --losing a friend or relative. It's hard to cling to asbtract ideas when you see first hand the effects of such profound evil.

the same can be said for the palestinian victims. not surprising ordinary pals that once rejected terrorism, now lack faith in 'peace'

[Philip]

The article is really nothing new. Morris, while he has catalogued what went on in 1948, has always been of the opinion that the Palestinians were responsible for the situation.

Kisses, ibrodsky.

[Miriam]

Looks like another Sacks affair, only this time the other way round. The "Guardian" must be really a jolly place


Check the articles for yourself:

[1]The original Benny Morris:

A new exodus for the Middle East?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0...803338,00.html


[2]The artcle about Morris' article (quoted above):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...803524,00.html


[3]Two letters on it:

Palestine and population transfer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/st...804173,00.html

And now check [1] and [2] against each other in light of the 2nd letter:

· In your news story you cite the historian Avi Shlaim as saying that "Benny [Morris] seems to be endorsing that [transfer] policy". In his G2 article, Morris speculates on what the Middle East may have been like today had Ben Gurion acted differently. He also speculates on the effect of an Arab victory in the 1948 war. It is a truism to say that had Jews and Arabs been separated in 1948, the problems of the Middle East today would not exist (in their current form). But Morris doesn't comment on the morality of the early 20th- century idea of transferring Arab and Jewish populations, and there is certainly nothing in his article in support of the Israeli right's agenda of transfer.

Perhaps Morris should be consulted on what his views are concerning current proposals for the transfer of the Arab population, rather than putting words into his mouth.
Syd Kaminsky
Manchester

[ayesha]

Originally posted by Miriam
Looks like another Sacks affair, only this time the other way round.

JFYI, Mr. Sacks has not turned his back on Israel(is), he's made no such u-turn.

[Miriam]

Originally posted by ayesha

JFYI, Mr. Sacks has not turned his back on Israel(is), he's made no such u-turn.

Neither does Morris advocate transfer, the point is wilful misinterpretation by "Guardian" in both cases.