‘Palestinianism’ and its relationship with colonialism and imperialism.

Friends, Meerim

I want to share with us a bit of hakafa on the movement called Palestinianism and its relationship with colonialism and imperialism.  Often times, when the haters talk of Zionism, they, accuse it of been colonialistic but the opposite is the case on Zionism, and Palestinianism is the movement that is imperial and colonial.

Firstly, what is imperialism?

Wikipedia defines it as …

“a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means”.

Merriam Webster said it is…

the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas;

Dictionary. Com defines it as…

the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.

So from the above, we have a foreign empire or nation leaving their national lands and extending colonial dominion over the lands and life of other people and their nation.

Now, what of colonialism?

Wikipedia defines it as …

the establishment of a colony in one territory by a political power from another territory, and the subsequent maintenance, expansion, and exploitation of that colony.

Now, what is a colony?

Dictionary. Com said it is…

a group of people who leave their native country to form in a new land a settlement subject to, or connected with, the parent nation.

Merriam Webster said it is…

an area that is controlled by or belongs to a country and is usually far away from it. A group of people sent by a country to live in such a colony.

Free Dictionary. Com said it is…

a group of emigrants or their descendants who settle in a distant territory but remain subject to or closely associated with the parent country.

Now, how does all these relate to the Arabs calling themselves Palestinians?

Firstly, historical records, archaeology, etc has proven that the Jews are the only group of people still in existence as a a cohesive group to have established their own indigenous and independent nation on that territory as their own land and country.

No other still existing group of people has ever done so right from the times that Rome conquered them until the ending of Ottoman rule on that land. They have what could be called national rights to the land as their own nation, just as every other people have on theirs.

This national rights has always been maintained in historical life of nations and that’s why when nations are conquered by empires, whenever the empires leave, the land reverts back to those who had formed their own indigenous and independent polity and nation on the land unless a new independent nation has been created on it..

This right is always observed both in multi ethnic and mono ethnic nations and the length of occupation by empires usually do not matter in many cases so long as the owners are still existing and demanding for their territory back.  Examples of such situation abound in history and will be the topic of another day.

Romans ransacking the Temple. credit wikipedia comons
Romans ransacking the Temple. credit wikipedia comons

Now, the Romans came over to this Jewish nation and in their imperialism, conquered and occupied them. To effect that occupation and imperialism, they allowed many people to come into this land and set up homes.

From the Romans to the Ottomans, the land experienced many empires who occupied, colonised and flooded the land with other people from different areas mostly from the Middle East Arab lands. We have Egyptians, the Maghrebs, Yemenis, Saudis, Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese, etc who were used by these imperialistic empires to occupy the land as colonisers and effect their colonialism and imperialism.

The Jewish national owners who were on the land were oppressed by these empires and those Arabs and others they imported to effect their occupation and colonialism, as attested by many historians of then times.

A colony is defined as being subject to the empire which brought them in.  That is an attribute that helps define the Arabs claiming to be Palestinians as the colonists they are.  Throughout those years these Arabs were been used by these empires to effect their occupation, they never moved to or owned the land as their own native country or had any allegiance to it. This is because they in truth know that the land is not theirs.

People who are indigenous and national owners of territories taken by empires from them are mostly known to always agitate and fight or pray to get the territory back unless they later create a new independent polity on it with others after running the empire out. The Arabs never did this because they know once again that it is not theirs.

When the Jews were struggling, praying, moving for and dying to get that their land back the Arabs did nothing and had allegiance to the empires which brought them in.

When the Jews made Zionism a strong movement to reclaim the land back by the early years of the 20th century and later got it back from the Ottomans, the only thing these Arab occupiers of that land did was to ally themselves with the Pan Arabic empire movement and maintained that they are not Palestinians but south Syrians in lending credibility to the fact that they are colonisers used by foreign powers on the land and has no attachment of any sort to the land.

They still maintained being Syrians and not Palestinians on at least three recorded different occasions.

One from their leader Haj Amin El Husseini in the early 1920s.

Another was in 1936 by their delegation to the Peel commission from their leader Auni Bey AbdulHadi.

The other was by their leader Ahmad Shuqarry to the UN in 1956.

Knowing that they are colonisers and foreigners been used for Arab imperialism, their leader Zuheir Mohsen said to the Dutch newspaper Truow in 1977 that

they invented the Palestinians as a political and tactical weapon against Zionism.

So what else could be called a group of people who were imported by empires to occupy another people’s territory if not colonists? What could be called their actions to continue maintaining that colony if not colonialism. What could be called the extension of Arab nations power and influence through this colonization been effected with the use of all the weapons of Palestinianism if not imperialism?

The Arabs in occupation of Jewish lands violated international law as stated in article 49(6 ) of the 4th Geneva Convention. What the Ottomans did in flooding the land with Arabs like the Al Masris of Egypt and Arafat’s Qudwas from Syria, etc is a violation of Geneva Convention.

credit: Myths and Facts.
credit: Myths and Facts.

What the Brits allowed the Arabs to do from the 1920s to the 1940s when they flooded the land and occupied it in violation of article 5 of the Mandate for Palestine document and setting up this weapon of Palestinianism, is a violation of Geneva Convention even though Britain was not in occupation of the land but allowed the Arabs to do so.

What the Arabs did in Judaea & Samaria and Gaza from 1948 till 1967 when they occupied those areas with their armies and moved their people in to live there, was a violation of the Geneva Convention.

What the Arabs are still doing now with this their weapons of Palestinianism is to maintain an occupation and continue violating Geneva Convention.

Check Also

Into The Fray: “Palestine” – Two countervailing hypotheses

Do the Palestinian-Arabs genuinely wish to establish a state for themselves?  Or do they really …