HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Sept. 14, 2005 Some people today make the assertion that Palestine was never a nation, which is true. It was under the control of the Mamluks from about 1260 till 1516 and the Ottoman Empire from 1516 till 1918. Mamluks and Ottomans alike, though not Arabs, were Muslims, as, of course, are the Palestinians. Palestine's Jewish population throughout those centuries was tiny, perhaps less than 5%. In the late nineteenth century, Jews, fleeing persecution in the Russian Empire, started to infiltrate Palestine, on the pretext of some very tenuous historical claim based on the Bible and other ancient books. This influx caused the Jewish population to rise to about 10% by 1918, at the end of WWI. At this time, the Balfour Declaration had just come out. Incidentally, the Balfour Declaration says that His Majesty “looks with favor” upon the foundation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. It does not say that His Majesty “hereby authorizes” such a foundation. Pursuantly to the declaration, President Woodrow Wilson sent Henry Churchill King and Charles R. Crane in 1918 to the Levant, today known as Lebanon, Syria and Israel, to investigate the attitude of the people then resident in the area towards the possibility of the establishment of a Zionist state there. The findings of the investigation, known as the King-Crane Commission Report make it clear that Muslims made up 80% of the population of Palestine at that time, while Christians made up less than 10% and Jews slightly more than 10%. The report further clarifies that both Muslims and Christians, or somewhere between 80% and 90% of the people of Palestine, were emphatically and almost unanimously opposed to the erection of a Zionist state in Palestine, while Jews were enthusiastically in favor. Today, we often hear it said that Israel is the only true democracy in the Middle East, as bulldozers and bombers work under the fire of bullets and rockets, and people are forcibly relocated or walled in. But where was the democratic principle in allowing 10% of the population of Palestine make the decisions for the other 90%? Here is an excerpt from the King-Crane Commission Report, with my capitalizatioo of the pertinent passages: “3. Wishes of the People.-THE MOSLEMS CONSTITUTE ABOUT FOUR-FIFTHS OF THE ACTUAL POPULATION OF PALESTINE, ACCORDING TO A RECENT BRITISH CENSUS. Except for certain official groups they were practically unanimous for the independence of United Syria, and were responsive to the current political influences. The organizations met at Jaffa took the position that Syria is capable of self-government without a mandatory power, but if one should be insisted upon by the Peace Conference, they preferred the United States...... .....THE CHRISTIANS OF PALESTINE, WHO ALTOGETHER CONSTITUTE LESS THAN TEN PER CENT OF THE POPULATION, SHOWED MORE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. Some groups in the north, as the Latin Catholics of Tiberias and Haifa and most of the Christians of Nazareth, were with the Moslems for independence and the reference to Damascus. Maronites and Greek Catholics, and usually the Latin Catholics, were for a French mandate. The Greek Orthodox everywhere, according to an agreed program, were for a British mandate, as were several scattering groups. None asked directly for the United States, though the opinion was expressed that if there were assurance that we would come if asked, most Christians would favor this solution. The Christians were in general strongly in favor of a mandatory power, which should exercise a real control. THE JEWS, WHO CONSTITUTE A LITTLE MORE THAN TEN PER CENT OF THE POPULATION, WERE ALL FOR ZIONISM, under a British mandate. THE MOSLEM AND CHRISTIAN POPULATION WAS PRACTICALLY UNANIMOUS AGAINST ZIONISM, USUALLY EXPRESSING THEMSELVES WITH GREAT EMPHASIS. This question was closely connected with that of the unity of all Syria under one Government.” So what happened to the King-Crane Commission Report, with its recommendations against a Zionist state? Some people see it this way: Woodrow Wilson deliberately suppressed the report until after Congress had adopted the Balfour Declaration. This may mean that the commission was only theatrical, enacted to make it look as if Wilson was seeking an equitable solution. Perhaps, left to his own devices, he would have opposed Zionism on the basis of the commission report, but he wasn’t left to his own devices. Several powerful Jewish Zionist activists, including Louis Marshall and Louis Brandeis, were pressuring Wilson also to “look with favor” on Zion. According to one witness behind the scenes at the time, Marshall and Brandeis were in a position to twist Wilson’s arm, because of their knowledge of improprieties in Wilson’s personal life. ------------ About the author Thomas Keyes: I have written two books: A SOJOURN IN ASIA (non-fiction) and A TALE OF UNG (fiction), neither published so far. I have studied languages for years and traveled extensively on five continents. Email: udikeyes@yahoo.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
