A century on, UK's Jewish homeland declaration stirs celebration and mourning in Middle East

[webfact]

A century on, UK's Jewish homeland declaration stirs celebration and mourning in Middle East

By William James and Jeffrey Heller

 

Palestinians take part in a protest calling on Britain to apologize for the Balfour Declaration, in the West Bank city of Ramallah October 18, 2017. REUTERS/Mohamad Torokman

 

LONDON/JERUSALEM (Reuters) - In a 67-word statement composed 100 years ago, Britain endorsed the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East, triggering a process that would culminate in the creation of Israel - and with it one of the world's most intractable conflicts.

 

On Thursday British and Israeli leaders will commemorate the centenary of that statement, known as the Balfour Declaration after the foreign minister who penned it, with a banquet in the gilded halls of London's Lancaster House mansion.

 

But as Prime Minister Theresa May and Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu dine, protesters in London and the Palestinian Territories will gather to demand that Britain acknowledge the suffering they say the declaration has caused to Palestinian people, and recognise their claim to statehood.

 

"The reason it is getting so much attention is because the conflict which it launched ... is still very much in existence and there is a sense, particularly on the Palestinian side, of continuing injustice," said Ian Black, an academic at the London School of Economics.

 

"It really is an issue which is alive and toxic and bitterly divisive."

 

While Israel reveres Arthur Balfour, naming streets and a Tel Aviv school after him, Palestinians decry his declaration as a promise by Britain to hand over land it did not own.

 

The contested declaration is at the root of the Israeli-Palestinian territorial conflict which, after several wars and decades of international diplomacy, remains unsettled.

 

According to advanced excerpts of her speech, May will say at the banquet: "I believe it (the declaration) demands of us today a renewed resolve to support a lasting peace that is in the interests of both Israelis and Palestinians – and in the interests of us all."

 

Britain held Palestine, which had previously been under Ottoman Turkish rule, from 1922 until after the end of World War Two.

 

Israel declared independence in 1948, at the end of British Mandatory rule and after the U.N. General Assembly voted in 1947 in favour of a plan, rejected by Palestinian representatives, to partition Palestine into an Arab state and a Jewish state.

 

The ensuing regional conflict, played out over a series of wars fought along Arab-Israeli lines, has left the Palestinians seeking to establish an independent state in territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war.

 

DELICATE COMMEMORATION

 

Thursday's commemoration, culminating in the dinner hosted by descendants of Balfour and the recipient of his declaration, Jewish community leader Walter Rothschild, requires Britain to strike a delicate diplomatic balance.

 

Britain regards Israel as a close and important ally, and supports international efforts to find a peaceful solution that results in separate Israeli and Palestinian states.

 

"I don't think the British are celebrating the commemoration, in fact I think they're trying quite hard to avoid doing that," said Black, who has written a book to mark the centenary entitled "Enemies and Neighbours".

 

Attempting to strike the right balance, Britain's foreign minister, Boris Johnson, on Monday praised the declaration for helping to create a "great nation", but he also said the spirit of the declaration had not been fully honoured. [nL8N1N55U4]

 

"The vital caveat in the Balfour Declaration - intended to safeguard other communities - has not been fully realised," he said, referring to a clause in the document which said nothing should prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities.

 

Israel has traditionally focused less on that clause and more on the declaration's landmark endorsement of a Jewish homeland, and plans to celebrate the anniversary.

 

The Israeli parliament will hold a special commemorative session. Its foreign affairs and defence committee will hold what was described as a "special celebratory meeting" entitled "100 years since the Balfour Declaration, to independence, to becoming a regional superpower".

 

"While the state would not have arisen without settlement, sacrifice and a willingness to fight for it, the international impetus was undoubtedly the Balfour Declaration," Netanyahu told a meeting of his cabinet ahead of his visit to London.

 

Israel does not oppose international efforts to make peace, but says - as do international sponsors - that a solution cannot be imposed and should stem from talks between the two parties.

 

Some Arab lawmakers in the Israeli parliament said they would boycott the celebrations, and protests are planned across several days in London by organisations pledging solidarity with the Palestinians.

 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas used an article in Britain's Guardian newspaper to reiterate calls for the British government to acknowledge the declaration as a mistake.

 

"The creation of a homeland for one people resulted in the dispossession and continuing persecution of another – now a deep imbalance between occupier and occupied," he wrote.

 

"The balance must be redressed, and Britain bears a great deal of responsibility in leading the way."

 

Britain has refused previous Palestinian demands for an apology, and does not officially recognise Palestine as a state. Johnson said on Monday Britain would be willing to do so, but wanted to time it to give maximum impetus to peace efforts.

 

"We certainly will do it — we want to do it — but now is not yet the time," he said. "That on its own will not end the occupation or bring peace."

 

(Editing by Gareth Jones)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-02

[Orton Rd]

Time for the Muslims to put their hate aside and accept Israel

[dexterm]

The British Govenment should be hanging its head in shame, and apologising for the misery caused and the countless lives lost through the meddling of their predecessors.

 

What right had a European power to give away land it did not own to foreign European Jews while ignoring the rights and wishes of the resident indigenous 91% Palestinian population.

 

Then supporting massive European Jewish migration, helping Jews with the infrastructure to establish a racist Zionist state, training Jewish militias while decimating Palestinian leadership and undermining all their attempts to resist this blatant colonialist project.

 

Palestinians quite rightly rejected the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and Partition in 1947 for the same reasons..why should they agree to a foreign power giving away a majority of their land to a minority of foreign colonists.

Edited November 2, 2017 by dexterm

[ilostmypassword]

Here is the Balfour Declaration in its entirety with an introductory sentence and follup-up sentence thrown in:

 

I have much pleasure in conveying to you. on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet

 

His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

 

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

 

You'll notice that there's a big caveat there  which actually takes up over half of the declaration.

"...it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Some might possibly say that this portion of the declaration is not insignificant and has not been entirely honored by Israel. Just possibly.

 

[champers]

To add some context, it should be remembered that during WW1 the UK government promised autonomy and independance to those Arab tribes who helped to drive Turkish troops out of what is now Syria and Jordan (with Lawrence of Arabia). All promises were broken after the war.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

The British Govenment should be hanging its head in shame, and apologising for the misery caused and the countless lives lost through the meddling of their predecessors.

 

What right had a European power to give away land it did not own to foreign European Jews while ignoring the rights and wishes of the resident indigenous 91% Palestinian population.

 

Then supporting massive European Jewish migration, helping Jews with the infrastructure to establish a racist Zionist state, training Jewish militias while decimating Palestinian leadership and undermining all their attempts to resist this blatant colonialist project.

 

Palestinians quite rightly rejected the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and Partition in 1947 for the same reasons..why should they agree to a foreign power giving away a majority of their land to a minority of foreign colonists.

 

Same old regurgitated hate filled bile. Same old faux indignation ignoring reality in an assumed search for absolute "justice".

[Morch]

47 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Here is the Balfour Declaration in its entirety with an introductory sentence and follup-up sentence thrown in:

 

I have much pleasure in conveying to you. on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet

 

His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

 

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

 

You'll notice that there's a big caveat there  which actually takes up over half of the declaration.

"...it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Some might possibly say that this portion of the declaration is not insignificant and has not been entirely honored by Israel. Just possibly.

 

 

Without taking away from Israel's supposed sins (and no need, we all know how this topic will evolve) - some might possibly say that circumstances were not as straightforward or conductive to things being sorted in an amicable way. Some might possibly say this wasn't and isn't a one-way street. 

[dexterm]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Same old regurgitated hate filled bile. Same old faux indignation ignoring reality in an assumed search for absolute "justice".

Same old attack the messenger without addressing the issues raised.

 

Nothing faux about my indignation at UK's betrayal and the suffering it has caused. The reality is that The Balfour Declaration was unjust in 1917 and the apartheid conditions imposed by Israel on Palestines today are still unjust.

[sanemax]

2 hours ago, dexterm said:

 

What right had a European power to give away land it did not own to foreign European Jews while ignoring the rights and wishes of the resident indigenous 91% Palestinian population.

.

That isnt quite correct .

There were already Jews living on the land and other Jews came from neighboring Countries as well , Yemen, Egypt, Iran etc . It was only later that European Jews began to arrive

[dexterm]

16 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Without taking away from Israel's supposed sins (and no need, we all know how this topic will evolve) - some might possibly say that circumstances were not as straightforward or conductive to things being sorted in an amicable way. Some might possibly say this wasn't and isn't a one-way street. 

The usual fence sitting intended to muddy the waters suggesting both sides were somehow to blame...now where have I heard that recently?

 

When thousands of unvited European colonists invade one's land with the intention of establishing their own religious state by dispossessing and disempowering the resident indigenous population, aided and abetted by the UK with all the guns and power, it is hardly unexpected that the native Palestinian population should not greet the interlopers amicably.

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, dexterm said:

 

When thousands of unvited European colonists invade one's land with the intention of establishing their own religious state by dispossessing and disempowering the resident indigenous population, aided and abetted by the UK with all the guns and power, it is hardly unexpected that the native Palestinian population should not greet the interlopers amicably.

Stop these inaccuracies , you are re writing history .

[Morch]

17 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Same old attack the messenger without addressing the issues raised.

 

Nothing faux about my indignation at UK's betrayal and the suffering it has caused. The reality is that The Balfour Declaration was unjust in 1917 and the apartheid conditions imposed by Israel on Palestines today are still unjust.

 

You are not a "messenger", but a one-sided political activist with a hateful  agenda, who's already admitted in the past to intentionally posting incorrect and partial information.

 

There is no "issue raised" in your post, other that piling up as many pejorative terms against anything related to Israel.

 

Your posts are filled with faux indignation and routinely ignore any factors, facts, circumstances and consideration not fully supportive of your agenda. The ones appearing on this topic are bound to be same.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Morch

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The usual fence sitting intended to muddy the waters suggesting both sides were somehow to blame...now where have I heard that recently?

 

When thousands of unvited European colonists invade one's land with the intention of establishing their own religious state by dispossessing and disempowering the resident indigenous population, aided and abetted by the UK with all the guns and power, it is hardly unexpected that the native Palestinian population should not greet the interlopers amicably.

 

Well, you'd call anything not fully aligned with your hateful views "fence sitting". I do not subscribe to your one sided views, your biased interpretation, your unrealistic "solutions" and your fantastic accounts. At the same time, and in the same way, I do not uphold all of the strong pro-Israel opinions aired on this pages. There is no compulsion to pick a side or to believe that either is 100% in the right. 

 

I am suggesting that the Palestinians could have made better decisions, could have taken more successful paths to achieve their goals, and that they should not be treated as unaccountable for anything and everything whatsoever.

 

The rest of your drivel is just the run of the mill tirade.

[dexterm]

11 minutes ago, sanemax said:

That isnt quite correct .

There were already Jews living on the land and other Jews came from neighboring Countries as well , Yemen, Egypt, Iran etc . It was only later that European Jews began to arrive

Roughly at the time of the Balfour Declaration

" In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews."

13 minutes ago, sanemax said:

That isnt quite correct .

There were already Jews living on the land and other Jews came from neighboring Countries as well , Yemen, Egypt, Iran etc . It was only later that European Jews began to arrive

I was actually being conservative with my 91% Palestinian majority. Roughly at the time of the Balfour Declaration in 1917

" In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)

 

It was a European invasion of colonizers. Most Jews from outside Europe came decades later after the establishment of the Zionist state.

[dexterm]

16 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Stop these inaccuracies , you are re writing history .

No links I notice to point out my supposed inaccuracies.

 

I suggest you view the Jewish Virtual library.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/population-of-israel-palestine-1553-present

[dexterm]

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Well, you'd call anything not fully aligned with your hateful views "fence sitting". I do not subscribe to your one sided views, your biased interpretation, your unrealistic "solutions" and your fantastic accounts. At the same time, and in the same way, I do not uphold all of the strong pro-Israel opinions aired on this pages. There is no compulsion to pick a side or to believe that either is 100% in the right. 

 

I am suggesting that the Palestinians could have made better decisions, could have taken more successful paths to achieve their goals, and that they should not be treated as unaccountable for anything and everything whatsoever.

 

The rest of your drivel is just the run of the mill tirade.

The UK's treatment of Palestinians in the Balfour Declaration and Israel's oppression of Palestinians to this day are both plain wrong.

 

No apologies for my point of view. I am not going to dress it up by some faux obfuscation (your forte) well perhaps both sides were partly to blame. 

 

All this talk of inaccuracies from the usual hasbara brigade but I seem to be the only one quoting links to support my facts so far. 

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, dexterm said:

No links I notice to point out my supposed inaccuracies.

 

I suggest you view the Jewish Virtual library.

"When thousands of unvited European colonists invade one's land with the intention of establishing their own religious state by dispossessing and disempowering the resident indigenous population, aided and abetted by the UK with all the guns and "

I really cannot write the history of that area in a TV post , whole books have been written about the subject . I suggest that you read some of them .

   Just to point of two of your inaccuracies . (Your quote above , sorry I messed the quote up )

The British did try to stop European Jews from going to Palestine , the Royal Navy stopped the boats from leaving Europe for Palestine , also when there , the Jews were fighting against the British .

    Jewish groups at the time , the Hagana and the Irgun were fighting AGAINST the British, not with them

 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The UK's treatment of Palestinians in the Balfour Declaration and Israel's oppression of Palestinians to this day are both plain wrong.

 

No apologies for my point of view. I am not going to dress it up by some faux obfuscation (your forte) well perhaps both sides were partly to blame. 

 

All this talk of inaccuracies from the usual hasbara brigade but I seem to be the only one quoting links to support my facts so far. 

 

You think it's plain wrong, and that's your right. It doesn't make it an absolute, universally accepted fact or truth. Learn the difference. And further, things do not exist in a vacuum, but are connected to other events, circumstances and what not. That you wish to focus just on those bits supporting your pet agenda is a choice - but it doesn't make the presentation more relevant.

 

No apology expected - just that embracing your hateful view is not a requirement for having a valid opinion and take on related matters. Same goes for picking a side to the absurd degree featuring in your posts. And as for what you call obfuscation - well, no, that's simply not adopting your one-sided narrative.

 

As for posting links being a measure of one's credibility, allow me to point out that you never post anything which is even remotely critical of extreme Palestinian positions. Nada. That's without getting into selective quoting habits, or co opting of statements made regardless of context.

 

Considering my views are often critical of Israeli actions and policies, your last comment is plain nonsense.

[owl sees all]

Was it not the promise of a Isreali homeland in Palestine that brought US into the war on Britain's side?

[sanemax]

11 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Was it not the promise of a Isreali homeland in Palestine that brought US into the war on Britain's side?

It wasnt ,no .

Edited November 2, 2017 by sanemax
To add a comma

[dexterm]

28 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I really cannot write the history of that area in a TV post , whole books have been written about the subject . I suggest that you read some of them .

   Just to point of two of your inaccuracies . (Your quote above , sorry I messed the quote up )

The British did try to stop European Jews from going to Palestine , the Royal Navy stopped the boats from leaving Europe for Palestine , also when there , the Jews were fighting against the British .

    Jewish groups at the time , the Hagana and the Irgun were fighting AGAINST the British, not with them

 

Again you are deliberately muddying the timeline.

 

At the time of the Balfour Declaration 1917 and for the next 22 years, the British were extremely supportive of Jewish migration to Palestine. They even appointed a Zionist Governor Herbert Samuel and trained Jewish militias. 

It was only in 1939 after the Palestinian revolt that UK began to realize the full extent of their colonialist trouble making, perhaps that and the desire for Arab oil with WW2  brewing, when they attempted to curb Jewish migration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Paper_of_1939

 

>> Jewish groups at the time , the Hagana and the Irgun were fighting AGAINST the British, not with them
...Yes, I wonder if Theresa May has invited the relatives of British soldiers Martin and Paice to celebrate the Balfour Declaration.

[sanemax]

3 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Again you are deliberately muddying the timeline.

 

At the time of the Balfour Declaration 1917 and for the next 22 years, the British were extremely supportive of Jewish migration to Palestine. They even appointed a Zionist Governor Herbert Samuel and trained Jewish militias. 

 

Its the Jewish homeland .

Jews have been living there constantly for over 2000 years

The Temple of David in Jerusalem , is over 2000 years old .

Anyway , I do think that 3000 years of history is a subject that is too big to discuss on forums

You would need to do a four year university course to fully understand the situation

[dexterm]

33 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Was it not the promise of a Isreali homeland in Palestine that brought US into the war on Britain's side?

Could be true, but some historians note that maybe UK PM Lloyd George may have had an exaggerated idea of how influencial American Jews actually were at the time.

 

"My answer is that he had a highly inflated idea of the international influence of the Jews," said [Israeli Professor Avi] Shlaim.

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2017/10/16/from-balfour-to-boris-britains-broken-promises-in-palestine
(btw ...good article)

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, dexterm said:

Could be true,

It isnt true .

It was Germanys submarine warfare against the UK and Germanys alliance with Mexico , encouraging Mexico to take "back" some of the U.S's states which made the USA join in WW 1 against Germany .

   WW2 , it was Japans bombing of Pearl Harbour that bought the USA into the war

[dexterm]

26 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Its the Jewish homeland .

Jews have been living there constantly for over 2000 years

The Temple of David in Jerusalem , is over 2000 years old .

Anyway , I do think that 3000 years of history is a subject that is too big to discuss on forums

You would need to do a four year university course to fully understand the situation

Judaism is indigenous to Palestine... and so are several other religions. But modern day Jews, diluted by millenia of inter marriage and conversion are not. It's a phony argument.

 

People like Ivanka Trump do not have a god given right to instant Israeli citizenship and a land package on stolen Palestinian land, while Palestinian refugees are forbidden from returning to their confiscated homes for which many still have the keys. 

 

What I object to is the Zionist attempt to change Palestine into a  racist supremacist state. I have no objection to a secular democratic Palestine being a haven for any genuinely persecuted Jew, with the proviso mentioned in the Balfour Declaration that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"

 

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by dexterm

[sanemax]

Just now, dexterm said:

 

People like Ivanka Trump do not have a god given right to instant Israeli citizenship and a land package on stolen Palestinian land, while Palestinian refugees are forbidden from returning to their confiscated homes for which many still have the keys. 

 

 

There is also US$ 300 Billion worth of property in the Middle East, owned by Jews who cannot access the homes and still have the keys , 

[simple1]

10 minutes ago, sanemax said:

It isnt true .

It was Germanys submarine warfare against the UK and Germanys alliance with Mexico , encouraging Mexico to take "back" some of the U.S's states which made the USA join in WW 1 against Germany .

   WW2 , it was Japans bombing of Pearl Harbour that bought the USA into the war

There are always layers of influencing issues. Though not the primary matter, an interesting article at the URL below. Perhaps someone with detailed historical knowledge of the period may like to  comment on the article.

 

http://www.momentmag.com/how-the-first-world-war-changed-jewish-history/

[dexterm]

8 minutes ago, sanemax said:

There is also US$ 300 Billion worth of property in the Middle East, owned by Jews who cannot access the homes and still have the keys , 

So two wrongs don't make a right. Just because one religious group has been persecuted does not give them the right to persecute another group.

 

I have said in previous posts that I hope provisions in an eventual peace agreement can address genuine Jewish refugee claims too.

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Judaism is indigenous to Palestine... and so are several other religions. But modern day Jews, diluted by millenia of inter marriage and conversion are not. It's a phony argument.

 

People like Ivanka Trump do not have a god given right to instant Israeli citizenship and a land package on stolen Palestinian land, while Palestinian refugees are forbidden from returning to their confiscated homes for which many still have the keys. 

 

What I object to is the Zionist attempt to change Palestine into a  racist supremacist state. I have no objection to a secular democratic Palestine being a haven for any genuinely persecuted Jew, with the proviso mentioned in the Balfour Declaration that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"

 

 

 

It's a phony argument because you do not agree with it. Nice touch there with the "diluted" bit. May want to watch it before true colors come out and all that. Fact is countries set their immigration rules however they see fit, and not according to your pseudo-liberal "ideals". The Palestinian policies (or rather, declared future policies) are not all that different. And, of course, same goes for passing a refugee status from one generation to the other - which is not the norm.

 

What you "have no objection to" carries less weight than hot air, and is about as relevant to conditions and realities pertaining to the situation. Other than spewing hate or painting rosy pictures, you have nothing to contribute on this.

 

 

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

That isnt quite correct .

There were already Jews living on the land and other Jews came from neighboring Countries as well , Yemen, Egypt, Iran etc . It was only later that European Jews began to arrive

You're right, it was 92% +, not 91%.