Print Version
Close this window when finished.
An Unconventional Arab Viewpoint
By Joseph Farah
Editor's note: The following is adapted from remarks made by Joseph Farah at a
Christian Coalition symposium on Islam Feb. 15 in Washington, D.C
This is an abbreviation of such speech.
I've been really bugged, especially since Sept. 11, 2001, by
all the self-proclaimed Arab-American and Muslim-American spokesmen I see on the
talking-head shows. What bugs me is the way they show no appreciation for
just how tolerant and open-minded and non-judgmental the American people
really are toward them and the Arab and Muslim world. Americans are so good, so
fair and so understanding. They are anything but quick to generalize and
stereotype ¡ even when doing so would clearly be in their best interest.
Over a two-day period this week, I had to take nine different
airline flights and go through nine different airport security
checkpoints. Not once during that two-day period did I ever get a second glance
from any security person. Not once was I subject to any extra checks.
Now, I am an Arab-American. I have an Arab face and an Arab name. But I
didn't get a second look. Meanwhile, I saw young mothers with little babies
struggling to make it through extra security. I saw little old grandmothers
facing the indignities of extra checks. And all the while, the Muslim-American
lobbies and the Arab-American anti-discrimination groups are denouncing this
country for being racist and for profiling.
It's just not true. Worse yet, there is every common-sense
reason for it to be so. The threat of terrorism in the United
States does come largely, if not exclusively, from Arabs and from Muslims. We
ignore that fact at our own peril. When I fly to the Middle East, I
often fly El Al. In fact, it is my preferred carrier. Why? Because it has
great security. I know, because of my name and my Arabic ancestry, I'm going to
have my bags searched more scrupulously than the average American. Do I mind?
Absolutely not. In fact, I am grateful. Because I know these security people are
not only
protecting the other passengers, they are protecting me. It only makes sense to
do this kind of profiling ¡ especially when we are in a war where our very way
of life is at stake.
For those of you who have not read my writings on the Middle
East and the Islamic-West conflicts, I don't think these battles are over
misunderstandings. I don't believe they are the result of a failure to
communicate. I don't believe they are caused by an inability to compromise. I
believe they are caused by evil people doing evil things, pure and simple.
I come at this issue of the Middle East a little bit differently than just
about anyone else. I'm an Arab-American Christian journalist. I've arrived
at my conclusions largely through first-hand experience covering the Mideast on
the ground.
Throughout my 25-year career as a daily newspaperman,
I've had two principal beats Hollywood and the Middle East. You might wonder
what these two beats have in common. The common denominator is that they both
deal in the realm of unreality. They both rely on myths. In fact, the
imagination of the Arabs in crafting fables, reinventing history and
fictionalizing facts would make Oliver Stone blush. And it is those myths
of the Middle East that I want to address today in the short time we have.
What is this debate all about? What are the real roots of
this conflict? If you believe what you read in most news sources,
Palestinians want a homeland and Muslims want control over sites they consider
holy. Simple, right? Wrong. In fact, these two demands are nothing more
than strategic deceptions ¡ propaganda ploys. They are nothing more than phony
excuses and rationalizations for the terrorism and the murdering of Jews.
The real goal of those making these demands is the destruction of the state of
Israel.
The proof of the pudding is that prior to the 1967
Arab-Israeli war, there was no serious movement for a Palestinian homeland. Why?
In 1967, during the Six-Day War, the Israelis captured Judea, Samaria and East
Jerusalem.
But they didn't capture these territories from Yasser Arafat. They
captured them from Jordan's King Hussein. Why did the so-called Palestinians
suddenly discover their national identity after Israel won the war. Why
wasn't there a demand for a Palestinian homeland before?
The truth is that Palestine is no more real than
Never-Never Land. The first time the name was used was in 70 A.D. when the
Romans committed genocide against the Jews, smashed the Temple and declared the
land of Israel would be no more. From then on, the Romans promised, it
would be known as Palestine. The name was derived, we think, from the
Philistines, a people conquered by the Jews centuries earlier.
Contrary to what Yasser Arafat will tell you, the Philistines
were extinct by that time. Arafat likes to pretend his people are the
descendants of the Philistines. Actually, the name was simply a way for the
Romans to add insult to injury to the Jews, not only were they
annihilated, but their land was renamed after people they had conquered.
Palestine has never existed ¡ before or since ¡ as a
nation state. It was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian
crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I.
The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as
their homeland. Who rejected that idea? The Arabs. The Jews could have no place
in the Mideast. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Now, at least to Western audiences,
Arafat and some other so-called "moderate" Arab leaders will tell you
that it's OK for the Jews to have their homeland, too side-by-side with
the
Arabs. Why wasn't it OK in 1948?
There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no
distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine
governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from
Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs
control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1
percent of the landmass.
But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all.
And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. No matter how
many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough. Arafat himself
explained the ploy of negotiations with Israel in a 1994 speech in South Africa
in English. He's explained it in Arabic dozens of times. First we create our own
state, then we use that state to liberate all of Palestine. That's
the goal. It's always been the goal. Arafat and his supporters will tell you the
reason a Palestinian Arab state is needed is because Arabs were forcibly
removed from their property in the 1948 war. But listen to what the Arabs were
saying about the refugee issue after that war.
* "The fact that there are these refugees is the
direct consequence of the act of the Arab states in opposing partition and the
Jewish state. The Arab states agree upon this policy unanimously and they must
share in the solution of the problem." Emile Ghoury,
secretary of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee, in an interview with the
Beirut Telegraph Sept. 6, 1948.
* "The Arab state which had encouraged the
Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the
way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these
refugees."
The Jordanian daily newspaper Falastin, Feb. 19, 1949.
* "Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as
refugees, suffering now from the malign attitude of newspapers and
communal leaders, who have neither honor nor conscience? Who brought them over
in dire straits and penniless, after they lost their honor? The Arab
states, and Lebanon amongst them, did it."
The Beirut Muslim weekly Kul-Shay, Aug. 19, 1951.
* "The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the
mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country,
because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
* "For the flight and fall of the other villages it
is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumors
exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame
the Arabs ... By spreading rumors of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and
children etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs
in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the
enemy."
The Jordanian daily newspaper Al Urdun, April 9, 1953.
I could go on and on with this forgotten or deliberately obscured
history. But you get the point. There was no Jewish conspiracy to chase Arabs
out of their homes in 1948. It never happened. There are, instead,
plenty of historical records showing the Jews pleading with their Arab neighbors
to stay and live in peace and harmony. Yet, despite the clear, unambiguous words
of the Arab observers at the time, history has been successfully rewritten to
turn the Jews into the bad guys.
The Arab states that initiated the hostilities have never accepted
responsibility ¡ despite their enormous wealth and their ability to assimilate
tens of millions of refugees in their largely under-populated nations. And other
states have failed to hold them accountable. Today, of course, this cruel
charade continues. The suffering of millions of Arabs
is perpetuated only for political purposes by the Arab states. They are merely
pawns in the war to destroy Israel.
There were some 100 million refugees around the world following World War
II. The Palestinian Arab group is the only one in the world not absorbed or
integrated into their own people's lands. Since then, millions of Jewish
refugees from around the world have been absorbed in the tiny nation of Israel.
It makes no sense to expect that same tiny Jewish state to solve a refugee
crisis it did not create. Do you think the Arabs really care about the plight of
their refugees? I would submit to you that Israel, of all the Middle East
states, has treated the Arab refugees with more fairness and
more compassion. Let me give you an example of what I'm talking
about:
The Jordan Times reports that "Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, who
have long been denied many civil rights including the right to work, now face a
new obstacle in their precarious lives." Under a bill introduced by
parliament last year, Palestinian Arabs will be deprived of their right to own
property. Those who already own property will not be able to pass it on to their
children. Now just imagine if Israel passed such a law? Can you imagine
the international outcry? What would the United Nations have to say about this?
How would the media establishment in the West view such a Draconian ploy? Yet,
this is happening in an Arab country virtually without comment ¡ except here.
And take a look at the transparent rationale for this action in Lebanon, as
described in the Jordan Times: "The Lebanese
parliament passed the law on the grounds that it wants to protect the
right of the Palestinian refugees to return eventually to their homes which they
fled after the creation of the state of Israel on Palestinian lands in
1948."
Don't you love that? "We are protecting your rights by denying your
rights." While Israel has bent over backwards to accommodate the
Palestinian Arabs ¡ especially those victimized by the 1948 war the Arab
nations have only sought to exploit their misery. That exploitation continues
today. It is overt. It is a matter of law. Yet the world sees it not. Ever
since I wrote a column in October 2000 called "Myths of the Middle
East," readers from around the world have asked me what is meant by
the term "Palestinian." The simple answer is that it means what Yasser
Arafat wants it to mean.
Arafat himself was born in Egypt. He later moved to Jerusalem. Indeed,
most of the Arabs living within the borders of Israel today have come from some
other Arab country at some time in their life. Arabs continue to flock into
Israel today. They continue to move into the Palestinian Authority. They
immigrated there even before it left Israeli control. The Arabs have built
261 settlements in the West Bank since 1967. We don't hear much about those
settlements. We hear instead about the number of Jewish settlements that have
been created. We hear how destabilizing they are how provocative they are.
Yet, by comparison, only 144 Jewish settlements have been built since 1967 ¡
including those surrounding Jerusalem, in the West Bank and in Gaza.
Is this a new phenomenon? Absolutely not. This has always been the case.
Arabs have been flocking to Israel and its environs ever since it was created
and even before, coinciding with the wave of Jewish immigration into
Palestine prior to 1948. Winston Churchill said in 1939:
"So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the
country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even
all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish
population."
And that raises a question I never hear anyone ask: If Israel's policies
make life so intolerable for Arabs, why do they continue to flock to the
Jewish state? This is an important question as we see the Palestinian
debate now shift to the issue of "the right of return."
According to the most liberal claims by Arab sources, some 600,000 to 700,000
Arabs left Israel in and around 1948 when the Jewish state was created. Most
were not forced out by Jews, but rather left at the urging of Arab leaders who
had declared war on Israel. Yet, there are far more Arabs living in these
territories now than ever before. And many of those who left in 1948 and
thereafter actually had roots in other Arab nations. This is why it is so
difficult to define the term "Palestinian." It always has been. What
does it mean? Who is a "Palestinian"? Is it someone who came to work
in Palestine because of a bustling economy and job opportunities? Is it
someone who lived in the region for two years? Five years? Ten years? Is it
someone who once visited the area? Is it any Arab who wants to live in the area?
Though Arabs outnumber Jews in the Middle East by a factor of about 100 to
one, the Arab population of Palestine was historically extremely low prior to
the Jews' renewed interest in the area beginning in the early 1900s. For
instance, a travel guide to Palestine and Syria, published in 1906 by Karl
Baedeker, illustrates the fact that, even when the Islamic Ottoman Empire ruled
the region, the Muslim population in Jerusalem was minimal. The book estimates
the total population of the city at 60,000, of whom 7,000 were Muslims, 13,000
were Christians and 40,000 were Jews.
"The number of Jews has greatly risen in the last few decades, in
spite of the fact that they are forbidden to immigrate or to possess landed
property," the book states. Even though the Jews were persecuted, still
they came to Jerusalem and represented the overwhelming majority of the
population as early as 1906. Why was the Muslim population so low? After
all, we're told that Jerusalem is the third holiest city in Islam. Surely,if
this were a widely held belief in 1906, more of the devout would have settled
there. The truth is that the Jewish presence in Jerusalem and
throughout the Holy Land persisted throughout its bloody history, as is
documented in Joan Peters' milestone history on the origins of the Arab-Jewish
conflict in the region, "From Time Immemorial." It is also true
that the Arab population increased following Jewish immigration into the region.
The Arabs came because of economic activity. And, believe it or not, they
came because there was more freedom and more opportunity in Israel than in
their own homelands.
It's time to inject the component of freedom into the discussion. In
recent years Freedom House, the human-rights organization that monitors the way
the nations of the world treat their own citizens, has found a there's a big
trend worldwide away from totalitarianism and authoritarianism and toward
freedom ¡ except in the Arab world. There are 22 Arab states ¡ all varying
degrees of police states. If the U.S. continues pushing for a Palestinian state
under the leadership of Yasser Arafat, there will be 23.
Let's hope and pray that this administration is beginning to get it. There
are some strong indications that is the case.
The impending Iraq campaign could represent a watershed event in the
history of the Middle East. Imagine a free Iraq.
Imagine a free Afghanistan. Imagine a free Iran. Imagine a free Lebanon. It
could happen. If we set out goals high and we act responsibly and we are
courageous and steadfast in waging this war on terrorism ¡ this war we did not
start it could happen.