Week 10 Discussion Prompt: Colonialism, Israel, and Palestine

A major theme of this course has been the links of early European/North American colonialism and imperialism to contemporary global capitalism. The documentary helps us understand the British colonial pre-history of the founding of Israel; the article reflecting on the Oslo Accords suggest some of the ways neoliberalism shapes contemporary politics and economics in Israel/Palestine. Use the documentary and the article to relate the case of Israel/Palestine to the themes of colonialism and neocolonialism/globalization/neoliberalism.

82 thoughts on “Week 10 Discussion Prompt: Colonialism, Israel, and Palestine”

  1. Palestinians have been exploited for many years and are still being exploited. In the documentary, we can see how Zionism has changed Palestine and its dynamics. Jews took British’s help to bring Jews in Palestinian land and also to take out Palestinians. British colonialized Palestine and exploited its resources to strengthen its roots in Palestine. There were many revolutions that took place, in which one of them was Al-Qassam’s revolution. However, the Palestinian population was not ready to fight from the British colonialism at that time. They still thought that they can negotiate; however, colonial exploitation is hard to expel from a society without force. There were also British forces that constantly got rid of or kept strict checks on Palestinian revolutionaries. Either they would execute or imprison these Palestinian revolutionaries.

    After many years of Nakba – displacement of Palestinians to bring in for Israelis. Palestinians reside in Gaza Strip or West Bank currently; however, they are not free there also. Israel governs in their territory as well. Israel has placed Jewish settlements in Gaza and West Bank where there is a dense population of Palestinians to divide and rule Palestinians. Additionally, there will be a road constructed from Israel to Gaza and West Bank, so that Israel is able to govern more strategically. There are Palestinian authorities; however, they have become corrupt. Furthermore, Palestinian Authorities act on Israel’s will (which is to exploit as much as they can from Palestinians) because Israel helps to keep Palestinian Political Trajectory. There are three combined groups in West Bank that have created divisions; these include – capitalists, land owners, and bourgeoisie and political wealthy families. These capitalists want to persuade the Palestinian authorities to have monopolies to distribute goods and land of Palestine. Furthermore, Israel performs Neoliberalism because most of the imports that Palestine has in Gaza and West Bank are from Israel. Israel has taken over the main sectors of economic growth under their rule, such as agriculture. Most of the areas of agriculture land water resources have been taken by Israel and very few resources of land and water are left for Palestinians to use. Also, the Oslo agreement between Israel and Palestine were not of much profit for the Palestinians. It is mostly benefiting for the Israelis because this will finish the trade boycotts of Arab countries and will allow foreign countries to invest in Israel. Furthermore, this problem is globally discussed and is affecting more countries and groups than just Israelis and Palestinians, as many have and are coming together to solve this ongoing conflict.

    1. Lalah,
      I agree, the conflict between Palestine and Israel is not a local struggle as other countries are directly or indirectly involved for many reasons such as political achievements, religion practices, and economic interests. I am also glad that you stated the fact that Israel took control of resource, water supply, and agriculture in Palestine. This strategies weakened Palestine and made it dependent on Israel.

      1. Lalah I think you do a good job of summarizing what the documentary laid out in terms of Palestine getting taken over and its people being exploited. I also think that you are right to highlight how this conflict is not just between the two sides because it is bringing many people into it to help diffuse the tensions. I personally think that at this point it becomes very difficult because the Jews that are living there now have been living there for many decades so them being forced out would be wrong, yet Palestine having to bare so much inequality is wrong so the issue is very complicated.

    2. Great write up here Lalah. It’s unfortunate that they can’t establish peace and create a two state solution. The resources that Israel with holds from the westbank and gaza not to forget the settlement constructions are destroying any chance at peace. It’s true, alot of countries are affected by the conflict!

    3. The conflict between Palestine and Israel is certainly becoming more of a global issue. With Palestine trying to join the United Nations while the United States has the support of Israel is reigniting the conflict. Recently, there were attacks on Israel by the Palestinians, but these have slowed down. I wonder how the future will hold for this conflict with the re-election of Netanyahu

    4. Hi Lalah,
      I really enjoyed reading your response. I liked how you mentioned the fact that a road will be constructed from Israel to Gaza and West Bank to make it easier for Israel to better govern these territories. This can be seen as a form of colonialism being seen in present times today.
      Thanks for sharing!

    5. Hi Lalah,

      I really enjoyed reading your post. I definitely agree with all of your points, especially the fact that the conflict between Israel and Palestine is not only between them, it brings in many people into the conflict and it brings in a lot of tension.

  2. Britain was more than supportive of the Zionist plan for the establishment of a Jewish state in the Palestine region since they considered a having a Jewish presence near the point where the Mediterannean was linked with the Red Sea, and having a European-friendly presence that was near the Suez Canal would be an asset to British interests. (Since they viewed the Jewish people to be closer to them than Arabs). They knew that establishment of such a body would be dependent on European Colonialism, and that they could help guarantee the Zionists survival by helping to keep the surrounding states weak. As lands were bought in Palestine, and tens of thousands of farmers were evicted from their homes and lands, it was something described as being “more drastic than traditional colonialism” in the documentary – because it did not just have the intent to use and exploit the local lands and population, this occupation had the intent to completely drive them out and take over their land. Per the documentary, Arabs and Palestinians were well aware that the zionist movement revolved around “a racist movement seeking capital to colonize land and exploit religion to create a homeland for the remaining Jews of the world, to give them an identity and a political future”, but could do little about it with British forces aiding the transfer.
    In 1915 in a secret memorandum to the British Cabinet that was taken up into account in the Sykes-Picot agreement, it was agreed that it was not the right time for the Jewish state to be autonomous in the region, and that it should be placed under British mandate after the war, and that facilities would be given to Jewish organizations to purchase land and found colonies and settlements, and that Jewish immigration would be given preference, aiming to place 3 to 4 million Jews in the region. Though Britain did not have the legal or moral right or authority to grant Arab lands to the Jews, it did so anyway, (just like any other place it colonized) and enforced it with British occupation in Jerusalem, alongside armed Jews. Britain refused to see Palestinians as nothing else than a group of sects, and they treated Jewish agency as national voice. As strikes and revolutionaries sprang up, British forces took incredibly harsh action against them, they arrested anyone having links to revolutionaries, and blew up houses, exiled the leadership, and killed tens of thousands. They let the Jews carry weapons, but searched for and confiscated any weapons belonging to Palestinians, and arrested the owners of the weapons and created detention camps where they put thousands of Palestinians in subhuman conditions. Meanwhile, Jewish gangs blew up bombs and killed Palestinians, and Jewish forces received special training from British forces – said to have ideas that perpetrated ideas of how to go about an ethnic cleansing. They organized night raids against Palestine revolutionaries to murder them in their villages, held military tribunals in which they executed many Palestinians, and they tortured the people and harassed them, doing things such as mixing their food supplies and making them useless. Palestinians were encouraged to put their stock in western peace processes to amend the issues, which did nothing for them.
    Looking forward through the decades, after the time of the British, Israel continued to systematically colonize Palestine through the strategic and asymmetric control of Palestinian land and resources. The Israeli settlements strategically intersected Palestinian populaces, taking over key water rights, aquifers, and key agricultural land, bisecting areas of Palestinians apart from each other with Israeli roads, strategically giving Israel more power over the fractured Palestinian people.
    Later, looking at the Oslo Accords, which promised to address the occupation in the Gaza Strip and West Bank and to address the Palestinians who were dispossessed from their lands – but was nothing more than a cover-up for the continued system and mechanisms for control over Palestine by Israel, and it also helped to disarm resistance to Israeli colonialism on Palestinian lands. Furthermore, it strengthened Israel’s position in the region, and led other countries in the area such as Jordan and Egypt to, as the article describes, “embrace economic and political ties with Isreal under American and European auspices.” Under this, Israel gained a huge economic boost by getting out from under the shackles of Arab boycotts, and this also furthered neoliberal policies and aspirations, since international firms could be attracted to Israel without being hampered by the same boycotts. The article further notes that support for the Oslo accords, with the thinking that it was also supporting peace in the region, only furthered colonization and neoliberal goals in the region, which per the author, “the former consistently worked to enable the latter”, exploiting Palestine and the Arab world in the favor of Israel and the West. Palestine fell further under Isreal’s control, and were completely under Isreali discretion over water rights and energy supplies, their trade relations, and even sources of employment. Even more recently, neoliberal austerity programs and a development model that furthers Isreali control over Palestines capital and exports by the creation of integrated industrial zones, is what Adam Hanieh in the article calls an “economic strategy [which] only acts to further tie the interests of Palestinian capital with those of Israel, building culpability for Israeli colonialism into the very structures of the Palestinian economy”. He further notes that the recent programs have only led to an increase in Palestinian poverty, and greater disparity in the distribution of wealth.

    1. Anita,
      You provided very detailed and well-organized description of the article and the documentary. Religion, political, social, and economic interests have motivated Israel along with other countries to dominate Palestine. And, as you mentioned, a lot of violence was involved in the process of controlling and colonialism in Palestine.

    2. I think that Israel/Palestine case shows how neoliberalism works in the real world. As you have mentioned, the neoliberal program promoted by the Israeli government escalated poverty and deepened the inequality between the wealthy and the poor among the Palestinian people. Therefore, even if neoliberalism as a theory tries to maximize human well-being, in practice, this case illustrates that it only promotes well-being of a few while the other suffers from poverty.

    3. I like how you clearly explained and expand on Zionist Plan. You also did a good job of explaining the Oslo Accord and what was the different political effects of that. And lastly, your analysis about economic strategy and Israel colonist are very well done and it helps me clarify the topic. Thank you

    4. Hi Antia,
      I really enjoyed reading your post. You did an excellent job on summarizing the the main aspects that were discussed in the documentary. It brought attention to the main points like how the British treated the Jews as equals and promised them land that was not theirs, but viewed the Palestinians almost as uncivilized people who were beneath them. The summary of the article helped me clarify and shed light on the specifics behind the political aspects of this topic.

    5. Hi Anita,
      I think you did a good job on your post, providing plenty of details on this historic issue. In addition, I like your analysis on positive and negative sides of those key concepts, making a strong connection between the theory and facts.

      1. Hi Anita, I was so blown away by the amount of details supporting your analysis,it almost as though you have absorbed every tiny detail in the documentary :) Thanks for pointing out other factors that triggered Israel into colonizing Palestine.

    6. The impact of British colonialism globally is still being felt, no where more globally than in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I was unaware of the cruel treatment that the British enforced on the Palestinian (though it was not surprising). The most interesting thing about the British rule was the fact that it was not intended to be a British colony permanently like the other colonies. This brings an interesting context to the history of the conflict.

    7. You did an excellent job of tying together the reading materials into a harrowing historical narrative of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict that also incorporates ongoing trends. However, I would be interested to see how an Israeli might view your narrative, and how he or she might account for the damning portrayal of the origins of his or her home. What narrative might they present as a counter?

  3. The documentary explains the fact that the struggle and tension between Palestine and Israel does originated a few decades ago. In fact this conflict has age of more than two centuries. The colonial project, with partnership of Jews and European countries, took place in Palestine with the intention of using land and resources and also creating a homeland country for the Jews. This process would not only give Jews identity, but also it would generate political opportunities for them. On the other hand, existence of Jews in Palestine, especially close to Suez Canal, would secure Britain’s interest in that area as they could trust Jews better than Arabs. Through the process of colonialism in Palestine, Israel took control of the resources and divided Palestinians from each other. The political, economic, and social changes formed a neocolonialism at this point. In response, many revolutions took place to defend Palestinians’ rights, but they all failed as Israeli governments attacked the revolutionaries harshly.
    Oslo Accord supposed to bring some sort of peace between Palestine and Israel by ending the conflicts/tensions and recognizing mutual laws and political rights in order to achieve security for these two states. Those who supported this accord believed that the Palestinian Authority will form an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and Israel would relinquish its control over these territories. However, in practice Israel used this accord to cover its ultimate control over Palestinian life. Moreover, Oslo resulted in a pernicious political outcome; it made the Israel regional position stronger and the Palestinian movements weaker. Under the Oslo Accord and with American and European sponsorship, Arab governments (especially Jordan and Egypt) established economic and political links with Israel. The Oslo Accord has been described as a “failure”, “Palestinian surrender”, and “Israel’s enforcer”, the reason that why the Palestinian leaders were willing to cooperation with this accord remains a question. Two major strategic plans, Allon and Sharon, allowed Israel to not only divide Palestine areas and confiscate land and capitals, but also minimize the responsibility for Palestinian people. This situation led Palestine to rely upon Israel and external aid and loans. Unarguably, the dominant Israeli governments illustrated the colonization in Palestine project by fracture the Palestinian national identity.
    Many years of conflict between Israel and Palestine, creates a global issue (although it was never a local issue). Currently, many Western nations including the US benefit from the existence of Jews in Palestine. Perhaps this is the main reason that the problem has not solved in that area.

    1. Fardad,
      you do a great analysis of the documentary and the oslo accords article. I found it particularly interesting that you mentioned that the US benefits from the existence of Jews in Palestine. This goes back to the question I asked in class about whats in it for the American government to be supporting Israel despite what they’ve done (and continue to do ) to the Palestinians. It’s rather clear that geopolitics is part of this issue, where US will prefer to have their biggest ally in the unstable Middle East region.

  4. Within the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, colonialism has been seen for years. In the documentary, we learn that Napoleon attempted to give Palestinian land to the Jewish community but failed to achieve this. After World War I, the Sykes-Pilot Agreement split up the Ottoman Empire which led to the British colonization and control over the land of Palestine. The British revived Napoleon’s previous plan of giving Jews a home country, therefore in 1948, the British helped Jewish people out of Europe and into the new Jewish state of Israel in previous Palestinian territory. An underlying motive for the British to do this was fear; fear of a united and strengthened Middle East generating so much wealth that Western Europe would not be able to handle. The creation of Jewish Israel was an economic strategy to create tensions within the Middle East, justified through the idea of Zionism. Thus, Palestinians were driven out of their own land and did not have the needed power or resources to resist the Zionism being seen and taking over their land because bigger entities like the British had more power over them. This event is known as “Al-Nakba,” meaning “the catastrophe.”
    In Adam Hanieh’s article, we also learn how the concepts of neocolonialism, globalization, and neoliberalism are seen within the conflict of Palestine/Israel today. An example of neocolonialism is seen within the Oslo Accords, the real intentions of Israel. The Oslo was not a peace negotiation, but rather it gave Israel more authority over Palestine. Regarding globalization, the creation of Israel led to many Arab nations boycotting the new country; meanwhile many international organizations and firms were in support of the new nation and invested in their economy. Neoliberalism is also seen within the conflict since the immense power and domination that Israel has over Palestine has suppressed its economic growth, placing them in a state of poverty. Palestine has become “permanently dependent.” The unequal distribution of wealth is also a factor in the immense gap between the wealthy and the Palestinians. Israel is only becoming wealthier while Palestine suffers. “Zionist” international firms, governments, and organizations are supporting Israel and their economy while many Palestinians, who were driven out of their homes for the creation of Israel, suffer in extreme poverty.

    1. It is interesting point that fear of a united and strengthened Middle East led British to support Zionism. I only thought that it was in the interest of Britain to gain a friendly state near the Suez Canal by making a Jewish settlement in Palestine.

    2. I like that you pointed out how the distribution of wealth made a big gap between Israel and Palestine.This statement is made very clear in your respond and through the facts you pointed out in this post. I also found it very interesting when you said, neoliberalism is seen the Oslo Accords which is the real intentions of Israel.

    3. Hi Leticia,
      I really enjoyed reading your post. It was really interesting how you connected the British fear of another power (The Middle East) growing to the causation of conquering and invading of Palestine. I would have never made that connection in that particular way, but you are completely correct! I also liked your summary of the article, as it summarized the main aspects of the Oslo Accord. It deals with the wealth of Israel compared to the poverty stricken Palestine due to the fact that Palestine is permanently dependent on Israel.

    4. Hi Leticia,
      I enjoy reading your post. And I agree with the idea that Palestine has become “permanently dependent.” It is obvious that the unequal distribution of wealth has become a factor in the huge gap between the wealthy and the Palestinians. And I believe that it is an unavoidable problem which can be caused in any country during the process of globalization, instead of happening only in history. Thank you for sharing!

    5. Hi Leticia, great post and the historical background that you provided was a good refresher and reminder that the conflict in that area is not new. Your comment about the distribution of wealth is also important as it only heightens the struggle between the Palestinians and the Israelites.

    6. Hi, I thought you did a good job of detailing the ties between neocolonialism, globalization, and neoliberalism and Hanieh’s article in a succinct way – and I also like how you tie in the unequal distribution of wealth into your argument.

  5. The documentary describes the Palestine under the British Mandate. In 1915, Herbert Samuel, the first Zionist minister in the British government presented “The Future of Palestine” to British Cabinet and introduced Zionism to Britain. He argued that Palestine should be placed under British rule and made into a Jewish settlement. This was taken into consideration by the British and carried out into action as British colonized Palestine. The Zionist movement was favored by the British because as Jewish people settle in Palestine, they can gain a friendly state close to the Mediterranean linked with the Red Sea which was in the interest of Britain. As a result of colonization in Palestine, the Jewish population increased dramatically and the Palestinian people were pushed out of their homeland. As a response, the Palestinians continuously protested and revolted against the Jewish immigration and British Mandate. However, they faced harsh repression by the British forces. They were not allowed to carry weapons and they were searched for possession of weapons in streets and houses. Many were brutally beaten, arrested, and even killed. In addition, many of the leaders were killed or forced to leave the country as British forces threatened their lives.

    Unfortunately, the exploitation of Palestinian people continues to this day under the Israeli government. Due to the Oslo Accords signed between the government of Israel and Palestine Liberation Organization, Palestinians now live in West Bank and Gaza Strip in Israel governed by the Palestine Authority. However, the author of the article, Adam Hanieh points out that this “peace process” has reinforced the colonization of Palestine and led to neoliberalism. To begin with, the Oslo helped Israel to create a positive image that is associated with peace which allowed Israel to have better control over the Palestinian. According to the article, Israel continued to have control over the “settlement construction, restrictions on Palestinian movements, the incarceration of thousands, and command over borders and economic life.” Therefore, despite the Oslo Accord, the ultimate power lied in the hands of the Israel. Moreover, the Oslo contributed to the disarmament of Palestinians who resisted the Israeli colonialism. This also made the colonization of Palestine less of a hassle for Israeli government. Finally, it strengthened the regional position of Israel. The Oslo Accord made neighboring nations to have economic and political ties with Israel alleviating Israel from the Arab boycott and allowing them to have economic boost. At the end, Oslo contributed to the advancement of Israeli power which helped Israel to wield strong control over the Palestinians. With the power and control gained by the Oslo Accord, Israel promoted neoliberal program which increases the ties between the Palestine and Israel economy. This scheme of Israeli government implanted colonialism into the structure of Palestinian economy and resulted in increase in poverty and wealth inequality among the Palestinians. Thus, Israel/Palestine case is one of the many examples which shows that even if neoliberalism sounds great in theory, in practice, it only benefits a few while the rest suffers.

    1. Hi Julia, I thought your ideas on the Oslo Accord were spot-on, and you described the implications of the Accord very well. I also liked what you said in the sentence: “The scheme of Israeli government implanted colonialism into the structure of Palestinian economy and resulted in increase in poverty and wealth inequality” – I thought that was a great synopsis in a single sentence.

    2. Hi Julia,
      You did a great job in summarizing the film and the article about the Oslo Accords. Your article analysis, especially, helped refresh my mind about the article and also helped me better understand it more clearly. I also completely agree that neoliberalism sounds great in theory but when practiced, it only benefits a few, the elite, while the rest suffer greatly. Thanks for sharing!

    3. Julia,
      Well done on your analysis on the Oslo accords article and tying it with the concept of neoliberalism. I believe what’s taking place in the Palestinian case is much worse than neoliberalism. Like you assessed, it’s also colonialism at play which is making the Palestinians fare much worse than let’s say any other sovereign country that is being exploited for its resources in the wave of globalization. Even though Palestinians have Gaza and West Bank under PA, it is still nowhere near sovereign. There are absolutely no signs of two-state solution, as advocated by the Oslo accords, when the Israeli’s have such a stronghold on settlements and the Palestinian Authority itself.

  6. As discussed in the class events are not inevitable, they are contingent on many other events. The movie, “Al Nakba,” says that the beginning of the Israeli/Palestine conflict was 1799 when there was a fear of British expansion countries began to back the Jews. Several decades later the British adopted this same approach to stop the unification of Egypt and Syria. Zionism began in 1885 in attempt to start a Jewish state in Palestine. Western countries began to help it in return for keeping the surrounding area weak. After World War I the Sykes-Picot Agreement split up the former Ottoman empire and the British took control of Palestine and gave preference to Jews. Not only were the locals exploited, but they were also forced off the land in thousands. This is an example of a very drastic form of colonialism. The Jewish population grew and the Palestinian population decreased which caused a lot of protests, but they were put down with force. There were many restrictions placed on Palestinians that were not applied to Israelis.

    The Oslo Illusion by Adam Hanieh looks at the Oslo Accords, an agreement between Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Israeli government in which Israel would slowly give up control of the areas West Bank and the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian Authority. The failure of this agreement to truly eve take form has resulted in it being seen as a failure and a form of neocolonialism. Israel continues to have authority over the areas, but not in the traditional colonial sense. The country continues to take advantage of Palestine by restricting people’s movements, incarcerating citizens, and controlling resources. The Oslo Accords also promoted neoliberalism by creating a labor force dependent on employment by the PA and a capitalist class which is subservient to Israel through the PA. This has resulted in greater levels of poverty and polarization of wealth, as well as more consumer debt which has resulted in people only being concerned with money and stability as opposed to resistance to neocolonial rule and neoliberal policies. Globalization is seen in the conflict through both the article and the video by showing the number of international players involved in the establishment of Israel. European nations supported Zionism, Arab nations were against it, and many international organizations also weighed in on different sides. The problem has global implications for surrounding Arab nations, Jews around the world, displaced Palestinians, and other nations that have economic and military interest in the region.

    1. Ryan, I agree in that the this conflict has global implications. I mean most of the conflicts do, but this one specifically has been going on for so long and to me I don’t see a solution anytime soon. The fact that so many people have been affected and nations that have economic and military interests in that region is just going to prolong the issue.

  7. There are several ways to tie the themes of colonialism, neoliberalism and globalization to the issues in Israel/Palestine case. In the documentary, we learn that European Jewish settlers began to steadily arrive in 1882 but there was never anything other than an overwhelming Arab majority until a few weeks before the “Nakba” (Arabic word for catastrophe) otherwise known as the establishment of the state of “Israel” in the spring of 1948. Zionism is a kind of European colonialism that began in the late 1800’s long before the Holocaust in Europe. Zionism’s goal is and has always been to establish a Jewish state on land already inhabited by an indigenous Palestinian people. This was done in a colonizing manner as the Jews started to steadily move in under the British mandate. In the documentary, it was even said that the move was for the exploitation of a land already inhabited by a population but justified through religious means.

    In reference to the Oslo accords and its ineffectiveness, today the code words of “peace” and “security” are really a call for the end of Palestinian resistance to Zionist colonialism and genocide. The only party benefiting from the Oslo accords was Israel, as this arrangement only masks the deepening control of Israel over the lives of the Palestinians. This is contradicting the two-state solution efforts being pursued, by creating a Palestinian “state” that is heavily, almost entirely, dependent on Israel. I believe this is the instance where we can recognize the neocolonial agenda at play. The article also mentions the worsening conditions of the Palestinian population over the decades. Not only have they been divided off into small enclaves throughout West Bank and Gaza, they have seen a sharp downfall in employment rates because of advancement of neoliberal policies and the globalization effect. Israeli’s are now substituting Eastern European and Asian workers for Palestinian workers.

    1. Nice write up here Bharti! I like how you pointed out the underlying conditions that the Palestinians would have to live with in the event a two state solution would take effect. Israel would still have a strong grip both militarily and economically, making the Arabs not as sovereign as they deserve to be. Good job!

  8. The case of Israel and Palestine historically is an example of colonialism and neoliberalism. The original intent of the state of Israel was to create access for western nations to the Suez Canal, which facilitates trade to eastern nation. Since the Egyptians occupied the Suez Canal at the time, the British helped to create Israel as an ally in the area to ease the passage through the canal. However, the largest obstacle for the creation of the Jewish State was the Palestinians, who already occupied the area designated to be Israel. Despite the existence of the Palestinians, the Zionist movement began as many European Jews moved to Palestine. As time went on, British officials helped to control the opposition against the Zionist movement by occupying the land and enacting harsh terms against the Palestinians. Eventually, Israel was reestablished as a nation, forcing the Palestinians to live under Israeli rule, instead of being autonomous. This type of colonialism differs from traditional colonialism because the British did not want to extract the resources from Palestine and exploit the people, but rather the intention was to remove the native population in favor of a new one. The British did this by giving the Jews disproportionate control of land over the Palestinians. The ramifications of this are still being felt today as violence and oppression in this area continues.
    Beyond the obvious colonialism, neoliberal economics is in play within Israel that generally puts the Palestinians in poverty. Similarly, to the corporations in the United States, Israel is replacing the labor force, generally done by the Palestinians, with foreign workers, usually from Asia and Eastern Europe. As a result, Palestine’s work earnings from Israel dropped from 25% of Palestinian GNP to 6% in four years. This is done because it gives the Palestinians less power within Israel’s economy. The wealth gap is expanding in Israel as well. Despite the fact that 20% of Palestinians live on $1.67 a day, the richest 10% saw a 22.5% increase in consumption. In addition, bank credit in Palestine doubled between 2008 and 2010. As stated in the article “The Oslo illusion,” creating a debt based economy in Palestine distracts the population and focuses them on the debt that they need to pay off, rather than resistance against the Israeli government who is oppressing them. This is significant for the Israeli economy because the threat of boycott decreases, which allows corporations to open business within Israel without concern of losing investment.

    1. Matt I thought you did a great job of using both the documentary and article to draw comparisons of how this area of the world has seen colonialism and neocolonialism. Also, I think you explain “The Oslo Illusion” particularly well and I like that you include the statistics from the article to back your point.

  9. The documentary that we watched shows how Palestine was colonized by Jewish people, orchestrated by Britain. Although, the British claimed that they intended to help Jewish people have their own state they were acting more so in their own self interest as they saw Israel as a threat to themselves. This act of colonialism lead to the displacement, imprisonment, beating, and killings of thousands upon thousands of Arabs who had formally occupied the land that the British government took and gave to Jewish people/Zionists. What the British did in Palestine/Israel is similar to what they did in many other areas of the world. They took an area that already had a people living in it and decided to take their land and control them as though they weren’t already living in their own society. Like the documentary said “The bride is beautiful, but she is married to another man.” The Oslo article I feel is were neocolonialism comes into play. This is because the agreement was proposed and passed of as something that would benefit the much exploited Palestine, but it turned out to only further harm them. Though the agreement doesn’t outright practice colonialism, it is neocolonialism because it does the same dirty work just not directly. What I mean is that Oslo, as the article explains at least, is now taking away more land from Palestine, taking away social programs that they depend on for survival, yet does none of the things that it had promised to do so as to actually help the people of Israel. Essentially this agreement gives Israel much of the control, so Palestine is struggling greatly financially and being forced into debt. The neoliberalism of this agreement additionally does not help bring peace of equality, but rather ties the two together with Israel getting to call the shots. As the article explains Oslo is leading to further problems, “This economic strategy only acts to further tie the interests of Palestinian capital with those of Israel, building culpability for Israeli colonialism into the very structures of the Palestinian economy. It has produced increasing poverty levels and a growing polarization of wealth.” This is an example of globalization gone very wrong and again not because globalization is a bad thing, but because this was done by an outside party who’s main goals were not for the people to unite and grow, but for its own self interest and control.

  10. The conflict between Palestine and Israel has been going on for more than two centuries. The documentary shows the struggle that Palestinians have gone through, and are still going through currently. There were many projects and different partnership between the Jews and European Countries, which took place in previous years. These meeting were held in Palestine, so the country can be used for its land and resource, as well as provide a home for the Jews. With this kind of exposure the country was hoping to generate more political opportunities. Over the years British colonialized Palestine and exploited their resource, therefore there were many revolutions that took place, which resulted in many Palestinian getting imprisoned or executed. Therefore through the process of colonialism in Palestine, Israel took control of the resources and divided Palestinians from each other. The Jewish population grew and the Palestinian population started to decrease.
    There were many revolution and protest, which were all shot down with force. There were so many restrictions placed on the Palestinians people, which were never applied to the Israelis. Due to all this circumstances, the political economic and social changes had formed neocolonialism at this point. There were many wars and revolution which took place to defend Palestinian rights such as the political economical and social changes, but they all failed as Israeli governments kept on attacking. In regards to the globalization, the creation of Israel led to many unhappy Arab nations who ended up protesting the new country, however many other international organizations were supporting the new nation. Neoliberalism is also seen within the conflict due to the immense power and domination Israel has over Palestine and how much it has suppressed its economic growth by literally making the country go down in poverty.
    The article “The Oslo illusion” claimed that it is important to create a economy that is debt in Palestine, in order to distract the population from other important issues that they were facing in their countries. This was created so people of Palestine can focus more on paying off the debt than going against the Israeli government, who has and still is abusing their rights.

    1. Alisa, thanks for sharing your thoughts on Israel/ Palestine case and the Olso Accords. It’s great how you discussed the relations between globalization and neoliberalism and the Israel/ Palestine case. I agree with you that neoliberalism is a major factor behind Palestine’s economic dependency on Israel, and how Oslo Accords is much more of economic and neoliberal in its agenda than a peace process.

  11. The conversation of Palestinian and Israeli history is a very passionate one for a lot of people and this documentary provided some rich history for me. The claim for the rightful owners of the state goes farther than two centuries ago to Napoleons time. The video highlights European nations strategic international plan to place Jews in Palestinian land. The introduction of Jews provided a settlement for Jewish people but it also provided a resourceful geographic and political establishment. This also gave Britain closer access to the Middle East especially the Suez Canal through Jewish settlements. This was achieved following world war two following the Holocaust, Britain told hold of Palestinian land and colonization. Basically the colonization of Palestinians was passed on from Britain to Jews through occupation. Another reason this was done was because Europe feared that the Middle East would be a powerful force if united. This theory is strongly supported by Zionist beliefs, which is still seen today with the slowly diminishing Palestinian land. Israel imposes a strong neo liberal rule because they control the flow of goods into Palestinian land and closed off all trade routes. These tight choke holds forces the Palestinian people to accept what is before them and weakens them from rising in strength.

    The one agreement that was supposed to assist Palestine in forming its own nation state separate of Israeli interference made Palestine even weaker. The Oslo Accords attempted to stop violence but rather disarmed Palestinians and left them defenseless. The violence increase between the two bodies and no withdrawals from Palestinian territory were made. Other Arab organizations, which we would now call Hezbollah in, the region felt threatened and betrayed so began attacking Israel in retaliation. This made Israel look like the good guys who are trying to cooperate but are being attacked for it. In result it made it easier for Israel to do what they wanted, further restricting Palestinians and slowly removing territory from them. The Oslo Accords was a giant Failure by mediating countries and in resulted in Palestine’s demise. Israel has restricted the movement of Palestinians continually with shakedowns, imprisonment, and lots of fear tactics a form of neocolonialism. This is backed by Zionism, which seeks to establish a Jewish state at any cost regardless if the Palestinians are there. Israel is successfully doing this by controlling every aspect of Palestinian life so that there is a heavy reliance on Israel. They also have influenced international politics to overlook and stall any conflict resolution attempts.

    1. Salim, thanks for sharing your personal experience and the historical context behind Israel/ Palestine case. You did a great job illustrating how European influence – like that of Britain played a major role in Zionism and establishment of Israel as a state in the Middle East.
      I share your opinion on the Oslo Accords, that it was used to the advantage for Israel, and its outcome is ironic as it left the Palestinians further from economic and political equality. It’s interesting to hear how you think Oslo Accords failed to achieve its mission, and how Zionism reflects neocolonialism.

    2. Hi Salim,

      I really enjoyed reading your post. I liked that you were very detailed explaining Britain role with Israel. I also agree with you when you said that Israel is successful due to the control it has on the Palestinian citizens. Very well written.

    3. Hi Salim:
      I like your arguments regarding that Europe feared that the Middle East would be a powerful force if united which is so true because they think that if Middle Easter countries were united would have the power to destroy Great Britain and France back in the day. It is true that Israel wants to conquer Palestine and establish Israel country regardless of the citizen of that country were their and that’s what Israel is doing right now to Palestinian citizen.

  12. When looking at the case of Israel and Palestine, you can see the convergence of themes such as colonialism, neocolonialism, globalization and neoliberalism, as each idea has had a large hand in shaping the history and trajectory of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. When you watch the documentary about the background of the Israeli state and how it came to be, you see the large part that colonialism played in that, as without the help of Europe, and more specifically the British, the state of Israel would almost certainly never have come into being. As the documentary discusses, beginning in the mid 1800’s, the British saw a Jewish state in the area of Palestine as being extremely beneficial to their interests, as they would be able to have a “colony” in the Middle East which would listen to them, and allow them greater influence in the region. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI, the British and the French carved up the Middle East amongst themselves, with the British taking Palestine as one of their new territories. During colonial rule of Palestine, the British heavily favored the Jewish population, treating them better and allowing them to have the land and resources that they desired, most of the time at the detriment to the Arab Palestinians. The British viewed the Jewish settlers as much easier to deal with and work with in supporting their own interests in the region, and thus promoted Jewish settlement and expansion throughout the area. Following the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, the West maintained a large say in the affairs of the country, backing them wholeheartedly against the antagonistic Arab states, as they viewed Israel as a Western outpost in the non-Western friendly Middle East.
    Further down the line in the history of the state of Israel, we see the emergence of themes such as neocolonialism, globalization and neoliberalism, however instead of being imposed by the West, they are being imposed by the state of Israel on the Palestinians. As is discussed in the article about the Oslo Accords, though the Accords were supposedly agreed to to help facilitate peace in the region, in actuality they just cemented and strengthened the control of Israel over the Palestinians. Instead of actually seeking to institute peaceful reforms, the Accords put Israel in more control over the Palestinians, continuing to keep them under the Israeli thumb. The “peace” that the Accords promoted also allowed Israel to enter economic deals with formerly antagonistic Arab states, allowing for greater foreign investment in the country, as these companies did not have to worry about Arab boycotts. Thus this “peace” again solely benefited the Israelis, as all of this new wealth was going straight into their coffers, along with putting many Palestinians out of work, as the economic influx changed the economy of Israel, creating an emphasis on jobs that were filled by Eastern Europeans and Asians, instead of Palestinians. Thus we can see how these ideas of neocolonialism and neoliberalism influenced the “peace” that was created out of the Oslo Accords, as it was more focused on improving the well being of Israel, and keeping the Palestinians in check, rather than creating an actual peace.

    1. Michael, your response is very thorough; I particularly like your analysis on the word “peace” that keeps being mentioned in the Oslo Accords. It is truly an illusion and is a method of ensuring Israel remains superior (economically, politically, socially) to Palestine.

  13. It seems that Britain was more supportive of Zionist to have a part of Palestine and make it a Jewish city. This would be linked to colonialism and it would help the Zionists to survive. A lot of the land that the Jews would take over was owned by the farmers. All the farmers were kicked off their lands and forced to leave everything they had behind. The Jewish community literally took everything away from the farmers in Palestine and were left with nothing. Britain, which supported the Jews, made this happen but the problem is Britain did not have the power to make this happen. Britain seems to strongly dislike the Palestinians and treats the Jewish community like they are royalists. The Palestinians started to stand up to the Jews and Britain for what they believed in and were outraged on how they were getting treated unfairly. Britain started to arrest people, destroy their homes, and kill millions of people. The conflict transformed from clan based civil war into proxy wars between its neighbouring states. This caused globalization religious and ideological struggles.  The Jews were allowed to carry around weapons and the Palestinians were not allowed to. If the Palestinians were caught with weapons then they were automatically arrested and thrown in a detention camp. The Jewish gangs were running around and literally tore the city up by killing people, destroying houses, and etc. There are no public services, there is widespread corruption, criminal activity, and sharp economic decline. There is also a dire need for food aid in Palestine causing an uproar and creating survival of the fittest scenarios. Humans need certain essentials to be able to satisfy their needs. These essentials go more in depth than food, water, and shelter; they include physical needs, non-physical needs, development, and growth. Most of the time, violence occurs when individual or group needs are not being met. The connections that can be made are that the corrupted leaders robbed the land, resources, and caused economic decline. The Oslo accords which was supposed to address the occupation of the Gaza strip and the west bank to help Palestine to get their land back but this never happened because they lied. This made Israel very powerful and the surrounding countries weaker compared to Israel. Palestine fell more and more under the control of Israel. Israel controls the water rights, energy supply, and the trade relations. The Cold War had a bad effect on decolonization because they helped to create corrupted leaders who did not run their states correctly. They caused the states to go into debt and messed up their chance of becoming an independent state. With so many failed attempts at resolution, the violence continues. With all the factions and interests involved, with such a horrible history of turmoil, being able to find a solution to the conflict remains a complicated goal. Most of the violent conflicts often result in a lose lose situation for everyone involved in it.

  14. The War between Israel and Palestinian breaks on a basis of colonialism, neocolonialism, and neoliberalism. These three factors come and work together to present the recent state of struggle. This fight starts with physical means of colonialism. Israel conquered the power over Palestine and took it to reconstruct the area in Palestine. When this area was fully dominated the Israel used their political and economic ideals gradually into the Palestine. Palestine was fully depended on Israel and Israel took all those support that were given by Arab countries to Palestine. Britain was the main key offender against Palestinians they wanted to be considered as a documented homeland for Jewish people despite the fact that Palestine already belonged to others. The British government also did not admit the deliberate injustice done to the Palestine rather than they carry on increasing the number of Eastern European Jews in the area. The neocolonial method essentially is off of a vulnerable, helpless and dependent Palestinian economy. According to “The Oslo Illusion” the examples are depending on low wages, high unemployment rates, and business employment were less than ten people with a company. The Israel’s basically applied power politically, territorial dominance, and dropped the Palestinian economy. This was all happening because of Oslo Accords. The aim of Oslo was not to end up the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strips, or to address the substantive issue Palestinians dispossession, but something much more functional. By controlling Palestine’s Independence, Israel took over the power over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Oslo Accords were intended to appease this battle among these two parties and to negotiate the right of Coexistence. As a replacement for building these two parties equal Israel was still on the top over Palestine. Appeasement never kept a country sustainable for anyone. Israel also harm this land by dividing it intentionally systematically conquering the Palestinian people and their ability for trade.
    Now, the Oslo Accords are viewed as a failure because of how Israel was able to come into power over the Palestinians rather than accept two sovereign governments. This is seen by Israel’s push of the Palestinian people to the Gaza strip, and the heavy barriers that surround the area. No production or trade is able to be done in and around the Gaza Strip without Israeli permission. This agreement of the Oslo Accords was seen as advantageous to the Israeli leaders as it kept Palestinian tension down while Israelis set up their home in the area.

    1. The Oslo Accords and its back channeling politics seems like such a conspiracy and something out of a movie. But it was crafted to remove a whole state and diminish into something unrecognizable. This is sad because the Jews were given the land because they had none and than remove the original inhabitants.

  15. The conflict between Palestine and Israel stems from neocolonialism, neoliberalism and colonialism. These three concepts reflect the conflict between Palestine and Israel. Palestine was colonized by Israel; it utilized its power on Palestine and changed the area. Israel divided different communities in Palestine ignoring the fact that there were existing communities and zones constructed. They played it smart in order to make resources and mobilization difficult by breaking the area, meaning Israel would always be in the way of or in between a Palestine bordering zone, the goal was to not let Palestine have any boundaries. It gets worst for Palestine. Of course the area was completely governed and on top of that since Israel cut access to frontiers, Palestine became reliant on Israel and every government that supported the Palestinians (disbursement wise) such as the Arab, US and Europe governments. Israel’s economic and political power is practiced in a neocolonialist way because Israel had power over Israel not just through physical colonialism but through Palestine’s economy as well therefore the conflict involved neocolonialism.We also learn about the true intentions of the Oslo Accords which was supposedly to create peace ( but in reality shielded Israel’s increasing power over Palestine) . This is all for show, they made it look like Palestine and Israel are allies when in truth it is the complete opposite. In fact, the countries or governments that strongly believed that Oslo would bring peace to Israel and Palestine are actually governments that tied together with Israel politically and this bond strengthened Israel. Palestine on the other hand weakened as their water use was limited hence they had no agriculture production (crops). This overall weakened Palestine’s economy to the point where they had no one to lean on but Israel in order to have a successful international trade relation. From the way I see it, since Palestine had almost no independence Israel had more power over land in the West Bank and Gaza Strip which is part of the Oslo Accords so called promise. In this conflict we see how Palestine was invaded by Israel which takes place through colonialism, the transitions of laws and policies we can relate to neocolonialism and the suppressing the growth of Palestine we can relate to neoliberalism.This conflict overall reminds us of the colonialism history of Britain in Africa. Israel colonized Palestine with Britain strategy. The mentality is to conquer and weaken a country by dividing it.

  16. All concepts, colonialism, neocolonialism, globalization and neoliberalism, share a power/control relationship; those who benefit and are in control, and those who do not and are subjects to the powerful. Both the article and the documentary explain these relationships using the Israel/Palestine conflict as an example. The concept of colonialism is mentioned in both, the article and the documentary. In the article, Palestine is described as new type of colony, under the control of Israel. The people of Palestine have not only been subject to Israel control, but have also been displaced of their homeland and are subject to Israel rule, which often does not benefit them, but only harms them. The documentary also explains a new form of colonialism, first by England and now by Israel. The role of England in the establishment of Israel is important because they provided the force necessary for modern Jewish occupation in Palestine. Neocolonialism is also seen in the present day relationship between Israel and Palestine. The article, The Olso Illusion, mentions different political actions taken by Israel that have ensured that there is a dependency relationship between them and Palestine. The Allon Plan of 1967 and the Sharon Plan of 1981 has allowed Israel to seize more lands and resources from the Palestinian. They have also gained control of water resources, making the Palestinians dependent on Israel who uses military forces to control. Neoliberalist policies are also mentioned as the economic relationship between Israel and Palestine has changed post the 1944 Paris Protocol. With this it was impossible for Palestine to establish any meaningful trade relations between them and another nation besides Israel. Palestine is now completely reliant on external capital for aid and loans, which are also under Israeli control. Palestinian labor structure has also been changed to benefit Israel’s needs and now Asian and Eastern European workers have replaced most of the workforce. The newly established economic policies have only merged Israel and Palestine’s capitol more, pushing Israeli colonialism into Palestinian economy; increasing poverty levels and polarization of wealth, another aspect seen in neoliberalist policies. Other policies and endorsements by foreign nations have also benefited the Jewish community and not the Palestinian. The article mentions that most of the Palestinian population is in debt and like other nations, there is a small group whose capitol has increased with the new economic policies. Globalization is also seen in the Israeli/Palestinian relationship, characteristics such outsourcing is seen when the workforce is now mostly supplied by foreigners instead of Palestinian nationals.

    1. Julia, I like your discussion about the role of globalization in Israel/Palestine, specifically regarding outsourcing of jobs to foreigners. I wonder what countries they specifically reach out to.

    2. Hello Julia,

      Your post is very informative. I enjoyed reading it. I agree with you as well that the role of Britain was very important during the establishment of Israel. You did a great job of discussion the outsource of job as well.

  17. The documentary goes into detail about the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict that has been happening for many decades. The Zionists wanted to establish a Jewish state in the land of already established Palestine so that the Jewish people could return to their homeland and get complete control of the land of Israel. The leader of the Zionist movement established relations with the United Kingdom in order for this to happen. The British helped the Zionist movement due to the fact that the British wanted to colonize that area of where the Mediterranean meets with the Red Sea. This establishment of people in the region would be an asset to European colonialism. This was poised towards British interests in both the area and the resources. As the Zionists moved into this region, land was being bought up, which caused many local farmers to be displaced. This intrusion on land was not just to exploit its resources and the population, like traditional colonialism, but to also establish dominance over them and to permanently live there. The Jews separated the Palestine areas from one another to establish dominance as well as take control of the resources in the area.

    There were many political, economic, and social changes that created the change from colonialism to neocolonialism, globalization, and neoliberalism. The Oslo Accord was meant to bring a resemblance of peace between Palestine and Israel. It should have ended the conflicts and tensions between them by recognizing each other’s laws and political rights. This was certainty not the case that developed out of the Oslo Accord. Instead, Israel used this accord to establish more power over Palestine through economic and political means. What the true intentions of Israel were are seen as neocolonialism. The destruction of the Palestine state caused surrounding countries to boycott Israel. In response, many of the international powers supported Israel through economic and political means. This is in reference globalization. The areas of the Palestine in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank are controlled by Israel in many ways, specifically economically. Israel oversees and controls all of this areas imports and exports. This causes immense debt, which causes the Palestinian people to get loans, financial aid from the world powers, and even rely directly on Israel in order for the people in these areas to survive. Neoliberalism is found in the case of the Palestine/Israel when Israel had almost complete control of the Palestinian economy. Israel shifted the economy so that it was concentrated mostly on the private sector rather than public, or government, spending. This causes extreme poverty in Palestine while Israel gets all the benefits.

    1. I like how you focused on the Palestinian reliance on Israel, they have a tight choke hold that forces them to not up rise. I read some where that Palestinian imports are closely rationed to provide the bare minimum. Still unreal living in a bubble that hides this happening in our world today.

  18. Though viewed in our news today as current event the Israeli and Palestine conflict has been one that dates back almost two centuries ago to the era of Napoleon. This documentary goes over the origins and progression of the conflict that has caused problems for so many years. We see themes of colonialism as Britain tried to strategically take control over Palestinian land by introducing a Jewish community there. This allowed Britain closer access to the Middle East, particularly the Suez Canal. With the British there, they were not just exploiting Palestine for their land, resources, and geographic location, but they were actually trying to drive locals out. This became an extreme version of colonialism. The Zionist movement targeted Palestine for Jewish Independence and statehood. The leaders and people believed that in order to make it a Jewish state, the removal of Palestinians would be required. Furthermore, there were mandates made where Britain assumed control over Palestine and they decided to form areas particularly for Jews. Jewish immigration was even given preference in the land. Palestinians resisted to the best of their ability but instead were treated very poorly by British forces. This included the inability to carry weapons and they were searched everywhere. Many Palestinians were brutally beaten, arrested and even killed. For example, one Palestinian told his story about how his grandfather was stopped by cops and told to sweep the entire police station. When he resisted, he was beaten literally to his death.

    The exploitation of Palestinian people continues today as expressed in the Oslo Accords. The Oslo Records which was signed between the Israeli government and the Palestine Liberation Organization declared that Palestinians would live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in Israel which is governed by Palestinian Authority. Adam Hanieh points out in this article that this is just a form of neocolonialism as Israel continues to have control over construction, borders, movements, and economic life. The Oslo Records also gave Israel an upper hand through their relationship with neighboring nations creating stronger economic and political ties. The Oslo Records while seen as an effort to attain peace in the region, it is clearly heavily weighted in favor of Israel. Furthermore, we see that globalization has played a significant role, especially in the documentary, as international nations have played a major role in the way things have played out in the region. The actions taken by international forces effected Jewish and Palestinian people for hundreds of years now.

    1. Hey Amneet,

      I was glad that you brought up the unbalanced nature of the Oslo Accords. I thought that one of Hanieh’s most interesting arguments was that by re-framing the conversation between Israel and Palestine into one of peace accords, the illusion was created of two parties on relatively equal footing, which is clearly false.
      I also really liked that you brought up how the Oslo Accords strengthened Israel economically by allowing for regional investment and foreign investment without the backlash of boycotts based on support for Palestine.

      1. Yes, Amneet (and Maggie) – that illusion of two equal parties at a negotiating table is a very important part of Hanieh’s piece. I’m glad you picked up on that Amneet.

  19. Themes of colonialism, neocolonialism, globalization, and neoliberalism are rampant throughout both the documentary and article’s discussion regarding Israeli-Palestinian relations. Al Jazeera’s documentary “Al Nakba” analyzes the implications of British colonialism on the Palestinian people and state, emphasizing that this period paved the way for the formation of Israel. In the beginning, the narrator notes that “Al Nakba” (“The Catastrophe” in Arabic – referencing the war over partition) did not begin in 1948, but rather originated over two centuries ago, with Napoleon’s imperialist ambitions to create a Jewish state. This concept of a unified Jewish state only grew stronger throughout the decades, culminating in Zionism (a term coined in 1885, which sought to establish a permanent Jewish settlement in Palestine). With the British Mandate, Zionism progressed; Palestine’s proximity to the Suez Canal, Mediterranean Sea, and Red Sea was deemed strategic and vital in advancing British world power. Additionally, Europe viewed a Jewish state better than an Arab state, hence there was a lot of international support backing British rule and Jewish immigration in Palestine. As expected of any colonial enterprise, the Palestinian people, their land, and resources were exploited by British forces. Protests ensued against the British Mandate and Jewish immigration, however, the Palestinian people were only further displaced and repressed (i.e. could not possess weapons and were constantly beat, threatened, and imprisoned by British forces).
    Sadly, this legacy of repression continues today. In Adam Hanieh’s article about the Oslo Accords, he highlights that this document is an illusion to peaceful relations between Israel and Palestine. Instead of attempting to un-do previous colonial wrongdoings, the Oslo Accords ignores the exploitative history Palestinians endured and instead gives the international community a false sense that both parties were at fault, and that both now experience a “peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity.” In reality, Palestinians continue to be displaced and are extremely limited in where they can live (West Bank and Gaza strip – governed by the Palestine Authority). In fact, the author stresses that the “ultimate power remains in the hands of Israel.” For example, the Allon and Sharon Plan of 1967 and 1981 seized Palestinian land and resources and created exclusive road networks for Israelis. 87% of irrigate land in the West Bank was removed from Palestinians, with the military restricting Palestinians from using water, while encouraging Israelis to use as much as they wish. All of these policies have made it nearly impossible for the Palestinian economy to develop, and has created a dependency on Israel. The Paris Protocol of 1994 gave Israel the final say on what the Palestinian Authority can import and export; hence, Palestinians became reliant on external capital and flows of foreign aid and loans. These examples all highlight neoliberal policies: Israel defends itself by stating that its policies only sought to “assist” Palestinians, but when analyzed at a deeper scale, one can note that Palestine came into this situation in the first place from British colonialism which encouraged the Jewish state. While a few on the top become extremely rich, a majority suffer in poverty. All in all, Hanieh comments that these financial and debt-based relations have “individualized” Palestinian society: Palestinians have become too occupied with paying off all of these debts that popular, organized resistance is not on the top of their agenda. This phenomenon is very apparent in colonized areas: concerned with basic needs to survive, it is difficult for individuals to become aware of the systemic problems that are causing them to become impoverished and/or repressed.

    1. Hey Tabatha,

      I really liked how you identified the role that consumer debt played in individualizing the conflict in Palestine; I think that is a really astute observation. I also appreciated your focus on control over irrigated land and water during the 60s and 80s, as I do think these forms of control were incredibly well planned and done with malicious intent. Regardless of any claims that could be made publicly, gaining control over so much of the most productive land and major water sources is an inherently aggressive act.

    2. I enjoyed your mention of the Napoleonic Era as a starting point for the historical narrative. It conveys just how far back the Israeli/Palestinian issue goes, a scope much greater than I had previously imagined. I had often associated the beginning of the Zionist movement with Theodor Herzl and the conclusion of World War II. I now see the deeper trend and the implications of it.

    3. Hi Tabatha,

      It was a very detailed, well-written summary. I like your examples and how you connect them with the theories. I also agree that Israel defends itself by stating that its policies only to assist Palestinians, however, Palestine was in this situation in the first place.

    4. Indeed the Oslo Accords is nothing more than an illusion. Illusions seem to be a major part of exploitative neoliberalism – ex. the illusion of no gov. involvement in the free market, the illusion of free will and the ability to affect change in a “democratic” government, the illusion that people are seen as people and citizens (when in actuality they are just consumers), the list goes on.

  20. The readings and the film were very enlightening. I wouldn’t be aware of all the history behind the Israel/Palestine conflict if it weren’t for our class materials. This definitely highlights the point made in Emily Jacir’s work. Directly taken from the article “We have been trained, as Americans, to see the Palestinian only as terrorist. That they have and continue to experience ethnic cleansing is not something Americans are privy to. We are told, instead, in the US news, that violence in the Middle East is due to Palestinian acts of violence, and not that they are under occupation, under the force of tanks, military gunships, and fighter jets.” We are shown images and told that the Palestinians are the aggressors against a helpless Israel, who is only trying to protect themselves after all.. We aren’t told of the story how the creation of a Jewish state was illegal and immoral.

    The invasion of Britain to create a colony for the Jews was illegal. It was not their land to give away. The killing and displacement of the Arabs is akin to The European powers taking over Northern America and their treatment of the Native Americans. I think we only hear about this colonisation because it is so recent; its no different than the colonialism of the past: invade foreign lands, kill all the natives, establish yourself as the ruling power. The only difference here is that Palestine wasn’t being exploited for resources to send back to the mother land, but for its land to be given away. We can see globalisation here because European powers took over a land that they had no business in. They wanted an ally who would be in favour of European countries. Neo-colonialism can be see today with the Israeli control over the Palestinian minority. The Oslo Accords on paper were meant to establish peace. For the Israeli government, The Oslo Accords were never meant to give up their control over The West Bank and Gaza. As the article says, a Palestinian face may be seen in control over Palestinian affairs, but all the power resides with Israel. Neo-colonialism can be seen within The Oslo Accords also because it restricts the movement of good, people, and services out of The Gaza Strip and The West Bank. Neo-Liberalism is seen within the conflict also. The Palestinian poor leadership is blamed on lack of expertise. What is not acknowledged is that there are some Palestinians who stand to make great profit over the situation.

    1. Hi,
      I agree with you if it was not for the material in class I would of never know what was going on in Israel. I did not like how Israel is taking over the Gaza strip it is not fail.

    2. I enjoyed reading your response! I have to agree that I too was unaware of the background story of how the Jewish state, Zion was created. I liked how you connected Europe’s invasion of North America from the natives to the colonization of Zion from the Arabs. As we saw in the past, Europe stuck it’s nose in foreign affairs where they wanted to secure their interests and Israel is no different.

    3. I like your comparison of the Israeli/Palestine conflict to the colonization of America and the relocating of the natives to camps. The similarities are striking, and it helps to make an international and far off problem really hit home.

  21. In my opinion, the story of the changing control over Palestine and its people is a story about shifting colonial masters. While British control was explicit during the period of the Palestine Mandate, the Israeli state has taken over the work of outright colonialism since 1948. One of the really interesting things about the documentary “Al Nakba” was that it traces the history of British tactics in suppressing the Palestinian Revolution of the mid to late 1930s. Almost all of these tactics have been wholescale adopted by the Israeli government: house demolitions for suspected militants and activists, road checkpoints to limit movement, collective punishment to break public morale, legally preventing the Palestinians from owning firearms. Although the British policy of establishing concentration camps has not been followed explicitly, it could be argued that the separation and penning in of Palestinians into the controlled cordons of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are really just large scale camps (especially given their economic dependence on Israel for any supplies, trade, the ability to move people or goods in and out, etc.).
    Neoliberalism adds an interesting dynamic to this equation and an angle I had not heard discussed before the Hanieh article. In Palestine, the focus on export-driven industrial development is illogical and unsustainable, as it further ensnares Palestinian communities in a dependency on Israeli largesse to allow foreign trade. Because Israel controls the flows of goods in and out of Palestine, any Palestinian demands that Israel doesn’t agree with can cause huge economic ramifications. This economic control is part of the reason that we have seen so many Israeli campaigns against illegal tunnels in and out of the West Bank. Although invariably rationalized with “destroying illegal arms routes,” by demolishing these tunnels Israel can maintain the status quo of brutal economic dependence.
    Neoliberalism also adds the interesting dynamic of isolating a Palestinian elite that has done incredibly well for itself within the restraints of this new economic trajectory. Because neoliberalism has strengthened those with a close relationship to the Palestinian Authority, wealth inequality has risen and corruption and patronage have become more widespread. This has also created a Palestinian elite that is benefiting from the status quo, making them unlikely to agitate for a more radical return of Palestinian rights and sovereignty. Hanieh also discusses the rise in consumer debt in Palestine. Like those benefiting from the status quo, consumer debt also functions to temper Palestinian demands, as these people have more to lose should they not compromise.

    1. I think the use of the term concentration camps, in reference to what the British instituted, and then your example of how Israel, though not explicitly, has somewhat copied this with their penning in of the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza, is fascinating as it makes you wonder if they either can not see, or do not want to see, the parallels, or any parallels, between what the Israeli state is doing, and what was done against the Jewish community by Nazi Germany.

    2. I enjoyed reading your response! I think it’s interesting to see the parallels between how the Nazi’s treated the Jews and how Palestinians are being treated by the Israeli government. Like how we discussed in class it’s shocking that this is currently happening in the 21st century, and how these laws are being imposed to further segregate Palestinians from one another.

  22. The British rule of pre-Israel paved way to the current situation we see in the Middle East. They supported the expansion of the Jewish state in Palestine and to make the Arabs surrender the land. European colonialism impacts are still present today, for the land they previously occupied was given to the people of their choosing. This forced the Palestinians out of their land that they have inhabited. The European colonialism opened the way for rich Jews to buy land and build settlements in Palestine and eventually led way for the Jews to live. The Palestinians saw what was going on and were being more diplomatic instead of by force, but at the time they did not have the power to do so by force. It is known that force is almost necessary when removing an occupation, much of what we see in the region today. The Arabs who do fight to remove the occupation are often mislabeled. The learned from their past and know diplomacy can only push it so far. In Gaza and West Bank it is still heavily influenced by outside forces and cannot be sovereign the way they wish to be. They were aware of the ‘racist movement’ that was coming but didn’t have the political strength to fight it. After WW1 ‘it was not a right time for a Jewish state’ in a secret letter from Samuels. After the way they were given ‘first rights’ to the land to build and settle. Previously we learned about the wealthy land owners, the workers and capitalist, much of which influence the major movements in the Middle East. In Israel the major land owners are pushing for more settlements and the political power help assist this. The workers do their part and it’s the same colonial order we saw hundreds of years ago. It isn’t just the Arabs and Jews that are affected by the constant fighting and injustice that is apparent in the region. All the neighboring Arab countries or supporters of Israel are affected by this. If it isn’t affected by money, violence, then it’s affected politically and who they side with. However, the same way Americans didn’t want to be controlled and manipulated by Britain, the Palestinians don’t want to be controlled and occupied by Israel. It’s a continuation of what happened to America, only on a more brutal and injustice scale. The cycle continues for these countries trying to find piece in a two-state solution, one that seems more dim as the war mongers continue to stay in power.

  23. The circumstances surrounding the rise of the State of Israel at the expense of Palestinians as well as the ongoing concerted subjugation of the remaining Palestinians by Israeli policy epitomizes the theme of the links between early colonialism and contemporary global capitalism. By looking at the concepts of colonialism, neocolonialism, globalization, and neoliberalism through the documentary “Al-Nakba” and the article “The Oslo Illusion,” this relationship can be made evident.
    “Al-Nakba” provides a clear illustration of the colonial/imperialistic conditions that opened the space for a gradual takeover of Palestine by the Zionist movement. From the time that Palestine was a still a province of the Ottoman Empire, influential figures within European governments, especially those of the Jewish religion, exercised the regional imperial power of entities like the British Empire along with personal financial resources to begin a process of capitalistic land grabbing and settlement of Jews on Palestinian land in a way akin to the indirect methods of contemporary neo-liberalism and neo-colonialism. The fall of the Ottoman Empire and the transformation of Palestine into a mandate administered by Great Britain began the period of intensive colonialism however. The interests of Jews in the upper echelons of British government backed by a wider Zionist movement, British interests in the nearby Suez region, and a general favoritism of Jews over Arabs led to a consensus in circles of the British government that the areas of Palestine should become the land of a future Jewish state. The complete control of Palestinian affairs as well as the might of the British army insured that policies encouraging the settlement of Jews and the ascendancy of their political goals were able to trump any Palestinian resistance. This created a situation of direct foreign rule and settlement by foreigners along with the exploitation and subjugation of the native populations; textbook elements of colonialism. The end of the British colonial regime in Palestine would also usher in an American neo-colonial regime in favor of the burgeoning Israel, all but ensuring the success of the Zionists.
    This foundation of the Israeli state in 1948 and the progression of its policies towards Palestinians into the modern era conveys elements of further colonialism, neo-colonialism, and neo-liberalism. The occupation of the West Bank and the lack of independence afforded to Palestinian governing bodies illustrates an enduring form of direct colonialism in Palestine, as a foreign force is occupying and exploiting land at the expense of native people. “The Oslo Illusion” article brings to light how there is also expansive neo-colonialism through the toolset of neo-liberalism. By controlling Palestinian access to resources such as jobs and public programs in the West Bank and Gaza, ensuring that the Palestinian elite is aligned with Israel in order to protect their interests, and further separating and dividing Palestinians through strategic land grabs and infrastructure development, Israel is using indirect means of control and subjugation, hence neo-colonialism, to ensure Palestinian marginalization. These methods have overtones of the economic market domination associated with a neoliberal paradigm, especially with the use of capitalistic structures such as the labor market to make the imposition of Israeli will seem as a matter of course as opposed to overt control.
    All of these new developments in the Israeli/Palestinian relationship are occurring in the context of globalization, another important feature of emphasis. The role of the UN and a variety of countries not directly related to Israel or Palestinian in mediating agreements between the two, such as the one in Oslo, convey a sense that the issue has transcended national borders in a way characteristic of globalization. The need for Israel to act in a more indirect manner in terms of their subjugation of Palestinians is also an important feature, as many countries feel strong opposition to colonialism.
    The link between early colonialism and modern capitalism in regard to Israel can thus be understood as follows: Israel, a state founded through the power of colonial subjugation is able to maintain that subjugation using methods of neo-colonialism through a neo-liberal economic structure.

    1. When they discuss the support that was given by the British to the colonizing Zionists in Palestine, and how the British chose the Zionists as more agreeable to work with, I think its interesting how they leave out that towards the end of the mandate, British support had turned against the Zionists to an extent, with the British putting caps on Jewish immigration because of fears of revolts in the territory, and also because of the terrorist attacks Zionists were carrying out not only on Palestinians, but also on British forces and officials.

    2. Hi Mason!
      what a simplified way to explain the link on Israel’s strategy in colonizing Palestine, good job. The ending was short but very direct and clear and it had a very strong conclusion.I also like the fact that you metioned relationship between Israel and Palestine through globalization.

    3. Hi Mason:

      It is tragedy how Israel is being expanding and colonized Palestine with the help of foreign countries like British & France. ” Al Nakba catastrophe” is open widely to Zionist movement to settle in Palestine and conquer their land as well the country. I totally agree with your analysis regarding Israel is founded through the power of colonial subjugation because of that Israel is being exist in the world.

  24. The documentary shows the tensions between Britain and Palestine that occurred years ago. Jews of Eastern Europe wanted to form a new Jew in Palestine. Zionism emerged in the late 19th century in central and Eastern Europe as a national revival movement, and soon after this most leaders of the movement associated the main goal with creating the desired state in Palestine. Britain was supportive of the Zionism for the establishment of Jewish state in Palestine due to their regional interests because they would be close to Mediterranean and Red Sea and this would be in Britain interests for Jews to be closer than the Arabs because they would trust Jews more than Arabs. Under Zionism, it was argued that Palestine should be colonized under Britain’s rule while having Jews settle in the area. After the colonization of Palestine by British, more and more Jews settled in the area and this made Palestinians pushed back and they started an uprising against British rule and the Jews that settled in their area. However, British rule did not leave the protesting to continue; therefore, and they took harsh actions against the Palestinians that were protesting against the new system. Colonialism occurred in the documentary by the British colonializing Palestine and forcing Jews to settle in the area because of their interests. After the colonialism that happened years ago, neocolonialism occurred for Palestine under Israel’s control this time in the present day. Oslo Accords is signed by Palestine Liberation Organization and Israeli government. It shows in the reading that Palestinians continue to be exploited and it is by Israel this time. Israel continues to control Palestine and its people in which this is in a way that harms them. After the Allon Plan (1967) and the Sharon Plan (1981) Israel could seize land and resources, divide Palestinian areas from each other, and avoid direct responsibility for the Palestinian population as much as possible. Control over land, resources, and economy meant that Palestinian state-formation were completely dependent on Israeli design. Combined with military-enforced restrictions on the movement of Palestinian farmers and their access to water and other resources, settlement building during the first two decades of the occupation transformed Palestinian landownership and modes of social reproduction. With the destruction of the agricultural sector, poorer Palestinians were displaced from rural areas and moved towards working in the construction and agriculture sectors inside Israel. We can connect globalization to the issue between Israel and Palestine. Conflict between Israel and Palestine has been going on for years and this is considered to be global issue.

  25. Frankly speaking, I am not familiar with this period of history before reading the article and watching the documentary. However, now I have got the general idea about the conflict between Israel and Palestine clearly representing the concept of colonialism, as well as neocolonialism, globalization and neoliberalism. The conflict started when members of the Jewish community engaged in the practice of Zionism, which was a racist movement seeking capital to colonize land and exploiting religion to create a homeland for Jews, in the nineteenth century. In the documentary, it shows that Britain had great influence on the invasion and colonization of Palestine. It must be noted the cruel humanity was driven by the strong desire for developing its economics. Great Britain played a huge role against the Palestinians in which they ignored that there were already locals living in Palestine but yet still wanted the homeland of the Palestinian people to be recognized as a homeland for Jewish people. In addition, there was a dependent relationship between Israel and Europeans. The major purpose of the invasion and colonialism was that European wanted the resources of the Middle East and thought that instilling a state there, Israel, was a smart way to get a hold of those resources. The power of Israel increased overtime and demonstrated neocolonialism as it took over the economic, social and political sectors of Palestine. I am surprised that most of the interviews presented in the documentary are with people who are either ethnic to the region or have a deep understanding of the conflict. This reminded me of the idea brought by Marks that from a global view, it is necessary to achieve a “polycentric” world view instead of Eurocentrism.

    The Oslo Accords is an agreement signed in 1993 between the Israeli government and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) that attempted to reach the resolution of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. According to the article of Oslo illusion, those peace agreements led to economic approach from near countries which seems to be a way of neoliberal theories applied in that political and economic conditions of Palestine, also the aim for economic interest was parallel to the political approach from British power while the British diplomat influence on Palestine to receive almost 3,000 Jews immigrant. British believed that they would make Palestine to leave their land bringing Jews population to occupy the Palestinian territories. The support to the Zionist movement was seen as a strategy by British to colonize Palestine. It is said that “we must realize that whoever divided our land had planned to settle Jews in it”. This is an early way of colonialism and neo-colonialism considering the economic interest to extract from the land. Furthermore, the author states that “The illusory perception that Oslo would lead toward peace permitted Arab governments, led by Jordan and Egypt, to embrace economic and political ties with Israel under American and European auspices”. This peace agreement led only to economic benefit for large international firms. I believe also that part of the globalization played a role in this conflict between British occupation and Palestinian people; because the primary aim from British led them to travel to Palestine and the use of force to impose their rule in this territory.

  26. The documentary and the article illustrate how the Israel/Palestine case is rooted in colonialism, neoliberalism, and globalization. The establishment of state of Israel in 1948 has direct correlation to European colonialism. The nationalist and political movement for reestablishing state of Israel began in late 19th century under the name of Zionism. On the surface it seemed to be a nationalist revival movement birthed out of the Jewish people’s desire to “return” to their homeland. However, Zionism has many ties to colonization and neoliberalism, as it required the eradication of Palestine people who had called the region their homeland for thousands of years. The Jewish settlement was similar to the European settlement in the Americas in 15th century, as it used political and military power to drive out the indigenous population. Furthermore, western colonialism gave Israel its political legitimacy in Palestine as seen on the Balfour Declaration and the Palestine Mandate granted to Britain by League of Nations. The establishment of Israeli state gave the West greater political influence and economic opportunities, which came at the sacrifice of Palestine people who didn’t have much say in the process.

    The Oslo Accords began in 1993 with the intention of starting the peace process between Israel and Palestine Liberation Organization. The peace process initially aimed to give the Palestine people the right to self-determination, but this doesn’t seem to be true in the Israel/Palestine conflict today. The article writes how the accords were used to Israel’s advantage, increasing its political and economic autonomy in the region, making Palestine more dependent on Israel. Israel’s increasing political and economic affluence in the region is backed by the European and United States’ governments who also have high interest in potential economic ventures in the region. Because of such neoliberal agendas by the powerful Western economies/ governments, the Oslo accords became a nominal “peace” process, that’s used to Israel and the West’s neocolonial and neoliberal policies towards Palestine. Judging from the current political and economic affairs in Israel/Palestine case, it’s evident that Palestine’s political and economic presence is no where near Israel’s. Even by looking at how Palestine’s physical presence – its people have been pushed into the corners of West Bank and Gaza strip for “security” reasons shows that Israel and West have no intention for negotiating Palestinian sovereignty in the region. The party that is benefiting the most from Israel/Palestine case are multinational corporations along with Israeli and European governments. The tight-knit relations between the large corporations and western governments will only further its neoliberal agendas in Palestine, making the “right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” less likely.

  27. The documentary shed light on the tension and conflict between Israel and Palestine that occurred decades ago as Britain supported the idea of Zionism and an area where Jews could call a place their own home. However, the land was not theirs and the fight for the land is what caused the struggle of peace between Israel and Palestine. Britain’s reason to support the Jews in Palestine was so that Britain could secure its interests in Palestine. The number of Jews immigrating to Palestine jumped from 4,000 in 1931 to 62,000 in 1935. As explained in the documentary, Palestine was colonized and Israel divided Palestinians and took control of their resources. There were protests by the Palestinians but they were immediately put down, and it is important to note that the British helped control opposing forces of the Zionist movement. The colonization of Palestine was rather a difficult one as they tried to remove the Palestinians from the land and place Jews in it. Thus, resulting in the ongoing tension over the control of land in Jerusalem.

    Palestine has been a victim of the colonization and neoliberal goals as Israel seeks to have “peace” with Palestine. The Oslo Accords clearly only benefited Israel as Palestine was dependent on them economically as Israel exploited Palestine as much as they could. The military enforced restrictions on Palestinians and this resulted in the restriction of their access to water and other resources. This affected their daily lives and the land in the Jordan Valley was taken away from them and given to the Israeli settlers, with much of the water source used by Israelis while the Palestinians were forbidden to build new wells and had limited water supply. Due to the destruction of the agricultural sector, poor Palestinians were displaced and looked for work in agricultural and construction sectors in Israel. The Palestinians were also divided into sectors as a result of the Oslo Accords, which were Israel’s intentions. Palestinians were dependent on Israel for their water and energy supplies as Israel controlled the West Bank and all movement was controlled and under Israeli’s authority. Economically, it was almost impossible for the Palestinian economy to have trade relations. Because there was no economic flow the Palestinians were dependent on Israel once again, as they were reliant on external capital flowers of aid and loans. Palestine has one of the highest rates of unemployment with 20% of the country with no jobs, and there has been an increase level of poverty. According to the article, 20% of Palestinians in the West Bank were living on less than $1.67 a day for a family of five in 2009 and 2010.

  28. The Israel-Palestine Conflict
    The never ending conflict between Israeli and Palestine is understood to be as a result of political, historical and ideological differences between the two nations. Over the recent past, the way has taken a new dimension where even innocent parties have been drawn into the war. However, the cause of the dissension cannot be established without looking at the hypsographical review and the socio-economics, and political factors that might have brought the conflict.
    According to Gelvin, (2014,p. 41) Zionism was a political movement that was tasked with the responsibility y of advancing British interest in the Middle East. However, Zionism faced a lot of challenges from the local religious followings as it was seen as promoting foreign interest. Zionism finally resulted in the establishment of Israel. This was done through a series of acts of violence in the local population and anyone who opposed the movement.
    Israel is seen as having been established through the efforts of Western Europe countries mainly the British. According to undocumented reports during and the aftermath of the Second World War, western nations as well as European nations saw the Middle East as a crucial territory to advance their agenda. This was specifically due to the existence of oil and gas deposits. The U.S, for example, was wary of the possibility of an Islamic or Arab movement that would ensure the monopoly of energy reserves in the Middle East. To advance, this agenda, the Zionist movement which culminated to Israel was established.
    In 1947, the UN General Assembly passed a proposition to have Palestine split into two, an Arab and a Jewish state through a resolution known as the partition plan. The partition plan significantly favoured the Jewish side since it was resolved that they would get much of the fertile land in addition to getting a larger part of the territory. Palestine was not for this idea as it was seen as undermining the sovereignty of the nation in addition to limiting the concept of self-determinism. The United Nations was at first reluctant in passing the charter for the partition plan, but it took the pressure from the U.S and Britain to go ahead and adopt the program.
    When Britain’s mandate in Palestine came to an end, there was an immediate outbreak of a dissension between the Jews and the Arabs in what was seen as a war for independence, or what others saw as the war of aggression. From one perspective, Israel was supposed to use Britain’s departure to declare it’s independent. However, the heightened conflict between Israel and Palestine saw the international community step in and ask for a truce. Despite the Palestine side standing down, Israel in collaboration with Jordan went ahead and invaded some parts that had been allocated to Palestine.
    According to Smith, it can be seen that the acquisition of the state of Israel was marred by various controversies, acts of violence, unlawful occupation and racial segmentation (2010, p.624). It is under this background that the long-standing conflict between Israel and Palestine began. Palestinians are of the view that Israel was awarded a bigger portion of the split nation while indeed the nation did not exist in the first place. In what appears to be a suggestion that Israel is a country imposed on the people in the Middle East to advance the Western interest. Palestine argues that the people in the region should have been left alone to decide whether they wanted to be divided into two nations.

    Gelvin, J. L. (2014). The Israel-Palestine conflict: one hundred years of war. Cambridge University Press.
    Smith, C. D. (2010). Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict: [a history with documents]. Bedford/St. Martin’s.

Leave a Reply