I: Introduction. 1.What Role Did Zionism Play In Influencing

For ages the Jewish population did not have a place to call home. They had been wandering around deserts, were once slaves in Egypt, but didn’t have any land to their name. Following the Holocaust, after many Jews had been persecuted by Hitler and the Nazis, a good portion of the overall amount of Jews in the world let alone Europe had been exterminated. As a result, Harry Truman and the UN suggested Israel, a homeland for the Jews. Tensions had been growing throughout the beginning of the 20th Century regarding the Palestinian area in the Middle East. This area was off to the side of Asia, near Africa. When the Jews and Arabs were offered part of this land, war broke out and still continues today. Even though a war happened as a result

Palestinian identity has lasted the test of time through exile, diaspora, and attempts at cultural white-washing. It is through these situations that Palestine has created a unique sense of identity, unlike many nation-states. The Palestinian identity has come to transcend borders, nationality, and mediums. It is not only represented in politics and protest, but in personal expression and the arts. This paper argues that both national identity and cultural productions of Palestine represent the diaspora through noticeable adaptation based on location and support the idea that Palestinian identity isn't singularly definable.

in 1918 britain aided by the arabs captured palestine from the the ottoman turks but britain had now made too many promises that hey couldn't keep . Many Arabs opposed British troops because of England's failure to fulfill its promise and were also getting angry about the increase of jewish migrating to palestine. Arabs became concerned that Jewish immigration would threaten their position in Palestine which lead to large scale attacks on the jews. At the time of Hitler's dictatorship in Germany, Jewish immigration increased dramatically in 1933. An Arab revolt started which Britain suppressed with the help of Zionist militias. Zionist settlements climaxed in 1936. In 1947, Britain forbid Jewish refugees from nazi concentration camps to land in Palestine to prevent war between Jews and Arabs, which resulted in worldwide criticism of Britain. Britain withdrew itself from the situation handing over the mandate over Palestine, leaving the United Nations to deal with the situation. The United Nations proposed that Palestine was divided into two states, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews, however the Arabs opposed this idea claiming that the UN plan allotted too much territory to the Jews. the arabs thought it was unfair that the jews should get more land because the arabs were by far the larger population but because of the holocaust the was a lot of sympathy for the jews and this may be why the got more land.

The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most long-term, pressing, and largely confounding social, political, and national quandaries of our age. Since we have been moving with surprising velocity into the vast horizons of globalization, the conflict has built up tremendous momentum and has called into question the adequacy of our current attempts at coming to a peaceful resolution that can simultaneously and successfully address both sides of the struggle. The purpose of this paper has been to understand the prospect of a two-state nation solution for Israel and Palestine. The discussion arises a retrospective view of the context behind the present analysis. We begin with a discourse that informs the reader of the historical narrative between the Jewish inhabitants of Israel and the Palestinians who also seek to live in the lands which comprise Israel. At the forefront of the discussion are some key issues such as trends in Israeli settlement expansion over time, the manner in which these settlements create political challenges towards the prospect of a two-state solution, and the fragmentation of power within Palestinian political parties which inhibit the opportunity for proper negotiations amongst the two parties. Finally, we delve into a discussion on nationalism, it’s importance in the discussion of a two-state solution, and the challenges posed when trying to formulate US Foreign Policy towards the matter.

With the Jewish expulsion from the land of Palestine, from the Romans. Their lives depended on endeavoring to survive in the land that they were coerced on. For some, assimilation was the only way to survive. It was either stay ostracized or assimilate and endeavor to become something. During the 18000s an incipient conception emerged from the Jewish people in many different counties. This conception came to what Zionism is, a way for the Jewish people to become a whole. Some Zionist vigorously repudiated the conception of assimilation to these countries. Some verbally expressed that assimilation is a slap to the Jewish people coerced out of the land of Palestine. While others verbally express living in the countries was like being ghost

As stated by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “British policy banned illegal immigration to Palestine, to solve problems in Palestine. Later on, the Jews took over Palestine and it is now called Israel. War broke out just so that the Jews could have their own country.” Earl Harrison, in his August 1945 report to President Truman, recommended mass population transfer from Europe and resettlement in British-controlled Palestine or the United States. The report influenced President Truman to order that preference be given to DPs, especially widows and orphans, in US immigration quotas (Berger). When the war ended, most Jewish DP's were housed in camps behind barbed wire in poor conditions. Until the State of Israel was established in 1948, legal immigration to Palestine was blocked by official British policy. Immigration to the United States in meaningful numbers was also severely restricted until the passage of the Displaced Persons' Act in 1948 (Displaced Persons). The Jews wanted their own land. The land that was promised to them in their religion. This land is one of the most religious places in the world. Even though the Jews were happy, the Palestinians were basically robbed of their own land, and war is still going on today, for the land of Palestine. This may have been nice for the Jews who were now taking over, but the

In the early stages of the Zionist movement, Theodore Herzl, the founder and “Father of Zionism”, negotiated with Britain, a major world power at the time, to give up five thousand square miles of Uganda. In 1903, this idea was brought to the Zionists, which offered geographical protection and isolation from Russia. These negotiations, however, came to a halt when Herzl died in 1904. Months later, however, the cause did find potential in the area of Palestine. Palestine was remote enough that Jews had geographical protection and had suitable weather for agricultural purposes. Similarly, Palestine was religiously significant because it contained the holy land of Jerusalem. As a result, in a span of twelve years (1902-1914), the Zionists move around 70,000 Jews within two migration periods known as the First and Second Aliyahs. These major movements gave the Jews the manpower they needed to make a serious threat to the Palestinian forces. Nevertheless, WWI put a halt in the Zionist efforts until the end of the war in 1917.

One of the major concerns was the Arabs already living on the land the Jewish wanted to populate. Among the players who had different views was Ze’Ev Jabotinsky, a Jewish nationalist and the founder of the Revisionist Zionism. The Revisionist advocated that the Land of Israel should be encompassed all the land within the Palestine mandate and the immediate Jewish right to political sovereignty over the entire area. The Revisionists wanted to maintain the “territorial integrity” of the Land of Israel and objected to the partition of Palestine and advocated for the establishment of Israel on both banks of the River Jordan. Jabotinsky suggested that it was the “moral right” of the Jewish people to return to Palestine and the world had already “acknowledged this right.” Further, Revisionists believed it was impossible to have an agreement with the Arabs as long as they hope they could create their own independent state. Consequently, the Jewish must create a state regardless of the Palestinians resistance secured by an “Iron Wall” which would be unbreakable by the Palestinians. The iron wall would lead to a peace resolution with the Arabs after which the Jewish state would give them “civil and national rights.” Revisionist Zionism adamantly advocated the creation of a strong Jewish state to guarantee and protect the

Zionists and Palestinian Arabs wanted individual nations and both felt they had a claim to Palestine. Shortly after in 1947, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution (UNGAR) called for a partition, which divided the country so that each state would have a majority of its own population. This divide meant that some of the Jewish settlements would fall within the proposed Arab state while an extremely large number of Palestinian Arabs would become part of the proposed Jewish state. (Beinin and Hajjar 2014). A year later in May, Israel unilaterally declared their independence and the State of Israel was established. This of course started a war, and neighboring Arab states invaded Israel almost immediately. During this war about 750,000 Arab Palestinians fled to Lebanon, the West Bank, and the Gaza strip. (http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/official-statements/%E2%80%9Cpalestine-refugees-unresolved-question-time-syria-crisis%E2%80%9D) Also during this fight, Israel expanded its borders far beyond the UN partition lines, leaving Egypt to take hold of the Gaza Strip & Jordan to control the West

However, when faced with the true reality of the situation, it seems simple to reach the conclusion that the British, and to some extent the United States, put aside the events of the Holocaust in favour of securing oil interests over an aggressive Soviet expansion, thus delaying the inevitable establishment of the Israeli state. Nevertheless, it is of great importance that the American and British political stances be analysed. Firstly it is essential to note the Jewish presence within the United States. Despite 1.5 million Jews being assimilated into society, anti-Semitism still existed with Jews being excluded from joining certain organisations and clubs and restrictive immigration laws operating under a quota system, thus limiting the number of Jews admitted. Despite this however, Zionist leaders saw it as essential that they enlist the American Jewish population in an attempt to get US government support for a Jewish state. In terms of the American view of Palestine, prior to the war the American government had regarded Palestine as a British responsibility. However, by March 1943, the US state department became concerned about

The investigation assesses demographic shifts to Palestine in the context of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. It more specifically inquires about the impact of Jewish immigration on Palestine in terms of the effects it had on Jewish-Arab relationships in Palestine. It seeks to determine the extent the third, fourth, and fifth aliyahs of 1919-1939 had on the economic development of the Israeli State and its social implications. Monographs and general texts will be used to provide background on the conflict, including the rise of Zionism, the British Mandate, the White Paper, and the Peel Commission. This context will also be used to critically analyze the role of Jewish immigration to Palestine and the role it played in land reforms, rioting, and the implementation of restrictions set by the British government on Palestine. Two secondary sources, William L. Cleveland’s A History of the Modern Middle East and Howard M. Sachar’s A History of

In the years just after World War II, Zionism (the desire to rebuild a Jewish national presence in the Promised Land) became a popular Jewish cause all around the world. Many Jews who were not practicing Judaism at all with religion became involved with the establishment of the State of Israel. Even today, many years after the successful founding of the State of Israel, there are Jews whose only real tie to Judaism is their belief in Zionism and their support for the State of Israel. They are joined by many Jews who are members of synagogues and support a modern Jewish religious movement, but who also find their prime identity as Jews in the Zionist cause.

The end of the 19th century brought with it the rise of Arab nationalism and Zionism, which called for the existence of a permanent Jewish State. Herzl’s 1896 manifesto “The Jewish State”, popularized the idea of Isaac’s promised land and influenced the Jewish peoples of Eastern Europe and Russia to proclaim Israel their own. The Jewish people took their first steps

Tensions between the Arabs and Zionists started after the 1800’s when the immigration of the European Jews to Palestine was on the increase. The population of Palestine from 1882-1883 was 468,000 and the population consisted of 408 Muslims, 44,000 Christians and 15,000 Jews. During this time Palestine was under the Ottoman Empire.

The decision on the Mandate did not take into account the wishes of the people of Palestine, despite the Covenant's requirements that "the wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory". This assumed special significance because, almost five years before receiving the mandate from the League of Nations, the British Government had given commitments to the Zionist Organization regarding the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, for which Zionist leaders had pressed a claim of "historical connection" since their ancestors had lived in Palestine two thousand years earlier before dispersing in the "Diaspora". During the period of the Mandate, the Zionist Organization worked to secure the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine. The indigenous people of Palestine, whose forefathers had inhabited the land for virtually the two preceding millennia, felt this design to be a violation of their natural and inalienable rights. They also viewed it as an infringement of assurances of independence given by the Allied Powers to Arab leaders in return for their support during the war.