the surrogate colonization of Palestine, 1917-1939

Published in Encyclopedia of Women in Islamic Cultures, Vol. 6, pp. 9-15.

Zionism and its Discontents, 2014

All large-scale historical processes can be divided into periods, characterized by crucial landmark events, developments and dates. These usually play a symbolic role but also serve as indicators of important shifts or new directions. Three such dates stand out in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: The 2nd November 1917: the date of the Balfour Declaration, which recognized the Zionist movement's claim to a 'National Home' in Palestine, and committed Britain to facilitating its realization The 29th November 1947: the date of the UN Palestine partition resolution, which led to the establishment of the State of Israel in the following year and to the Palestinian Nakba (dispossession of hundreds of thousands who became stateless refugees) The 5th June 1967: the date of the war that led to Israel's expansion into its current boundaries, incorporating all of historical Palestine within its system of military and political control. These dates and the events with which they are associated did not create new realities from scratch, of course. Rather, building on existing trends, they served to consolidate pre-existing developments and to open up new historical possibilities. In particular they helped give rise to new patterns of settlement and resistance, and thus reshaped relations between the main protagonists of the evolving conflict. The Balfour Declaration was issued towards the end of the First World War, after Great Britain had gained control over much of Palestine and large areas of the Middle East that used to be part of the Ottoman Empire. It followed 35 years of organized Jewish immigration and settlement activity in the country, which resulted in the consolidation of a small but growing Jewish community (known as the New Yishuv), spread over dozens of new rural settlements, towns and urban neighbourhoods. Although it made no reference to that community, its existence was an important contextual factor for the Declaration. It granted international legitimacy to the new Yishuv and facilitated its further growth under the leadership of the world Zionist movement. Together with the British Mandate for Palestine, officially inaugurated in 1920, it created a new political framework based on boundaries that define the territory to this day. In that way it made the incipient conflict between Jewish settlers and indigenous Palestinian-Arabs more sharply focused on the political future of the country. While Palestinian resistance to Jewish immigration and land settlement preceded the Declaration, going back to the late 19th century, the post-1917 period became crucial in shaping the conflict in its current form. It is also the necessary starting point for discussing the colonial/apartheid question and its relevance for Israel/Palestine. With the demise of the Ottoman Empire and the British takeover of Palestine, two new and related elements were introduced into the country: European imperial rule and a settler political project.

In this chapter I consider the debate over the nature of Zionism as a colonial settlement movement through an analysis of its actual record, rather than its declared intentions. From this perspective I make the following main points:  Until the First World War, the term “colonial” and its derivatives were used freely by Zionists to describe Jewish settlement activity in Palestine. Thus the Jewish settlements were referred to as “colonies” (moshavot) and the Zionist movement’s bank (currently Bank Leumi) was initially called the “Jewish Colonial Trust.” The efforts to distinguish Zionism from European colonial movements began only once colonialism acquired a negative reputation.  Contrary to the claim of Zionist scholars, Zionism did have a “mother country” – Great Britain. While GB did not provide the Zionist settlement project with the same unequivocal support it gave colonization efforts of its own nationals, British political and military power was essential for the success of the Zionist project.  In the manner of colonial settlement projects elsewhere, Zionism had a devastating effect on the indigenous Palestinian population, culminating in the Nakba of 1947-49.

Brown Journal of World Affairs, 2017

Throughout the past century, the Zionist movement constructed the most sophisticated settler-colonial project of our age: the State of Israel. The violent birth of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent colonization of the entirety of the land of Palestine after the 1967 war are indeed reflections of Zionism's successes in fulfilling its settler-colonial ambitions in Palestine. Yet, while this settlercolonial project continues unabated, it is an entangled one, unable to reach the ultimate point of Jewish exclusivity in the land. Zionist settler colonialism, as its historical precedents suggest, is fundamentally based on the operative logic of "eliminating the native" and failing to utterly marginalize and "minoritize" him. The vibrant Palestinian presence in the land, the everyday resistance to the colonial order, and the robust Palestinian adherence to their rights all stand as structural obstacles to the ultimate realization of the "Zionist dream." 1 Despite Israel's relentless colonial power and domination, Palestinian steadfastness means that this project will remain impeded and incomplete, a matter that may lead to its future demise.

Contemporary Arab Affairs, 2020

This study compiles historical information to highlight the role played by both East and West European countries in the creation of Israel since before World War I. East European countries, especially Russia, Poland, and Romania, were as effective in this regard as the West Europeans. While racial policies were paramount in East Europe, including Germany, religious and strategic policies were as effective in the West, especially in Britain. Two points can be redrawn in this regard: That the question of Palestine was a Western question on both sides of the continent; it had nothing to do with the Eastern question that engulfed the Ottoman Empire before and during World War I. Additionally while World War II did not start the process of creating Israel, it accelerated it since the United States became an active supporter of the Zionist project. The second conclusion explains why all major powers give so much latitude to Israel, regardless of its constant neglect of international law to this very day.

Asian Affairs, 2020

The article examines notions of settlement, colonialism, and indigeneity, and their relevance for the case of Israel/Palestine. With a focus on the pre-1948 period, it looks at how the Palestinian-Arab national movement and the Zionist movement offered different understandings of the process of Jewish immigration into the country and the opposing political claims that were raised in that historical context. It concludes with a discussion of the crucial role of the 1948 Nakba for future relations between the two ethno-national groups in the country, as it set the stage for the social and political conflicts that have plagued the state of Israel since its inception. Der Artikel analysiert Vorstellungen von Besiedlung, Kolonialismus und Eingeborenheit und deren Bedeutung am Falle von Israel/Palästina. Mit dem Zeitraum vor 1948 im Mittelpunkt untersucht der Artikel wie die palästinensische-arabische Nationalbewegung und die Zionistische Bewegung verschiedene Erklärungen anboten für den Prozess der jüdischen Emigration in das Land und wie sich gegensätzliche politische Ansprüche in diesem historischen Kontext ergaben. Die zentrale Rolle der Nakba (ethnische Säuberung der palästinensischen Bevölkerung) im Jahre 1948 wird zum Schluß diskutiert und im Zusammenhang mit den zukünftigen Beziehungen zwischen den beiden ethnisch-nationalen Gruppen im Land gesehen, da die Nakba den Hintergrund für die sozialen und politischen Konflikte bildete, die den Staat Israel seit seiner Gründung plagen.

Middle East Critique , 2024

Israel's settler-colonial project stands as a peculiar instance of colonial domination in the modern era, distinguished by its ideological roots in Zionism, a potent blend of mythological narratives, militaristic nationalism, and expansionist aspirations. Unlike traditional colonial powers, Israel operates without a conventional metropole, instead leveraging strategic alliances with Western powers, particularly the United States, to sustain its colonial enterprise. The endurance of this project is inextricably linked to the subjugation and fragmentation of the Arab world, which serves as a wellspring of resistance against Israel's colonial ambitions, as evidenced by the normalization of relations between Israel and various Arab regimes. Yet, Palestinian resistance has proven resilient and adaptive, persistently asserting its rights, identity, and connection to the land, while exposing the moral bankruptcy of Israel's colonial dominance. To fully grasp the complexities of Palestine's past, present, and future, it is imperative to employ a settler-colonial framework, which not only illuminates the specific dynamics at play but also sheds light on the broader implications for understanding and challenging similar structures of oppression worldwide.

Arnon Golan is in the