Several days ago I published a quotation by A.W. Tozer which stated, “So powerful is human speech that the wrong use of a word or phrase may easily result in real error in thinking.” There is an excellent example of this in the oft repeated phrase, “Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.” Speaking of Israel’s rule of the West Bank and Gaza as, “the occupation,” and the Israelis as, “occupiers,” has become so common place that it has resulted in real error in the thinking of many people when it comes to evaluating the situation is the Middle East.
Most people know that Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. Presumably the “occupation” began at that time, and the Palestinians have been under the cruel yoke of Israel ever since. But the term, occupation, implies that before 1967 the land belonged to the Palestinians and it should be returned to them. But was this really the case?
The fact is that from 1948 until 1967 the lands in question were under Arab control; Egypt controlled what was called the Gaza Strip, and Jordon controlled the West Bank (Actually, they gave it that name). The West Bank came to be controlled by Jordan when King Abdullah’s Arab Legion invaded it in 1948. In 1950 it was annexed. Egypt came to control Gaza at the same time (but unlike Jordan, it never annexed the territory it controlled).
So where were the “rightful owners” of the land, the Palestinians, during this 19 year period of Arab occupation…I mean, control? The Arab masters of the West Bank and Gaza made no attempt to assimilate the approximately 650,000 to 780,000 Palestinian refugees who had been displaced by the 1948 war. In most cases they were confined to refugee camps in conditions so bad that it is hard for someone who has not seen them to imagine (I know. I’ve seen one of the camps they were kept in near Jericho).
It is important to note that during the 19 years in which Jordan and Egypt controlled the territories there was never an effort made to create a Palestinian state, nor was one even discussed. Apparently they intended to keep them in refugee camps indefinitely because they made no other arrangement. Odd, isn’t it, considering the amount of land and wealth they controlled, that the best plan the Palestinian people’s Muslim brothers could come up with in 19 years was the squalor of a refugee camp?
Meanwhile with far fewer resources and much less land Israel was successfully assimilating over 800,000 Jewish refugees who had been expelled from various Arab countries during the same period, not to mention those who were emigrating from other places.
So, as I attempt to evaluate all of this I have three questions. First: considering the way they treated the Palestinians, why weren’t the Jordanians and Egyptians referred to as occupiers during the 19 years they controlled the West Bank and Gaza? Second: Why isn’t Israel’s capture of the west bank and Gaza referred to as, “the liberation?” Third: If you were a refugee, would you rather have a Muslim or a Jewish brother?
