This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Israeli–Palestinian conflict article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
![]() | Israeli–Palestinian conflict was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " In the news" column on March 30, 2002. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report 8 times. The weeks in which this happened:
|
![]() | This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. |
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Index
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21 |
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
![]() |
|
representing what Laura Robson has called the "colonial practice of territorializing sectarian identity" whereby the "designation "Jewish" would carry with it all sorts of political baggage totally absent from the prior experience of the many Jewish communities of the Arab Ottoman world and their Muslim and Christian compatriots".
> whereby the "designation "Jewish" would carry
What's going on with the quotation marks here? Plenthy ( talk) 15:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
@ האופה please discuss individual points before apply such sweeping reversions.
DMH223344 ( talk) 19:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
"Palestinian refugees are people who lost their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab–Israeli conflict"which is of course disingenuous. I replaced this with explicit reference to expulsions and the forceful prevention from returning to their homes afterwards. DMH223344 ( talk) 19:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
"Palestinian refugees are people who lost their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab–Israeli conflict"sufficiently addresses the complexity?
"The internationalization of Palestinian terrorism in the 1960s and 1970s is an integral part of every comprehensive source on the devlopment of the conflict."Then we should use sources which connect the incidents to the conflict. And certainly not articles from fox news on this topic. DMH223344 ( talk) 04:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
"but one cannot discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without it"then provide sources which discuss palestinian political violence as separate from israeli security concerns. Of course you cannot, because Israeli security concerns covers palestinian political violence
"...it appears to be.."then bring in sources that claim it is a core issue
"inter Arab actions have influences Israeli security policy", but it's interesting that you also lump it under Israeli security policy...
האופה, you have reverted twice within 24-hours, in breach of the Active Arbitration Remedies listed at the top of the page. You were informed of this being a contentious topic area on 17 April, so should have been aware of this limit. I invite you now to self-revert.
As regards your removal of the addition - the addition was neutral, presented various viewpoints in a neutral manner, and was referenced. Please now restore. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 12:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
It's interesting that user @ האופה thinks the recent additions to this section are "only the pro-palestinian view"--I would curious to know how the foreign minister of Israel and the deputy mayor of jerusalem are considered pro-palestinian perspectives. Also, at the time of writing the Iron Wall, Avi Shlaim was a liberal zionist. You'd also need to do some work to convince me and others that Quandt and Christison have "pro-palestinian" perspectives. Lastly, if you think this does not represent RS, then bring sources. DMH223344 ( talk) 15:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
A recent addition to the article quotes from a book by Slater, which says "from November 1977 to October 2000, no Israelis were killed inside the Green Line." this is such an obviously false claim, (see for example Dizengoff Street bus bombing) that makes the entire source questionable, It should be removed. Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 23:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
the claim is a lie, it means that there is another source that contains conflicting information. What we usually do in such circumstances is include both sources. Selfstudier ( talk) 12:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
From Prophets without honor:
The intractability of the conflict is strongly linked to the resilience of nationalist atavisms—the eminent historian Fernand Braudel wrote about the “mentalities (that) are prisons of long duration”—to the dysfunctional nature of the parties’ respective politics, and to the poverty of leadership. But the abject submission of the Palestinians and the ever deepening system of occupation and discrimination in the territories are Israel’s sole and exclusive responsibility. As brilliantly explained by Michael Sfard, this is a system built on three pillars: the gun, the settlements, and the law that formalizes the network of colonization.1 Under the mantle of security claims, the Jewish state has created in the Palestinian territories one of the most efficient occupation regimes in history, which is, moreover, also cost-effective, for it is the international community’s donor money to the Palestinian Authority that saves the occupier the burden of having to directly administer the territories. This leaves Israel free to cater to its insatiable security needs with draconic measures, such as limiting the Palestinians’ freedom of movement, erecting walls that separate communities, dotting roads with checkpoints where innocent people are manhandled, activating sophisticated intelligence mechanisms that control the lives of an ever growing number of suspects, conducting surprise searches of private houses in the middle of the night, and carrying out arbitrary administrative detentions. If this were not enough, vigilantes among the settlers, some known as “the Youth of the Hills,” constantly harass Palestinian communities, destroy orchard trees, and arbitrarily apply a “price tag” of punishments to innocent civilians for whatever terrorist attack might have been perpetrated by a Palestinian squad. Underlying this very serious problem of the unpardonable depravity of settlers’ extremism is the even more serious problem that has to do with the involvement of the entire Israeli body politic in maintaining and continuously expanding a regime of dominance in the territories. For too long, the peace process has served as a curtain behind which the policy of practical annexation has flourished.
DMH223344 ( talk) 00:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
According to this, the term 'historic Palestine' is partisan and violates WP:NPOV. This is apparently the case regardless of the contents of cited reliable sources. This seems like the kind of reasoning worth discussing. Is this kind of reasoning consistent with policy? It strikes me as so odd that I'm not sure it is even consistent with the Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct. Sean.hoyland ( talk) 15:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Correct typo in section Israeli-Palestinian Conflict#Economic disputes and boycotts. The first letter of a sentence was cut off.
Change:
"s a result, the PA's" -> "As a result, the PA's"
GrapesRock (
talk)
21:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Done -
Bastun
Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!
21:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@ DMH223344, @ האופה, I didn't understand the reasoning behind the reverts, could you explain it? Alaexis ¿question? 17:34, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
> From early on, the leadership of the Zionist movement had the idea of "transferring" (a euphemism for ethnic cleansing) the Arab Palestinian population...
The article on Ethnic Cleansing defines the term to include extreme methods such as murder, rape, and property destruction, as well as coercion and prevention of the victim group's return through deportation or population transfer.
The source cited indeed describes at length the idea of population transfer considered by the Zionist leadership, but there is no claim that they contemplated methods of systematic murder, rape, or property destruction.
Based on this, I recommend revising the sentence to eliminate the parenthetical reference to ethnic cleansing, as it implies actions (murder, rape, property destruction) that are not substantiated by the cited source. 77.125.167.35 ( talk) 04:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
DMH223344 ( talk) 16:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Probably the most appealing article in therecommendation of the Commission was that about the ‘forced transfer’of Arabs from the future Jewish state. To Ben-Gurion this was an‘unparalleled achievement’. It was ‘the best of all solutions’, according toBerl Katznelson. ‘A distant neighbour’, he said, ‘is better than a closeenemy.’ Transfer was such an ideal solution that ‘it must happen someday’, he concluded. A strategy of phases, admittedly always vague andanything but an articulate plan of action, could only prevail if a solutioncould be found to the demographic problem. ‘Transfer’ was the magicformula.The idea of transfer for the Arabs had a long pedigree in Zionistthought.
Thus the wishful and rather naive belief in Zionism’s early years that the Palestinians could be ‘spirited across the border’, in Herzl’s words, or that they would simply ‘fold their tents and slip away’, to use Zangwill’s formulation, soon gave way to more realistic assessments. Between 1937 and 1948 extensive secret discussions of transfer were held in the Zionist movement’s highest bodies, including the Zionist Agency Executive, the Twentieth Zionist Congress, the World Convention of Ihud Po‘alei Tzion (the top forum of the dominant Zionist world labour movement), and various official and semi-official transfer committees.
DMH223344 ( talk) 16:42, 6 July 2024 (UTC)After reviewing Zionism and its consequences, I examined the onset of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the 1917–47 period, and argued that because the Zionists wanted to ensure a large Jewish majority in the coming state of Israel, their leaders repeatedly discussed the means by which most of the Palestinians could be expelled or induced to flee; the euphemism they employed was “transfer.” The scholarship on “transfer”—especially by Israeli historians—leaves no doubt about its importance in the thinking of every major Zionist leader before and after the creation of Israel.
DMH223344 ( talk) 16:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)The concept of population transfer, as a facile solution to the twin problems of the Arab landless peasants and the creation of land reserves for Jewish settlement was for some time in the back of the minds of the 2ionist leadership. In fact, in private discussions with the British, the Zionist leadership put forward population transfer as a tentative suggestion but stopped short of formulating it into a proposal for action.
‘The idea of transfer had accompanied the Zionist movement from its very beginnings’, Tom Segev reports.DMH223344 ( talk) 16:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
“ | My feeling is that the transfer thinking and near-consensus that emerged in the 1930s and early 1940s was not tantamount to preplanning and did not issue in the production of a policy or master-plan of expulsion; the Yishuv and its military forces did not enter the 1948 War, which was initiated by the Arab side, with a policy or plan for expulsion. | ” |
“ | Yet the distance between being prepared to accept such an eventuality and the formal adoption of the transfer plan by the Zionist Organization was enormous. The traditional approach was that there was enough room in Palestine for many millions of Jews and one million Palestinian Arabs. | ” |
“ | In reality, the archives show that rather than seek the expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs, the Zionist leaders believed that there was sufficient room in Palestine for both peoples to live side by side in peace and equality, and that, far from despairing by the mid-1930s of mass Jewish immigration, they worried about the country’s short-term absorptive capacity should millions of Jews enter Palestine. | ” |
The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.. Alaexis ¿question? 07:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
This is what I'd like to propose, please see the reasoning below. Happy to discuss it, this is supposed to be the first iteration.
There seems to be a consensus that no policy or plan of action were formulated based on the idea of transfer.
"championed the Arab cause". [1] He apparently can't see the difference between A) a historian updating the understanding of history based on fresh information, and B) being some sort of propagandist just because the narrative that emerges isn't quite so amenable to a given ideology. It's hard to know what to make of that level of skew. Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
‘I support compulsory transfer. I don’t see in it anything immoral’
Berl Katznelson favored transfer as an integral part of an international agreement that would redraw borders between peoples and states in the postwar era. He emphasized that this would be a peaceful transfer of population based on a mutual agreement.So here we are talking about "peaceful" rather than compulsory transfer. But as Masalha shows Katznelson did not oppose compulsory transfer on moral grounds.
The traditional approach was that there was enough room in Palestine for many millions of Jews and one million Palestinian Arabs... This does not mean that transfer was not important.
It is possible to assume with a high degree of probability that if one of the Great Powers had volunteered to carry out a transfer of the Arabs of Palestine, very few of the Zionist leaders would have opposed such a move... The mainstream viewed it as a good thing that one could, if need be, do without.DMH223344 ( talk) 15:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
"Anita Shapira and Efraim Karsh argue that the traditional Zionist approach believed there was enough room in Palestine for both Jews and Palestinian Arabs, and that Zionist leaders saw room for peaceful coexistence and worried more about the country's absorptive capacity for Jewish immigrants rather than expelling Palestinians."does not at all describe the concept of transfer as unimportant (indeed the quote from Shapira you sourced would not support such a claim) so any argument about "now only viewpoint is present" simply does not apply. DMH223344 ( talk) 04:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
The transfer conception was based on what was assumed as positive experience in exchange of populations between Turkey and Greece in the aftermath of World War I.
@ Makeandtoss can you explain why you think the recent additions to the lead are too detailed? We have plenty of room in the lead, in comparison this lead is much shorter than for example the lead for Zionism. DMH223344 ( talk) 16:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Please note: a public call from the Israel subforum on Reddit to edit this article. starship .paint ( RUN) 13:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Israeli–Palestinian conflict article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
![]() | Israeli–Palestinian conflict was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " In the news" column on March 30, 2002. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report 8 times. The weeks in which this happened:
|
![]() | This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. |
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Index
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21 |
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
![]() |
|
representing what Laura Robson has called the "colonial practice of territorializing sectarian identity" whereby the "designation "Jewish" would carry with it all sorts of political baggage totally absent from the prior experience of the many Jewish communities of the Arab Ottoman world and their Muslim and Christian compatriots".
> whereby the "designation "Jewish" would carry
What's going on with the quotation marks here? Plenthy ( talk) 15:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
@ האופה please discuss individual points before apply such sweeping reversions.
DMH223344 ( talk) 19:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
"Palestinian refugees are people who lost their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab–Israeli conflict"which is of course disingenuous. I replaced this with explicit reference to expulsions and the forceful prevention from returning to their homes afterwards. DMH223344 ( talk) 19:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
"Palestinian refugees are people who lost their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab–Israeli conflict"sufficiently addresses the complexity?
"The internationalization of Palestinian terrorism in the 1960s and 1970s is an integral part of every comprehensive source on the devlopment of the conflict."Then we should use sources which connect the incidents to the conflict. And certainly not articles from fox news on this topic. DMH223344 ( talk) 04:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
"but one cannot discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without it"then provide sources which discuss palestinian political violence as separate from israeli security concerns. Of course you cannot, because Israeli security concerns covers palestinian political violence
"...it appears to be.."then bring in sources that claim it is a core issue
"inter Arab actions have influences Israeli security policy", but it's interesting that you also lump it under Israeli security policy...
האופה, you have reverted twice within 24-hours, in breach of the Active Arbitration Remedies listed at the top of the page. You were informed of this being a contentious topic area on 17 April, so should have been aware of this limit. I invite you now to self-revert.
As regards your removal of the addition - the addition was neutral, presented various viewpoints in a neutral manner, and was referenced. Please now restore. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 12:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
It's interesting that user @ האופה thinks the recent additions to this section are "only the pro-palestinian view"--I would curious to know how the foreign minister of Israel and the deputy mayor of jerusalem are considered pro-palestinian perspectives. Also, at the time of writing the Iron Wall, Avi Shlaim was a liberal zionist. You'd also need to do some work to convince me and others that Quandt and Christison have "pro-palestinian" perspectives. Lastly, if you think this does not represent RS, then bring sources. DMH223344 ( talk) 15:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
A recent addition to the article quotes from a book by Slater, which says "from November 1977 to October 2000, no Israelis were killed inside the Green Line." this is such an obviously false claim, (see for example Dizengoff Street bus bombing) that makes the entire source questionable, It should be removed. Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 23:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
the claim is a lie, it means that there is another source that contains conflicting information. What we usually do in such circumstances is include both sources. Selfstudier ( talk) 12:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
From Prophets without honor:
The intractability of the conflict is strongly linked to the resilience of nationalist atavisms—the eminent historian Fernand Braudel wrote about the “mentalities (that) are prisons of long duration”—to the dysfunctional nature of the parties’ respective politics, and to the poverty of leadership. But the abject submission of the Palestinians and the ever deepening system of occupation and discrimination in the territories are Israel’s sole and exclusive responsibility. As brilliantly explained by Michael Sfard, this is a system built on three pillars: the gun, the settlements, and the law that formalizes the network of colonization.1 Under the mantle of security claims, the Jewish state has created in the Palestinian territories one of the most efficient occupation regimes in history, which is, moreover, also cost-effective, for it is the international community’s donor money to the Palestinian Authority that saves the occupier the burden of having to directly administer the territories. This leaves Israel free to cater to its insatiable security needs with draconic measures, such as limiting the Palestinians’ freedom of movement, erecting walls that separate communities, dotting roads with checkpoints where innocent people are manhandled, activating sophisticated intelligence mechanisms that control the lives of an ever growing number of suspects, conducting surprise searches of private houses in the middle of the night, and carrying out arbitrary administrative detentions. If this were not enough, vigilantes among the settlers, some known as “the Youth of the Hills,” constantly harass Palestinian communities, destroy orchard trees, and arbitrarily apply a “price tag” of punishments to innocent civilians for whatever terrorist attack might have been perpetrated by a Palestinian squad. Underlying this very serious problem of the unpardonable depravity of settlers’ extremism is the even more serious problem that has to do with the involvement of the entire Israeli body politic in maintaining and continuously expanding a regime of dominance in the territories. For too long, the peace process has served as a curtain behind which the policy of practical annexation has flourished.
DMH223344 ( talk) 00:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
According to this, the term 'historic Palestine' is partisan and violates WP:NPOV. This is apparently the case regardless of the contents of cited reliable sources. This seems like the kind of reasoning worth discussing. Is this kind of reasoning consistent with policy? It strikes me as so odd that I'm not sure it is even consistent with the Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct. Sean.hoyland ( talk) 15:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Correct typo in section Israeli-Palestinian Conflict#Economic disputes and boycotts. The first letter of a sentence was cut off.
Change:
"s a result, the PA's" -> "As a result, the PA's"
GrapesRock (
talk)
21:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Done -
Bastun
Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!
21:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@ DMH223344, @ האופה, I didn't understand the reasoning behind the reverts, could you explain it? Alaexis ¿question? 17:34, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
> From early on, the leadership of the Zionist movement had the idea of "transferring" (a euphemism for ethnic cleansing) the Arab Palestinian population...
The article on Ethnic Cleansing defines the term to include extreme methods such as murder, rape, and property destruction, as well as coercion and prevention of the victim group's return through deportation or population transfer.
The source cited indeed describes at length the idea of population transfer considered by the Zionist leadership, but there is no claim that they contemplated methods of systematic murder, rape, or property destruction.
Based on this, I recommend revising the sentence to eliminate the parenthetical reference to ethnic cleansing, as it implies actions (murder, rape, property destruction) that are not substantiated by the cited source. 77.125.167.35 ( talk) 04:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
DMH223344 ( talk) 16:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Probably the most appealing article in therecommendation of the Commission was that about the ‘forced transfer’of Arabs from the future Jewish state. To Ben-Gurion this was an‘unparalleled achievement’. It was ‘the best of all solutions’, according toBerl Katznelson. ‘A distant neighbour’, he said, ‘is better than a closeenemy.’ Transfer was such an ideal solution that ‘it must happen someday’, he concluded. A strategy of phases, admittedly always vague andanything but an articulate plan of action, could only prevail if a solutioncould be found to the demographic problem. ‘Transfer’ was the magicformula.The idea of transfer for the Arabs had a long pedigree in Zionistthought.
Thus the wishful and rather naive belief in Zionism’s early years that the Palestinians could be ‘spirited across the border’, in Herzl’s words, or that they would simply ‘fold their tents and slip away’, to use Zangwill’s formulation, soon gave way to more realistic assessments. Between 1937 and 1948 extensive secret discussions of transfer were held in the Zionist movement’s highest bodies, including the Zionist Agency Executive, the Twentieth Zionist Congress, the World Convention of Ihud Po‘alei Tzion (the top forum of the dominant Zionist world labour movement), and various official and semi-official transfer committees.
DMH223344 ( talk) 16:42, 6 July 2024 (UTC)After reviewing Zionism and its consequences, I examined the onset of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the 1917–47 period, and argued that because the Zionists wanted to ensure a large Jewish majority in the coming state of Israel, their leaders repeatedly discussed the means by which most of the Palestinians could be expelled or induced to flee; the euphemism they employed was “transfer.” The scholarship on “transfer”—especially by Israeli historians—leaves no doubt about its importance in the thinking of every major Zionist leader before and after the creation of Israel.
DMH223344 ( talk) 16:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)The concept of population transfer, as a facile solution to the twin problems of the Arab landless peasants and the creation of land reserves for Jewish settlement was for some time in the back of the minds of the 2ionist leadership. In fact, in private discussions with the British, the Zionist leadership put forward population transfer as a tentative suggestion but stopped short of formulating it into a proposal for action.
‘The idea of transfer had accompanied the Zionist movement from its very beginnings’, Tom Segev reports.DMH223344 ( talk) 16:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
“ | My feeling is that the transfer thinking and near-consensus that emerged in the 1930s and early 1940s was not tantamount to preplanning and did not issue in the production of a policy or master-plan of expulsion; the Yishuv and its military forces did not enter the 1948 War, which was initiated by the Arab side, with a policy or plan for expulsion. | ” |
“ | Yet the distance between being prepared to accept such an eventuality and the formal adoption of the transfer plan by the Zionist Organization was enormous. The traditional approach was that there was enough room in Palestine for many millions of Jews and one million Palestinian Arabs. | ” |
“ | In reality, the archives show that rather than seek the expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs, the Zionist leaders believed that there was sufficient room in Palestine for both peoples to live side by side in peace and equality, and that, far from despairing by the mid-1930s of mass Jewish immigration, they worried about the country’s short-term absorptive capacity should millions of Jews enter Palestine. | ” |
The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.. Alaexis ¿question? 07:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
This is what I'd like to propose, please see the reasoning below. Happy to discuss it, this is supposed to be the first iteration.
There seems to be a consensus that no policy or plan of action were formulated based on the idea of transfer.
"championed the Arab cause". [1] He apparently can't see the difference between A) a historian updating the understanding of history based on fresh information, and B) being some sort of propagandist just because the narrative that emerges isn't quite so amenable to a given ideology. It's hard to know what to make of that level of skew. Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
‘I support compulsory transfer. I don’t see in it anything immoral’
Berl Katznelson favored transfer as an integral part of an international agreement that would redraw borders between peoples and states in the postwar era. He emphasized that this would be a peaceful transfer of population based on a mutual agreement.So here we are talking about "peaceful" rather than compulsory transfer. But as Masalha shows Katznelson did not oppose compulsory transfer on moral grounds.
The traditional approach was that there was enough room in Palestine for many millions of Jews and one million Palestinian Arabs... This does not mean that transfer was not important.
It is possible to assume with a high degree of probability that if one of the Great Powers had volunteered to carry out a transfer of the Arabs of Palestine, very few of the Zionist leaders would have opposed such a move... The mainstream viewed it as a good thing that one could, if need be, do without.DMH223344 ( talk) 15:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
"Anita Shapira and Efraim Karsh argue that the traditional Zionist approach believed there was enough room in Palestine for both Jews and Palestinian Arabs, and that Zionist leaders saw room for peaceful coexistence and worried more about the country's absorptive capacity for Jewish immigrants rather than expelling Palestinians."does not at all describe the concept of transfer as unimportant (indeed the quote from Shapira you sourced would not support such a claim) so any argument about "now only viewpoint is present" simply does not apply. DMH223344 ( talk) 04:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
The transfer conception was based on what was assumed as positive experience in exchange of populations between Turkey and Greece in the aftermath of World War I.
@ Makeandtoss can you explain why you think the recent additions to the lead are too detailed? We have plenty of room in the lead, in comparison this lead is much shorter than for example the lead for Zionism. DMH223344 ( talk) 16:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Please note: a public call from the Israel subforum on Reddit to edit this article. starship .paint ( RUN) 13:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)