57 pages • 1 hour read
Rashid KhalidiA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
In this chapter, Khalidi focuses on the period between 1917 and 1939. He argues that the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine, and the British leaders’ bias in favor of Zionist settlers represent the first declaration of war on Palestinians.
Khalidi begins by describing the first decade of the 20th century in Palestine. He notes that, “socially, Palestine was still heavily rural with a predominantly patriarchal, hierarchical nature, as it largely remained until 1948” (18). While a small group of elite families controlled Palestinian society, changes were occurring. There was greater access to education, more mobility within and outside Palestine, and a burgeoning press which led to greater availability of printed materials (books, newspapers, and periodicals). These changes created opportunities for the indigenous population. With the weakening of the Ottoman empire, the indigenous population started to shift their identity from family, religious affiliation, and city origin to a collective identity.
Major battles took place in Palestine during World War I (1914-1918). The British and Allied Forces captured much of the territory. During the war, British statesman Arthur James Balfour (who was secretary of state for foreign affairs at the time) publicly pledged to create “a national home for Jewish people” in Palestine (24). His single-sentence statement became known as the Balfour Declaration. Palestinians remained unaware of this declaration until after the war. The declaration did not acknowledge the Arab majority (94% of the total population) living in Palestine. In fact, the words “Arab” and “Palestinian” are missing from the declaration. Instead, this group is referred to as the “existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” (24). The declaration also did not promise the Palestinian people national or political rights.
After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the war, the League of Nations, the first worldwide intergovernmental organization, adopted the Mandate for Palestine in 1922. This was supposed to help former Ottoman empire territories eventually gain independence. In contrast to other territories in the Middle East, international leaders did not apply this mandate to Palestinians. Instead, the Mandate for Palestine only extended the rights to create a national home to Jewish people. This mandate allowed for British administration of Palestine and other nearby Middle Eastern territories. The terms of this mandate also included the Balfour Declaration. With this mandate, the British encouraged European Jewish immigration to Palestine. The British helped to set up and support a Zionist governing body in Palestine, and it gave the newly formed Jewish government international diplomatic status, enabling the Zionist settlers to represent their interests before the League of Nations. The Jewish population in the territory increased from nine to over 25% of the total population between 1922 and 1935. The rise of Hitler in Germany spurred Jewish immigration to Palestine.
During this period, Khalidi notes that Palestinians faced two collective traumas. The disappearance of Ottoman rule represents the first. The Ottoman Empire controlled the territory encompassing Palestine for 400 years. British rule represents the second. Not only were Palestinians now under alien rule, but the British also promised their homeland “to others [European Jewish people] as a ‘national home’” (28). Khalidi notes that “Palestinians now saw themselves inexorably turning into strangers in their own land” (41). These traumas helped spur the emergence of a Palestinian national identity. Palestinians organized politically against British rule and its support for Zionist aspirations. The British brutally suppressed Palestinian opposition.
At the same time, Palestinian leadership could not develop a framework for their national movement. Khalidi attributes this failure to infighting among Palestinian leadership. Some Palestinian leaders wanted an independent nation-state, whereas others wanted to become part of another Arab country such as Jordan. The British exploited this infighting, weakening the Palestinian’s ability to combat the Zionist movement.
Using excerpts from his uncle Dr. Husayn’s memoir, Khalidi shows how his uncle “believed that the primary problem faced by the Palestinians during the Mandate was the British” (49). Dr. Husayn also recognized how effective Zionist lobbying was by this time. While several official British commissions tried to raise more awareness around a Palestinian nation-state, they were immediately countered by Zionist lobbying in London.
Fury broke out in the Arab world over British treatment of the Palestinians. To try and improve their standing with Arab countries (which they viewed as imperative for their imperial strategic interests), the British tried to curtail their support for the Zionist movement right before the start of World War II through the 1939 White Paper. A change in British government and World War II resulted in no changes to the situation in Palestine.
One of Khalidi’s goals is to show episodes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from a different perspective than prevailing views. He does this by busting several myths. First, Khalidi dismantles the notion that Muslims and Jewish people have always been at odds in Palestine. At the start of the 20th century, Jewish people lived alongside the indigenous Muslim-majority in relative peace. Second, outside observers claimed that Palestine was stagnant or even in decline before World War I. Khalidi shows through Ottoman, Palestinian, Western, and Israeli sources that Palestine was modernizing. Finally, Khalidi busts the idea that Palestinian identity is a recent phenomenon. The collective trauma faced by the indigenous people of Palestine between World War I and World War II led to the emergence of Palestinian national identity. Pro-Zionists used these three false narratives to try and make the Palestinians invisible. By doing so, they could more easily make claims to the land. Khalidi’s perspective aims to convey that Palestinians also have a deep connection to their homeland. By beginning his book with myth busting, he positions himself in opposition to dominant histories.
Khalidi introduces The Role of Outside Players in a Conflict’s Trajectory as another key theme. Khalidi focuses on two aspects of this theme: superpowers and international organizations. He first turns to Great Britain which was a superpower at this time. Khalidi strongly believes that the Balfour Declaration kicked off the century-long war on the Palestinian people. The declaration pledged Britain’s support for the Zionist movement. He also focuses on Article 22 of the League of Nations. This account of the support of superpowers and international organizations juxtaposes with his first-person discussions of his family members and other individuals, positioning them as smaller pawns in a larger political game.
One such family member is his uncle, Dr. Husayn Fakhri al-Khalidi. Khalidi humanizes this period of Palestinian history by describing the experiences of his uncle. Moving from descriptions of his great-great-great uncle to descriptions of his uncle, Khalidi gives his narrative a sense of temporal scale—this scale is already announced by the “hundred years” in the text’s title. His accounts between the Introduction and Chapter 1 have skipped multiple generations of his family, and the problems that he describes have only developed and not been solved. This temporal framing helps to convey how many people the conflict has affected in a more subjective and emotive way than dates or statistics alone.
Khalidi also explores the role of Palestinian leadership in perpetuating the conflict. His reoccurring criticism of Palestinian leadership reinforces his aim for a sober and balanced historical approach to his topic. He does not vilify or sanctify Palestinians but partakes in criticism from several different aspects. This is a vital part of his thematic exploration of The Role of Outside Players in a Conflict’s Trajectory, since his portrayal of multiple groups destabilizes the notion of two equal sides opposing one another.