The UN vote to approve the partition plan because they thought it was fair. They approved the partition plan because:
They felt guilty about the Holocaust;
They were bowing to political pressure from the Zionist Lobby;
Alleged bribes and threats made to political leaders; and
Threats of cuts to foreign aid and other forms of pressure from the USA;
So no, it wasn’t because they thought it was fair. It was because they were pressured by Zionists and the largest most powerful and wealthiest country in the world.
Israel didn’t have anything close to a state any more than the Mormons have something close to a “state” in Utah. They had a large concentration of Jews in parts of Palestine but Jews were still outnumbered 2 to 1 in 1947 by non-Jews in the area. The vast majority of Jews in Israel didn’t arrive until the rise of Naziism and the aftermath of WWII and then the aftermath of the war that created the state of Israel.
We are where we are and we can’t turn back the clock but the State of Israel is a bad actor and maybe they will get away with it or maybe the Palestinians will get nukes. Isn’t it better to be fair now rather than negotiate later with Palestinians with a nuke and nothing to lose?
We’re certainly not going to negotiate from the starting position that we’re a bad actor. We’ll negotiate, in good faith, with a partner willing to live alongside us in peace.
Do you really think the state of Israel would have any international recognition at all if the Brits handed mandatory Palestine over to the Arabs and the Zionists managed to carve for themselves a defensible state by force of arms? Do you think a Zionist state so founded could have achieved an independent economy under those circumstances?
Damuri Ajashi:
That’s not true at all. The USA agreeing to the partition plan was an open question until the last minute. While Harry Truman (obviously) agreed to it in the end, the State Department was heavily against it. And the idea that the USSR (who held veto power in the UN and could have prevented the partition plan) felt any pressure from the USA is absurd.
(That said, Stalin didn’t agree to it for the sake of “fairness”, he did so because he thought it would get the Jews out of his country.)
At some point prior to 1960 or so, Britain would have left the Mandate, just like it left all its colonial possessions.
As soon as it left, a civil war would have broken out, just like the one that stared in 1947.
The world would eventually have recognized whichever side won.
As to whether the Jews would have won this hypothetical 1950s war… let’s just say that 6 million extra potential immigrants would have helped a lot. The Holocaust hurt Israel a lot more than it helped it.
IMHO, people generally greatly overstate the importance of the Holocaust in the founding narrative of Israel; Israelis are guilty of this more than anyone. Herzl founded this country, not Hitler.
They wouldn’t have walked away leaving no one in charge. If they didn’t give some or all of it to the Zionists (as in fact they did in 1947 with UN approval), they would have handed it over to one of Lawrence’s Arabian friends, as they did with the other Middle East parcels of land they had mandatory power over.
The world hasn’t recognized Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem and the Golan Heights despite the fact that Israel was clearly the winner in the Six-Day War, and that’s WITH an overall recognition of the State of Israel. I can’t imagine it would have worked out better for a Zionist insurgent army/civil war faction in a Palestine that was hypothetically never created with UN approval as a Jewish/Zionist state.
That’s if the Arabs that would have been hypothetically handed the reins of power wouldn’t have blockaded or sunk incoming ships full of Jewish potential immigrants.
Let’s face it…the scenarios you outline are not impossible, but the road to recognition as a legitimate nation is a hell of a lot more uphill without the 1947 UN-approved partition plan than with it. That it happened at that perfect storm of a moment was practically a miracle as it was.
But they DID walk away leaving no-one in charge! What, did you actually think that the Brits “gave” anything to the Zionists or to the Palestinians? They just… left, handing over the keys to whatever faction happened to be holding the area in question at the moment. The British didn’t lift a finger to help the Jews control “their” part of the country. All they did was take the credit, hold a parade, and run with their tails between their legs.
We weren’t given a country, we were abandoned to our fate.
The reason the global community has problems recognizing places like Jerusalem is that the UN declared two states, Jewish and Arab. So long as the two-state concept exists, it’s impossible to give up. If the British had just declared a single country and left, the world would have recognized whatever ethnic group that seized control as the legitimate ruler, just as it has always done elsewhere in the Middle East and in Africa. Did anyone ever have a problem that a Sunni minority used to rule a Shiite majority in Iraq? Or vice versa in Syria? As far as the world is concerned, those are both legitimate, indivisible countries. And don’t get me started on Africa.
I mean, a big problem was that Birobidzhan wasn’t an independent country or even a SSR which “technically” had the right to secede. It was an ASSR (I think) and those were ‘autonomous’ at best: their entire existence depended on the whim of the central government and it could have been abolished any time the government wanted, just like the ASSR for the Germans was.
The Soviets apparently toyed with the equivalent of a Roma homeland too, but that never took off even to the extent Birobidzhan did.
I mean, there are places which were mostly empty of people in 1945. (Kaliningrad had just been emptied of Germans, presumably the Russians hadn’t moved in yet). There were other places like parts of the western US that didn’t have many people to start with, and then there are other places that had people but didn’t have the same kind of religious and national significance that Jerusalem had for muslims. the Mandate of Palestine was kind of an unusually bad place to locate a Jewish State (and I say that as someone who thinks a Jewish State should certainly have been formed somewhere).
I think it’s pretty clear that locating the Jewish State in a part of the world that lots of people care about intensely- whatever the other costs and benefits- made future conflictual relationships much more likely than locating it in Idaho, the borderlands of the Russian Far East, or the former East Prussia.