Was the Zionist claim to Palestine a valid one? Part 2

In the same way, the Balfour Declaration appeared in the events line and it actually became the juridical basis of the Zionist claim to Palestine. Issued on November 2, 1917, it took the form of a letter from Arthur James Balfour, the British foreign secretary to Lord Rothschild, an important British Zionist leader. The declaration stated:

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country". [1]

The reason why I quoted the whole content of the declaration isn’t only to emphasize its vagueness but also to point out the negation of any political rights for the inhabitants of the land, fact which is in total contradiction with the demographic of human realities in Palestine. It is once again a proof that the existence of the natives on the land was common knowledge for all the sides involved, but it was left aside.

In other words, the whole declaration was made by a European power, an outsider, about a non-European territory which was actually the object of another promise made by the same power. Above all, the declaration had not only negated any political rights to the natives, but it had also disregarded completely the opinions of the native majority, whether they were Arabs, Jews or other[2]. It is even more unjust the fact that they were like pawns on a global chessboard, even though the game was being played in their backyard.

Till now, I’ve discussed how Palestine wasn’t even an aim from the start and how it became an aim in time although it was already a home for other people. Further on, I would dare to say that even the Balfour Declaration wasn’t a valid juridical base as its object was already an object in another agreement. In this case, from the juridical point of view, both agreements would have been proven invalid. The McMahon-Hussein of October 1915 came after a long correspondence in between the two sides which showed not exactly honest interests, especially in the European side. 

---

[1] Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A history with documents (Boston, New York: Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2010), 96-97.

[2] Edward W. Said, The Question of Palestine (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980), 16.