negolien wrote:
“The United Nations unjustly partitioned Palestine.”
This is opinion, and therefore cannot be myth.
negolien wrote:
The British tried to work out an agreement acceptable to both Arabs and Jews, but their insistence on the former's approval guaranteed failure because the Arabs would not make any concessions. They subsequently turned the issue over to the UN in February 1947.
You say that like the Jews would. There's a great quote towards the start of the latest time (don't have it with me ATM, can get exact quote later, if you want) saying that Jews and Arabs are bound to fight because neither will accept anything less than exactly what they want. It's by a Jew, in the 1920s.
negolien wrote:
The contrasting attitudes of the two groups "could not fail to give the impression that the Jews were imbued with the sense of right and were prepared to plead their case before any unbiased tribunal, while the Arabs felt unsure of the justice of their cause, or were afraid to bow to the judgment of the nations."1
And you don't think they were in the middle of Holocaust guilt at the time?
negolien wrote:
When they returned, the delegates of seven nations — Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, The Netherlands, Peru, Sweden and Uruguay — recommended the establishment of two separate states, Jewish and Arab, to be joined by economic union, with Jerusalem an internationalized enclave. Three nations — India, Iran and Yugoslavia — recommended a unitary state with Arab and Jewish provinces. Australia abstained.
All of those nations were from outside of the Middle East. Doesn't this remind you of Western Europe's attempts to reshape Easteern Europe at the end of WWI?
negolien wrote:
The Jews of Palestine were not satisfied with the small territory allotted to them by the Commission, nor were they happy that Jerusalem was severed from the Jewish State; nevertheless, they welcomed the compromise. The Arabs rejected the UNSCOP's recommendations.
Of course they would, the Jews gained land, the Arabs lost land.
negolien wrote:
The ad hoc committee of the UN General Assembly rejected the Arab demand for a unitary Arab state. The majority recommendation for partition was subsequently adopted 33-13 with 10 abstentions on November 29, 1947.3
Most of whom were Western Nations.
None of this proves the division was just, only that it was in accordance with UN procedures.
negolien wrote:
“The majority of the population in Palestine was Arab; therefore, a unitary Arab state should have been created.”
This is half opinion, therefore not myth.
negolien wrote:
At the time of the 1947 partition resolution, the Arabs did have a majority in western Palestine as a whole — 1.2 million Arabs versus 600,000 Jews.7 But the Jews were a majority in the area allotted to them by the resolution and in Jerusalem.
So you're telling me that the Palestinians in refugee camps just magically appeared?
negolien wrote:
The decision to partition Palestine was not determined solely by demographics; it was based on the conclusion that the territorial claims of Jews and Arabs were irreconcilable, and that the most logical compromise was the creation of two states. Ironically, that same year, 1947, the Arab members of the United Nations supported the partition of the Indian sub-continent and the creation of the new, predominantly Muslim state of Pakistan.
Which is irrelevant to the original statement. Besides which, Pakistan was smaller than India, and inherited the smaller population, IIRC.
negolien wrote:
“The Arabs were prepared to compromise to avoid bloodshed.”
Yes, that's incorrect, but were the Jews any better?