Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Jewish sovereignty or territorial division?[edit]

Source added says "The Arabs refused to accept the establishment of a Jewish state in any part of Palestine." They refused the establishment of a Jewish state not of a Jewish presence. For example, in "What Price Israel?" Alfred Lilienthal says that the Arabs did not oppose a unified state built on cantons. Makeandtoss (talk) 00:39, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Which source are you talking about? The source in the article is 1948 by Benny Morris, page 66. It says The league demanded independence for Palestine as a "unitary" state with an Arab majority and minority rights for Jews. The AHC went one better and insisted that the proportion of Jews to Arabs in the unitary state should stand at one to six, meaning that only Jews who lived in Palestine before the British Mandate be eligible for citizenship. There are plenty of other sources that say they rejected any kind of partition or "territorial division" as the article said before you changed it, including apparently, the source you mention. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
I am talking about the quote in the source used to support the claim in the article... They refused any territorial division that gives Jewish sovereignty. I hope page 66 doesn't talk about Arab demands during a meeting/response to a plan, rather than their overall/final stance. Makeandtoss (talk) 01:01, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
When you said "per source" in your edit summary, which source were you talking about? I was looking at page 66 in Morris, which is apparently the previous ref but still relevant. Page 73 says All paid lip service to Arab unity and the Palestine Arab cause, and all opposed partition. So it also supports the statement they refused any kind of division. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 01:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
I was referring to the source used in the article supporting the claim which is Morris page 73 where you started quoting "lip service", continue reading to see "The Arabs refused to accept the establishment of a Jewish state in any part of Palestine." which was what I was referring to. Makeandtoss (talk) 01:13, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
So you're cherry picking one sentence from a source I have a feeling you haven't actually read a complete page of? Nice. I think we actually had this discussion in the past, but let's wait for a couple more opinions. Meanwhile, per BRD, please leave the longstanding version in place. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 01:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
That depends on how we define division/partition, as separate sovereignties or separate areas. But its tricky since it might be considered OR, so the long standing version "territorial division" is sort of vague and needs elaborating as its slightly misleading. Makeandtoss (talk) 01:28, 4 February 2016 (UTC)


There should be mention of the controversy surrounding the passing of the partition plan in the lead, aka, the United States exploit of power and resources to rally votes for the plan. "What Price Israel?" gives a detailed look into this aspect. From content in Reports of pressure for and against the Plan sub section. Arab efforts too ofcourse. But can someone please look at that Arab section? Its a bribery attempt and a bunch of quotes lacking commentary .Makeandtoss (talk) 01:55, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

By what criteria do you think What Price Israel is RS per Wikipedia policy? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 02:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Who said I did? I have read this book, its not quite neutral. However, it has some exclusive insight; interviews with the delegations involved in the voting of the plan. If I search, I am sure I will find RS sources that discuss this. As for now, I am only pointing out that they exist. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Reactions to the vote[edit]

In the section for reactions of "Arabs in Palestine", there is a stand-alone sentence citing Tom Segev:

The Arabs promised to respect the rights of the Jewish minority.[132]

The citation is correctly attributed, though Segev made this statement only incidentally while discussing reaction to the partition plan and the desire for Arab independence in all of Palestine.

Yet above, in the section "Reports of pressure against the plan", several Arab leaders are quoted as threatening or promising violence against Jews:

  • Jamal Husseini - "blood will flow" (could be ambiguous, but it's likely he meant Jewish blood)
  • Nuri al-Said
  • Muhammad Hussein Heykal Pasha
  • Mahmoud Bey Fawzi - "bloodshed in Palestine" (again, could be ambiguous, but likely Jewish)
  • Fadel Jamall

And in the "Reactions" section, under "Arab States", the following Arab leaders spoke of violence against Jews:

  • Azzam Pasha
  • Shukri al-Quwatli
  • King Farouk

And in the section where the Segev citation itself occurs, "Arabs in Palestine", Haj Amin al-Husseini threatens violence, and there are reports of actual violence occurring, on 2 December (1948) to "Jewish passersby", and on 4 December in an attack on kibbutz Efal.

I think that the sentence/paragraph quoted stands in disagreement, or certainly out of context, with the rest of this article and should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:22, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Both sides expected war. Both sides knew that war means 'blood will flow'.Nishidani (talk) 21:00, 31 December 2016 (UTC) -- Occasionally when speaking to an international audience (i.e. non-Arabs), some Arab spokesmen made high-minded declarations about how Jewish rights would be respected as a minority within a future Arab-governed state of Palestine, but such spokesmen generally didn't bother to explain that such protections would likely have applied only to "pre-Zionist" Jews, while most later-arrived Jews would likely have been expelled (an equivocation or deception of propaganda that often continued to be practiced right into the 1980s). Very few Jews set much faith in such protections, not only because of historical precedent (Iraq celebrating its independence with the Assyrian massacre etc.), but also because of the radically divergent bloodthirsty rhetoric which the Arabs commonly used when talking among themselves...
Nishidani -- are you trying to create an excuse for wannabe-genocidal "throw the Jews into the sea" type rhetoric? Jingoistic rhetoric is common in wars, but promises to completely and utterly destroy the enemy's existence as any kind of settled community are not too common in modern warfare (as opposed to medieval Mongol invasions and Nazi expansionism)... AnonMoos (talk) 08:38, 1 January 2017 (UTC)