Just some additional thoughts to my earlier post on Antisemitism:
There is a core to the Middle-East conflict which has roots reaching back deep in time. One of them is the belief of many Jews that Israel is their god-given homeland. Since at least the turn of the first millennium, Jews (esp from Europe) emigrated in countless waves to an area that included today’s Israel - to settle in what was already settled: by Arabs. That in turn (understandably) led to conflicts, often of a violent nature. Large waves of emigration began some 900 years later, in the 1880s, swelling the Jewish population to more than 1/2 million by the end of WWII. During that time Arabs of course fought back but Jews also strengthened their claims to the land they occupied.

While it is of course understandable that Jews fled from persecution in their former, especially European homelands, many of them went to what became Palestine - based on their belief that this was their true home. And they took possession of land through many means (see for example the map above, showing the reduction of Arab Palestine territory from 1946 to 200), causing hatred amongst those who originally lived on that land. The biggest coup certainly was the declaration of independence and the proclamation of the State of Israel in 1947/1948, which went hand in hand with large scale ethnic cleansing (driving Palestinians of their land), and which was the final chapter of the terror campaign by Irgun.
Irgun, also called Etzel (see emblem on the left) was a clandestine militant Zionist group that operated in Palestine from 1931 to 1948. Its members fought the British under the leadership of Menachem Begin (who later became prime minister of Israel); their activities included attacks on prominent symbols of the British administration, including the British military, police, and civil headquarters at the King David Hotel on July 22, 1946. Irgun was described as “terrorist” in a 1948 letter to the editor of the New York Times signed by Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, Sidney Hook and several other prominent Jews condemning a visit to the United States by Menachem Begin in 1948 after he had become leader of the new Herut party.
The King David Hotel bombing shows the hypocrisy of Israel’s condemnation of bomb attacks on its own citizens. Bombs were used regularly by Irgun to achieve its goal of establishing a Jewish state in Palestine. This attack happened on July 22, 1946. Members of the Irgun, dressed as Arabs (!), set off a bomb in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which had been the base for the British Secretariat, the military command and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Division (police). Ninety-one people were killed, most of them staff of the secretariat and the hotel: 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 other. Around 45 people were injured. The attack was initially ordered by Menachem Begin.

Menachem Begin and King David Hotel after the bombing
Conclusion: Despite large scale expulsions by the Romans in 132CE, and the former Jewish kingdom having been ruled for further hundreds of years by the Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, Jews never gave up their belief that, what later became Palestine, is their god-given land. And they didn’t go about their business in gentle, inclusive ways - to the contrary. Arab resistance was always seen as unjustified (probably because, in Jewish eyes, they had no right to live on the land given to the Jews by their god). There is a line of blood and oppression going through Jewish Middle-Eastern existence, stretching back from at least 2000 years: from constant violent clashes with the Arab populations of Palestine to the King David Hotel bombing to the massacres by Israel’s army under Ariel Sharon in the 1982 Lebanon war to cluster bombs in the 2006 Lebanon war to Israel’s atomic arsenal. Strong-arm tactics, irrational rage and violent aggression seem to be part of Jewish self-understanding, at least in that region. Yet through powerful spin as well as intimate connections to Western powers (and probably the language of money) consecutive Israeli governments and pre-1948 Jewish organisations seem to have been able to successfully divert attention away from that history of aggression, focusing it instead on Palestinian Arabs. And I am not
just talking about war and physical terror. There are also the land grabs, starting with the first immigrations and then stretching to the occupation of Arab land in the 1967 war and its integration into the State of Israel (including the expansion of Jewish settlements against UN resolutions) to today’s illegal acquisition of Arab land for the purpose of building a wall to separate Israel from Palestinian territory. In short: Palestinians and their ancestors have been subjected to a long history of dispossession, injustice, violence and misguided religious beliefs (including that of self-righteousness and religious superiority).
The complexities arising from a conflict that is thousands of years old do not allow for easy solutions. Nevertheless: small steps might contribute to the disentanglement of violence, counter-violence, ancient hardened attitudes and beliefs, fears, self-serving interests, etc. One such small step could come from considering to learn from countries like New Zealand, Canada or Australia. These nations too were created by the illegal annexation of land occupied by its original inhabitants. But like it is the Israel and Palestine today, I would not argue that these nations should be disbanded and the land be
given back to the indigenous people - from the perspectives of everyone living there, including the descendants of the original conquest victims, this would be totally infeasible. What has happened though in those countries is that current and/or recent governments as well as organisation like churches have formally apologised to its indigenous people, signed peace treaties or otherwise acknowledged the wrongdoings of their forbearers. As a small step, could similar attitudes and actions, initiated by those Jewish people who are highly critical of Israel’s behaviour towards Palestinians, contribute significantly towards lasting peace? Could it add a highly symbolic value to the fight for social justice, plus could it give more credibility to the support given by more liberal Jews concerned about Palestinian suffering?
If that would be the case, pre-conditions though need to be fulfilled for acknowledging and apologising for the past. One certainly is a rejection of the idea that Jews have a god-given right to occupy the so-called holy land. It was that idea that has driven the many migration waves I mentioned briefly, it is still driving Israel’s current expansion policies and it is a very important justification for why Israel as a state exists. Other arguments also need to be critically reflected, e.g. does the suffering of Jews, especially under the Nazi terror regime, justify the expropriation of other people’s land? In my experience, there is a deep resistance in Jews right across the political spectrum to confront the issues that lead to the establishment of the State of Israel; statements by well-meaning people and activists like Starhawk seem to prove my point. “I was raised as an American Jew in the postwar period, when Israel was our great dream realized, our one compensation for the horrors of the Holocaust†does not at all reflect any self-critical introspection.