92. Zionism and colonialism

Sheldon Linden's rebuttal (March 5 [91]) of Mr. Abul Kheir's letter of February 24 [90], proves that he didn't understand the letter. If, as he said, "Israel was re-established as a haven and homeland for the Jewish people ... so that 'never again' would Jewish lives and culture be snuffed out," why then, instead of Argentina which, according to Herzl, "is one of the most fertile countries in the world, extends over a vast area, has a sparse population and a mild climate," atheist Zionists from Eastern Europe preferred to steal Palestine and cleanse it of its inhabitants to form a "Jewish state"? The reason is that Argentina will not arouse the interest of any Jew "practicing and non-practicing" alike. That is why Herzl had to go with Palestine in order "to form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism." Judaism was reduced to no more than a tool in the hands of Zionists to help them implement their plan.

In a penetrating essay, Israel a Colonial-Settler State? which should be read in its entirety, the French Jewish philosopher, Maxime Rodinson, demonstrated that Zionism is a form of Western colonialism and the Arab opposition to it is in fact an opposition to alien colonizers. His conclusion was that, "The settling of a new population of European origin in a Palestine inhabited by Arabs was the product of a European ideological movement ... It achieved its ultimate goal-----domination of the territory settled by the immigrants-----thanks to a British political act, the Balfour Declaration, which was given the force of international law by the victory of the allies over the Ottoman Empire ... thanks also to the protection provided by the British mandate ... and finally, thanks to a war directed first against a Great Britain become reticent, and then against the Palestinian Arabs supported by their fellow Arabs."

No one could have said it any better.

March 25, 1993

For a reply see [93]