Revisiting the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement.

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,344
I thought it might be interesting to revisit this agreement (never implemented), because Mudar Zahran, current leader of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition was referencing it last month, the 17th November, at this conference held in Jerusalem:

Conference on “The Jordan Option”, Tuesday, 17th November, at Jerusalem’s Begin Center

It would seem that if Mudar Zahran managed to come to power in Jordan that he would look to something like this agreement as a template for the Arabs coming to agreement with the Israelis.

Now, the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement was never implemented. - It was signed not long before the Mufti of Jerusalem began organising riots under Islamic pretexts and stoking up Islamic radicalism and of course we know that in 1922 he restored Al Aqsa and made it a prominent site for Islam (and today's Jihad against the Jews all took off from there, basically, imho).

The agreement was signed between Fayṣal al-Awwal ibn al-Ḥusayn ibn, who was King of Greater Syria in 1920, and was King of Iraq from 1921 to 1933, and Chaim Azriel Weizmann who was President of the Zionist Organization and later became the first President of Israel.

The main points of the agreement were as follows:

1. The agreement committed both parties to conducting all relations between the groups by the most cordial goodwill and understanding, to work together to encourage immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale while protecting the rights of the Arab peasants and tenant farmers, and to safeguard the free practice of religious observances. The Muslim Holy Places were to be under Muslim control.

2. The Zionist movement undertook to assist the Arab residents of Palestine and the future Arab state to develop their natural resources and establish a growing economy.

3. The boundaries between an Arab State and Palestine should be determined by a Commission after the Paris Peace Conference.

4. The parties committed to carrying into effect the Balfour Declaration of 1917, calling for a Jewish national home in Palestine.

5. Disputes were to be submitted to the British Government for arbitration.


(from wiki)

Anyway, I'll throw it open to the floor. What do people on here think of that agreement as a template for working towards agreement between the Jews and the Arab-Muslim world, as a template towards having the Palestinians' rightful claims to be addressed? And what is the likelihood of the key Arab Muslim states coming back around to that type of thinking, and burying all the abominable radicalism that came after 1919-1922?

More information here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal–Weizmann_Agreement
 


Old Mr Grouser

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
6,341
I thought it might be interesting to revisit this agreement (never implemented), because Mudar Zahran, current leader of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition was referencing it last month, the 17th November, at this conference held in Jerusalem:

Conference on “The Jordan Option”, Tuesday, 17th November, at Jerusalem’s Begin Center

It would seem that if Mudar Zahran managed to come to power in Jordan that he would look to something like this agreement as a template for the Arabs coming to agreement with the Israelis. ...
The agreement was signed between Fayṣal al-Awwal ibn al-Ḥusayn ibn, who was King of Greater Syria in 1920, and was King of Iraq from 1921 to 1933, and Chaim Azriel Weizmann who was President of the Zionist Organization and later became the first President of Israel ...
There's been a lot of media attention recently to the Centenary of the Balfour Declaration, but it's not been set in its proper context.

It was only one part of a far bigger plan for the continuing Europeanisation of the Mediterranean.

There was the 1915 Constantinople Agreement, the Sykes-Picot Agreement, and the Treaty of Sevres (which resulted in the Turkish War of Independence).

In particular the Treaty of Sevres and the Turkish struggle against it triggered Muslim protests worldwide.

That's when Arabs stopped selling land to the Jewish settlers; they saw Palestine becoming another 'white settler colony'.
 
Last edited:

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,606
The immigration of the Jews on a "large scale" has already happened, and encouraging it to happen again would only result in making millions of Palestinians homeless as their land is seized for Israeli settlements. Its very much like what Cromwell did in Ireland with the Cromwellian settlement, where Catholics were turfed off their land to make way for British Protestants.
 

Old Mr Grouser

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
6,341
The immigration of the Jews on a "large scale" has already happened, and encouraging it to happen again would only result in making millions of Palestinians homeless as their land is seized for Israeli settlements.

Its very much like what Cromwell did in Ireland with the Cromwellian settlement, where Catholics were turfed off their land to make way for British Protestants.
But at the time of the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement no land had been seized in Palestine. It had all been bought from willing sellers.

However land was being seized for European settlers in Algeria; and during the Great War and at the start of the 1920s Muslims had been turned off their land in large numbers, and with terrible atrocities, in Turkey. That's what made the Palestinians worry.

And then in the 1930's Mussolini was turning people off their land so that Italians could farm it.

You can't look at the Arab-Israeli dispute in isolation.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,606
But at the time of the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement no land had been seized in Palestine. It had all been bought from willing sellers.

However land was being seized for European settlers in Algeria; and during the Great War and at the start of the 1920s Muslims had been turned off their land in large numbers, and with terrible atrocities, in Turkey. That's what made the Palestinians worry.

And then in the 1930's Mussolini was turning people off their land so that Italians could farm it.

You can't look at the Arab-Israeli dispute in isolation.
But we now know from leaked Israeli government documents that the vast majority of the settlements are built on Palestinian owned land. In particular the settlement of Ofra was build on land obtained by forged documents.
 

Old Mr Grouser

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
6,341
But we now know from leaked Israeli government documents that the vast majority of the settlements are built on Palestinian owned land. In particular the settlement of Ofra was build on land obtained by forged documents.
That's in the present day, not back then.

Unfortunately Israel seems to have painted itself into a corner.

In 1948 and for a long time afterwards it was independent in all respects

But in recent times it's become an unofficial American colony, a white settler regime substantially dependent on the USA and heavily involved in US politics.
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,344
But we now know from leaked Israeli government documents that the vast majority of the settlements are built on Palestinian owned land. In particular the settlement of Ofra was build on land obtained by forged documents.
You're already back to the usual libels against Israel, diverting from the point of the thread - which is an essential recognition of Jewish rights, and a willingness to move forward positively, working together, as good neighbours, Jews and Arabs, which was what the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement was essentially about.

(Notwithstanding that your accusation is highly dishonest. The vast majority of settlements are not built on Palestinian land. Many of them are in areas like Gush Etzion and Hebron, which had Jewish communities that had existed sometimes for thousands of years before they were depopulated in Arab riots in 1948. Neither have the Palestinians ever held sovereignty over the West Bank. And btw the new settlement announced earlier this year was the first new settlement since the early 1990's.

Ofra that you mention was an anomaly - the government admitted to the Israeli High Court that a large portion was built on land privately owned by Palestinians, and they subsequently took steps to restitute the land back to its original Palestinian owners. - https://www.timesofisrael.com/ofra-settlement-homes-bulldozed-after-final-protesters-evacuated/)


Anyway, it always descends to this, to attacks on Israel. It was like when Trump first announced his formal recognition of Jerusalem, it wasn't until it became evident that the world would side against them, and the mob all reassured each other with their usual slogans, that the thread I started filled up with the usual expressions of contempt of the Jews, and support for Hamas' reaction and the reactions of their other enemies etc.

I suppose anything not in the vein of show them uppity, scheming, dirty Jews in Israel a thing or two, is doomed to flounder on this forum.
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
24,514
But we now know from leaked Israeli government documents that the vast majority of the settlements are built on Palestinian owned land. In particular the settlement of Ofra was build on land obtained by forged documents.
Exactly, what did the Palestinians ever do to the Jews anyway, it was hitler that killed 20 million of them, why not give them Bavaria?



Apart from one or two castles no one lives there and the Germans don't seem to want it.

(They're not bavarians btw, they're just Germans.)
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
24,514
I suppose anything not in the vein of show them uppity, scheming, dirty Jews in Israel a thing or two, is doomed to flounder on this forum.
That's anti-semitic.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,619
Exactly, what did the Palestinians ever do to the Jews anyway, it was hitler that killed 20 million of them, why not give them Bavaria?
I seem to recall you were once adamant that less than three thousand Jews were killed by the Nazis, and none of them deliberately.

You need to keep track of yourself my little anti Semite.
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,344
I thought it might be interesting to revisit this agreement (never implemented), because Mudar Zahran, current leader of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition was referencing it last month, the 17th November, at this conference held in Jerusalem:

Conference on “The Jordan Option”, Tuesday, 17th November, at Jerusalem’s Begin Center

It would seem that if Mudar Zahran managed to come to power in Jordan that he would look to something like this agreement as a template for the Arabs coming to agreement with the Israelis.
Just bumping this thread following yesterday's big anti-government protests in Jordan.

Washinton Post | Jordan’s king appoints new prime minister as protests resume

So will this appointment, or appeasement succeed in quelling the anti-government protests?

Or will King Abdullah II be forced to give up his throne and return to Saudi Arabia from where he came and hand over the reins to the leader of the opposition, Mudar Zahran?

The Korean conflict, the Castro regime, next the pan Arab-Israeli conflict all peacefully resolved?
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
roc_ I think this might interest you, it is about a Settler Rabbi who had a change of heart about Zionist cruelty towards the indigenous Palestinians and went on to become actual friends with Palestinians including leading members of Hamas and other actually Islamist hardline groups.

[video=youtube;o9RQG35bgbk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9RQG35bgbk[/video]
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top