The Arab nationalist challenge to the Israeli Communist Party (1970–1985) (original) (raw)

Origin of Secular Nationalist Ideology in Palestine and Influence of the Soviet Union’s Communism

After the Russian revolution in 1917, one major earthquake came in world politics that the Bolshevik party destroyed the Tsarist autocracy and established a communist government under the leadership of Vladimir Lenin. Consequently, Bolsheviks created the Soviet Union and tried to spread communist ideology through the world. After this political development, Lenin became more popular and rose as the hero of the Russian Revolution. He also influenced several regional leaders, who were fighting against colonial powers. Therefore, several leaders emerged in the regional politics and followed the Lenin’s path to liberate their country from the influence of colonial powers. In this context, Arab communist groups and parties began emerging throughout the West Asian region. Consequently, Palestinian secular nationalism rose under the leadership of Yasser Arafat and created a Fatah movement in 1959 and the PLO in 1964. Both the Palestinian organizations had only one agenda to liberate Palestine from Zionist occupation, which was supported by the United States of America (USA), Britain and France.

Arab Political Parties in the Occupied Lands of 1948

Addaiyan Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, 2022

The Arab-Israeli parties in the 1948 occupied lands play a prominent role in representing the Arab society, which falls under the Israeli occupation. Those parties have faced many attempts of suffocations, prosecutions and bans in light of the Israeli occupation's attempts to obliterate the Arab national identity of the occupied lands and deprive the Palestinian citizens from practicing their democratic rights to vote and be elected. This study addresses five main claims: 1) the Palestinian conditions in the 1948 occupied lands, 2) the efforts of the Palestinian political organization after Al-Nakba 1948, 3) the Palestinian political organization in the 1967 occupied lands, 4) the most prominent Arab parties in the occupied lands, and finally discuss the impact of the Arab parties on the pathway of the Israeli politics. The study follows the descriptive, historical approach and comes out with several results. Primarily, there are serious Palestinian efforts to obtain the right to establish political and organizational parties and bodies, and the Israeli occupation maintains the absence of the cultural and ideological resources in the 1948 occupied lands and feeds the national, ideological, and doctrinal differences. The study also recommends that there must be a unified political reference that gathers the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied lands and connects them with their Arab depth. In addition, there must be a political program to employ the Palestinians' efforts and energies in confronting the Israeli occupation and its racial politics, and the Arab party's work in the occupation's official institutes should be improved to be more effective, achieving the maximum benefit for the Palestinians.

Israel Affairs Israel's policy towards its Arab minority, 1947-1950

In the absence of preconceived strategies -despite several pre-state attempts to prepare blueprints for tackling the Arab problem -Israel's early Arab policy was shaped in a process of trial and error, fluctuating between ideological aspirations and good intentions (or wishful thinking) and the needs on the ground: the 1948 war and its consequences, the wide-open borders and regular infiltration, and the fear of a second comprehensive war with the Arab states.

The Arab Struggle against Partition: The International Arena of Summer 1947

, the Government of Britain announced its decision to refer the problem of Palestine to the UN. This announcement can be considered a crucial turning point in the policy of Britain towards Palestine and it brought forth a new situation: the question of Palestine ceased being a British-only issue, and became an international one. On 28 April 1947 a Special Session of the General Assembly gathered, the aim of which was to discuss Britain's request. It was decided during the session to set up a special inquiry committee that would look into the situation in Palestine. Recommendations concerning the political future of Palestine would then be submitted to the General Assembly that was due to meet in September. This inquiry committee was known as the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). The committee had 11 members and it was active from 26 May until 31 August. The main part of its inquiry was conducted in Palestine (between 15 and 20 July) and the part dealing with its conclusions took place in Geneva. The British, Zionists and Arabs had different attitudes and approaches to the committee and its inquiry. The British related to the committee in a concrete way and preferred not impose any recommendations or solutions. The Zionists made every effort to influence the committee to support the principle of partition and the Arabs refrained from taking part and had a limited relationship with it: the Arab states gave testimonies to the committee only in its later working stages and the Palestinian Arabs boycotted the committee throughout the whole affair. On 1 September, UNSCOP submitted its recommendations to the UN. All members of the committee united around the idea that the British mandate should come to an end and that the citizens of Palestine were entitled to independence. However, beyond this basic accord, disagreement existed between the members: one member chose to abstain, three recommended the foundation of one federal state over the whole area and seven members recommended the foundation of two independent states, one Jewish and one Arab. 1 The Arabs overwhelmingly rejected UNSCOP's recommendations. The Arabs' list of arguments against the majority's conclusions was indeed a long one. A Palestinian historian summarized it by saying 'Everything about it was Zionist'. 2 When one takes into consideration the majority's recommendations and the enthusiasm with which these recommendations were accepted by the Zionist leadership, then one can indeed affirm that claim. UNSCOP recommended an independent Jewish state, although the Arabs firmly objected to the principle of independence for the Jews, and did so in a way very generous to the Jews. More than half of the area of Palestine (62 per cent) was