More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects on africa after world war 2 colonialism
Effects on africa after world war 2 colonialism
Effects on africa after world war 2 colonialism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
SECTION B
Introduction
The prolonged presence of the British Mandate for Palestine and its subsequent downfall played an essential role in the establishment of Israel in 1948. Britain’s role in the fragmentation of peace is relatively undisputed. However, circumstances independent of British intervention such as illegal Jewish immigration, Arab nationalism, and Britain’s economic and international standing had significant influence on the United Nations’ determination that partition of Palestine was their only viable option.
Perspectives on British Intentions
Broadly speaking, Britain’s conflicting promises and attempts to contain two nation-states under one mandate led to its fragmentation. Conflicting perspectives arise from views on Britain’s
…show more content…
La Guardia regards the Balfour Declaration as a British instrument used for their own gain, affirming that they wanted to exploit the Jewish people and gain notoriety as supporters of the Zionists while simultaneously maintaining economic interests in the Arab world. Sachar concurs with La Guardia on the subject of Britain’s intentions to control Palestine in order to secure military interests in the Middle East through a Jewish state rather than an Arab state, reinforcing the idea that Britain saw a Jewish state as a strategic boon. Historian Reynold uses the Balfour Declaration to support his subjective argument that the failure was due to the lack of “genuine interest or initiative on the British side to make [the Mandate] work”. Additionally, he discounts the intricacies of the Zionist movement and …show more content…
Historian Goldscheider proposes that problems caused by illegal immigration of Jews into Palestine forced Britain to choose between Arab and Zionist interests. Goldscheider’s suggestion that Britain was compelled by Arabs to take a stance against Jewish immigration represents a close-minded perspective that fails to incorporate the complexities of the issue. While presenting a subjective perspective similar to Goldscheider’s, Ravndal views immigration as the cause of international intervention, citing the significance of the international outcry against the British as a result of the restriction of Jewish immigration due to the 1939 White
The cornerstone that anti-colonialism was built upon in the years after World War II is the general consensus among the world that each man and woman is entitled to a basic level of freedom to live their lives that is not unique to any one nation. This ideal is solidified in the preamble of
Imperialism, Colonialism, and war had a huge impact on the Middle East, and it can also be thought of as the source of conflict. According to the map in Document A, it shows that the size of the Ottoman Empire grew smaller after the first world war, along with this change came new boundaries. These borders were created by the victorious European countries that won World War I, and made different ethnic and religious groups separated and grouped together with others. Great Britain's took over Palestine mandate and developed the Balfour Declaration that promised Jews support in making a home in Palestine. Most of the Palestine land was populated with Arabs.
...Palestine. The main points of the White Paper put the plans for partition as impractical and enforced restrictions on Jewish immigration and the transfer of land. The White Paper said that with the Jewish population at 450,000 having been settled in the mandate, the points in the Balfour Declaration have been met. “His Majesty’s Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State.” Even though much hope seemed to be lost at this point, faced with the impending Nazism in Europe, Zionist Jews and non-Zionist Jews had felt the pressure to unite and thus led to the Biltmore Conference.
r remains faithful to the memory of his peaceful childhood when Jews and Palestinians lived together in peace, and the prospect of a better future. Despite the political wrongs his people have suffered, he is proud of his heritage and intends to “restore race relations between Jews and Palestinians, (by restoring) human dignity” (146). To do this, Chocour implements innovative techniques: he has Palestinians visit the Kibbutzim, and has Jews spend time with Palestinian families. Chocour’s message is quite honorable, “to change hearts not institutions” (222). Chocour remembers that “Jews and Palestinians are brothers, the(y) have the same father, Abraham, and believe in the same God” (34).
The book begins by giving a brief background into the setting of America at the onset of the war. It details an anti-Semitic America. It also explains most of the anti-Semitism as passive, which ordinarily would do little harm, but during a holocaust crisis became a reason for America’s inaction.
As time passed, however, Britain’s standing a Great Power quickly diminished. Despite this, British possession of nuclear weapons, United Nations Security Council membership, access to political an...
Bob Hawke once said; “Unless and until something concrete is done about addressing the Israeli-Palestinian issue you won't get a real start on the war against terrorism.” Perhaps Hawke put into a few simple words one of the most complicated issues within our world today, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As Israel continues to strip the Palestinians of their land and fears it’s very existence because of the Palestinians terrorist acts, there seems to be no solution in sight. The world appears to be split and all over the place when it comes to this matter. According to The Middle East Institute for Understanding approximately 129 countries recognize Palestine as a state while many others do not. Over all the political matters within this issue not only affect Palestine and Israel but the world as a whole, as the Middle East and the West seem to disagree. This has had and will continue to have an enormous impact on many political affairs all over the world particularly in the current fight against terrorism. Personally I feel that the Israeli Palestinian conflict while being a very complicated matter has a simple solution. Within this issue I am a firm believer that the occupation of the West Bank by Israeli forces is extremely unjust and must come to an end. Once this is achieved a two state solution will be the most effective way to bring peace to the area. The occupation of the West Bank violates political and legal rights, human rights, and illegally forces Palestinians who have lived in the area for hundreds of years from their land. This conflict is at the height of its importance and a solution is of dire need as nuclear issues arise in the Middle East due to the tension between Israel and it’s surrounding neighbors, and the...
It is my belief that the author presents a very controversial view of the causes and implementation of the Holocaust. The root of the controversy is his contention that the German people, as a society, are responsible for the attempted extermination of the Jews. According to Mr. Goldhagen, in the eyes of the Germans, the Jews as nothing more than a cancer that must be removed in order to cure the ills of their nation. In the book Mr. Goldhagen has gone to great extents to prove his views. However, “…his theories will probably remain a point of contention with historians for years to come.”4 The brutality and horror that is described throughout the book is, at times, overwhelming. To realize that one group of people can treat their fellow man with such heartlessness and savagery in what we call a civilized world is almost beyond comprehension.
On November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted for a partition resolution that led to the establishment of the nation of Israel in May, 1948. This was great news for Jews in Palestine and the diaspora as it meant the fulfillment of the quest for the rebirth of their nation in their previous homeland after many years of wandering (Pappe, 2006, p. 12). However, their Palestinian Arab counterparts opposed to the establishment from the start felt cheated by the international community and remained categorical that the final answer to the Jewish problem would only be solved in blood and fire (Karsh, 2002, p. 8).
“There is no such thing as a Palestinian.” Stated former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir after three fourths of one million Palestinians had been made refugees, over five hundred towns and cities had been obliterated, and a new regional map was drawn. Every vestige of the Palestinian culture was to be erased. Resolution 181, adopted in 1947 by the United Nations declared the end of British rule over Palestine (the region between the eastern edge of the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River) and it divided the area into two parts; a state for the Jewish and one for the Arab people, Palestine. While Israel was given statehood, Palestine was not. Since 1947, one of the most controversial issues in the Middle East, and of course the world, is the question of a Palestinian state. Because of what seems a simple question, there have been regional wars among Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, terrorist attacks that happen, sometimes daily, displacement of families from their homes, and growing numbers of people living in poverty. Granting Palestinian statehood would significantly reduce, or alleviate, tensions in the Middle East by defining, once and for all, the area that should be Palestine and eliminating the bloodshed and battles that has been going on for many years over this land.
The history of the Jewish people is one fraught with discrimination and persecution. No atrocity the Nazis did to the Jews in the Holocaust was original. In England in 1189, a bloody massacre of the Jews occurred for seemingly no reason. Later, the Fourth Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III required Jews to wear a badge so that all would know their race, and then had them put into walled, locked ghettos, where the Jewish community primarily remained until the middle of the eighteenth century. When the Black Death ravaged Europe in the medieval ages, many Europeans blamed the Jews (Taft 7). Yet, the one thing that could be more appalling than such brutal persecution could only be others’ failure and flat-out refusal to intervene. Such is the case with the non-Axis coutries of World War II; these nations failed miserably in their responsibility to grant basic human rights – even the right of life – to Jewish immigrants prior to World War II.
“Many Jews were fleeing Europe from Hitler so that they can reclaim the land they believed was their Biblical birthright, (Document 4 Excepts from the Israeli Declaration of Independence). Leaders were petitioning Great Britain to allow Jewish people to begin migrating into Palestine, then in 194 8the formal state of Israel was formed. “The Balfour Declaration Britain promised a national home for the Jewish people as seen in” (document 2). However, people were already living there so the natives felt like they were getting there home taken away from
...r under one leadership. The Arab forces were more so scattered and unable to join together under a single cause, creating instability within. The most effective strategy in war that helped the Israeli forces win was the occurrence of Plan D, which pushed thousands of Arabs out of zones that Israel deemed important. By executing Plan D, the Israeli forces were able to create a sense of fear throughout the Arab population, and ultimately lead the Palestinian Arabs to flee instead of supporting and fighting with the Arab forces. From being outnumbered to not pursuing the same goal, the Arab states were doomed from the beginning. Israel’s effective means of using every opportunity to grow and remain organized led it to win the War of 1948, thus creating a greater sense of pride within the newly established state, and creating a military that could not be tarnished.
On November 2 1917 the Balfour Declaration was issued from Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild conveying a promise to the Zionist Federation of a national home in Palestine. This appeared to be a step closer towards materially realising the early Zionist aspirations as previously articulated by Theodor Herzl in August 1897 when he envisioned “the creation of a home for the Jewish people in Palestine to be secured by public law.” Although professing to be a “declaration of sympathy with the Jewish Zionist aspirations” in reality the reasons behind the Balfour Declaration surpassed Zionist efforts in British politics or genuine pro-Zionist sympathies. Despite many Zionists becoming increasingly active in British politics, the formation of a Jewish state was not the intended consequence of the declaration; rather it was primarily in provision of British own interests in Palestinian territory. This land, to which the Balfour Declaration referred had been part of the Ottoman Empire since the 16th century and included contemporary Israel and a small section of present-day Jordan. It occupied a prime strategic position dividing two French colonies, Syria and Lebanon, and the British colony in Egypt whilst harbouring jurisdiction over the prized Suez Canal. Simultaneously British had imperialistic motives to take advantage of the power vacuum left vacant by the slow death of the Sick Man of Europe, the Ottoman Empire. The Balfour Declaration also temporarily allowed the Britain to hold the balance of power between the two opposing nationalist movements in Palestine however it did obligate them to both sides proving a future problem. It was also hoped that propagating a future national home to the Zionists at large would secure the ...
The debate about British Identity has been prominently featured in recent years as a public concern. The foundation of British Identity was based on the act of union in 1801 between England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland that created Great Britain. Heath and Roberts describe this identity as “a relatively recent construct and was gradually superimposed on earlier national identities of English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish” (2008:4). The four nations were unified mainly because of the political and economic project of the British Empire that developed a shared agenda and The Second World War which melted the distinctive differences between the constituent nations (Ward, 2004). According to Colley, the interests that unified the nations do not exist and even if they do” they are less distinctive” (1992). Although there is identification with Britishness, it is noticeable that Britons hold a stronger allegiance to their primary nation. The British Identity is decreasing as many writers suggested, and this is due to many different trends and influences such as globalization, immigration and communication (Heath and Roberts, 2008). This essay highlights some of the reasons of the decline in the British national identity and the rise of the consentient nation’s sentiment. This is approached by firstly considering the internal factors of the devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, and secondly the external factor of immigration and will analyze the relationship between age and identification with a nation.