THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume XII, Issue # 235, November 3, 2010
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
STANFORD HOSTS A HATE TALK
By Jonathan Gelbart
THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL MOVEMENT: WHAT PEOPLE COMPRISE THE PALESTINIAN NATION? WHAT
TERRITORY SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE BORDERS OF A FUTURE SOVEREIGN STATE OF PALESTINE? WHAT
ARE THE ENGINES OF THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT? WHAT RIGHTS HAVE BEEN DENIED TO THE
PALESTINIANS? HOW & BY WHOM? -- THE BIASED & DISTORTED ANALYSIS OF UCB PROFESSOR BESHARA
DOUMANI IN HIS LECTURE AT STANFORD UNIVERSITY ON SEPTERBER 29, 2010 -- A REFLECTION OF THE "ALL OR NOTHING"
MENTALITY SEEN IN LEADERS OF & SPOKESMEN FOR THE PALESTINIAN CAUSE
FULL STORY:
University of California-Berkeley History Professor Beshara Doumani came to Stanford University on September 29,
2010, to give a lecture sponsored by the Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies titled, "The Iron Law and Ironies of
Palestinian History." He was introduced by notorious Stanford University History Professor Joel Beinin, who managed
to insert his repeated, and unfounded, claim that academic freedom in the post-9/11 era is "very much still in jeopardy."
Beinin, quoting from Doumani's faculty biography, noted that he specializes in "recovering the history of social groups,
places, and time periods that have been silenced or erased by conventional scholarship on the modern Middle East."
This seemingly innocuous description belied a very specific, partisan subtext.
Taking a unique perspective, Doumani laid out his argument that current discourse throughout the Palestinian national
movement is too "state-centric," focusing on Palestinian statehood as an end in itself, without regard for "the lives of
ordinary Palestinians" or whether they support such a goal. The wants and needs of the entire Palestinian diaspora,
Doumani argued — including "those who are citizens in the State of Israel" — must be taken into account in
discussions of a future "Palestine."
Doumani repeatedly emphasized "the denial of the Palestinians' right to exist as a political community" as the most
egregious and harmful fault of "the Zionist movement and its supporters, Great Britain, and the United States." This
denial, he alleged, has shown itself in the 1922 charter for the Mandate for Palestine (which, while it does not use the
word "Arab," repeatedly mentions the rights of non-Jews and the Arabic language); Israel's insistence after 1948 that
the Palestinian refugee issue was humanitarian and not political; and finally, Israel's refusal to recognize Hamas,
following its victory in the 2006 Palestinian elections.
"This non-recognition," Doumani stated boldly, has allowed "the twin engines of this conflict, which are of course
territory taking and demographic displacement, to continue unabated as we speak." The Professor apparently felt no
need to mention Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel's existence, the continual glorification of terrorism on Palestinian
television, and the Palestinians' repeated rejections of peace deals spanning decades as "engines of this conflict."
Doumani then began discussing the "five ironies" that "each mark a . . . moment of erasure of the Palestinians and
birth of Palestine or the other way around." These included statements such as "the destruction of Palestine in 1948
marked the creation of the Palestinians as we know them" and "the recognition by Israel of the PLO [Palestine
Liberation Organization] as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinians signaled the end of the PLO as a
significant political movement." Most interesting, however, was the fifth irony, which Doumani described as follows:
"The Palestinians today are being force-fed a state
or two against their will. I say force-fed because
a state that can be a territorial home for Palestinians
as a political community is not on the table. The
Palestinians are being asked to give up the right of
return as well as East Jerusalem and half of the
West Bank. . . . This state has become the vehicle
for pre-empting Palestinian nationalism. If it
succeeds, it will . . . lead to the permanent
disenfranchisement of the Palestinians. . . . There
is really no support for the PA's [Palestinian
Authority's] negotiating posture today among
the majority of the 11 million Palestinians in the
world."
This "all or nothing" mentality has been seen again and again in Palestinian leaders, most notably with Yasser Arafat
at the 2000 Camp David Accords. Presenting the socalled "right of return" as a non-negotiable prerequisite for the
establishment of a Palestinian state reveals a complete lack of interest in finding an actionable solution to the conflict.
Whether he realized it or not, Doumani was implying that Palestinians do not want an independent Palestine — they
want Israel.
Doumani concluded his remarks by restating the importance of the Palestinian diaspora to negotiating the state of
Palestine; praising the Palestinians for finding loopholes in Israeli law that allow them to gain foreign passports; and
highlighting the untapped potential of the Palestinian community in Israel. With regard to the latter, he lamented
Israelis' concern that their Arab compatriots might comprise a fifth column within their country, while essentially
encouraging those Arabs to realize those fears. "There is no reason why Palestinian citizens of Israel cannot be the
leaders of a Palestinian national movement," Doumani maintained. Although he claimed to be "agnostic" on the
issue of a one-state or two-state solution to the conflict, he noted, "There is one state already. . . . The solution is a
state for all its citizens."
During the question and answer session, an audience member confronted Doumani on his final statement. "Why is it,"
the man asked, "that there is no outcry against the treatment of Palestinians in Arab countries [such as Lebanon,
Jordan and Syria]? Are these countries really states for all their citizens?" As might be expected, Doumani
sidestepped the question. "Two wrongs don't make a right," he answered flatly. "If it's wrong elsewhere, it's wrong in
Israel. I'm just asking that the right of equality for all people be applied to Israel." In Doumani's world, the right of
equality for all people need not be applied to Muslim countries, and the fact that Arab citizens of Israel enjoy more
political freedom than citizens of any Arab state is irrelevant.
Other audience questions involved the role of international law, the American-Israeli relationship, and the possibility
for coexistence. Doumani claimed that Israel has "no leg to stand on" with regard to international law and that "the
free ride is over" in the American-Israeli relationship. Finally, Doumani concluded, coexistence is "the only solution I
can see." That may be, but coexistence under whose terms?
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Israel & the Arabs -- The Israeli-Arab Conflict
Middle East -- Arabs, Arab States,
& Their Middle Eastern Neighbors
American Foreign Policy -- The Middle East
Islamism & Jihadism -- Radical Islam & Islamic Terrorism
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
International Politics & World Disorder:
War, Peace, & Geopolitics in the Real World:
Foreign Affairs & U.S. National Security
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Jonathan Gelbart is a senior at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, majoring in International Relations. He is
the President of Students for an Open Society and former World News Editor of the Stanford Review, an
independent publication. He wrote this article for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.
The foregoing article by Jonathan Gelbart was originally published in Front Page Magazine, October 18, 2010
and can be found on the Internet website maintained by the Middle East Forum, a foreign policy think tank which
seeks to define and promote American interests in the Middle East, defining U.S. interests to include fighting radical
Islam, working for Palestinian Arab acceptance of the State of Israel, improving the management of U.S. efforts to
promote constitutional democracy in the Middle East, reducing America's energy dependence on the Middle East,
more robustly asserting U.S. interests vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia, and countering the Iranian threat.
(URL: http://www.meforum.org/2761/stanford-hosts- a-hate-talk)
Republished with Permission of the Middle East Forum
Reprinted from the Middle East Forum News
mefnews@meforum.org (MEF NEWS)
October 18, 2010
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume XII, 2010
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity