A different Uganda Proposal - Israel in British Somaliland?

[Tallil2long]

I can openly admit that I view the current situation in the Israel-Palestinian conflict as a sad and tragic outcome for everyone involved. Seeking alternatives to deadlocked territorial disputes is something I like to explore and ponder for family reasons. And I'm opposed on practically all territorial claims based on history, since they never bring any good to anyone and only lead to spiralling cycles of violence.

The continous existence of Jewish population in Palestine is a remarkable tale of cultural continuity. But the presense of a single group in a territory where they once were a majority at a given point in history is definitively not a valid reason to claim it on the grounds that "we were here first." Using history for political purposes like that is always dangerous and bloody business, no matter which ethnic or religious group does that.

I'm myself descended from refugees whose old homeland was forcibly colonized by a Soviet population transfer after WW2, and I think that I have no real right to say to people who have lived in the former lands of my ancestors for three generations by now that they should leave their homes. Same goes for rest of the world - Serbs had no right to treat Kosovo Albanians like "overbreeding defilers of Old Serbia and Kosovo-Metohija", Poles had no right to expell Ukrainians in late 1940s and so forth. Why should there be exceptions to this rule?*

*Note that I still think that after OTL horrors of WW2 the Jewish population simply had to find a place of their own somewere from the world - but I still think that Palestine was not the optimal spot for that.



Sinai would have definitively been a poor option, but personally I consider the Somaliland scenario as an option that avoids the usual "Let's just settle them to Alaska"-styled solutions that are obviously suboptimal to the interests of the Jewish community. In fact I've chosen it after carefully considering all the potential options, seeking a spot that would be close enough to have cultural history and connections to the Holy Land while still being less politically controversial area for settlement.



I personally find it really hard to believe that British Somaliland would turn into a "Israel in Africa" with Jewish majority. But it would still have some kind of impact, and hence this thread.

I pretty much have to agree with you; the unfortunate fact is that not everyone's aspirations can be accommodated, given the history of conquest and expulsion in OTL. To return one group to an historical homeland would mean expelling someone else, whose great-grandfathers may have been conquering ethnically-cleansing jerks, but who themselves are just people trying to make a living on the land they inherited.

I don't have to like it all, though. Although there is no good solution, I don't easily accept one that ratifies a previous expulsion. If we accept that a group has a right to land because of a previous occupation/expulsion, that encourages others to try; after all, if they can just make it stick for a generation or two, then they have a "right" to the land. Where does that end? I'd prefer not to see a Fifteenth Balkan War, or whatever.

Either way just leads to the spiraling cycle of violence you mentioned. The cure just begets the illness; examples of historical success breed more attempts. Israelis kicking Palestinian Arabs out of the West Bank cannot be said to be more evil than the Arab Conquest of same.

Anyway, enough philosophizing.

Somaliland is probably the least bad of a set of bad options, but I don't see it leading to a Jewish state, since without the "ancestral homeland" draw, it just won't be compelling enough. If the Jews must have a State after WW2, Palestine seems the only plausible option.

The best bet would be to find a way to smooth it so that the Palestinian Arabs accept the idea of Jewish sharing in the political process of a new nation, so that Jews don't feel the need for defensible borders, and Arabs don't feel the need to flee their homes following the failed ethnic cleansing attempt of 1948; in theory this could result in a State that embraces both the Jewish immigrants and the Palestinian Arabs already living there. But for that sort of teamwork to be accepted, I fear, we'd need a POD in the 7th Century...

 

[Karelian]

I pretty much have to agree with you; the unfortunate fact is that not everyone's aspirations can be accommodated, given the history of conquest and expulsion in OTL. To return one group to an historical homeland would mean expelling someone else, whose great-grandfathers may have been conquering ethnically-cleansing jerks, but who themselves are just people trying to make a living on the land they inherited.

And who didin't choose to be born to that land in the first place. No easy solution to this problem as far as I can see.

I don't have to like it all, though. Although there is no good solution, I don't easily accept one that ratifies a previous expulsion. If we accept that a group has a right to land because of a previous occupation/expulsion, that encourages others to try; after all, if they can just make it stick for a generation or two, then they have a "right" to the land. Where does that end? I'd prefer not to see a Fifteenth Balkan War, or whatever.

A cynic would say that it doesn't have to end anywhere unless one side gives up. Since total genosides are luckily much, much more rare than earlier in history, every group that has suffered wrongdoing and harm is still alive and intact to deal with the matter the best they could. And they either keep waiting for moment for revenge or leave the matter at that.

In example modern Finns have chosen to look forward and deal with the fact that they now live in a land that is 10% smaller than it used to be, whereas my Serbian friend commented the independence of Kosovo with a different mindset: "We had to wait 700 years, but at the end we outlasted the Ottomans. We'll wait this one out as well."

When one mixes religion, politics and territorial claims, the amount of time and number of generations that has passed from the time some piece of land changed owners is totally irrelevant. Jonathan Glover deals with this issue on his books quite extensively, and I agree on his viewpoints on the matter.

Somaliland is probably the least bad of a set of bad options, but I don't see it leading to a Jewish state, since without the "ancestral homeland" draw, it just won't be compelling enough. If the Jews must have a State after WW2, Palestine seems the only plausible option.

The best bet would be to find a way to smooth it so that the Palestinian Arabs accept the idea of Jewish sharing in the political process of a new nation, so that Jews don't feel the need for defensible borders, and Arabs don't feel the need to flee their homes following the failed ethnic cleansing attempt of 1948; in theory this could result in a State that embraces both the Jewish immigrants and the Palestinian Arabs already living there. But for that sort of teamwork to be accepted, I fear, we'd need a POD in the 7th Century...

And hence the POD as a "close enough" lesser evil, only possible in a scenario where the global history follows drastically different course during the 20th century.

 

[Unknown]

I would like to see this idea in TL form.

 

[Rich Rostrom]

1)Why are the aspirations of other groups, such as the Palestinians, the Serbs, the Poles after WW1, and others, recognized and accommodated to some extent, but not those of the Jews?

The aspirations of which Jews? Only a small minority of Jews were seriously interested in the Zionist project. Vastly more Jews were interested in achieving full acceptance and civil equality in the countries they lived in. Many of these saw Zionism as obstructing this goal.

Another large element preferred remaining in their traditional separate societies in these countries (and many of these regarded Zionism as presumptuous or blasphemous).

As to the aspirations of the Zionists vis-á-vis the Poles or Serbs - Poles and Serbs were long established nationalities which already lived in their countries. Jews were not a nationality, most Jews objected to the idea of making Jewishness a nationality, and almost none of them lived in Palestine.

 

[Tallil2long]

The aspirations of which Jews? Only a small minority of Jews were seriously interested in the Zionist project. Vastly more Jews were interested in achieving full acceptance and civil equality in the countries they lived in. Many of these saw Zionism as obstructing this goal.

Another large element preferred remaining in their traditional separate societies in these countries (and many of these regarded Zionism as presumptuous or blasphemous).

As to the aspirations of the Zionists vis-á-vis the Poles or Serbs - Poles and Serbs were long established nationalities which already lived in their countries. Jews were not a nationality, most Jews objected to the idea of making Jewishness a nationality, and almost none of them lived in Palestine.

Okay, good points. Yet in the context of creating a Jewish State (the context of this thread) Zionism proved to be pretty powerful -- I seriously doubt that any proffered National Home other than in Palestine would've worked, and it was Zionism (or at least a fairly widespread individual ideal of Jews returning to Palestine) that made the difference, IMHO. It was exactly because most Jews were, as you pointed out, either opposed or uninterested in creating a Jewish State that the only region that could've received even the minimum necessary support was Palestine.

I probably should have phrased the question differently: "Why do so many posters utterly discount widespread Jewish desire to fix any Jewish State specifically in Palestine?"

 

[Minchandre]

The aspirations of which Jews? Only a small minority of Jews were seriously interested in the Zionist project. Vastly more Jews were interested in achieving full acceptance and civil equality in the countries they lived in. Many of these saw Zionism as obstructing this goal.

Another large element preferred remaining in their traditional separate societies in these countries (and many of these regarded Zionism as presumptuous or blasphemous).

As to the aspirations of the Zionists vis-á-vis the Poles or Serbs - Poles and Serbs were long established nationalities which already lived in their countries. Jews were not a nationality, most Jews objected to the idea of making Jewishness a nationality, and almost none of them lived in Palestine.

That's not very true. Zionism enjoyed very broad support among world Jews, even those who weren't willing to go themselves. Yes, there were the Bundists (Socialist assimilationists) and the very religious who considered Zionism blasphemous (though many religious were supportive of it as well), but a good portion of Jews did support Zionism.

And don't forget that Zionism, in the sense of Jewish nationalism, was a reaction to the very fact that the Poles, Germans, French, etc often did not let the Jews assimilate, insisting that no matter what, they were Jews first and [nationality] second. Some Jews doubled down and tried harder, some supported post-nationalist philosophies like Socialism, but many decided that it was unworkable and went to Zionism.

Was Zionism an absolute majority of Jews? Probably not (and impossible to say, because no one really did those surveys). But it's incorrect to imply that it was a small group.

And Jews have been considered a single nationality for most of the Diaspora. There are records of more than a single occasion where, for example, the four separate Jewish communities of Venice (Sephardi, Ashkenazi, Italian, Greek) having a single tax levied on the lot of them, despite them all speaking different languages and having different cultures. When a group of Lithuanian Jews moved to Jerusalem in the 1600s, they were forced to pay the remaining debt of a group of Sphardi Jews that had left a century before.

 

[idonotlikeusernames]

Maybe have a POD where the US becomes the de-facto Jewish homeland in that they not only let but fully expect their Jews to assimilate in stark contrast to the prevailing European attitudes. Might have to get the Brits to settle some of their Jews in the colonies that would eventually become the US so that we can get a mainly secular Jew among the founding fathers.

 

[Essam]

Cush, or Punt seem like interesting names for such a state.

 

[Karelian]

Cush, or Punt seem like interesting names for such a state.

New Himyar?

 

[Minchandre]

Maybe have a POD where the US becomes the de-facto Jewish homeland in that they not only let but fully expect their Jews to assimilate in stark contrast to the prevailing European attitudes. Might have to get the Brits to settle some of their Jews in the colonies that would eventually become the US so that we can get a mainly secular Jew among the founding fathers.

The problem with this (the founding father thing) is that the US was founded a good century before secularism started becoming prevalent. Notice, for example, that the United States Constitution, etc. all guarantee freedom of religion, but take the existence of God and worship thereof sort of for granted. In the early US, churches were not only the cultural but often legal centers in many places, with councils organized along religious lines deciding laws and punishments (especially the case in New England, but very much not limited to there).

And after that, the US always had a strong "white people only" policy, and Jews weren't considered white enough for a lot time. and then there were the already-existing Jewish communities, who were scared of a large Jewish influx leading to more antisemitism...

That said, someone asked a while ago how to many a Jewish-dominated US state, and I presented what I thought was a "not ASB" scenario.

Don't forget that at the time, there were large quantities of Jews (mostly in Russia) living on shtetls, living agriculturally (mostly through near-subsistence farming). Think Fiddler on the Roof.

The problem is that these rural Jews were less likely to leave than the urban Jews for any number of reasons (less wealthy, more connected to their communities, more conservative...). Those that did came largely after the more urban Jews, and so they came to New York to find an already thriving Jewish community, and were hesitant to try their luck elsewhere.

We just need something to break this status quo. Maybe the German Jews in New York (that arrived decades before the Russian rabble) take measures to encourage them to pass on (either positively or negatively). Maybe the city or State of New York doesn't like absorbing all those Jews and takes measures. Maybe a state further west has some sort of economic incentive. And it won't take much - once a pattern of Jews arriving and flowing west is established, it'll continue.

Maybe something like this occurs: Wyoming is a very underpopulated state. It's cold, yes, but not much colder than the Pale. The soil is fine for farming and ranching (Ukrainians settled in the Canadian prairie did very well). And Wyoming has shown a willingness to entertain unconventional means to increase their population in the past (they were the first state to give women the vote, largely it is thought to encourage women to immigrate.

And the 1900 population of Wyoming is 92,000, compared with 1.5 million Jews! So let's say that Wyoming (or Montana, or Idaho, or maybe even Alaska, but probably not Colorado) invites a smallish group Jews over in order to get some more people. They flourish, drawing more and more. This all starts about 1880 (Wyoming population: 20,000), which is when the Jewish immigration to the States begins in earnest. Wyoming passes the 50,000 person threshold just before 1890 historically; here, it'll be around the same, but the state will already be about a third Jewish by then (OTL pop: 60,000; is it really that hard to get 2% of the US's Jews to head to Wyoming?) Like pulls like, and by 1920, Wyoming is a strong majority Jewish - maybe even as much as 3/4. English is spoken amongst children, but Yiddish is more common in Cheyenne than any other language. Some cowboys and Indians complain about it, but the Jews are Godly, hardworking neighbors, so there's not an enormous amount of room for complaint.

In parallel, Zionists are starting to become interested in the idea. Yes, there's already several kibbutzim and cities established - and Tel Aviv, who can forget! - but the British make it clear pretty quickly that they're not so interested. And there's the US, letting in all kinds of Jews, and Wyoming, where Jews are engaging in agriculture, working the land, riding horses (the Zionists had a huge hardon for horses, I don't know why), working mines, building steel mills...and a combination of British pressure and increasing Arab violence is enough for whole kibbutzim to uproot and move, funded by wealthy Jews in Europe and the US, and also sometimes even by themselves. Even a lot of Tel Avivis found themselves ill at ease in their houses, own just reoccupied after the expulsion by the Ottomans just 3 years earlier.

By 1933, we have well over half a million folks in Wyoming (OTL: about half that), about 80% Jewish; Jews and non-Jews mostly live separately, but mix pretty peacefully, even in Cheyenne after a few drinks. A lot of Zionists have come to Wyoming, too, and put in a little piss and vinegar, but the mostly traditional Jews already there don't enormously like them, and so the communities stay mostly separated. New York and Wyoming Jews are friendly, but each looks down on the other; the New Yorkers for the steppers' rural ways and "building Poland in Wyoming", the steppers for the New Yorkers living like rats in a filthy little urban cage.

The passage of the Nuremberg Laws sees an interesting reaction. Historically, the Slattery plan to settle Jewish refugees in Alaska failed due to a lack of Jewish support, and Alaskan opposition. The Jews were mostly concerned that a sudden influx of Jews would lead to antisemitism. Here, though, we've already had half a century of people decrying Jewish control of American land, and most Americans regard Wyoming about as they do Utah (which, especially in 1933, is far from well - but tolerable). Several hundred thousand Jews arrive in the period from 1933-1939 (the total number of Jews in Greater Germany in this period is a bit less than 600,000 - I'm not sure how many the US would actually allow to arrive, or how many Wyoming can support - though Nebraska supported a population of 1.4 million at the same time, and has similar conditions). Not all of the Jews end up in Wyoming, but most do, even though most are German-speaking, urban, often secular Jews (and so clash with the shtetlers). The Nazis never seriously consider transferring Jews to the US for the same reason they never really considered transferring them to Palestine; the US wouldn't have let more than a few hundred thousand in, anyway - though the half million or so Jewish DPs are let in after the war.

In 1950, the state of Wyoming stands with a mighty population of about 2 million, well over three quarters Jews. They are divided into German and Polish/Russian types, even today, with the former mostly busily developing little towns and cities (Cheyenne is well over half a million), and the latter mostly living the quiet country life as farmers and ranchers. Wyoming and New York Jews remain two distinct cultures, with the latter mostly unchanged and the former sharing much with OTL Israeli culture,though not quite so militant. There are about 6 million Jews in the US (compare 4.5 OTL), split about equally between Wyoming, New York, and "other". A few hundred thousand hardy Jews remain in the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine, which stretches across both sides of the river Jordan; though Tel Aviv remains a vital city, Haifa will become Palestine's first city, with Tel Aviv remaining a cute little Jewish enclave, given limited self-government. Over the years, the Jewish population in Palestine will contract slightly, as young people constantly trickle off in the US.

Fuck, I should develop that properly.

 

[Opunium]

What about (Southern) Rhodesia; temperate climate, large and in desperate need of white settlers.