What would a Palestinian state have looked like?

A bit uncommon before Black September, and there was never another after that. The events of Black September put a glass ceiling on the careers of Palestinian-born or Palestinian-origin Jordanians in both the civil service and the military. They still remain captains of industry and commerce (Talal Abu Ghazaleh and the Arab Bank, two of the biggest corporations in Jordan, were founded and headed by Palestinian-borns), but there is still something of a Jordanian-Palestinian divide even now.

https://www.lonelyplanet.com/jordan...-rivalry/40625c8c-8a11-5710-a052-1479d2757adc

It is not Black September but the change took place long after this POD in 1988, long after this POD is over when Jordan gave up on holding the West Bank. What happened there was a real stab in the back for these Palestinians.

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-ac...nian-passport-2332-0761.1000113.php?aid=23346

"What constitutes Jordanian citizenship has shifted dramatically since Jordan’s 1988 disengagement from the West Bank. Prior to 1988 all Palestinian refugees entering Jordan, with the exception of 1967 refugees from Gaza, were granted full Jordanian citizenship. This designation entitled them to the rights and responsibilities enjoyed by all Jordanians. However, this practice has since changed and thousands of Palestinian-Jordanians have been rendered stateless–losing all civil and political rights virtually overnight."

In this POD, there would be no such problem.

On the other side of the partition, what does Palestine look like? Will there be attempts by this version of Israel to move their Arab population to Palestine, and if so, would Palestine welcome them, or would they in fact reject them, in favor of trying to support civil rights for the Palestinians in this Israel?

Interestingly after 1967, when these Palestinians inside of Israel met Palestinians who were in the occupied territories, the ones in the occupied territories called them Israelis and refused to accept them for quite a while. If we imagine that they were forcefully moved then the Palestinians outside, I am sure would have accepted them.
 
I was going from these figures. This is usually the first place I go to get any information on this subject.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/population-of-israel-palestine-1553-present

There are some obvious problems in changing which territory they're measuring, they're including all of Mandatory Palestine before 1945, only territory controlled by Israel for 1967, and then only Israeli citizens for 2005 and 2019. The figures do show the drop in the non-Jewish population in territory controlled by Israel, but don't tell us how many were killed by the expulsion.

From quick searchings, I can only find the low estimate on the site you've linked, and it also contains the more usual estimates. Maybe those figures are for only the population of the territory apportioned to Israel in the partition, or excludes Christian Palestinians.

Compared to other wars in the region, actually much fewer died than in other conflicts.

One point that should be mentioned is the speed of the Israeli advance was not particularly great so large numbers of Palestinians were able to leave before the fighting started. We know that after the war from the memoirs of the participants, that the Israeli army advance found much to their surprise that regions like Safed and Haifa were empty before they arrived.

As I stated large areas of the British mandate, were captured by the Arab governments in the fighting, the Jewish population both the Arabs and Europeans were expelled brutally in those areas.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/between-green-line-and-blue-line-13397.html

'Jews caught on the Jordanian side were even less fortunate; those who weren’t expelled were killed or taken to prison camps, and their property was confiscated or destroyed. The Jordanians ravaged Jewish cultural and holy sites in East Jerusalem—bulldozing an enormous 2,000-year-old cemetery on the Mount of Olives, razing the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, and reducing synagogues to rubble. Abdullah el Tell, a Jordanian commander and later the military governor of the Old City, even boasted about it. “For the first time in 1,000 years, not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter,” he said. “Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible.”'
 
Interestingly after 1967, when these Palestinians inside of Israel met Palestinians who were in the occupied territories, the ones in the occupied territories called them Israelis and refused to accept them for quite a while. If we imagine that they were forcefully moved then the Palestinians outside, I am sure would have accepted them.

So would Israel immediately expel the ~40% of non-Jewish residents in partition plan Israel, or would there be a period of 'apartheid' before they came to this decision?

The response that an independent Palestine, their neighbors, and the great powers would have to Israel's decision to expel their non-Jewish population would be influenced by how they did it.

Would Israel pick a time and expel as many as they could it all at once? If there wasn't already war going on, the Palestinian state, probably other neighbors, and possibly the great powers, would go to war in response to it. If measures to keep the Palestinian population from growing, or convincing them to flee, are effective, and there are plenty of Jewish migrants like in OTL, this is less likely to happen.

Would they have policies that encouraged non-Jews to flee during peacetime? Then the partition plan Palestinian state would accept them up to a point, but would begin to limit their acceptance of refugees as their numbers grew, or if it became obvious Israel's goal was to remove as many Palestinians as it could. They'd instead start to focus on convincing Israel to give them civil rights, and so less reason to flee the country.

One point that should be mentioned is the speed of the Israeli advance was not particularly great so large numbers of Palestinians were able to leave before the fighting started. We know that after the war from the memoirs of the participants, that the Israeli army advance found much to their surprise that regions like Safed and Haifa were empty before they arrived.

But where they didn't leave ahead of the Israeli advance, and from the civil war before Israel's declaration of independence, we have records of civilian settlements being attacked and cleared out. They were not mistaken in thinking that staying where they were put them in danger of being brutally expelled, they were mistaken in thinking that in any final peace, they'd be permitted to return to their homes.


Compared to other wars in the region, actually much fewer died than in other conflicts.

The size and permanence of the Palestinian refugee population was unique. In places with higher populations there were more deaths, in places without ethnic cleansing, fewer of those deaths were civilians. I can't think of another example where half the total population, mostly from one ethno-religious group, was permanently expelled.

As I stated large areas of the British mandate, were captured by the Arab governments in the fighting, the Jewish population both the Arabs and Europeans were expelled brutally in those areas.

'Jews caught on the Jordanian side were even less fortunate; those who weren’t expelled were killed or taken to prison camps, and their property was confiscated or destroyed. The Jordanians ravaged Jewish cultural and holy sites in East Jerusalem—bulldozing an enormous 2,000-year-old cemetery on the Mount of Olives, razing the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, and reducing synagogues to rubble. Abdullah el Tell, a Jordanian commander and later the military governor of the Old City, even boasted about it. “For the first time in 1,000 years, not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter,” he said. “Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible.”'

There were also countless Palestinian villages razed by Israeli forces. The same kind of brutality you're describing was found in every part of the conflict, the difference was in the numbers affected by it, the victims of this kind of activity in this conflict were primarily Palestinian Muslims, and they continued to suffer as a refugee and diaspora population.
 
Kick
So would Israel immediately expel the ~40% of non-Jewish residents in partition plan Israel, or would there be a period of 'apartheid' before they came to this decision?
...


Yep you would have to imagine a major change to the OTL, something that it very unlikely.


Would they have policies that encouraged non-Jews to flee during peacetime? Then the partition plan Palestinian state would accept them up to a point, but would begin to limit their acceptance of refugees as their numbers grew, or if it became obvious Israel's goal was to remove as many Palestinians as it could. They'd instead start to focus on convincing Israel to give them civil rights, and so less reason to flee the country.

It would and did not happen.



But where they didn't leave ahead of the Israeli advance, and from the civil war before Israel's declaration of independence, we have records of civilian settlements being attacked and cleared out.

One notable but dubious case. What we do know is the majority left long before the Israeli army arrived.



The size and permanence of the Palestinian refugee population was unique. In places with higher populations there were more deaths, in places without ethnic cleansing, fewer of those deaths were civilians. I can't think of another example where half the total population, mostly from one ethno-religious group, was permanently expelled.

Huh, we have been discussing the Arab Jews where this happen, unlike the Palestinian, whether it happened we do know this is real.

there are also many examples after ww2 in Eastern Europe. India after the British left was another example.


There were also countless Palestinian villages razed by Israeli forces.

Try listing these countless examples, I notice by the way you are continuing to whitewash Arab crimes which were real.

There is an observation I find it the Arabs including the Palestinians paid the Jews for what they took from them, the Palestinians could be paid out of petty cash.

Anyway, this is getting tiring unless you have something decent to discuss, I am moving on.
 
Yep you would have to imagine a major change to the OTL, something that it very unlikely.

In the major change to OTL described in the OP, that the partition plan goes ahead and everyone sticks to it for at least a while - you think that it's likely or unlikely that Israel would try to remove their Palestinian population? or that the non-Jewish population would be equal citizens to Jews in this Israel?

It would and did not happen.

What would? and what did not happen?


...


One notable but dubious case. What we do know is the majority left long before the Israeli army arrived.

I think we should take every report from every side of the conflict that describes them being forced out of their homes seriously. And also look at demographic and census data to see if populations were actually moved.

Huh, we have been discussing the Arab Jews where this happen, unlike the Palestinian, whether it happened we do know this is real.

there are also many examples after ww2 in Eastern Europe. India after the British left was another example.

The scale of the expulsion of Arab / European Jews in the 1948 war wasn't close to the scale of the expulsion of Palestinians.

Try listing these countless examples, I notice by the way you are continuing to whitewash Arab crimes which were real.

I could go find a list of their names.

Q80uGFK.gif


There is no way for me to argue with you over crimes we both agree happened. You're arguing over whether Jews or Israelis committed any crimes worth mentioning in the 1948 war.

There is an observation I find it the Arabs including the Palestinians paid the Jews for what they took from them, the Palestinians could be paid out of petty cash.

That is outrageous. You are whitewashing or outright denying that Jewish militia or paramilitaries or Israeli forces carried out crimes during the 1948 war.

Anyway, this is getting tiring unless you have something decent to discuss, I am moving on.

I'd like to discuss how Israel and Palestine would develop if the partition plan was followed, or I'd have preferred to sit back and watch one.

But then I mistakenly responded to a poster claiming that Palestinians were compelled to leave their homes by Arab radio reports, and that there was no threat that Israel would have expelled them from the state permanently, even though they said they wanted to do this leading up to the war, and although they did in fact expel them permanently. It didn't seem like anyone was going to challenge this statement.
 

MatthewB

Banned
I would think a Palestinian state would have looked like any other geographically-small and oil-bereft middle eastern Arab state; Jordan, Lebanon, Syria.... run by strongmen surrounded by cronies, supported by Russia, flittering back and forth from theocracy to dictatorship.
 
I would think a Palestinian state would have looked like any other geographically-small and oil-bereft middle eastern Arab state; Jordan, Lebanon, Syria.... run by strongmen surrounded by cronies, supported by Russia, flittering back and forth from theocracy to dictatorship.

There are no small states in the region. and Russia will not protect or support them as the state that Russia has picked as an ally there is Syria and the Syrian government considers this area to be part of Southern Syria. I am sure that without a powerful Israel, Syria would have already grabbed Lebanon and Jordan by now too.
 
Let me state I agree that the whole issue of Palestine/Israel has been fraught with problems from day one. Also let me state that many of the actions ofthe Israeli government, especially in the last 20 years have been less than "proper". OTOH the actions of the Arabs/Palestinians have been less than sterling, making your political point through a program of deliberate murder of innocent civilians as a matter of policy is not something that should be celebrated. An unwillingness to compromise, and making maximal positions non-negotiable or deal breakers, especially when you have lost three wars trying to achieve them, is not a strategy designed to produce useful results.

While Israel is imperfect, and "whataboutism" is not always a good comparative technique, some things must be said in the context of "what a Palestinian state would have looked like". Expecting a Palestinian state to be radically different than the other Arab/Muslim states in the region is not ASB, but is certainly unlikely. let's look at a few things that most folks on this board would consider important.
1. Democracy: Other than Israel none of the states in the region have anything close to a genuine democracy. Votes may occur, but in fact produce no real results. Complain if you will about how Israelis vote, but there are Arab members of the Knesset in reasonable proportion to their population.
2. Human rights: Equality for women? LGBTQ folks not be persecuted or even jailed/executed? Freedom of the press? Freedom of assembly? Religious and/or ethnic minorities not persecuted (ask the Copts in Egypt, the Druse in Syria about this - or the whole Sunni vs Shi'a bit).(1)(2)
3. Educational opportunity: Investment here has been poor, emphasis on religious education, and as per (2) opportunities for women/minorities limited.
4. Corruption: Look at the various rankings by international organizations that do this. FWIW many EU countries have suspended direct monetary aid to the Palestinians (PLO and Hamas) due to corruption.

The best guess for what a Palestinian state would look like is what the states in the area look like. The actual boundaries are less relevant, whether they are the parition boundaries, West Bank/Gaza based on pre-1967 lines or "from the Jordan to the sea" as Hamas proclaims.

(1) Note that the Christian population of the West Bank, historically having large Arab Christian populations especially in places like Nazareth, has been falling like a stone due to emigration since the PLO took over governance of those areas. This rate of emigration is well above that for Muslims, so issues like the economy which cut the same on all can't be the motivator.
(2) In Gaza, Hamas routinely uses "protected" sites such as mosques, hospitals, and schools for military purposes and deliberately uses civilians as human shields - firing rockets from civilian neighborhoods or houses while forcing civilians to remain. This is well documented by outside folks/media and the UN whose schools are so used. This is a violation of human rights and the Geneva Conventions of 1947 (as amended). Legally the party who uses "protected" facilities for military purposes or uses civilians as shields are the ones responsible for destruction or death, not their opponents.
 
I would think a Palestinian state would have looked like any other geographically-small and oil-bereft middle eastern Arab state; Jordan, Lebanon, Syria.... run by strongmen surrounded by cronies, supported by Russia, flittering back and forth from theocracy to dictatorship.

I think it's likely that in this timeline Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon remain in the sphere of the colonial powers for a while, the scenario requires that the British stick around for another few years to make sure the partition goes ahead, and Lebanon was still heavily influenced by France in OTL for many years. Perhaps Britain and France still support them in a conflict with Egypt, which the Americans would oppose like in OTL for the same reasons. They could switch over to American support in the early 60s, in opposition to the Soviet backed Syria and Egypt.

The best guess for what a Palestinian state would look like is what the states in the area look like.

Without the pressures of dealing with the Palestinian refugee crisis and the regional superpower of Israel, we don't know what a 'normal' Arab Muslim state in the region would look like. If the fate of independent Palestine is tied to the fates of Israel and Lebanon, and all are backed by western powers, they could all be as liberal as each other.

With no Palestinian diaspora I doubt the neighboring Arab states would be focused on opposition to Israel so much as jockeying to be the leading power in an Arab bloc, and much less likely to support Palestinians in the Levant. They never supported them much in OTL, except in that they wanted to gain territory.

Conflicts between Israel and Palestine here would be over the status of Palestinians inside Israel, their competing demands to change the borders would be held down by the British enforcing the partition, and then by their American allies trying to keep their proxies in the region focused on the Soviet-backed states, and also by the hostility of neighboring Arab states against both of them.
 
I am sure that without a powerful Israel, Syria would have already grabbed Lebanon and Jordan by now too.
Syria's attempt to invade Jordan failed miserably OTL, and if there's no Israel then Jordan's Arab Legion is still qualitatively the best military in the middle east. Syria isn't "grabbing" it, at least not without losing some fingers from the offending hand.
 
I would think a Palestinian state would have looked like any other geographically-small and oil-bereft middle eastern Arab state; Jordan, Lebanon, Syria.... run by strongmen surrounded by cronies, supported by Russia, flittering back and forth from theocracy to dictatorship.
Syria isn't oil bereft and neither Jordan nor Lebanon were/are Russian proxies...

On the note of Jordan, like it, Palestine would likely be a British proxy for some time (hell, may even be in a personal union with Jordan).
 
There are no small states in the region. and Russia will not protect or support them as the state that Russia has picked as an ally there is Syria and the Syrian government considers this area to be part of Southern Syria. I am sure that without a powerful Israel, Syria would have already grabbed Lebanon and Jordan by now too.
Syria wasn't a proper ally of the USSR until the Ba'athist regime took over. Prior to that, they were client states and customers for hardware, but never really a bond between Damascus and Moscow like there is today.

And just because the Soviets already have one ally, doesn't mean they can't get more. Iraq flip-flopped between neutral and ally, but Saddam proved unstable and untrustworthy. Lebanon (or rather, its Christian Maronite leadership) felt more kinship to France than even its own Arab neighbors. Jordan was firmly pro-British, then pro-American, but kept cordial ties to the USSR. Egypt used to be an ally until Anwar Al-Sadat kicked out the Soviet advisers in the late 1970s.
 
Syria isn't oil bereft and neither Jordan nor Lebanon were/are Russian proxies...

On the note of Jordan, like it, Palestine would likely be a British proxy for some time (hell, may even be in a personal union with Jordan).

To get the scenario for this thread, both Palestine and Israel will be British proxies, the British will have to stick around, defuse the civil war, and get those borders in place for long enough that everyone tolerates them.

This would turn Jordan against the British, they want that West Bank and they want as much as they can get. The equivalent of the Suez conflict could see Jordan throw in with the Egyptians.
 
This would turn Jordan against the British, they want that West Bank and they want as much as they can get.
Depends how it's handled. Palestine could be in a personal union with Jordan if the Hashemites play their cards right.

The equivalent of the Suez conflict could see Jordan throw in with the Egyptians.
The shelf life of a Jordanian king who loses British favour in that time period could likely be measured in weeks. The Arab Legion still has British officers after all.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
There are no small states in the region. and Russia will not protect or support them as the state that Russia has picked as an ally there is Syria and the Syrian government considers this area to be part of Southern Syria. I am sure that without a powerful Israel, Syria would have already grabbed Lebanon and Jordan by now too.
Source: my ass

We all know how Syria annexed Lebanon after Syrian troops marched in unopposed don’t we?
 
Last edited:
Depends how it's handled. Palestine could be in a personal union with Jordan if the Hashemites play their cards right.

The shelf life of a Jordanian king who loses British favour in that time period could likely be measured in weeks. The Arab Legion still has British officers after all.

The British here will be trying to get those partition borders, adding Acre and Gaza to Jordan would be a hard sell when they're trying to keep the potential Israel on side, and once there is any kind of independent Palestine, it will be an even harder sell for that potential state to give itself up entirely.
 
The British here will be trying to get those partition borders, adding Acre and Gaza to Jordan would be a hard sell when they're trying to keep the potential Israel on side, and once there is any kind of independent Palestine, it will be an even harder sell for that potential state to give itself up entirely.
I'm suggesting a personal union, not a real union or political union. Palestine would still be independent with its own institutions, it'd just have a common head of state with Jordan.
 
Syria wasn't a proper ally of the USSR until the Ba'athist regime took over. Prior to that, they were client states and customers for hardware, but never really a bond between Damascus and Moscow like there is today.

.

I disagree with all of this, even before the Ba'athist Party took over in Syria, there was a strong relationship between the USSR and Syria and these relationships have continued till today.
 
Top