69 million page views

Let's not suggest that in 1947 the U.N. partitioned Palestine

Reader comment on item: Obama to Palestinians: Accept the Jewish State

Submitted by Marjorie Stamm Rosenfeld (United States), Apr 5, 2013 at 02:37

Mr. Pipes writes, "U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181 of 1947, partitioning Palestine into two, mentions the term Jewish state 30 times."

This statement makes it sound as if the UNGA actually partitioned Palestine, when, in fact, it didn't. UNGA resolutions are non-binding and function only as recommendations, requiring the agreement of affected parties to become binding. The Palestinian Arabs rejected the partition resolution and attacked Palestinian Jews as soon as passage of the resolution was announced in November 1947, killing almost 2,000 Jews during the six months prior to the declaration of Israel as a state in May 1948. This and the invasion of neighboring Arab countries the day after the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, invalidated partition. It's important to understand this because people who think the U.N. partitioned Palestine are people who also think that Israel is stealing Palestinian land. The one idea follows logically from the other.

I certainly agree with all the rest of the article and would like to say that with four states calling themselves Islamic Republics (Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, and Mauritania) and any number of other states indicating in their Constitutions that they are Islamic states, anyone who says there can't also be a Jewish state has revealed himself to be a bigot, a racist, or an anti-Semite--perhaps all three!


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Daniel Pipes replies:

True, except that the British government indicated it would abide by the UNGA decision. So it was in effect binding and was therefore taken very seriously by all involved.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)