[From article]
Peters asserts that British governments, after the League of Nations in 1922 had given Britain the Palestinian Mandate, did not abide by the obligation to foster a Jewish National Home. Most important, and the argument that has been controversial, is that Britain permitted substantial Arab migration into the Mandate territory, especially into those areas settled by Jews. This migration was unimpeded and unacknowledged by British officials, who did, in contrast, impose severe restrictions on Jewish immigration into Palestine.
[. . .]
Britain removed three quarters of the total Palestine area from the Mandate by setting up the Emirate of Trans-Jordan, which later became the Kingdom of Jordan. By doing so, Peters held, Britain essentially established an Arab state in Palestine.
[. . .]
Peters was surprised that although whole populations of Jews had been forced to flee from Arab countries, there were few documents about this flight, although there were stacks of documents about Arab refugees.
[. . .]
This is the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict: the refusal of Palestinians to acknowledge, or at best their attempt to minimize, the historic relationship of Jews with the land of Palestine.
[. . .]
The concept of a “golden age” for Jews in those countries during which Jews and Muslims lived happily together, particularly in the Magreb countries, is an imaginary portrait. More accurately, Jews, and Christians, too, were second-class citizens, dhimmis, who lived in a condition of inferiority, or in misery and fear. Rather than a state of equal coexistence, more usual were persecution, humiliation, and massacres in Casablanca, Fez, and Settat.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/01/the_peters_principle_on_the_middle_east_conflict.html
January 9, 2015
The Peters Principle on the Middle East Conflict
By
Michael Curtis
