Reply #74: Yes, Nakba and the desire to destroy Israel are related.

[aranthus]

However, in the case of this article, the authors only mentioned "Israel's 63-year belligerent occupation". Not only is the statement false, it's inconsistent with accepting Israel at all. The reasonable interpretation of that specific phrase is that they mean the occupation of Tel Aviv and Haifa, as Israel proper is the only area that Israel has occupied for 63 years. Palestinians have been talking about the occupation of Palestine since well before 1967. they always meant Israel proper in the past, and I don't see any reason to think that the code has changed. It is really a stretch to think that they mean the Nakba, when they don't even mention it.

Now contrast that with what Abbas wrote in the New York Times, and which you have referred to. He claimed that the Palestinians have been occupied for 63 years. Not only is that specific statement true, but it is not inconsistent with an Israel. The reason is that Abbas didn't say that the Palestinians had been occupied by Israel for 63 years. In fact, in the early years, they were occupied by the Egyptians and Jordanians, who were the real architects of the destruction of the proposed Palestinian state. The very different nature of what Abbas said from these authors may explain why the Israelis didn't officially raise a fuss.

You state, Saree Makdisi does not need to be mainstream aranthus, needing to substantiate well what you claim is more to the point.

First, I think that I have substantiated what I have asserted. Second, perhaps I wasn't clear in my question about Makdisi. What I was trying to get at was whether you thought he represented the majority or normative opinion of Palestinians. The reason that I asked is that you seem to be citing him to support the idea that the subject authors aren't being as rejectionist as I think. The thing is that Makdisi is about as rejectionist as they come, so it's a little odd that you cite him to make that point (if that's what you were trying to do). Personally, I hope Makdisi is nowhere near the mainstream of Palestinians' thought. If he is, peace is worse than an illusion.