What does the phrase a land without people for a people without a land mean ?
Engaging with scholarship on Palestine or participating in Palestinian activism renders it nearly inevitable to encounter a form of the phrase: ''A land without a people for a people without a land”.
Unfortunately, despite the extensive studies by Palestinians and others on the subject, iterations of this argument persist as a significant element of Israeli propaganda. How can such a ludicrous and clearly discredited notion persist to this day? Wouldn't refuting it be just as simple as doing a quick online search?
Indeed, a mere examination of the Nüfus (Ottoman population registry) or the subsequent British mandate census data reveals that the land has consistently been inhabited. Furthermore, analyzing these figures reveals a distinct tale of a minority settler population expanding alongside a substantial native majority. I will refrain from discussing population figures; however, if you are interested in the specifics of census and demographic data, I recommend acquiring a copy of Justin McCarthy’s The Population of Palestine: Population History and Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and the Mandate.
Even the early proto-Zionists recognized that this was not a factual statement. Some of the early Zionist "pioneers," who settled in Palestine prior to the first Zionist conference, expressed condescension toward their interactions with the indigenous population. I imagine it would be impossible to record encounters with people who do not exist.
So why does this slogan persist?
- Terra Nullius:
This slogan endures today as it was never intended to be taken literally, but rather as a colonial and ideological construct. This expression represents another articulation of the concept of Terra Nullius, meaning "nobody's land." This concept significantly contributed to legitimizing the eradication of the indigenous population in nearly all settler colonies, establishing the 'legal' and 'moral' foundations for the seizure of native land. Per this notion, any lands not governed in a 'modern' manner were deemed empty by the colonists and so available for theft. Indeed, there are people present, but none of them are significant or worthy of consideration.
Nebi Musa celebrations at Yaffa Gate, Jerusalem, Palestine - circa 1937. Library of Congress image, G. Eric and Edith Matson Photograph Collection.
Zionism is unequivocally a settler colonial movement aimed at replacing the indigenous Palestinian population. This was a source of pride for the early Zionists, who perceived the local population as primitive and barbaric, believing that a beneficial outcome of Zionism would be the creation of a modern nation-state to serve as a bulwark against these 'regressive' forces in the east.
A defining aspect of early Zionist political discourse is the portrayal of Palestinians as existing solely as individuals or occasionally as communities, rather than as a people or nation. This was coupled with the customary arrogance and disdain towards the indigenous populations observed in nearly all settler colonial movements.
Bethlehem, Palestine , 1900-1910s Christmas Day.
The early settlers, who interacted with the natives and simultaneously claimed that the land was empty, did not perceive this as contradictory. According to these colonists, even if some disorganized people were present, they were unworthy of the land they inhabited. They could not convert the land into a modern, functioning nation-state, efficiently extract resources, or contribute to 'civilization' through the free market, unlike the settlers. Patrick Wolfe's research on Australia demonstrates this dynamic and its exploitation in the establishment of the settler colony.
This becomes exceedingly clear when examining the dialogues of early Zionists, such as Chaim Weizmann, who, when asked about the inhabitants of Palestine, responded with:
“The British told us that there are there some hundred thousands negroes [Kushim] and for those there is no value.”.
The impact and influence of racist European colonial discourse are evident here. This attitude would evolve into a fundamental principle of Zionism as a political and colonial project. This underscores the emphasis within the Zionist narrative on the alleged desolation and backwardness of Palestine before their arrival. This identical rationale underpins the 'making the desert bloom' myth, which remains central to Israeli Hasbara efforts. The underlying message being: We deserve the land more than its indigenous inhabitants, who have made nothing with it, and that we possess the capability to modernize it.
- Selective history:
One of the most frequently cited works supporting this idea is Mark Twain’s The Innocents Abroad (1869), in which he chronicled his travels around Europe and the Middle East. His negative depictions of the 'Holy Land,' encompassing both its inhabitants and terrain, are what draw attention, as he characterized Palestine as a “..hopeless, dreary, heart-broken land.” He subsequently claims that ‘Palestine is desolate and unlovely.’
Twain's narrative is regarded as conclusive evidence that Palestine was a desolate, barren wasteland before the arrival of Zionist colonists. However, as is customary, to articulate and uphold this argument, context must be entirely disregarded and any evidence to the opposite omitted. Even if we accept Twain's commentary, it would be irresponsible to ignore the circumstances surrounding his visit.
Yaffa Gate, Jerusalem, Palestine - circa 1931. Library of Congress image. G. Eric and Edith Matson Photograph Collection.
It is evident that Twain visited Palestine in September, indicating the end of the summer season, during which the land had not seen any rain for months. Moreover, his arrival coincided with a drought, meaning that this was an exceptional case of dryness even for September. His journey coincided with the American Civil War, which disrupted the cotton trade the region depended upon. This meant that the entire area, including Palestine, was experiencing a substantial economic decline and a rise in poverty, prompting several peasants to forsake their farms.
Scene outside the Yaffa Gate, Jerusalem, Palestine - Old City circa pre 1918. Library of Congress image- G. Eric and Edith Matson Photograph Collection.
However, if you remain unconvinced, what insights have others who visited Palestine provided?
Twain is hardly the sole traveler to have visited Palestine in the 19th century. David Roberts, a Scottish painter, is another traveler who visited Palestine in 1839. He documented his journeys, stating that the route from Yaffa to Jerusalem lay...
“..across the plain of Sharon, through a richly-cultivated country. The ground is carpeted with flowers—the plain is studded with small villages and groups of palm-trees, and, independent of its interesting associations, the country is the loveliest I ever beheld.“
“March 11, reached Railhead (Ludd) at 2.30 pm. Olive trees and almond orchards. Fine hills inland, not unlike Scotland. Last night we went through flat sandy places. About daybreak the country began to be green. Tents among crops and trees all the way up from Gaza. Weather warm and pleasant, with clouds. A few Old Testament pictures of people and villages. Inhabitants seem to live by selling enormous oranges to the troops on the train.”
Walid Khalidi in before their Diaspora: A photographic history of the Palestinians, 1876, calls the Jaffa orange “the Palestinian gift to the world.”
Gaza circa 1920 - 1933. Library of Congress image.
On page 94 of his digitized journal, accessible in its entirety (here), he described the flowers flourishing in Palestine:
“Came back through a tangle of huge golden daisies -knee deep solid gold, as if Midas had been walking here among the almond trees and cantaloupes.”
Nablus, Palestine circa 1930's.
So, what is the truth? Was Palestine a desolate, backwater wasteland, or a paradise with golden daisies and green hills similar to those of Scotland?
Roberts and Sassoon both traveled to Palestine in the spring, following the end of the rainy season in years devoid of droughts. Consequently, it is logical that the land would be green, and the trees and flowers would be flourishing.
Palestine ca. 1880 and 1922. Palestinians with ladders at olive trees and picking olives off the ground. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.
Why concentrate solely on the Twain paragraph while disregarding others? Is it not intellectually disingenuous to regard The Innocents Abroad as the authoritative depiction of Palestine when alternative narratives contradict it? Is this not a reckless and misleading presentation of information?
Regrettably, this is typical, as these arguments are frequently presented in bad faith. The primary objective of these claims is not to communicate historical or factual truth. These claims primarily function as propaganda to justify the colonization of Palestine and to demonstrate that the Zionist movement was more entitled to the land than its indigenous inhabitants. This reflects the settler's insecurity, as such justifications would be unnecessary if they did not subconsciously feel a lack of belonging.
Yaffa From the Sea, 1895. (Original photograph is from the private collection of Sultan Abdul Hamid.)
This is hardly the only example of such discourse; Joan Peters' From Time Immemorial is a more shameless propaganda publication disguised as a historical account, replete with cherry-picked data and absurd claims regarding the origins of Palestinians. Despite being thoroughly debunked by numerous scholars, this book continues to enjoy significant popularity among Zionists as the definitive version of history. The persistence of this book as an informational resource indicates that much discourse regarding the question of Palestine is anything but fact-based.
These cases demonstrate a fundamental aspect of Israeli and Zionist propaganda: it is replete with selectively chosen data, dubious framing and omissions of inconvenient information. Success predominantly depends on the listener's ignorance. These arguments lack robustness and dissipate when confronted with authentic historical literacy. We must strive to challenge these claims wherever they emerge and do our best to set the record straight.
Lydda airport-Palestine, 1939.
However, for the sake of argument, even if Palestine were genuinely "desolate" or "unlovely," would this justify settler colonialism, genocide, ethnic cleansing, and the establishment of a reactionary ethnocracy at the expense of the native Palestinian population? Certainly not. It’s a pointless argument that only seeks to discredit the indigenous people.
Bibliography: