What do you think?
Rate this book
Bitter Harvest: A Modern History of Palestine
Hadawi analyzes the people of ancient Palestine, through the years of British colonization; he examines the Jewish community and Zionism, the legacy of Jewish terror against both British and Palestinian targets. Later sections look at the role of the state of Israel, its treatment of Palestinians, and the emergence of the Palestine Liberation Organization. In the final chapter Hadawi covers the 1979 Camp David Accords, Israel's invasion of Leabon in 1982, and the intifada of mid-1989.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published November 1, 1979
3 people are currently reading
161 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
May 26, 2025
A CHRISTIAN PALESTINIAN LOOKS AT THE CONFLICTS FROM 1917 AND LATER
Sami Hadawi (1904-2004) was a Palestinian scholar and author who was born in Jerusalem to Palestinian Christian parents. He worked as a land specialist for the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine in New York City. He was Director of the Institute for Palestine Studies (IPS) in Beirut until his retirement in 1970.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1979 book, “the Zionists accepted partition of the Holy Land because it gave them something they did not own and to which they were not entitled in justice or in equity. Partition of countries against the will of the people is not only wrong in principle; it has been proved to be inhuman too… The Powers which resist the will of the people … are the same Powers which have inflicted the tragedy of partition on Palestine… After thirty years of tribulation and suffering, the world has come to recognize error of its judgment in partitioning the Holy Land in 1947; but there is nothing that can be done to remove the evil which had been unleashed upon a peaceful people and a land held sacred by the adherents of the three great faiths. The least that can now be done is to undo the injustice by recognizing that a wrong has been committed against an innocent people and redressing it in a humanely and just manner.” (Pg. 1)
He says of the Balfour Declaration, “the Moslem and Christian inhabitants are mentioned in such a way as to give an entirely false picture of their position in the country and their indubitable right to it. Although constituting in 1917, 92% of the population, they were referred to as ‘the existing non-Jewish communities of Palestine.’ This tended to give the erroneous impression that they were an insignificant minority occupying a position subordinate to the Jews. This clause, by purporting to protect the rights of the Arabs… in reality aimed at robbing them in due course… of their right to the country as owners and inhabitants.” (Pg. 14)
He states, “the connection of the early Hebrews (or Israelites) with Palestine… was short-lived, unstable, intermittent, long extinct, based on nothing better than the right to conquest and subject to the condition that there should have been national or racial affinity between the Hebrews of 4,000 years ago and the Russian, Polish, American and European Jews of today… The so-called ‘miracle of Israel’s restoration’ in 1948 was not according to God’s Will as the Zionists and some misguided Christians would have the world believe, but as a very un-Christian human international crime against the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of the Holy Land. It is sheer irony to talk of Jewish aliens ‘coming home’ to a land they had never seen and taking it from the population who have been born and live there.” (Pg. 27-28)
He recounts, “On 3 June 1922, the British Government issued … 'The Churchill Memorandum’ [aka the ‘White Paper’] to point out that ‘His Majesty’s Government … have [not] at any time contemplated … the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population… in Palestine… the terms of the (Balfour) Declaration … do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine.’” (Pg. 46)
He states, “The Arabs, who had never recognized the legality of the [British] Mandate imposed upon them without their consent, could not subscribe to the thesis that the two obligations contained in it were of equal weight. The Zionists proffered a CLAIM to Palestine based on questionable ancient biblical and historical theories which the Arabs resisted and continue to resist; the Arabs, on the other hand, have a RIGHT to Palestine based on BIRTH and UNINTERRUPTED POSSESSION.” (Pg. 48)
He outlines, “The Israelis have always claimed that the ‘Palestine war’ was started with the entry of the Arab armies into Palestine after British withdrawal from the country on 14 May 1948… In the case of Palestine… it is what took place BEFORE the two opposing armies met on the battlefield that must fix responsibility. The war in Palestine… must be divided into three distinct phases: The FIRST the period prior to the Partition Resolution of … 1947 when the Zionists were planning, organizing, and carrying out terror and sabotage activities with a view to expelling first the British Mandatory and then the Moslem and Christian inhabitants. The SECOND, the six-month period between … the Partition Resolution and … the date of British withdrawal; and The THIRD, the period subsequent to 14 May 1948 during which the armies of the Arab states entered Palestine… There is ample evidence to show that the Zionists, having achieved British withdrawal … were now ready to switch their campaign of terror from the Mandatory Government to the unarmed Arab population.” (Pg. 79)
He acknowledges, “With conditions being what they are along the entire length of the demarcation line it is no wonder that the Arab villagers attempt, from time to time, to cross over to ‘steal’ what legitimately belongs to them and in the process lose their lives. It is only natural for such conditions to create a situation of revenge by those who lose their dear ones after having lost their lands and means of livelihood.” (Pg. 109)
He states, “unlike many Jews in Nazi Germany, the Arabs of Palestine did not sell their property, and they refuse to do so to this day. It was seized and later confiscated by the Israeli authorities without the consent and against the wishes of the rightful owners. If, therefore, justice ordains that forced sales for fear of racial persecution can be annulled even though the Jewish owners had received the value of their property at time of the sale, it follows with stronger reason and in equity that property confiscated by Israel against the expressed decisions of the United Nations, must also be returned to its rightful owners.” (Pg. 168)
He observes, “what was incomprehensible and certainly unpardonable in this case was to see a people [the Jews] who had suffered persecution and oppression in the past should themselves suddenly practice this very evil against other people, ignoring their own experiences and the principles of human decency and the provisions of the international laws and regulations enacted from time to time for the protection of human rights and human dignity.” (Pg. 169) Later, he adds, “Three decades have passed and the Palestine Arabs are still waiting for world conscience to be aroused to their plight. They appear to be waiting in vain.” (Pg. 179)
He argues, “Zionism---unlike Judaism---lacks any religious significance, and uses Judaism as a means to further its political objectives… It would be too lengthy a process to enumerate all the evidence and arguments to prove the racist and racial discriminatory policies, laws, and practices of the Zionist-Israeli hierarchy… The Israeli ‘Law of Return’ confers the rights of entry automatically and unconditionally upon any Jew… This same right is denied to a Palestinian Arab who … owns property in Palestine, and lived there all his life, as well as his ancestors before him.” (Pg. 183)
He says, “To suggest that Egypt was, in 1967 planning to attack Israel is ludicrous… it was the Israelis who were preparing for an attack on Syria long before President Nasser had asked the U.N. Emergency Force to leave the Gaza Strip… The movement of Egyptian troops into the Sinai Peninsula was merely a defensive measure to counter-balance the Israeli build-up on the Syrian borders and in order to deter aggression.” (Pg. 227)
He suggests, “The allegation that a Palestinian State will pose a threat to Israeli security, does not conform to fact. Once a just settlement has been reached with the Palestinians, there should no longer be any cause of conflict between Arab and Jew. At any rate, the small Palestinian State will not have the means or capacity to constitute a danger to Israeli security… the State of Israel is regarded as a ‘super-power’ militarily…” (Pg. 279)
This book will be of great interest to anyone seeking the Palestinian (and even a CHRISTIAN Palestinian) perspective on the Israel/Palestinian matters.
Sami Hadawi (1904-2004) was a Palestinian scholar and author who was born in Jerusalem to Palestinian Christian parents. He worked as a land specialist for the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine in New York City. He was Director of the Institute for Palestine Studies (IPS) in Beirut until his retirement in 1970.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1979 book, “the Zionists accepted partition of the Holy Land because it gave them something they did not own and to which they were not entitled in justice or in equity. Partition of countries against the will of the people is not only wrong in principle; it has been proved to be inhuman too… The Powers which resist the will of the people … are the same Powers which have inflicted the tragedy of partition on Palestine… After thirty years of tribulation and suffering, the world has come to recognize error of its judgment in partitioning the Holy Land in 1947; but there is nothing that can be done to remove the evil which had been unleashed upon a peaceful people and a land held sacred by the adherents of the three great faiths. The least that can now be done is to undo the injustice by recognizing that a wrong has been committed against an innocent people and redressing it in a humanely and just manner.” (Pg. 1)
He says of the Balfour Declaration, “the Moslem and Christian inhabitants are mentioned in such a way as to give an entirely false picture of their position in the country and their indubitable right to it. Although constituting in 1917, 92% of the population, they were referred to as ‘the existing non-Jewish communities of Palestine.’ This tended to give the erroneous impression that they were an insignificant minority occupying a position subordinate to the Jews. This clause, by purporting to protect the rights of the Arabs… in reality aimed at robbing them in due course… of their right to the country as owners and inhabitants.” (Pg. 14)
He states, “the connection of the early Hebrews (or Israelites) with Palestine… was short-lived, unstable, intermittent, long extinct, based on nothing better than the right to conquest and subject to the condition that there should have been national or racial affinity between the Hebrews of 4,000 years ago and the Russian, Polish, American and European Jews of today… The so-called ‘miracle of Israel’s restoration’ in 1948 was not according to God’s Will as the Zionists and some misguided Christians would have the world believe, but as a very un-Christian human international crime against the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of the Holy Land. It is sheer irony to talk of Jewish aliens ‘coming home’ to a land they had never seen and taking it from the population who have been born and live there.” (Pg. 27-28)
He recounts, “On 3 June 1922, the British Government issued … 'The Churchill Memorandum’ [aka the ‘White Paper’] to point out that ‘His Majesty’s Government … have [not] at any time contemplated … the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population… in Palestine… the terms of the (Balfour) Declaration … do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine.’” (Pg. 46)
He states, “The Arabs, who had never recognized the legality of the [British] Mandate imposed upon them without their consent, could not subscribe to the thesis that the two obligations contained in it were of equal weight. The Zionists proffered a CLAIM to Palestine based on questionable ancient biblical and historical theories which the Arabs resisted and continue to resist; the Arabs, on the other hand, have a RIGHT to Palestine based on BIRTH and UNINTERRUPTED POSSESSION.” (Pg. 48)
He outlines, “The Israelis have always claimed that the ‘Palestine war’ was started with the entry of the Arab armies into Palestine after British withdrawal from the country on 14 May 1948… In the case of Palestine… it is what took place BEFORE the two opposing armies met on the battlefield that must fix responsibility. The war in Palestine… must be divided into three distinct phases: The FIRST the period prior to the Partition Resolution of … 1947 when the Zionists were planning, organizing, and carrying out terror and sabotage activities with a view to expelling first the British Mandatory and then the Moslem and Christian inhabitants. The SECOND, the six-month period between … the Partition Resolution and … the date of British withdrawal; and The THIRD, the period subsequent to 14 May 1948 during which the armies of the Arab states entered Palestine… There is ample evidence to show that the Zionists, having achieved British withdrawal … were now ready to switch their campaign of terror from the Mandatory Government to the unarmed Arab population.” (Pg. 79)
He acknowledges, “With conditions being what they are along the entire length of the demarcation line it is no wonder that the Arab villagers attempt, from time to time, to cross over to ‘steal’ what legitimately belongs to them and in the process lose their lives. It is only natural for such conditions to create a situation of revenge by those who lose their dear ones after having lost their lands and means of livelihood.” (Pg. 109)
He states, “unlike many Jews in Nazi Germany, the Arabs of Palestine did not sell their property, and they refuse to do so to this day. It was seized and later confiscated by the Israeli authorities without the consent and against the wishes of the rightful owners. If, therefore, justice ordains that forced sales for fear of racial persecution can be annulled even though the Jewish owners had received the value of their property at time of the sale, it follows with stronger reason and in equity that property confiscated by Israel against the expressed decisions of the United Nations, must also be returned to its rightful owners.” (Pg. 168)
He observes, “what was incomprehensible and certainly unpardonable in this case was to see a people [the Jews] who had suffered persecution and oppression in the past should themselves suddenly practice this very evil against other people, ignoring their own experiences and the principles of human decency and the provisions of the international laws and regulations enacted from time to time for the protection of human rights and human dignity.” (Pg. 169) Later, he adds, “Three decades have passed and the Palestine Arabs are still waiting for world conscience to be aroused to their plight. They appear to be waiting in vain.” (Pg. 179)
He argues, “Zionism---unlike Judaism---lacks any religious significance, and uses Judaism as a means to further its political objectives… It would be too lengthy a process to enumerate all the evidence and arguments to prove the racist and racial discriminatory policies, laws, and practices of the Zionist-Israeli hierarchy… The Israeli ‘Law of Return’ confers the rights of entry automatically and unconditionally upon any Jew… This same right is denied to a Palestinian Arab who … owns property in Palestine, and lived there all his life, as well as his ancestors before him.” (Pg. 183)
He says, “To suggest that Egypt was, in 1967 planning to attack Israel is ludicrous… it was the Israelis who were preparing for an attack on Syria long before President Nasser had asked the U.N. Emergency Force to leave the Gaza Strip… The movement of Egyptian troops into the Sinai Peninsula was merely a defensive measure to counter-balance the Israeli build-up on the Syrian borders and in order to deter aggression.” (Pg. 227)
He suggests, “The allegation that a Palestinian State will pose a threat to Israeli security, does not conform to fact. Once a just settlement has been reached with the Palestinians, there should no longer be any cause of conflict between Arab and Jew. At any rate, the small Palestinian State will not have the means or capacity to constitute a danger to Israeli security… the State of Israel is regarded as a ‘super-power’ militarily…” (Pg. 279)
This book will be of great interest to anyone seeking the Palestinian (and even a CHRISTIAN Palestinian) perspective on the Israel/Palestinian matters.
Displaying 1 of 1 review