Talk:Nakba

Core sources

Works marked with an asterisk (*) are already cited in this Wikipedia article.

21st-century "classics"

Highly-cited (100s of cites) 21st-century books by highly-cited authors (and more-recent works by those same authors):

• *Morris, Benny (2004) [1988]. The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-00967-6.
  • Morris, Benny (2008). 1948: A History of the First Arab–Israeli War. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-12696-9.
• *Pappe, Ilan (2006). The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. Oneworld Publications. ISBN 978-1-78074-056-0.
  • Pappé, Ilan (2020-05-01). "An Indicative Archive: Salvaging Nakba Documents". Journal of Palestine Studies. 49 (3): 22–40. doi:10.1525/jps.2020.49.3.22. ISSN 0377-919X.
  • Pappé, Ilan (2021-11-12). "Everyday Evil in Palestine: The View from Lucifer's Hill". Janus Unbound: Journal of Critical Studies. 1 (1): 70–82. doi:10.2021/ju.v1i1.2319. ISSN 2564-2154.
  • Pappe, Ilan (2022) [2004]. A History of Modern Palestine (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-24416-9. (TWL link)
• *Masalha, Nur (2012). The Palestine Nakba: Decolonising History, Narrating the Subaltern, Reclaiming Memory. Zed Books Ltd. ISBN 978-1-84813-973-2.
  • Masalha, Nur (2018). Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History. Zed Books. ISBN 978-1-78699-275-8.

General

21st-century academically-reviewed books:

• *Schulz, Helena Lindholm (2003). The Palestinian Diaspora: Formation of Identities and Politics of Homeland. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-26821-9.
• Shlaim, Avi (2009). Israel and Palestine: Reappraisals, Revisions, Refutations. Verso Books. ISBN 978-1-78960-165-7.
• Davis, Rochelle (2011). Palestinian Village Histories: Geographies of the Displaced. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-7313-3.
• Khalidi, Rashid (2020). The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917–2017. Metropolitan Books. ISBN 978-1-62779-854-9.
• *Slater, Jerome (2020). Mythologies Without End: The US, Israel, and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 1917-2020. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-045908-6.
• Manna, Adel (2022). Nakba and Survival: The Story of Palestinians Who Remained in Haifa and the Galilee, 1948-1956. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-38936-6.
• Sabbagh-Khoury, Areej (2023). Colonizing Palestine: The Zionist Left and the Making of the Palestinian Nakba. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-1-5036-3629-3.

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

• *Forman, Geremy; Kedar, Alexandre (Sandy) (2004). "From Arab Land to 'Israel Lands': The Legal Dispossession of the Palestinians Displaced by Israel in the Wake of 1948". Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 22 (6): 809–830. doi:10.1068/d402. ISSN 0263-7758.
• *Baumgarten, Helga (2005-07-01). "The Three Faces /Phases of Palestinian Nationalism, 1948–2005". Journal of Palestine Studies. 34 (4): 25–48. doi:10.1525/jps.2005.34.4.25. ISSN 0377-919X.
• Wolfe, Patrick (2012). "Purchase by Other Means: The Palestine Nakba and Zionism's Conquest of Economics". Settler Colonial Studies (in Arabic). 2 (1): 133–171. doi:10.1080/2201473X.2012.10648830. ISSN 2201-473X.
• *Manna', Adel (2013). "The Palestinian Nakba and its Continuous Repercussions". Israel Studies. 18 (2): 86. doi:10.2979/israelstudies.18.2.86.
• Rouhana, Nadim N.; Sabbagh-Khoury, Areej (2014). "Settler-colonial citizenship: conceptualizing the relationship between Israel and its Palestinian citizens". Settler Colonial Studies. 5 (3): 205–225. doi:10.1080/2201473X.2014.947671. ISSN 2201-473X.

Nakba in culture

21st-century academically-reviewed books:

• *Sa'di, Ahmad H.; Abu-Lughod, Lila, eds. (2007). Nakba: Palestine, 1948, and the Claims of Memory. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-13579-5.
• *Lentin, Ronit (2013). Co-memory and melancholia: Israelis memorialising the Palestinian Nakba. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-1-84779-768-1.
• *Al-Hardan, Anaheed (5 April 2016). Palestinians in Syria: Nakba Memories of Shattered Communities. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-54122-0.
• *Nashef, Hania A.M. (2018). Palestinian Culture and the Nakba: Bearing Witness. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-351-38749-1.

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

• *Ghanim, Honaida (2009-03-01). "Poetics of Disaster: Nationalism, Gender, and Social Change Among Palestinian Poets in Israel After Nakba". International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society. 22 (1): 23–39. doi:10.1007/s10767-009-9049-9. ISSN 1573-3416.
• Khoury, Elias (2012). "Rethinking the Nakba". Critical Inquiry. 38 (2): 250–266. doi:10.1086/662741. ISSN 0093-1896.

Nakba and genocide studies

21st-century academically-reviewed books:

• Auron, Yair (2017). The Holocaust, Rebirth, and the Nakba: Memory and Contemporary Israeli–Arab Relations. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-1-4985-5949-2.
• *Bashir, Bashir; Goldberg, Amos, eds. (2018). The Holocaust and the Nakba: A New Grammar of Trauma and History. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-54448-1.
• *Wermenbol, Grace (2021). A Tale of Two Narratives: The Holocaust, the Nakba, and the Israeli-Palestinian Battle of Memories. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-84028-6. (TWL)

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

• Lustick, Ian S. (2006). "Negotiating Truth: The Holocaust, "Lehavdil", and "Al-Nakba"". Journal of International Affairs. 60 (1): 51–77. ISSN 0022-197X.
• Fierke, K.M. (2014). "Who is my neighbour? Memories of the Holocaust/ al Nakba and a global ethic of care". European Journal of International Relations. 20 (3): 787–809. doi:10.1177/1354066113497490. ISSN 1354-0661.
• Rashed, Haifa; Short, Damien; Docker, John (2014). "Nakba Memoricide: Genocide Studies and the Zionist/Israeli Genocide of Palestine". Holy Land Studies. 13 (1): 1–23. doi:10.3366/hls.2014.0076. ISSN 1474-9475.

Nakba denial / Nakba memory

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

• *Sa'di, Ahmad H. (2002). "Catastrophe, Memory and Identity: Al-Nakbah as a Component of Palestinian Identity". Israel Studies. 7 (2): 175–198. doi:10.1353/is.2002.0016. ISSN 1527-201X.
• *Webman, Esther (2009). "The Evolution of a Founding Myth: The Nakba and Its Fluctuating Meaning". In Litvak, Meir (ed.). Palestinian Collective Memory and National Identity. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-62163-3.
• Milshtein, Michael (2009). "The Memory that Never Dies: The Nakba Memory and the Palestinian National Movement". In Litvak, Meir (ed.). Palestinian Collective Memory and National Identity. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-62163-3.
• Ram, Uri (2009). "Ways of Forgetting: Israel and the Obliterated Memory of the Palestinian Nakba". Journal of Historical Sociology. 22 (3): 366–395. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6443.2009.01354.x. ISSN 0952-1909.
• *Sayigh, Rosemary (2013-11-01). "On the Exclusion of the Palestinian Nakba from the "Trauma Genre"". Journal of Palestine Studies. 43 (1): 51–60. doi:10.1525/jps.2013.43.1.51. ISSN 0377-919X.
  • *Sayigh, Rosemary (2022). "On the Burial of the Palestinian Nakba". Routledge International Handbook of Ignorance Studies (2 ed.). Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003100607-31/burial-palestinian-nakba-1-rosemary-sayigh. ISBN 978-1-003-10060-7.
• *Rekhess, Elie (2014). "The Arab Minority in Israel: Reconsidering the "1948 Paradigm"". Israel Studies. 19 (2): 187–217. doi:10.2979/israelstudies.19.2.187. ISSN 1527-201x. {{cite journal}}: Check |issn= value (help)
• *Sela, Avraham; Kadish, Alon (2016). "Israeli and Palestinian Memories and Historical Narratives of the 1948 War—An Overview". Israel Studies. 21 (1): 1. doi:10.2979/israelstudies.21.1.1.
• *Rouhana, Nadim; Sabbagh-Khoury, Areej (2017). "Memory and the Return of History in a Settler-Colonial Context: The Case of the Palestinians in Israel". In Rouhana, Nadim N.; Huneidi, Sahar S. (eds.). Israel and its Palestinian Citizens: Ethnic Privileges in the Jewish State. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-04483-8.
• Shenhav, Yehouda (2019). "The Palestinian Nakba and the Arab-Jewish Melancholy". In Shai Ginsburg; Martin Land; Jonathan Boyarin (eds.). Jews and the Ends of Theory. Fordham University Press. pp. 78–. ISBN 978-0-8232-8201-2.
• Gutman, Yifat; Tirosh, Noam (2021-01-29). "Balancing Atrocities and Forced Forgetting: Memory Laws as a Means of Social Control in Israel". Law & Social Inquiry. 46 (3): 705–730. doi:10.1017/lsi.2020.35. ISSN 0897-6546.
• Abu‐Laban, Yasmeen; Bakan, Abigail B. (2022-07-12). "Anti‐Palestinian Racism and Racial Gaslighting". The Political Quarterly. 93 (3): 508–516. doi:10.1111/1467-923X.13166. ISSN 0032-3179.

Discussion (core sources)

Additions/subtractions? Levivich (talk) 03:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Levivich, happy to add here - could you explain the objective? There are many more relevant books in the article bibliography, and in google books. Not to mention the various sources in Arabic (e.g. Ma'na an-Nakba). Onceinawhile (talk) 17:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

The objective is to identify the major books about Nakba -- the "best" sources. I had missed two books already in the article, which I just added to this list, but I think at this point all the books in the article are on this list. Did I miss any others? In addition to those, there are, listed above, books that should be cited in the article, but aren't. Are there any others? The article relies too much on not-the-best sources: newspaper articles, kind-of-obscure journal papers, etc., which can and ought to be replaced with better sources, like the major books by major scholars in the field. No doubt there are foreign-language books about Nakba as well, but I've only looked at English books. Levivich (talk) 18:14, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

In that case, your list - prioritizing Pappe and Morris - is incorrectly weighted. They are absolutely core to the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight, which is the story of what the Israelis did to the Palestinians. But the Nakba is a wider topic, about the overall Palestinian collective trauma.

I can bring more sources, but we should iron this difference out first.

Onceinawhile (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

I didn't really intend this list to be weighted, except that the "classics" have like 10x or 100x the citations of other books on the list, so I separated them, and then I looked for any more-recent books by the same authors about Palestine, so we can see what if anything they changed or added in their writing about Nakba since they wrote their "classics." The classics, like all classics, are widely-cited, but relatively old. That's why I think it's important to look at newer sources and not just the classics.

I don't necessarily think classics should be given more weight than newer sources. In instances where newer sources say something different than the classics, we need to pay attention to that. We need to determine if the mainstream scholarly views have changed, or if new significant minority views have emerged, or what. One example: did Nakba start and end in 1948, or did it begin before 48, and/or continue after 48? My sense that scholarship has moved on those questions since Pappe 2006 and Masalha 2012, and I'd be keen on looking at how more recent sources describe the timeline of Nakba (and also what Pappe and Masalha have said in more recent writings on the topic, including papers and not just books).

I'm not entirely sure how to handle Morris. My gut instinct is that Morris represents a significant minority view on Nakba (or maybe more specifically, the causes of the Nakba). I see that other scholars discuss Morris's views, particularly in relation to Pappe's, and both Morris and Pappe discuss each other's views, and the Wikipedia article mentions them already. I was going to see how the most recent scholarship handled Morris. It may be one of those cases where Morris is talked about in the article more than used as a source for the article (and maybe same with Pappe).

For now, though, I'm just looking to collect the most in-depth, widely-cited, reputable works about Nakba... i.e., books by scholars reviewed in some academic journal, the more citations the better. That could obviously be expanded to book chapters and journal articles, but I think books is a good place to start because they will have the most depth. Levivich (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

I added some papers that had decent cite counts, reorganized the list by topic, and clarified inclusion criteria. Levivich (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Outline

Outline

Full source citations at #Core sources History of Nakba Ottoman period and pre-Ottoman (pre-1917) Sources: Forman 2004, Pappe 2006 ch 2, Masalha 2012 ch 1, Wolfe 2012, Manna 2013, Masalha 2018, Pappe 2022 chs 1-2 Ottoman Empire Arab nationalism, Palestinian nationalism settler colonialism Zionism, Political Zionism, Labor Zionism, First Zionist Congress Yishuv, Old Yishuv kibbutz Jewish National Fund World War I McMahon–Hussein Correspondence, Sykes–Picot Agreement Balfour Declaration absentee landlord Western support of Zionism Early nonviolent Palestinian protests of Zionism Ottoman support, and restraint, of Zionism Zionist land acquisition using local laws Causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight § "Concept of transfer in Zionism" Mandate period (1917-1947) Sources: Forman 2004, Pappe 2006 ch 2, Shlaim 2009 ch 1, Masalha 2012 ch 1, Wolfe 2012, Manna 2013, Masalha 2018, Khailidi 2020 ch 1, Pappe 2022 ch 3, Sabbagh-Khoury 2023 ch 3 Mandatory Palestine, Mandate for Palestine Jewish Agency Haganah Mapai, Hashomer Hatzair, Mapam Supreme Muslim Council 1929 Palestine riots, Shaw Commission, Hope Simpson Enquiry, Passfield white paper, MacDonald Letter 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine, Peel Commission World War II, The Holocaust United Nations Special Committee on Palestine British/Western support, and restraint, of Zionism Zionist land acquisition using local laws 1948 Nakba (1947-1949) Sources: Schulz 2003 ch 2, Pappe 2006 chs 3-8, Shlaim 2009 chs 2-4, Masalha 2012 ch 1, Wolfe 2012, Manna 2013, Masalha 2018, Khalidi 2020 ch 2, Slater 2020 ch 5, Manna 2022 ch 2, Pappe 2022 ch 4, Sabbagh-Khoury 2023 ch 4 1948 Palestine War, 1947–1948 civil war in Mandatory Palestine, 1948 Arab–Israeli War, 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight Plan Dalet Al-Khisas, Balad al-Shaykh massacre, Deir Yassin massacre, Safsaf massacre, Tantura massacre, Al-Dawayima massacre, 1948 Palestinian expulsion from Lydda and Ramle Haifa, Jaffa, Safad, Tiberias, Acre, West Jerusalem ~300-400k expelled/fled Nov 47 - May 48 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine Israeli Declaration of Independence Arab League, Arab Higher Committee Killings and massacres during the 1948 Palestine war Operation Hiram List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1947–1949 Palestine war West Bank, Gaza Strip Transfer Committee, Resolution 194, Palestinian right of return United Nations Relief and Works Agency United Nations Conciliation Commission Expelling "infiltrators" Lausanne Conference of 1949 Western support for Israel ~400k expelled/fled after May ~750k ttl expelled/fled Looting Sexual violence Destruction of holy sites biological warfare (Cast Thy Bread) psychological warfare Partition period (1949-1967) General sources: Forman 2004, Pappe 2006 ch 9, 12, Manna 2013, Masalha 2018, Manna 2022 chs. 3-7 Sources: Pappe 2022 ch 5, general sources 1949–1956 Palestinian expulsions Palestinian refugees Internally displaced person Palestinian diaspora Palestinian Bedouin Druze in Mandatory Palestine Present absentee Absentees' Property Laws Office of the Israeli Custodian of Absentee Property Israeli land and property laws, Law of Return, Israeli citizenship law Israel Land Administration Israel Central Bureau of Statistics Jordanian annexation of the West Bank Muslim Brotherhood Fatah Palestinian fedayeen Arab Nationalist Movement Arab Cold War Arab Communists, USSR, National Liberation League in Palestine, Palestine Communist Party, Maki (historical political party) United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Geneva Conventions Qibya massacre Kafr Qasim massacre Qalqilya Suez Crisis Palestine Liberation Organization, Palestine National Council Hebraization of Palestinian place names Imprisonment Ghettoising Forestation Naksa period (1967-87) Sources: Schulz 2003 ch. 2, Baumgarten 2005, Khailidi 2020 chs 3-4, Pappe 2022 ch 6, general sources Six-Day War Naksa Resolution 242 Israeli occupation of the West Bank East Jerusalem Golan Heights Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine Battle of Karameh Mafdal Palestinian National Covenant Cairo Agreement (1969) Black September Yom Kippur War Likud Resolution 338 Lebanese Civil War Siege of Tel al-Zaatar Land Day Camp David Accords 1982 Lebanon War Sabra and Shatila massacre Intifada period (1987-present) Sources: Baumgarten 2005, Pappe 2022 chs 7-10, general sources First Intifada Hamas Oslo Accords Palestinian enclaves Palestinian National Authority, Palestinian Legislative Council Nakba Day Second Intifada Israeli West Bank barrier Battle of Jenin (2002) Israeli disengagement from Gaza Blockade of the Gaza Strip Fatah–Hamas conflict Nakba Law Naksa Day Features of Nakba Displacement Basically same sources as "1948 Nakba (1947-1949)" Loss of land Sources: Forman 2004, Masalha 2012 ch 3, Wolfe 2012, Sabbagh-Khoury 2023 chs 1-2 Statelessness Sources: Schulz 2003 ch. 4 Right of return Sources: Schulz 2003 chs. 5-6 Loss of records Sources: Masalha 2012 ch. 4 Loss of labor Sources: Wolfe 2012 Terminology / historiography Sources: Baumgarten 2005, Litvak 2009 ch. 1, Shlaim 2009 chs 27, 29, Masalha 2012 ch. 5, Manna 2013, Manna 2022 ch. 1 Cultural impact of Nakba Sources: Listed at #Nakba in culture Memory / denial Sources: Pappe 2006 chs 10-11, Litvak 2009 chs 2-end, Masalha 2012 chs 2, 6-7, Sabbagh-Khoury 2023 chs 5-6, and those listed at #Nakba denial / Nakba memory Genocide studies Sources: Listed at #Nakba and genocide studies

Discussion (outline)

A work in progress, but thoughts? Levivich (talk) 22:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Like nableezy - 23:19, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

The current structure is nothing to particularly write home about, so yeah, like. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hired. ) Selfstudier (talk) 12:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Levivich (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm adding to the outline links to other articles, and sub-topics (where I'm not aware of an article to link), that I think are WP:DUE per the sources listed in each outline section. Please speak up if you think anything should be added or removed. Also, as the outline will be changing, just note that folks' approval/disapproval at any given point in time may no longer apply to a later, changed version of the outline. Levivich (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I think this outline is missing coverage of notable opposing narratives, namely the Israeli national narrative which is currently covered in the section 'Opposition to the notion of Nakba'. Marokwitz (talk) 10:46, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I expect that'll be covered in historiography and memory section; I haven't gotten to expanding those parts of the outline yet (and probably won't for a while, still on the history section right now). Levivich (talk) 22:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I've added article links to the history section in the outline above. If anyone thinks there are other articles that should be linked in the history section of the Nakba article, or that we shouldn't be linking to something that is listed in the outline, please let me know. Levivich (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I've added a very small bare-bones start to the History section of the article, and struck through the links on the outline that are now in the article. My plan is to expand the history section until all the links in the outline are in the article, then move on to the other sections. I may move some links to other parts of the outline and reorganize the outline a bit as I go. Levivich (talk) 05:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2024

Under motives add "defense and security" 2A02:FE1:3018:2300:9CB:C015:D0C6:8405 (talk) 09:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Source? Selfstudier (talk) 09:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Nakba

I happen to be a Palestine sympathiser, but any fool can see the bias in the intro. Opinions etc are treated as indisputable facts. This article needs a good going over with a sledge hammer. Sardaka (talk) 11:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I completely agree. This article presents contested content as factual, such as labeling events as 'ethnic cleansing' in a biased manner, while ignoring the roles of Arab authorities during the war and solely blaming Israel. In reality, the causes were multiple, involving evacuation orders issued by local Palestinian and foreign Arab authorities, voluntary departures due to fear of living under Jewish rule, and other factors that are subjects of scholarly debate. I will add a POV template until these issues are addressed. ABHammad (talk) 13:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

@ABHammad: Specify all the reasons for the template addition, with sources. Thanks. Selfstudier (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The ethnic cleansing term is referenced to at least 30 RS. What RS do you have opposing this view, noting that even Morris claims a "partial" ethnic cleansing? Makeandtoss (talk) 13:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

It seems like the mainstream view that some ethnic cleansing occurred, but are these sources really defining the Nakba as ethnic cleansing? I don't have easy access to most of them, but that seems like an unusually narrow definition of the Nakba that I would be surprised to see in many RSs. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 14:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

If scholars are referring to it as an ethnic cleansing, then that is part of the Nakba description. That is not defining the Nakba as ethnic cleansing and the lead first sentence doesn't do th:at either. Selfstudier (talk) 14:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Agree with Sardaka, ABHammad and Danielx.   It should be noted that the title of this article appears as a link in a statement made in the Genocide of Indigenous peoples article, in the Israel section, and as such is presented as [one of the] primary basis for accusations of "genocide" of the Palestinian people. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The primary basis for such accusations is South Africa's genocide case against Israel and the matter will ultimately be decided in court. Selfstudier (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

This is not correct. Israel has been accused of ‘genocide’ against the Palestinian Arabs for decades, as documented in the article Palestinian genocide accusation. KronosAlight (talk) 18:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

True, but now it is in court, which wasn't the case before. Selfstudier (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

That might be true, but you falsely claimed that the court case was the primary basis, which was false. It's been an ongoing accusation for many decades, even as the population of Palestinians has increased from 1 million to 5.5 million as of last year. KronosAlight (talk) 18:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The court case is currently the primary basis. The size of the Palestinian population has nothing to do with it, a common mistake. Selfstudier (talk) 18:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Retroactive history is not the purpose of Wikipedia. KronosAlight (talk) 19:18, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Be nice to know what you are agreeing with exactly. I'm still waiting for anyone to say. Selfstudier (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Related NPOV discussions are occurring on the Genocide of Indigenous peoples Talk page here. -- Gwillhickers (talk)

Unsigned nonsense nothing to with the Nakba. Probably canvassing. Selfstudier (talk) 18:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Added signature. As already explained, Nakba is listed as a primary reason behind accusations. Neutral notification to interested parties is appropriate and must only seem like "nonsense" to those who want to avoid the issue. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Also don't know why you are randomly altering other editor's comments. I'll add that to the list. Selfstudier (talk) 18:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

"randomly altering other editor's comments."?? "altering"? " editor's "? More than one?? ... Implying that the message has somehow been slanted? Please substantiate this slanderous assertion. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

U are responsible for making a mess of poor ol xDanielx comment above. Selfstudier (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Please provide the diff of the so called "mess" I made of xDanielx's comment, and more importantly, show how I may have slanted the message, which would then warrant a complaint. Don't recall doing anything of the sort, and if my edit somehow effected the message, it was not intentional. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I never said it was intentional, definitely careless tho, and arguing about it instead of fixing it, well... Selfstudier (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

@XDanielx: I added quotes to the ethnic cleansing cites. That should answer your question. Levivich (talk) 18:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for adding those excerpts. As I mentioned I'm not really questioning the claim that the Nakba involved ethnic cleansing. The article seems to mention a few sources who do question that, but it's at least clear that that's a minority view.

Rather I was questioning whether the Nakba should be defined as or equated to ethnic cleansing, implying that that's the entire essence of the word. A few sources do seem to make such an equation - Rashed, Short & Docker 2014, Confino 2018, Lentin 2010, arguably a few others.

But for example Kimmerling 2008 says Palestinians refer to the 1948 war and their subsequent exile as a nakba. Isn't the Nakba also about the loss of the war as Kimmerling says, as well as flight, inability to return, etc?

There are also several excerpts here that either don't appear to mention Nakba at all (e.g. Manna 2022), or mention the Nakba and ethnic cleansing, but without directly stating anything about the relation between the two. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 01:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Kimmerling 2008 says at pp. 280-281:

Thus, a de facto ethnic cleansing was carried out. At the end of the 1948 war, the number of Palestinian refugees was estimated to be between 700,000 to 900,000. Most of their villages, towns, and neighborhoods were destroyed or repopulated by Jewish residents, some of whom were long-term residents and others of whom were recent immigrants. Since then, the Palestinians’ return to their homes and fields has become a central and irremovable political demand and a key component of the Palestinian identity and constitutive myth. Many Palestinians families hold keys to their homes in Jaffa, Haifa, Ramalla, and hundreds of other destroyed or Israelized villages, as if time froze one day in 1948. The majority of the Jews perceive a full right of return (al-awda) in its literal meaning as a certain prescription for the destruction of Israel. However, many Palestinian and Israeli politicians and intellectuals gave a softer meaning to the return, claiming that it would be implemented by repatriation to the newly established Palestinian state, along with compensation and rehabilitation programs carried out by Israel and the international community. Israel would also be required to accept its moral responsibility for creating the situation, which few Israeli Jew are ready to fulfill.

Palestinians refer to the 1948 war and their subsequent exile as a nakba, a catastrophe; Israeli Jews regard the same period as a war of independence that has become a fundamental component of their identity and a symbolic compensation for the Holocaust. Both peoples have their own cosmic catastrophes, and both have strong collective memories of being the victims of a colossal injustice—either the Jewish experience of Nazi genocide or the Palestinian experience of politicide and ethnic cleansing.

In this passage, it seems clear to me that Holocaust = the Jewish experience of Nazi genocide, and nakba = the Palestinian experience of politicide and ethnic cleansing. I'd say he equates nakba with ethnic cleansing. And yes, "loss of the war" is part of the 1948 war, and "flight, inability to return, etc" is their subsequent exile.

As for Manna 2022, I've added the last sentence of this passage from p. 98 to the citation; posting a bit more here for context:

The leaders of the Zionist movement took advantage of the special situation of the Druze in northern Palestine by making them a generous offer that guaranteed a successful policy of divide and conquer. The agreement assured the survival of all Druze villages and towns, and their inhabitants, in return for services by their leaders in that critical phase of the war, on the eve of the entry of the Arab armies. Most of the Galilee Druze tried to remain neutral until the spring of 1948, but the survival instinct and an awareness of imminent danger propelled them to accept the Israeli hand extended to them. The leaders of the Jewish state had their own regional motivations which prompted them to exclude members of that sect from the ethnic cleansing plan of the Nakba.

If Kimmerling and Manna were removed from consideration, that still leaves over 30 modern scholarly works describing the Nakba as an "ethnic cleansing." If you have concerns about other sources in that cite, I'd be happy to double check them. Levivich (talk) 03:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Of those 30+, I would only interpret the three I mentioned as very clearly equating the Nakba with ethnic cleansing. A few others come very close to saying that, but the majority of them don't seem to directly support the statement that the Nakba is (not involves) ethnic cleansing.

Re Kimmerling 2008, I don't think it's clear that he meant precisely the same thing by nakba and the Palestinian experience of politicide and ethnic cleansing. Shouldn't we focus on the sentence that explicitly mentions the Nakba, and essentially gives a definition which includes the war?

Thanks for the Manna 2022 excerpt, that's certainly relevant though the ethnic cleansing plan of the Nakba doesn't clarify if ethnic cleansing was a component of the Nakba or the entire thing.

Taking a step back, is it really your view that the loss of the war, the fleeing of some Palestinians without the ability to return, the changing of some Arabic place names, etc. is not a part of the Nakba? If this is controversial we can dig into the sources more, it was just my impression that a broader definition of Nakba was fairly standard. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 05:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

The prevention of people from returning is simply an ongoing manifestation of the ethnic cleansing, while the erasure of place names is a step further: an act of cultural genocide. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Let's look at them again:

1. Saleh Abd al-Jawad: a denial of the Nakba, a negation of the breadth of ethnic cleansing perpetrated in Palestine
2. Beshara Doumani: the wave of ethnic cleansing that transformed Palestine in 1948 and that persists to this day
3. Rashid Khalidi: the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948 ... the ethnic cleansing of Palestine began well before the state of Israel was proclaimed on May 15, 1948 ... The Nakba represented a watershed in the history of Palestine and the Middle East. It transformed most of Palestine ... This transformation was the result of two processes: the systematic ethnic cleansing of the Arab-inhabited areas of the country seized during the war; and the theft of Palestinian land and property left behind by the refugees as well as much of that owned by those Arabs who remained in Israel
4. Adel Manna: the ethnic cleansing plan of the Nakba
5. Nur Masalha: mourning sixty-three years of al-Nakba is not just about remembering the “ethnic cleansing” of 1948, it is also about marking the ongoing dispossession and dislocation
6. Nadim Rouhana: the history of the dismantlement of Palestine and the ethnic cleansing of the majority of Palestinians from their homeland – known in Palestinian historiography as the Nakba
7. Ahmad H. Sa'di: the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians during the Nakba and its aftermath ... his later statement on the ethnic cleansing he documented in his book ... he expresses the ultimate form of denial of moral responsibility for the Nakba: he deplores the fact that the job was not completed
8. Areej Sabbagh-Khoury: The 1948 mass displacement of Palestinians fundamentally transformed the Zionist project from colonization of land by purchase to colonization by warfare, ethnic cleansing, and mass dispossession. (p. 182; I will add this quote to the citation in the article)
9. Alon Confino: the ethnic cleansing that was the Nakba
10. Amos Goldberg: the Nakba, although a unique event in its own right, belongs to the same modern and global history of genocide and ethnic cleansing
11. Baruch Kimmerling: the Palestinian experience of politicide and ethnic cleansing
12. Ronit Lentin: Even though it is not the only act of ‘ethnic cleansing’ in modem history, the Nakba is unique in many ways ... the Nakba – not genocide but rather ‘ethnic cleansing’, or ‘spaciocide’
13. Ilan Pappe: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
14. Yehouda Shenhav: almost every household in Israel has become acquainted with the Arabic word: al-Nakba ... The ethnic cleansing of Palestine included the abolition of hundreds of Palestinian towns and villages ... the ethnic cleansing of Palestine did not begin or end in 1948 ... The ethnic cleansing continues in the present day
15. Abigail Bakan: what Ilan Pappé has summarised as the ‘ethnic cleansing of Palestine’, a process involving massacres and expulsions at gunpoint ... serious scholarship has left little debate about what happened in 1948 ... scholars are currently fruitfully addressing issues such as the intersection of the Holocaust with its roots in European racism, and the Nakba with its roots in European colonisation
16. Elias Khoury: The Nakba’s initial bloody chapters were written with the forceful ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948
17. Mark Levene: Proponents of the Nakba as ethnic cleansing largely frame the 1948 expulsions within a long-term, ongoing program of Zionist colonial settlement (p. 46, will add to cite)
18. Derek Penslar: It was ethnic cleansing.
19. Patrick Wolfe: In the absence of that context, the Nakba would make no sense. We might even agree with Benny Morris that ethnic cleansing was a spontaneous aberration that took place in the heat of warfare
20. Hannah Hever: ethnic cleansing by means of the Nakba
21. Honaida Ghanim: The relationship between the two events was formed on the basis of an exclusionist prototype, deadly for the Palestinian due to its contextualization within the Zionist national enterprise, whereby the State of Israel was established using measures of violence against and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians; this is especially evident when taking into account that, as some have noted, almost half of the participants in the war of 1948/Palestinian Nakba were Holocaust survivors.
22. Rashed, Short & Docker: ... whether or not the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of 1948 constituted a genocide and whether the massacres that took place during this time can be construed as genocidal. Yet it is apparent to Palestinians in different contexts experiencing discriminatory policies intended to drive them away from their land that the ‘Nakba’ of 1948 did not end in that era and is an ongoing process.
23. Jerome Slater: There were two other possible Israeli policies that would have met the need for a Jewish state but avoided the Nakba ... Even if one accepts those assumptions—shaky as they are—it hardly follows that the only way to have done so was by violent ethnic cleansing ... a heavily Jewish majority in the state of Israel was a historically justifiable goal, but it by no means follows that ethnic cleansing—as we would call it today—was the only way to bring that about.
24. Hania Nashef: ... the Nakba is unending. It was born in a red house in Tel Aviv, in which the architects of Plan Dalet (Plan D) finalized the strategy for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in March 1947.
25. Ghaleb Natour: The Nakba as the flight and expulsion is a disaster for the Palestinian people ... That the expulsion was planned and was one of the preconditions for the establishment of the Jewish state in Palestine has been described by several authors who provide convincing evidence from analysis of documents and testimonies that it was a systematic ethnic cleansing of the country.
26. Marcy Jane Knopf-Newman: In contemporary discourse the word transfer is better known as ethnic cleansing, a term I employ in this book to illustrate the reality of the nakba ... European Jews who participated in the initial and ongoing ethnic cleansing since the nakba in 1948 are settlers ... Jerusalem is the setting of heightened tension due to the ongoing nakba (continuing the process of ethnic cleansing that began before 1948) ...
27. Samera Esmeir: turn the trial into a case about the denial of the Nakba ... the story of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians
28. Helena Lindholm Schulz: [p. 24] the flight and the fighting are remembered as al-nakba ... [p. 32] there was expulsion on a grand scale, reminiscent of an ‘ethnic-cleansing’ project
29. Marouf Hasian Jr.: entire chapter solely about whether Nakba was genocide or ethnic cleansing
30. Uri Ram in an article titled "Ways of Forgetting: Israel and the Obliterated Memory of the Palestinian Nakba" says Baruch Kimmerling describes it as an "almost 'ethnic cleansing'" and notes other Israeli historians who do as well: [p. 388] The result amounts to an almost “ethnic cleansing” (Kimmerling 2003: 27; Benvenisti 2000: 147) ... Historian Ilan Pappe defines “ethnic cleansing” as “an effort to render an ethnically mixed country homogeneous by expelling a particular group of people and turning them into refugees while demolishing the homes they driven out from” ... He maintains that this describes the events in Palestine in 1948 ...
31. Michael Milshtein: According to the Palestinians, the Nakba was the result of a well-prepared plan for ethnic cleansing, going back to the end of the nineteenth century.
32. Avi Shlaim: [p. x] This outcome of the war constituted not merely an injustice but a profound national trauma, a catastrophe or al-Nakba, as it is called in Arabic. ... [p. 55] More recendy, a group of revisionist Israeli historians, using official documents released under the 30-year rule, have challenged the standard Zionist version of the 1948 war in general and the origins of the Palestinian refugee problem in particular. ... ‘Transfer’ is a euphemism for the expulsion or organised removal of the indigenous population of Palestine to the neighbouring Arab countries. In today’s world, the closest equivalent to ‘transfer’ is the ethnic cleansing practised by the Serbs

I think more than three equate the Nakba with ethnic cleansing. Levivich (talk) 14:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Appreciated as always Levivich. This is what Wikipedia discussions should be more like: focused on reliable sources.

Can I ask what is the source of the Bakan quotation?[Found in main article] IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

A lot of these seem to support a broader definition.

1. This isn't a definition, and the language isn't very clear. This seems much closer to a definition by Abd al-Jawad: The Nakba was many things at once: the uprooting of people from their homeland, the destruction of the social fabric that bound them for so long, and the frustration of national aspirations. That sounds much broader than expulsion only.
2. Doesn't mention the Nakba.
3. Seems to suggest the Nakba includes the theft of Palestinian land, including of that owned by those Arabs who remained in Israel. Abd al-Jawad had also discussed the theft of land of Palestinians ... who remained behind in the context of the Nakba.
4. "of" doesn't generally denote an equation, e.g. the opening move of a chess game is not the chess game.
5. The author goes on to describe closures and invasions, de facto annexation facilitated by Israel's 730-kilometre ‘apartheid wall’ in the occupied West Bank, and the ongoing horrific siege of Gaza as part of the Nakba.
6. the dismantlement of Palestine and the ethnic cleansing, not only the latter.
7. "during" the Nakba, not "that was" the Nakba.
8. Doesn't mention the Nakba.
9. Yes, this is one of the three I mentioned.
10. A comparison of sorts (not an equation) to related instances of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

etc. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 15:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Idk what you mean by definition, if you are referring to the WP:SCOPE (title + the intro sentence(s) usually) then I think that is clear enough? Selfstudier (talk) 15:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

"the uprooting of people from their homeland, the destruction of the social fabric that bound them for so long, and the frustration of national aspirations" is ethnic cleansing.

2 is the foreward to a book all about the Nakba

3 arguably, yes, he's saying the Nakba was (i) ethnic cleansing, plus (ii) theft of land

4 Yeah but in context, Manna says the Nakba was genocide and the ethnic cleansing plan was a part of it

5 "closures and invasions, de facto annexation facilitated by Israel's 730-kilometre ‘apartheid wall’ in the occupied West Bank, and the ongoing horrific siege of Gaza" are all part of the ethnic cleansing

6 it's "and the ethnic cleansing of the majority of Palestinians from their homeland – known in Palestinian historiography as the Nakba" - the part after the dash, as I read it, applies to the "ethnic cleansing," but let's say OK, the Nakba is two things: ethnic cleansing, and the dismantlement of Palestine

7 "the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians during the Nakba" means, to me, that ethnic cleansing = Nakba. It's like, "the violence and bloodshed during the war" means the war = violence and bloodshed.

8 The entire book is about the Nakba; it's in the title; surely she's not referring to something other than the Nakba here

10 it's between genocide and ethnic cleansing, is what he's saying

I mean if your point is that the Nakba was not only ethnic cleansing, but also something else... OK. "The Nakba is the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and also [something else]..." is how we could start this article. Levivich (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Just to points 1 and 5: that is not an argument for the interpretation of those sources to say that the Nakba is an ethnic cleansing. Lots of things can be regarded as part of an ethnic cleansing—if a source discusses, for instance, the renaming of Arab villages without directly referring to ethnic cleansing, we cannot just say "that renaming is part of ethnic cleansing" to justify that source as supporting the ethnic cleansing label. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I think (2) and (8) are good examples of the sort of imprecision I'm getting at. Mentioning ethnic cleansing in a book about the Nakba is not an equation of the two things. Abd al-Jawad's Nakba also mentions broccoli and salmon, but he isn't equating broccoli and salmon to the Nakba.

Right, I would suggest including [something else] - I don't have a specific proposal right now but I think it should be something significantly broader. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 16:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Continue this discussion when you have an alternative to propose. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 16:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

This is a useful discussion even before an alternative is proposed. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Please don't scoff with ad absurdum argumentation like this salmon and broccoli malarkey. If you have a serious point to make – because this is a serious subject (ethnic cleansing /genocide) – then make it. But lame humour when it comes to the subject of serious atrocities is not particularly amusing ... trivialization of the darker chapters of human history is not funny or appropriate. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't a joke, just seemed like the clearest way to make the point that we can't interpret every bit of content as being a statement about the Nakba. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 05:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

OK, in the forward, when the series editor writes that the book, called Nakba and Survival, provides a unique insight into how, by managing to stay in their homes and on their land, they resisted the wave of ethnic cleansing that transformed Palestine in 1948 and that persists to this day, you can't seriously be suggesting that he is talking about something other than surviving the Nakba. You can read the whole book, including the forward, for free, via the link in the article bibliography. Levivich (talk) 20:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Most say it is ethnic cleansing, and a few say ethnic cleansing was a major part of it, and a few say it was worse than ethnic cleansing (genocide). I think "is an ethnic cleansing" is a faithful summary of these sources. Levivich (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Editors being surprised at what RS says is not a reason to place an NPOV tag. I've removed it. Someone can replace the NPOV tag if and when they post sources that provide a different POV than the one in the article. All those citations and quotes are there for a reason, folks: it's to educate you about what the Nakba is. If you're surprised to read it, well, I'm glad Wikipedia is doing its job. Levivich (talk) 18:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Levivich, ABHammad, KronosAlight — If someone posted a different POV there would not be any need for the NPOV tag in the first place. Neutrality can be slanted simply by the absence of sources that may offer a different POV. I've restored the tag. The issue is not resolved. Please review Help:Maintenance template removal, which is linked on every NPOV tag. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Post these alleged absent sources or remove the tag. Levivich (talk) 19:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Again, lack of neutrality can be effected with any number of RS. The neutrality issue itself has to be discussed, not whether there may be other sources.. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Post sources showing a POV different from the one in the article or remove the tag. Just saying "nuh uh" won't get you anywhere. You have not yet identified a single NPOV problem. You need sources to do that. Not an assertion of non-neutrality, but quotes from sources showing an NPOV problem. Levivich (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Great, now you have reordered a talk page comment that was already replied to, seems you really do have no idea of talk page guidelines. Selfstudier (talk) 20:11, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I placed my own comment on the next paragraph down before other comments were made. Since this also has in no way slanted any message, this is obviously just an attempt to obscure the thread and shoot the messenger, rather than square off with an issue you have thus far not even challenged with viable points. . -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I've cleaned it up and restored the original/correct threading of comments. Please mind WP:TPG. With that out of the way, please either remove the NPOV tag or post an explanation of the NPOV problems with cites (and preferably quotes) from sources showing that this article isn't complying with WP:NPOV. Levivich (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Levivich — I've no issue with you returning the order. The attempt by another editor to imply that I was trying to skew the discussion somehow was baseless. Re:The NPOV tag. I simply restored this tag after it was inappropriately removed. Claiming there is no issue because no one has presented sources doesn't prove there isn't any issue. Again, there must be countless cases on WP where a slanted pov has been effected by using multiple RS. If the original poster of the NPOV tag opts to remove it, I'll not provoke an editwar and let it slide. On that note, thanks for not going there yourself. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Another editor has removed the NPOV tag. In any case, that issue needs to be discussed more thoroughly. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to ABHammad -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The way {{npov}} works is that when an editor places the tag, they also post on the talk page pointing to WP:NPOV problems. This requires a showing that the content of the article doesn't match what WP:RS says. That requires quoting the article, and citing (and preferably quoting) contradictory RS. This has not been done. Merely asserting an NPOV problem is not enough.

BTW, ABHammad's comment above, "evacuation orders issued by local Palestinian and foreign Arab authorities" and "voluntary departures due to fear of living under Jewish rule" are long-debunked Nakba denial myths, and WP:Wikipedia is not a reliable source, so linking to the causes of the expulsion/flight article doesn't cut it (also, as this article explains in great detail, the Nakba isn't the same thing as the expulsion/flight; that was just a part of it, albeit the main part).

There's really no questioning that the Nakba is an ethnic cleansing according to modern mainstream scholarship. Contra to the OP, that's not an opinion, it's a fact. Three dozen scholars being quoted for the proposition establishes that, unless someone can bring another three dozen scholars disagreeing with it.

Anyone who has read the modern scholarship on this issue knows that the only debates about this are whether the Nakba is an ethnic cleansing or a genocide, and whether it was planned from the late 19th century or if it was planned in the run-up to the 1948 war. Not whether it happened at all; that is no longer in dispute. Levivich (talk) 21:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Setting aside whether there's a significant viewpoint that does not equate Nakba to ethnic cleansing (which I'll comment on separately), that's only one aspect of the NPOV policy, which also deals with tone, attribution, and so on. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 01:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I would prefer not to full protect the article over multiple editors tag-warring. Please try and work this out. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Per Template:POV: Editors adding the tag are required to "identify specific issues that are actionable within Wikipedia's content policies", and are reminded that "An unbalanced or non-neutral article is one that does not fairly represent the balance of perspectives of high-quality, reliable secondary sources. A balanced article presents mainstream views as being mainstream, and minority views as being minority views. The personal views of Wikipedia editors or the public are irrelevant."

Is it not clear that the editors adding the tag are not presenting any "high-quality, reliable secondary sources" and are only giving "personal views of Wikipedia editors"? This despite being asked multiple times to provide RS which present the POV they claim is not being represented. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Problematic WP:VOICE definition as "Ethnic cleansing"

Thank you for the detailed quotes, @Levivich:. It was an interesting read. However, no one contests that at least some scholars believe the 1948 displacement was "ethnic cleansing". On the same time, many other disagree. One of the primary problems with this article is that the lead totally adopts one point of pov, stating it in WP:VOICE, while entirely ignoring other prominent views. I believe that two key sources presented so far (one by Levivich, the other by Zanahary) help clarify the issue further:

Michael Milshtein: According to the Palestinians, the Nakba was the result of a well-prepared plan for ethnic cleansing, going back to the end of the nineteenth century. This quote, posted here to support the ethnic cleansing definition, actually shows that this description is specific to the Palestinian perspective.

Oxford Reference definition of Nakba: A term meaning ‘catastrophe’, used to denote the expulsion of up to 700,000 Palestinians before, during, and after the Arab–Israeli War of 1948. The period of the Nakba refers to events that took place between December 1947 and January 1949 and is subject to fierce controversy and contestation in Israeli and Arab narratives.

All in all, the sources make it pretty clear that the "ethnic cleansing" description is one of several perspectives in relevant historiography, maybe something we can define as one school of thought, among several. This article (which I'm still not sure is really different from the more balanced 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight) should present a balanced description of the event, starting with the most common denominator, maybe something like "term for the mass displacement of Palestinians during the 1948 Palestine war, due to debated causes", followed a brief introduction of the differing scholarly views. ABHammad (talk) 07:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

All in all? Milshtein is one think tank chap, so was hardly a particularly authoritative voice in the first place, while the Oxford reference says Nakba refers to the expulsion, a.k.a. ethnic cleansing. "controversy and contestation" applies to everything in the topic area, but that is not a statement that the Nakba was not an ethnic cleansing. So that's one half-cocked source, and another that doesn't even support your point. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Milshtein isn't just a think tank chap (although he is at WINEP [1]): until 2018, Colonel Milshtein headed the Department of Palestinian Affairs at IDF Intelligence [2] [3]. CNN says he is "widely described as Israel's leading Hamas expert." The 2009 book chapter he wrote that's being quoted has 23 Google scholar cites, one of the lowest on the #Core sources list (and the reason why I didn't use him much in the article). Probably the only notable citation of those 23 is where the chapter is cited by Nur Masalha in his 2012 book, p. 252:

Contemporary Palestinian anxiety seems to be focusing on the need to prevent the final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine. In particular, in the post-Second (al-Aqsa) Intifada period, marked by increased Israeli repression, both the fear of another Nakba and the yearning to return appear to be intensifying (Milshtein 2009: 64; Jamal 2005: 133–60).

A scholar, but I'd call this chapter a minor work in the field, not like on the level of Masalha, Pappe, Morris, etc. His work does support the proposition that Palestinians view the Nakba as an ethnic cleansing; this of course does not mean that only Palestinians view it as an ethnic cleansing. And even if Milshtein said that (which he hasn't), he would be an outlier compared to all the others. Even if we removed Milshtein, Manna, and Kimmerling from the list (which we shouldn't do), and added Benny Morris and Efraim Karsh, the count would still be 29-5 in favor of "is an ethnic cleansing." Levivich (talk) 14:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's problematic. If we have 30+ RS saying ethnic cleansing, then what happened was ethnic cleansing. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I am pretty sure one could find many sources that use other definitions, but I don't have the time to search for them right now. Perhaps another editor could take on this task? ABHammad (talk) 08:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I have no clue as to why this section is opened at all, this has been discussed already above, if you have 30+ sources to bring saying it is not ethnic cleansing, then bring them, else no case to answer here.Selfstudier (talk) 09:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Lead's uncomplicated presentation of the Nakba as ongoing

I notice that the lead of this article describes the Nakba as a phenomenon simply regarded as ongoing (The term is used to describe the events of the 1948 Palestine war in Mandatory Palestine as well as the ongoing persecution and displacement of Palestinians by Israel) without representing the "ongoing Nakba" viewpoint/concept as one in coexistence with the understanding of the Nakba as something that occurred in 1948 and finished sometime between then and now.

Some sources:

A term meaning ‘catastrophe’, used to denote the expulsion of up to 700,000 Palestinians before, during, and after the Arab–Israeli War of 1948. The period of the Nakba refers to events that took place between December 1947 and January 1949 and is subject to fierce controversy and contestation in Israeli and Arab narratives. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191835278.001.0001/acref-9780191835278-e-200

Al-Nakba (in Arabic, disaster or catastrophe) refers to the flight and expulsion of the Palestinians during the 1947 to 1948 War, the confiscation of their property, massacres committed by Zionist (after 14 May 1948, Israeli) forces, the collapse of their society and, ultimately, the loss of their homeland. Mattar, Philip. "Nakba, al-." Encyclopedia of the Modern Middle East and North Africa, edited by Philip Mattar, 2nd ed., vol. 3, Macmillan Reference USA, 2004, pp. 1639-1640. Gale eBooks, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3424601958/GVRL?u=new64731&sid=bookmark-GVRL&xid=a8da4155. Accessed 24 June 2024.

(I will add some more soon)

Interested in thoughts ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Interesting, I think those quotes raise another important question: what's the difference between 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight and the Nakba article? I see the first was created in 2002, and this one in 2021. ABHammad (talk) 18:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Depends the scope (sorry if I sound like a broken record). The Ongoing Nakba is a narrative that arose after the return failed to materialize and lots of other bad things occurring. It seems logical because there was also 1949–1956 Palestinian expulsions and a 67 expulsion, settlements, illegal annex, etcetera. (not sure about the title of that one either). Selfstudier (talk) 18:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Pretty simple. There was much more to the ethnic cleansing than the mere expulsion: there was also killing, the destruction of villages, other forms of cultural erasure, and the refusal of the right of refugees to return ... so, in other words, lots is different. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

If the sources all describe it first as the expulsion and flight, and considering the fact that we already have Ongoing Nakba that explains the view that the 1948 event continues to our day, this article may be a WP:POVFORK, thoughts? HaOfa (talk) 08:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Once again, these articles have a different scope. Selfstudier (talk) 08:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree, from what I have seen many sources equate the Nakba with the Palestinian expulsion and flight of 1948, while the article Ongoing Nakba covers the notion that it still continues to these days. Seems like one of these articles is possibly redundant. ABHammad (talk) 08:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

This is more on the impact of the war on the Palestinian community, and the continuation of the perceived injustice, if I'm not mistaken Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

The 'Nakba' was originally the 'catastrophe' of the defeat of the Arab armies and their failure to prevent the creation of a Jewish state after their declaration of war against Israel in 1948. The Palestinians who fled and were expelled at the time (and it was both) were nothing unusual or exceptional for either the region or the wider world in the post-WW2 world (e.g. see: Partition of India). The catastrophe was the military defeat and perceived humiliation at the hands of the Jews.

It was only later that the Nakba came to be interpreted as the catastrophe of Palestinian exile, but this is mostly a post-1960s phenomenon, because it's only really in that decade that national consciousness of the Palestinians more or less crystalised into a coherent nationalism. Prior to that, not just they but every other Arab nation regarded them as Arabs of Palestine, particularly because the zeitgeist at that time was Pan-Arabism. So the ‘nakba’ became revised and reinterpreted in the Palestinian national story as a catastrophe of dispersion rather than of military defeat. KronosAlight (talk) 10:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM. Selfstudier (talk) 11:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Think it's fairly obvious what I was adding to this topic given you seem to be reversing any edit to this page which attempts to clarify the way the term has changed over time. KronosAlight (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

That can be done, bring some sources instead of a speech and we'll take a look. Selfstudier (talk) 20:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

The war is the war; the Nakba is the Nakba. The attempt to shoehorn the Nakba, which was a pre-planned ethnic cleansing that began in 1947, into the context of the war is purely a function of revisionist Zionist historiography, and at this point quite plain and simply constitutes Nakba denial. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Presenting highly contested views as mainstream is exactly the problem with this article, and I am afraid you're doing the same in this comment. The Nakba certainly was not a pre-planned ethnic cleansing. While cases of government-backed expulsions did occur, this doesn't mean it was a real policy throughout the war. You are underplaying lots of other causes. ABHammad (talk) 08:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

The Nakba was not just ethnic cleansing, as has been repeated multiple times here in this discussion. However, the ethnic cleansing part did involve clearly planned crimes, not least in the form of Plan Dalet, with its permissive approach to burning and mining villages and expelling the inhabitants of any villages that in any way resisted. So scorched earth tactics and ethnic cleansing. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Same comment here as I made in a reply to KronosAlight, less speechifying and more sourcing please. Selfstudier (talk) 13:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:Tertiary sources like dictionaries and encyclopedias, especially 20-year-old ones, are not the WP:BESTSOURCES. "The Nakba continued after the end of the war in 1949" has cites and quotes in the body. Levivich (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Redundancy

@IOHANNVSVERVS: the text now reads The new draft was approved by the Knesset in March 2011, and became known as the Nakba Law. In 2011, the Knesset passed the Nakba Law [...] And then in the next section, In 2011, Israel enacted a law nicknamed the 'Nakba Law', [...]

Your revert didn't mention any reasoning. Surely we don't want such blatant redundancy? Did you have a different idea for how to fix it? — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 13:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 04:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

The sentence "In 2023, after the United Nations instituted a commemoration day for the Nakba on 15 May, the Israeli ambassador Gilad Erdan remonstrated that the event itself was antisemitic." is now duplicated, existing as the end of a paragraph and its own new paragraph immediately after. An easy edit for anyone with permission. john factorial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks for pointing this out. Levivich (talk) 17:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight

There are two discussion occurring at Talk:1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight#Haifa and Talk:1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight#Unconditional surrender at Haifa: gross misrepresentation discussing whether the article should be edited to further cover the opinions of Benny Morris. Editors are invited to participate. TarnishedPath^talk 07:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Warped narrative that contradicts the facts!

There is just way too much wrong with this whole Wikipedia submission.

I've seen many comments here already of people pointing things out.

The "catastrophe" on May 15, 1948 was an attack on Arab Militia who had attacked Tel Aviv on May 14th.

To call the Nakba an ethnic cleansing is naive and ridiculous because Palestinians and Isreali's are ethnically the same.

If you look at newspaper articles from 1948, you will see them calling all arabs to evacuate. You will see them publicly stating they were going to eliminate all Jews.

That is what lead to Isreal not waiting on United Nations and declaring its independence. Without establishing a state, they wouldnt have the power to defend themselves.

After the war ended, of course Isreal wouldnt let back in the people who fled to help the enemy commit genocide.

Pull up articles from 21-48 in arab nations. You can read translated articles from muslim nations expelling all jews from new muslim nations that was previously the Ottoman empire.

Lastly, this article talks like "palestine" was a thing before 1968.

Just to clarify, for over 400 years before 1921, there was no palestine. That area was known as Jerusalem Sanjak and several other "provinces", none of which were "palestine".

1921, Ottomon empire fell, thats when "Mandate of Palestine" became the designation of the geographical area that had been severed.

After the war in 48, jordan had control of west bank and egypt had gaza. No thoughts or intentions of a "palestine, it was their territory.

Only in 68', after the 6 day war, when isreal took west bank and gaza (arabs started the war and lost the land as part of their surrender).

Did Isreal annex the territory as it was their legal right? Nope. They remained patient and attempted many times to help west bank and gaza become its own state.

So there is just way too much wrong with this Wikipedia article that it should be considered for what it is, utter nonsense! 2001:1970:5569:E600:8A7A:A689:1D3B:2324 (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)