There is much debate as to the existence of Palestine as a state, nation, or ethnicity. Golda Meir said, “There was no such thing as Palestinians” while having Palestine on her birth certificate. It was an ancient name in reference to the Philistines (often as an insult), and arguably just a borrowed term by the survivors of the Nakba. Some insist it is a purely modern contrivance, yet I find it common in every history book I own predating the creation of the State of Israel going back into the 19th Century. Ironically, “Israel” was typically absent from nearly all historical maps, being only a kingdom for a few centuries within what can more neutrally be called Cannan, or the Holy Land, or the Levant. However, there was always a LAND of Israel, at least as an ethnic shibboleth to the Jewish People. In that sense, Israel and Palestine were synonyms of the same place. But to be honest and accurate, since 1948, the STATE of Israel established itself in what was traditionally called the land of Palestine, and is not synonymous in borders. (British) Palestine was no longer a state, and has been until 2012, when the people living in the remainder of the mandate were given the status of non-member observer state of the United Nations General Assembly. Of course, this does not line up nicely with having two governments — if they can be called that, and neither of which are really in control. Why the UN did this will become apparent as you read on.
But enough summary. We can split hairs all day, and some arguments are far more honest than others, but it is all beside the point.
We must ask WHY is it so important to challenge the name Palestine or the existence of a Palestinian People? Like the term African-Americans, Palestinian is a reference to a people living under a common circumstance. These ethnic groups are not homogenous, but several are declared indigenous by international standards. Their commonality is being powerless, unrecognized refugees in a homeland they lived in — under ANY name and under various rulers — some for a thousand years or more. On one hand, it is intentionally defining a population for political purposes. On the other, preventing any label leaves a group even more vulnerable and voiceless.
Let’s look more closely why we may denigrate a name. We can assume (or presume) that a name legitimizes the existence of a people, and therefore any claim to a homeland. If we want to deny legitimacy because a group of people did not have their own (named) state, nation, or kingdom, then we find ourselves back in pre-war Europe. It was for this very reason that Jews (and Romani, etc.) were so susceptible to lacking protection as citizens or even people with rights by powers that decided affairs on borders and the legal status of human beings. Similar moral permissions of the Holocaust and Palestine can be drawn here. The rheotirc is eerily the same, all the more shameful because the descendants who survived the one are now using it to be on the other side of history.
When you see people attack the name “Palestine” and say there is no “Palestinian People”, what you are really hearing is that they are not legitimate human beings, and certainly not entitled to any sovereignty (as a state OR citizen) over the lands they’ve lived in before 1948, many for generations going back untold centuries. This isn’t even primarily about who has the power, but who is refused it. This is the definition of Apartheid and why the shoe fits. Israel could have given citizenship to the people who lived there and were displaced, but only did so sparingly and selectively. After all, how can a “Democracy” based on ethnicity survive if they are a minority? It can’t, which is why it is why the only resolution is annexation and genocide, the order being unimportant.
It’s disappointing that we can’t be more clear on this: Not being “a” people doesn’t make human beings not people. If we had grasped this a hundred years ago, there would have been no Dachau, or Auschwitz, or Treblinka. None of that would have been possible if Jews were given equal rights as protected citizens wherever they chose to call home and probably lived long before lines were drawn and redrawn in WWI and previous conflicts. Instead, the apartheid against Jews in Europe has been templated upon the untenable occupation of lands most of us recognize by the name Palestine.
No wonder in June 2024, the State of Palestine was recognized as a sovereign state by 145 of the 193 member states of the United Nations. They know that to some, non-recognition is an excuse to deny not just a homeland, but human rights and even life itself. A name isn’t much. But it’s still an impediment in the path of rhetoric from ethnonationalism to genocide. Look carefully at those who wish to remove it