The terminology that the media uses conveys so much!
And we, the consumers of their news reports, are often so uninformed
and/or unthinking that we swallow the hook embedded in the tidbits that
they feed us. So it is that, on the West Bank, Jews live in "settlements"
while Arabs live in towns, villages, and cities. And while we're at it
there's the term "West Bank" itself.
Like most folks, I'm comfortable with "West Bank" as a
neutral, innocent, geographical phrase ..while the use of "Judea and Samaria" is
politically motivated and is what the "settlers" and right wing Israelis
call it ...right?
Actually that's wrong! It's another rewrite of history
that we've swallowed. Consider the following:
"They (Judea and Samaria) are the definitive and
proper political and geographic names for the region and have been in
general use since Clearchus, a disciple of Aristotle. These two areas have no other
names. These names were used during the League of Nations Mandate period. They
appear in British government documents, United Nations documents
including the UN Partition Plan of 1947. They appear in U.S. State
Department documents, including a July 18, 1948 map. Even as late as
1961, the Encyclopedia
Britannica refers to “Judaea” and “Samaria” in an article on
“Palestine” (Vol. 17, p. 118).
Trans-Jordan illegally invaded Judea-Samaria in 1948
and as a result of its aggression occupied that region. It then
unilaterally annexed the area on April 4, 1950, which was recognized
by only two nations, the
United Kingdom and
Pakistan.

The Judea and Samaria regions are
indicated on
this detail of a French map of the area from 1791. |
The
Arab League, their Muslim supporters, anti-Israel elements and
anti-Semites, deliberately sought to rob the region of its correct
political and geographic name. They had to fabricate a brand new name
for they could find no other name for the territory. Mislabeling was
their technique of disinformation and de-legitimization. The “West Bank”
was the name concocted by
King Abdullah I of Trans-Jordan and his British advisors,
allowing the king to annex land outside of his artificially “created”
kingdom. He then changed the name of his kingdom twice, first to “The
Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan” but that was quickly rejected since it
gave the appearance of a kingdom only along the banks of the
Jordan River. The
name then was changed again to the “Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.”
The term “West Bank” eradicates all Jewish historical connection to the
area. It is a sad commentary that many in the West, including the
political left, many of
Israel’s supporters, some Israelis themselves, as well as the
naive and self-delusional who think the name does not matter, have
acquiesced to this unilateral change of names and use it in common
parlance. But the name does matter. Similarly, the Arabs insist on
calling the Persian Gulf, the “Arabian Gulf” and Iran’s Khuzistan
province, “Arabistan.” Why then doesn’t much of the world call the
Persian Gulf “Arabian?” Is there a double standard at work here?
Besides the political origins of the phrase, one must
wonder from a geographical perspective how wide a river bank can be? A
river bank may be a few feet or so, but not some 30 miles deep from the
river! Just because a new name is invented, does not mean the world
should adopt it in common usage. Does an aggressor get rewarded with the
additional bonus of a geographic name change designed to eradicate the
historic name of a region? In March 1939, Germany renamed the
present-day Czech Republic, “Böhmen und Mähren” after seizing that land
by aggressive act. During World War II, Germany invaded, occupied and
annexed part of Russia calling it “Ostland.” Do we use those terms
today? Do we call Mexico the “South Bank” because it borders on the Rio
Grande? Should we rename Serbia, the “West Bank” (of Europe) because it
lies to the west of the Danube River and re-designate Poland the “East
Bank” due to its location east of the Oder-Neisse Rivers?
| “If you tell a lie long enough, loud
enough, and often enough the people will believe it.” |
— Adolph Hitler
Mein Kempf |
|
|
Long before most of media capitulated to protests
over Danish cartoons and statements by the Pope, the media and many in
the world, out of fear and intellectual laziness agreed to obfuscate the
truth by surrendering the use of the name Judea-Samaria and adopt the
term “West Bank.”
The Roman emperor Hadrian in 135 CE after suppressing
the Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba, attempted to eradicate Jewish
nationhood, statehood and any connection to the Land of Israel. He
renamed the territory “Palestina” - after the Philistines, the ancient
adversaries of the Israelites. Seeking to erase the Jewish connection to
Jerusalem the Romans razed the city and named the city built atop the
rubble, “Aelia Capitolina.” Nevertheless as late as the 4th century, the
Christian author, Epiphanius, referred to “Palestina, that is Judea.”
Despite this “Palestina” is still Israel, Aelia Capitolina is still
Jerusalem and the West Bank is still Judea-Samaria.
Dr. Steve Carol
Prof. of History (retired)
Senior Fellow Center for Advanced Middle East Studies www.camesinfo.com
Official Historian “Middle East Radio Forum” www.middleeastradioforum.org
Scottsdale, Arizona
http://www.contender.org/articles/gstart001.htm