Unknown Occupations

Oslo-Based Palestinian Writer Ahmad Abu Matar, in a televised debate with the former head of the Arab Writers Union, asks a question:

“Ahmad Abu Matar: “My colleague, Dr. ‘Ali ‘Oqla ‘Orsan, said, regarding the question of why we have forgotten Alexandretta, that it is all a question of priorities. To be honest, I do not understand these priorities. Alexandretta was occupied in 1936, and we have forgotten about it, and Al-Ahwaz was occupied in 1925, and we have forgotten about it. Palestine was occupied in 1948 - so what are the priorities? Do you want to liberate the first region to fall, or the last? If you want to start with the last region - go ahead and issue just one statement about the UAE islands occupied by Iran. This proves that there is a defect in the thinking of the anti-normalization committees.”

He is asking why the Palestinian cause is privileged by the Arab world, while other similar cases have been completely forgotten and even discarded from the Arab nationalist agenda?

It is a variation on the question asked by Andre Glucksmann:

“…On the scales of world opinion, some Muslim corpses are light as a feather, and others weigh tonnes. Two measures, two weights…. why do the 200,000 slaughtered Muslims of Darfur not arouse even half a quarter of the fury caused by 200-times fewer dead in Lebanon? Must we deduce that Muslims killed by other Muslims don’t count? This conclusion has its weak spots, because if the Russian Army - Christian, and blessed by their popes - razes the capital of Chechnian Muslims… killing tens of thousands of children in the process, this doesn’t count either. The Security Council does not hold meeting after meeting, and the Organization of Islamic States piously averts its eyes. From that we may conclude that the world is appalled only when Israelis kill a Muslim.

Should we thus presume that the public at large implicitly endorses the ideas that Ahmadinedjad shouts at the top of his lungs? And yet so many of those sceptics who display consternation over bombings in Lebanon seem shocked if you suspect them of anti-Semitism. I want to trust them. We don’t want to imagine that the entire planet is mired in anti-Jewish paranoia! But then the matter becomes even more puzzling. What is the source of this hemiplegia? Why is the world frightened by Israeli bombs alone?”

Here is some information about the two cases:

1. Alexandretta:

There is a deep rooted disagreement between Turkey and Syria over the Hatay Province.

Syrians hold the view that this land was illegally ceded to Turkey by France, the mandatory occupying power of Syria in the late 1930s. Syria still considers it an integral part of its own territory. Syrians call this land Liwa' aliskenderun (Arabic: لواء الاسكندرون‎) rather than the Turkish name of Hatay.

The referendum which was organized in 1939 by the French-backed Republic of Hatay remains a cause of tension in relations between Turkey and Syria. The referendum has been labelled phoney by the journalist Robert Fisk [3]. Official Syrian maps still show Hatay as a part of Syria (e.g. [4]). Historical details of this transfer of land from Syrian sovereignty to Turkish rule are given in "The Alexandretta Dispute" article published in the American Journal of International Law [5].

The French decision to cede the province to Turkey influenced Syrian President Hashim al-Atassi to resign in protest at continued French intervention in Syrian affairs, maintaining that the French were obliged to refuse the annexation under the Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence of 1936. However, under the leadership of Syrian President Bashar al Assad from 2000 onwards there was a lessening of tensions between Turkey and Syria over the Hatay issue. Indeed, in early 2005, when visits from Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Turkish prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan opened a way to discussions between two states, it was claimed that the Syrian government announced it had no claims to sovereignty concerning Hatay any more.[6]. On the other hand there has been no official announcement by the Syrians relinquishing their rights of sovereignty.

Following changes to Turkish land registry legislation in 2003 a large number of properties in Hatay were purchased by Syrian nationals, mostly people who in fact had been residents of Hatay since the 1930s but had retained their Syrian citizenship and were in fact buying the properties that they already occupied. By 2006 the amount of land owned by Syrian nationals in Hatay exceeded the legal limit for foreign ownership of 0.5%, and sale of lands to foreigners was prohibited. ^[3] (see Foreign purchases of real estate in Turkey for more details}.

There has been a policy of cross border co-operation, on the social and economic level, between Turkey and Syria in the recent years. This allowed related families divided by the winded border to freely visit each other during the festive periods of Christmas and Eid. In December 2007 up to 27,000 Syrians and Turks crossed to border to visit their brethren on the other side. [7][8]

2. The Ahwazi Arab in Iran:

The Governor of Dashte-Azdegan in Khuzestan, a province in southwestern Iran where the majority of inhabitants are indigenous Arabs, declared that this region has the highest incidence of malnutrition among children in comparison to other cities and regions in Iran. [-]

What is the fault of the Ahwazi Arab indigenous people of Khuzestan that their children are being subjected to this hunger and malnutrition? ...

How would the Iranian ruling class in Tehran, which considers itself to be a part of the “Aryan Race” and habitually disrespects the indigenous Arabs of Iran, explains this tragedy? ... Why should the Arab inhabited province of Khuzestan, which produces over 4 million barrels of oil per day, be left backward and hungry, while the Persian provinces of Tehran, Yazd, Isfahan and Fars benefit from all the wealth generated by Ahwazi produced oil?

During the previous regime of the Shah, the name of this part of Khuzestan was changed from the Arabic name of Khafajieh to Dashtmishan. The current regime changed it to Azedegan. Both names were forced on the indigenous Ahwazi Arab inhabitants. Why? To de-Arabise and Persianize the area? Was this done to negate its historical identity?

Past and present Iranian regimens have attempted, but failed, to completely eradicate indigenous Ahwazi Arab identity, is it now the time to starve them to death? so as to force them off their oil-rich land? Is this why there is a new campaign of ethnic cleansing and hatred in Tehran led by individuals such as Mr. Mohsen Rezaie, Varjavand, Bavand, and Mirmehrdad Sanjari, or racist newspapers and websites in Tehran such as Shargh, Baztab and similar racist publications and websites that promote hate and ethnic cleansing against the indigenous Ahwazi Arabs of al-Ahwaz (Khuzestan). Is there an end in sight?

Past and present Iranian regimes have forcefully confiscated the lands of indigenous Arab peasants in Shoush, Dash-Azedagen, Ahwaz and other places, changed their names, degraded, disrespected , humiliated their indigenous Arabs inhabitants, and continuously mock them in their textbooks and publications. Is the ultimate aim total annihilation of over 4.5 million indigenous Ahwazi Arab inhabitants of Southwestern Iran through hunger and malnutrition?


Two facts strike me as I read of these disputed territories.

In the case of Alexandretta, even though Syria still considers it an integral part of its own territory, there has been a policy of cross border co-operation, on the social and economic level, between Turkey and Syria and even a renunciation of claims of sorts. Which means that where there is a will, there a way of coming to grips with territorial losses...

In the case of the Ahwazi Arabs, what strikes most is the total silence in the Arab world, and in the world, about their obviously wretched plight. Why the silence? Why the acceptance of such crimes against the humanity of the Ahwazi Arabs?

Which tells me that there is no will to continue the conflict with Turkey, and there is no will to compassion when it comes to the Ahwazis.

Which tells me that the whole moral outrage whipped up against Israel in its dealings with Palestinians is just a cynical ploy. And this suggests that its success relies on ingrained contempt for the dhimmi Jews. It's the outrage that ensues when age-old social orders are toppled, when the last become first, when the trampled, the despised, the cowering caste of Jews suddenly become sovereign, independent, and implacable in their resolve of never again.

It is the rage experienced by a deeply-racist culture against those whom the culture holds to be inferior.