In a May 4 review of Blue Box, a documentary about how the Jewish National Fund (JNF) acquired land in Mandatory Palestine before and after the creation of the State of Israel, Variety writer Alissa Simon strays from evaluating the film’s overall quality to erasing the Jewish people’s ancient connection to the land. She then proceeds to rewrite modern Israeli history, casually overlooking the violent Arab response to the United Nations’ partition plan that would have given the Palestinians a state of their own.
Join the fight for Israel’s fair coverage in the news
Variety Fail #1: Israel’s ‘Land Without a People National Myth’
In ‘‘Blue Box’ Review: The Little-known History of Israel’s Biggest Real Estate Transaction, Simon writes:
Offering a stark contrast to the popular Israeli national myth of “a land without a people for a people without a land,” this multi-layered documentary will inspire much debate and deserves wide distribution.”
To begin with, the Jewish people’s connection to Israel dates back about 3,000 years. For those who do not accept the Biblical narrative, archaeological findings have proven this. By using the words “national myth,” Simon seemingly implies that the drive for Jewish self-determination was illegitimate, little more than a fable detached from the historical record.
Second, Simon suggests that Jews who moved to what was then British Mandatory Palestine — this, prior to Israel’s formal establishment in 1948 — thought they were entering a “land without a people.” In reality, there were in 1947 over one million non-Jewish people in the area – who never formally organized themselves into a functional national entity. Indeed, the Palestinian independence movement took off with the establishment in 1964 of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), a terrorist group committed to Israel’s destruction.
As Zuheir Muhsin, a former head of the PLO‘s Executive Council, said in 1977: “Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only practical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel.…”
Related Reading: What Was the Land of Israel Like Before 1948?
Not only was the local Jewish leadership well aware that Jews were not living in a vacuum, they also sought ways to accommodate the Arab population. For example, Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky insisted on granting full equality, civil rights and cultural autonomy to the Arab minority in any future State of Israel:
Eretz Yisrael [the Land of Israel] on both sides of the Jordan River – its territory is suitable for a million Arabs, for a million of their descendants, for several million Jews – as well as for peace.”
Variety Fail #2: From Partition to Palestinian Refugee Crisis in the Blink of an Eye
Next, ‘Blue Box’ Review: The Little-known History of Israel’s Biggest Real Estate Transaction fast forwards to the rebirth of Israel:
After the partition of Palestine and the declaration of the independent State of Israel in May 1948, five Arab countries attack the new nation.”
What the writer leaves out is that Jewish leaders accepted the UN’s partition plan. Specifically, they agreed to an independent Jewish state alongside an Arab one. The city of Jerusalem was envisioned as an international territory with special status.
On the other hand, the local Arab leadership, along with surrounding Arab governments, rejected any compromise with the Jews, demanding a complete end to all Jewish migration, a halt in the sale of land to Jews and the cancelation of the Balfour Declaration.
Variety Fail #3: Israel Violates UN ‘Right of Return’
For good measure, Variety then accuses the Jewish state of denying the Palestinians a “Right of Return”:
Then comes the problematic decision by Israel to preclude the return of these exiles [who left the country during the 1948 war]…. In apparent defiance of UN Resolution 194, mandating the right of return for the refugees, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion appoints the Israeli government as custodian of the land and then sells 250,000 acres to the JNF…”
Fact check: Contrary to Simon’s claim, Resolution 194, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 11, 1948, did not guarantee a “Right of Return” to Palestinians, never mind an unconditional one. Nor did it specifically mention Arab refugees, thereby indicating that the resolution was aimed at all displaced persons, both Jewish and Arab.
Rather, Resolution 194 recommended that refugees be allowed to return to their homeland if they meet two important conditions:
- That they be willing to live in peace with their neighbors.
- That the return takes place “at the earliest practicable date.”
Nevertheless, many Arab states, including Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen — from which approximately 700,000 Jewish refugees fled after Israel’s establishment — voted against the resolution, perhaps out of fear that they would ultimately be forced to repatriate their Jewish former citizens if Arabs were simultaneously incorporated into nascent Israel.
Slippery Slope: From Evaluating JNF to Undermining the Jewish State
With over four million followers on social media, four podcast series and its own two-time Emmy-winning television series, Variety remains a go-to publication for those interested in the global entertainment industry.
But such a sizeable following obligates Variety‘s editorial board to practice better due diligence.
Blue Box highlights the fact that the Jewish National Fund’s role in Israeli society remains a topic of robust debate. Unfortunately, Variety allowed one of its writers to cynically turn a review of a documentary about JNF’s policies into an attack on the fundamental principles underpinning Jewish self-determination.
This effectively tarnishes the outlet’s reputation for providing self-proclaimed “expert film, TV, digital, music, and theater business analysis and insights.”
Featured Image: Government Press Office archive.
