Premium
the surrogate colonization of Palestine, 1917–1939
Author(s) -
ATRAN SCOTT
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
american ethnologist
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.875
H-Index - 78
eISSN - 1548-1425
pISSN - 0094-0496
DOI - 10.1525/ae.1989.16.4.02a00070
Subject(s) - settlement (finance) , internalism and externalism , indigenous , zionism , mandatory palestine , political science , externalism , politics , power (physics) , political economy , law , palestine , sociology , history , ancient history , economics , philosophy , ecology , physics , finance , epistemology , quantum mechanics , payment , biology
The “surrogate colonization” of Palestine had a foreign power giving to a non‐native group rights over land occupied by an indigenous people. It thus brought into play the complementary and conflicting agendas of three culturally distinguishable parties: British, Jews and Arabs. Each party had both “externalist” [those with no sustained practical experience of day to day life in Palestine] and “internalist” representatives. The surrogate idea was based on a “strategic consensus” involving each party's externalist camp: the British ruling elite, the leadership of the World Zionist Organization and the Hashemite Dynasty of Arabia. The collapse of this triangular consensus, which put an end to the policy but not the process of surrogate colonization, resulted from irreconcilable antagonisms within and between the major currents of each internalist camp. A focus on the land problem in Palestine highlights contradictions in each party's internalist agenda, which forestalled a rift between the Jewish and British sides of the consensus long enough for the Zionist settlement in Palestine (Yishuv) to acquire territory and to develop a largely self‐sufficient economic, cultural, political and military infrastructure.[Palestine, Zionism, British empire, fellaheen, land settlement]