53One of the largest and oldest historic Palestine cities. It is located 38km north-west of Jerusalem. It was occupied on 11 July 1948. Soon after the city’s occupation, the Zionists made an agreement with its inhabitants that they could stay. Soon after, the Zionists reneged on their promise and detained over 3,000 men in a concentration camp, and on the same day they started looting the city. On 14 July 1948, the city’s inhabitants were ethnically cleansed (forcible expulsion) from the city. Out of the 17,000 Palestinians who used to call al-Ramleh home, only 400 people were allowed to stay.
54Interview with Samiyyeh Abdelrahman Al Taji, Amman, Jordan, mentioned previously, pp.11‒12.
55Located 20km north-east of Gaza. It was fully ethnically cleansed on 12 May 1948.
56Established in 1948 and located north-east of Gaza city.
57It is located 18km north-west of Hebron. It was fully ethnically cleansed following the horrific massacre that the Israeli army committed on 29 October 1948.
58Interview with Mariam Mohammad Nofal (1930), Jabalia refugee camp. The interview was conducted by researcher Na’eemeh Abu Hmaid on 5 Junr 2014, p.12.
59Interview with Rasheedeh Hasan Fdalat, Al Baqaa’ refugee camp, mentioned previously, pp.13‒14.
60Interview with Ameeneh Abdelhamid Ataba, Nazareth, mentioned previously pp.29-31.
61Interview with Samiyyeh Abdelrahman Al Taji, Amman, Jordan, mentioned previously, pp.4‒5.
62Interview with Rasheedeh Hasan Fdalat, Al Baqaa’ refugee camp, Amman, mentioned previously, pp.3‒6.
63Herod’s Gate in Jerusalem. It is a gate in the northern walls of the Old City of Jerusalem. It adjoins the Muslim Quarter, and is a short distance to the east of the Damascus Gate.
64The Orient House was the headquarters of the PLO between 1980 and 1990. It is located in Jerusalem and was originally built in 1897 by Ismail Moussa Alhusayni.
65Interview with Laila Nusseibeh (Al Taji Al Farouqi) (1935), Amman, Jordan. The interview was conducted by researcher Hanan Turki on 11 November 2013, pp.29‒30.
66Interview with Firyal Hana Abu Awad, Santiago, Chile, mentioned previously, p.19.
67Interview with Thurayya Yaseen AlYa’qoubi, Rafah, p.18.
68Interview with Rasheedeh Hasan Fdalat, Al Baqaa’ refugee camp, Amman, mentioned previously, pp.44‒45.
69Interview with Fatima Mohammad Hijazi, Al Baqaa’ refugee camp, Amman, mentioned previously, pp.2, 9 and 10.
70Interview with Khadeejeh Khalil Abuisba, Amman, Jordan, mentioned previously, pp.21, 22 and 26.
71Ibid., pp.3 and 10.
REFERENCES
Al-Dajani, M. and J. Soliman (1995) “Dr. Rosemary Sayegh: Between Anthropology and Oral History”, al-Jana (Beirut), No. 3 (August): 17‒22.
Elsadda, H. (1999) “How to Make Use of Feminist Literature in History Writing”, in F. Abdulhadi (ed.), The Palestinian Women and Memory. Ramallah: Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation.
Gluck, S.B. and D. Patai, eds. (1991) Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. New York and London: Routledge.
Kalildi, W. (1948) Dayr Yasin, 9 April. Beirut: Institute for Palestine Studies, 1999.
Tonkin, E. (1995) Narrating our Pasts: The Social Construction of Oral History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
United Nations (1994) Report of the UN Security Council, S/1994/674, 27 May: 1‒36, http://www.icty.org/x/file/About/OTP/un_commission_of_experts_report1994_en.pdf.
PART IV
The Nakba and 1948 Palestinians
8
The ongoing Nakba: urban Palestinian survival in Haifa
HIMMAT ZUBI
History is written by the victors. Cities are likewise built by the victors; and the history of Haifa, “the city of peace and coexistence”, has been blotted out by the victors who have silenced the story of the Arab Haifa and the narratives of its original residents.
In the absence of a Palestinian archive, the oral history methodology has become of utmost importance for the documentation of the Palestinians’ life before and throughout the Nakba, especially the life of the marginalized communities.
This chapter is derived from the argument that the Palestinian Nakba did not end in 1948 and that it has been a systematic practice rather than a single event. To better comprehend its continuous reality, special attention should be paid to those who remained in Palestine following the occupation.
As in historical narratives based on oral history, this study addresses a specific subject in terms of time and space, and presents the experience and lives of urban Palestinians who remained in Haifa after the Nakba. It does not attempt to portray pre-Nakba and post-Nakba life in Haifa. Yet by shedding light on the lives of the remaining townspeople, as portrayed in their memories, it contributes to historicizing the different aspects of this population’s life, that are still absent from Palestinian and global studies.
This study is based on the explicit and concealed contents of the oral testimonies of twelve Palestinian residents of Haifa, in addition to a few other published testimonies. As well as archival documents, this chapter tells the story of Haifa from the perspective of its indigenous Palestinian residents. It places a special emphasis on the meaning of the Nakba that their city has gone through; why they decided to leave/stay and the ways they resisted the attempts to eliminate them during and following the Nakba. Moreover, the study divulges the reality of their lives, highlighting the changes that occurred in their everyday life from their own perspective, and the present‒absent “silence box”1 of their stories.
THE ONGOING NAKBA
The Zionist project carries within it features of the settler-colonial project (Masalha 2012; Wolfe 2006) and is mainly based on the concept of elimination and effacement that does not necessarily relate to genocides (Wolfe 2006).
In 1948, the Zionist movement expelled 750,000 Palestinians, 90% of whom were townspeople. Moreover, 420 villages were evacuated and destroyed (Khalidi 2006). This was followed by the declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel upon the ruins of the Palestinian people.
The 1948 Nakba did not mark the end of the attempts to remove the Palestinians. It was the beginning of the elimination of the physical space and of the Palestinian body, which continue. The Nakba is not merely a memorable historical event. It is an ongoing tragedy; a limitless disaster in terms of time and space (Khoury 2012). It is a continuous trauma for the refugees, and for the Palestinians in the occupied territories (within the 1948 and 1967 borders) (Masalha 2012). The ongoing Nakba is accompanied by continuous attempts to efface and expel the Palestinians from history and time.
Studies about the pre-Nakba period are of immense importance, for there is documented evidence of the Palestinian existence on this land before they were uprooted. Moreover, socio-historical studies, especially those which used oral testimonies as a liberal methodology (Masalha 2012), have greatly contributed to reintegrating the Palestinians, including the marginalized populations, into history (Sayigh 2002; Masalha 2012; Zu’bi 2012; Sa’di and Abu-Lughod 2007).
However, the history of those who remained in their homeland after the Nakba, particularly the urban Palestinians, and the impact of the ongoing Nakba on their daily lives, are still absent from the field of research generally, and from Palestinian studies particularly.
The Nakba of the Palestinian cities
The Palestinian cities did not survive the Nakba. While some Palestinian villages remained safe from collective displacement and total destruction (Manna 2016), the Zionist military forces conducted a semi-complete effacement of the vast majority of Palestinian cities (Rashid al-Haj Ibrahim 2005).
The Palestinian cities were targeted directly after Operation Nachshon.2 It was the first operation in Plan Dalet,3 and special attention was paid to the main cities in Palestine (Pappé 2006: 103). Following the Deir Yassin massacre on 9 April,4 and further to the implementation of Plan Dalet, Zionist military forces violently targeted the Palestinian cities. This led to
their fall between mid-April and late May5 1948 (Khalidi 2008). The occupation of the Palestinian cities included the semi-complete evacuation of their Palestinian residents.
Israeli statistics reported in official correspondence during 1948‒1949 indicate that only 26,000 Palestinian civilians, out of 202,000, survived expulsion during the Nakba.6 Another document details the number of survivors in each city, based on a report issued by the Minorities Ministry and entitled “News of the Arabs in Israel and the Occupied Territories”. The document included the handwritten word “classified”, and indicated that according to reported data of the Minorities Ministry, dating back to 23 August 1948 and referring to the number of non-Jews, 4,000 Arabs remained in Yafa, 600‒800 in Al-Lydd, 150 in Ramlah, 4,500 in Haifa, while not one Palestinian remained in Safad and Tiberias.7
These figures were modified at a later stage,8 particularly after conducting a preparatory survey prior to the elections to the Constituent Assembly.9 Despite the slight modification of the numbers,10 these figures demonstrate the semi-complete ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian cities, as the percentage of the remaining Palestinians did not exceed 10% of the original residents.11
The Nakba and the fall of Haifa
As in other Palestinian cities and villages, the city of Haifa witnessed anger and tension following the declaration of United Nations Partition Plan in November 1947. Further to the strike declared by the Arab Higher Committee in response to the Partition Plan, the Arab city witnessed violence, and bombs were thrown by the Zionist forces.
The attacks continued throughout the months that preceded the occupation of Haifa. They resulted in many killed and wounded, and evoked fear among the Palestinians, many of whom fled the city. The displacement had particularly increased in the second month of 1948, and Palestinians fled the city, although since its establishment in December 1948 the National Committee of Haifa12 had repeatedly called on the residents of Haifa to remain in the city (Khalidi 2008).
The events in Haifa caused some Palestinian leaders to flee the city (Pappe 2006). Some left Haifa, heading to the Arab countries to consult the Higher Arab Committee or the military leadership, as was the case with Rashid Al-Hajj Ibrahim. He left Haifa on 8 April 1948, for an urgent meeting with Amin al-Husseini in Cairo, and with President Shukri al-Quwatli, along with members of the military committee in Damascus. However, Haifa fell before his return, as indicated in his memoirs (Rashid al-Haj Ibrahim 2005).
The Haganah attack on Haifa started early on 21 April 1948,13 and ended the next day, upon the fall of the city to the Zionists. The attacks had been a combination of bombardments with heavy machine guns and mortars and psychological warfare through continuous noisemaking through the evening until midnight (Rashid al-Haj Ibrahim 2005: 30).14 The exodus of the Palestinian residents of Haifa, which started on 22 April, was a spontaneous reaction to the tactics of the Haganah.
EVERYDAY LIFE IN HAIFA FROM ITS RESIDENTS’ PERSPECTIVE
Based on interviews with native Palestinians in Haifa, this section addresses the experience of Haifa’s Palestinian residents before and after the city’s fall. Interpreting the interviewees’ experiences before and during the Nakba, first why did Palestinians leave during the Nakba?
Additionally, using archival and periodical documents, the daily lives of the Palestinian residents in Haifa after the Nakba are illustrated, and why this actuality was concealed from their testimonies is explained.
Haifa before its fall
Compared with other major Palestinian towns, Haifa is a relatively newly established city, whose history of development dates to the second half of the eighteenth century.15
Haifa had entered a phase of rapid growth following the construction of a branch line for the Hejaz railway, connecting the city to the main line between Damascus and Medina. Haifa’s port became a reception point for Mecca’s pilgrims, and a main site for wheat exports; hence it served many regions (Al-Bahri 1922; Mansour 2006).
The British forces occupied Haifa in 1918. The first fifteen years of the British Mandate constituted a significant stage in the city’s development. During that period, the Mandatory government invested special efforts to develop the city in a way that reflected its policies and political aspirations (Seikaly 2002). Despite the aspirations of the British mandate, and its military interests and collusion with the Zionist forces, the Arabs had benefited from these developments and prosperity. The Palestinian contributions to the city transformed it into the biggest industrial centre in the region, and it benefited from the establishment of the new port and the oil refineries in the early 1930s. Haifa entered a new phase of industrial prosperity that attracted thousands of new residents, seeking employment (Yazbak 2010; Seikaly 2002).
Haifa Umm El-a’mal (Haifa the mother of labour)
Due to the aforementioned reasons and the difficult economic situation facing peasants, resulting from the British policy regarding the lands (Faris 2014; Seikaly 2002; Abdo 1987), the city of Haifa had witnessed an 80% increase in its Arab population in the period between 1931 and 1944. This is a significant increase when compared to other Palestinian cities at that time16 (Yazbak 1988).
Thousands of Palestinians had arrived in Haifa from various localities (Faris 2014). While the clear majority of Haifa’s Arab inhabitants came from inside Palestine, the city also hosted migrants, from the adjoining Arab regions such as Syria and Lebanon (Seikaly 2002: 48), as indicated by Abu Raed’s17 testimony:
We are originally from Afghanistan; my grandfather was a Sheikh and one of the “People of the House”. He lived in Haifa. We had two houses at Sirkin Street, leading to the market. He [my grandfather] was wandering throughout Greater Syria to heal and help people. During his wanderings, he met my grandmother, and they got married in Damascus. My grandmother is a descendant of the Horani family from Syria.
Abu Raed’s family was not the only family with relations in Arab and Muslim regions. The interviews conducted with the Palestinian residents of Haifa who remained after the Nakba demonstrate that many of them have family ties with adjoining Arab localities, especially on the wife’s part. As Umm Nour stated:
I am originally from Haifa, but I was not born there. My mother gave birth to me in Lebanon, in Batroun [village]. After their wedding, my mother and father lived in Haifa. However, prior to [my] delivery, my mother was going to her parents in Lebanon. Nothing could be compared to the woman’s experience of delivery alongside her parents.
In this regard, Haifa was not very different from other coastal Palestinian cities (Ziadeh 2010; Tamari 2008). Like Ziadeh’s (2010) Tripoli, which hosted different groups, thus enriching the landscape with a sort of diversity, Haifa had also featured such demography. It had a diverse society, where long-standing inhabitants coexisted with Muslim and Christian immigrants from inland towns (Seikaly 2002).
The city’s port and open borders contributed to Haifa’s economic prosperity and diverse markets (Seikaly 2002). The markets’ names demonstrate that the city was an integral part of the Arab sphere; and the inhabitants’ testimonies are an indicator of the city’s lifestyle and of its relationship with its Arab neighbours on the one hand, and with other countries on the other:
My father was a fabric merchant; he was importing fabrics from Europe, the Greater Syria and the Muslim countries, but mainly from the Greater Syria. He had a shop in Al-Shwam [Greater Syria] market, where he also had an associate. That market was overcrowded, like the old market of Nazareth, but it extended over a big area. (Umm Elias)
The open borders and being an integral part of the Arab world was also clear in Umm Nabil’s testimony:
I remember the fabric shop of Abu Fadel in Al-Shwam market. He had English fabrics [imported from England]. It was for men’s fabrics. There was also ‘Azam’s shop for women’s fabrics; they used to bring the fabrics from Europe. When my mother wanted to sew us clothes for the holidays, she used to go to Al-Shwam market. I used to go with her to see the throng in the market. There were also spi
ces and seasonings. Al-Shwam [the Syrians] were bringing everything.
Those who did not move from the countryside to the city had also benefited from Haifa’s markets, where they sold their rural products, as Salwa testified:
The vegetables were brought from the villages around Haifa: from Shefa-‘Amr, I’billin and Tamra. The most important products were the eggs and the dairy products. The Bedouin women used to bring eggs, chickens and milk from the nearby villages to sell them in the market early in the morning.
Prosperity was not limited to the markets for fabrics and food. It also included the construction industry. Describing his family business, Abu Raed said: “My father had two trucks and a quarry. All the stones of which the houses in Abbas Street were built were brought by my father from Qabatiya and Jenin”.
Haifa’s economic progress and prosperity were reflected in the establishment of national institutions (Hasan 2008). For example, on 1 July 1919, a chamber of commerce was founded in Haifa to run the city’s economy, facilitate trade and represent the traders to the government in all trade-related procedures, through twelve members, including a president, whom the traders elected once every two years (Al-Bahri 1922).
The diary of Rashid al-Hajj Ibrahim (2005) points to the establishment of many social, educational and cultural Arab institutions in the city. For example, there was the Orthodox club where literary, scientific and political lectures were held. The Islamic Association (1992) and the Arab Orphans’ Committee (1940) were also established in the city (Rashid al-Haj Ibrahim 2005: 227).
The press was also strong in Haifa, especially after the Ottoman countercoup of 1908 in Istanbul, which obliged the Ottoman sultan to grant more freedom. In consequence, various journals and newspapers were established (Al-Bahri 1922).18
Within the framework of this cultural and intellectual prosperity, the city also hosted theatre plays performed by great actors of the Palestinian theatre in Haifa and Yafa.19 During that period, it was common for Haifa, like other Arab and Palestinian cities, to host Arab artists. The most outstanding performances were by the musician Farid al-Atrash and his sister Asmahan. Oum Kolthoum also performed in Al-Inshirah Theatre in the city (Hasan 2008; Mansour 2011).
An Oral History of the Palestinian Nakba Page 24