Because each one of them had an empire that rule the middle east. And each one of them wants everyone else to return to their empire. And each one of them wants everyone to forget about their brutal empire and blame the West .
The post-WWII push for Arab unity reveals how complex and deeply fractured the region’s political landscape was. While some leaders like Nuri al-Said of Iraq envisioned an inclusive federation, others like Egypt’s al-Nahas sought to dominate the unity agenda for national interests. What’s fascinating is how external powers, particularly Britain, simultaneously supported and manipulated these movements, often hindering true collaboration. This pattern of conflicting ambitions mirrored in later Arab-Israeli conflicts-where territorial aspirations among Arab states undermined collective action-reminds us that both unity and discord were intricately tied to the ambitions of regional power players.
Maybe. Just maybe. A group broad enough to hold 400 million people in a dozen countries or more don't actually have that much in common. Different histories, different politics, different schools of their religion, different minorities. Why would they WANT to be absorbed and boiled down into whatever the person in charge thinks "Pan Arab" is?
These are the exact reasons why a United States of Africa is ridiculous and doesn't make sense. Cramming over a billion people with thousands of languages and dialects, countlessly different and clashing cultures, and wildly different often poor economic conditions. Yet somehow, there are still ninnies who think it's possible. Truly baffling
"in a dozen countries or more don't actually have that much in common. Different histories, different politics, different schools of their religion, different minorities" None of it stopped German unification.
@AbyssIsSalvationHistory You didn't just seriously compare the union of an area the size of the US to the union of Germany, and the differences between Levantines, Arabians, Egyptians, Berbers and others to the differences between Hannoverians and Bavarians. That's not serious talk
@@hegantank6495 Simply put the Assyrians were way too few in number to form a viable state. Add to that the fact that they were seamlessly integrated in to the society of the day, it just wouldn't have made sense. Most arguments would be based on the ethnic/religious tensions brought on by arab nationalism and further stoked by western meddling in arab internal politics.
@@hegantank6495 Being genocided is a horrible thing but it doesn’t automatically mean you deserve a gigantic state of your own. The ottomans genocided nearly every single ethnic minority they had
I appreciate seeing this history summarized here. We hear a lot these days about national aspirations, but between ~1917 and 1948, most of the Arab population (excepting Egypt), at least as reported in the western press, thought of themselves primarily as Arabs, and aspired to be part of a larger pan-Arab nation. Although British and French machinations and Zionist complications certainly played a role in this never coming to pass, it was very largely infighting among those who aspired to lead such a nation that resulted in fragmentation of the Arab world.
It’s basically as Lawrence described in his accounts of the Arabs, following his insurgency against the Ottomans. Everyone had to make an appointment at all, was because of them, and therefore they deserved to be in charge, because their people were the truest, most glorious, most brave and worthy Arabs. And because of this prideful and temperamental culture, nobody could get along and cooperate well enough to actually create a federation. He notes the fundamental culture of the Arabs is all about pride and hierarchy; they are extremely sensitive as to societal position and status.
As an Egyptian, I cringe when I hear someone call us Arabs, my grandfather was even angrier than I am, because he lived through all of this. We should have never gotten into this dumb idea to begin with. Nasser destroyed Egyptian nationalism for this, he brainwashed the Egyptians to think that they were Arabs.
This is literally just not true. Britain and France distributed land based on economic incentives. They had no care for the Arabs and guess what? The Arabs never actually desired a pan Arab state. It’s like people who think the United States of Africa is a good idea or desires by any Africans.
You are a really an enrichment to the History Szene the online one that Cover the History of the Staates and Areas that Not interesting for the West and the Media. How many Channels have Videos about the same Wars and Events. Really Great Job Guy ❤
This is a test comment because I think my account is flagged to where any risky speech is set to review by an ai, Israel, Palestine, Jew, Muslim. Well boys lets see if it works!
This is a test comment because I think my account is flagged to where any risky speech is set to review by an ai, Israel, Palestine, Jew, Muslim. Well boys lets see if it works!
It’s like saying why didn’t Europe unite when the Romans ruled most of Europe. Sovereignty rises as nations diversify. Slowly a nation has a harder time combining millions of diverse people which leads to utter chaos and eventually balkanization.
Watching this reminds me of the dummies who think a Pan-African state is possible. All the obvious, common sense reasons are there, yet they still persist in this delusion
I once heard that a Pan Indian state would have never happened on its own, but outside forces and governance is what made them close, barring the obvious outlier (Pakistan)
@thesenate1844 The thing is, India has a lot of cultural and religious similarities. The majority of the nation is Hindu, or something similar to it, and outliers being so small it didn't matter. Ethnic wise, it's sort of the same. Africa, on the other hand, does not have any of this. A good half of this continent is split between Islam and Christianity, and even then, there are more denominational splits. Massive, often competing, and potentially hostile ethnicities living in the same regions, example Rwanda and major language difference. I mean my country South Africa has 11 official languages, along with a whole bunch of others that aren't officially recognized because they aren't in large enough numbers. Furthermore, major economic differences. South Africa and Botswana are the two of the continents most developed economies. This isn't the case for the vast majority of Africa. If a Pan-African state were to emerge, then the burden of improving these poor states would fall on these developed economies disproportionately. It's just possible or practical
@lephinor2458 India doesn't have a terrorism issue, that's something their neighbours (Pakistan, Bangladesh) are struggling with majorly, one even aiding and abetting them. If you're referring to Hindutva, they're not nearly as bad. If I'm wrong please correct me.
@@mixkid3362A hypothetical Pan African state would by definition include all the countries more closely associated with the Arab world like Egypt. While a united high tech afrofuturist utopia would be awesome, its not going to happen. Thats like expecting all of Eurasia to unite purely because they share the same landmass.
I don't think the video fully addresses the question, 'Why did the Arabs fail to unite?' To answer this, one must explore why the region wasn't unified into a single nation during Ottoman rule. Additionally, it's important to consider that large parts of the area were still under tribal rule, and sectarian religious factions dominated the landscape. This was not just a matter of personal ambitions and power politics.
Cmon Jabzy, don't do this to me. Im at work. I need to concentrate and focus on my work. You cant release an hour long video during work hours (9am-5pm). 😭😭😭😭 I MUST FOCUS ON WORK!!!!!
10:21 Small mistake, they were called Village Institutes, and they were modeled on an educational plan drafted by John Dewey during his visit to Turkey in 1925 at the invite of Atatürk. The infrastructure for the plan began with Saffet Arıkan in 1937 when he started opening Teacher’s Schools to provide adequate supply of teachers for the upcoming educational mobilization. With Hasan Ali Yücel and Ismail Haklı Tonguç, the project’s funding and the attention given to it increased drastically. Hasan Ali Yücel also translated many philosophical works and classic literature into Turkish for the first time. Some graduates of the Village Institutes are still alive, such as pianist İdil Biret.
As an amazigh moroccan, pan arabist has never happened and we will never allow it to happen. Every night i reread the 'Battle of Nobles' wikipedia page for goodvibes
34:30 Nonsense. In the Tantura (2022) documentary there is a iTf man who says that they took a pregnant woman, made bets whether the baby is a boy or a girl, disemboweled and cut her stomach open to check who won, another one talking about school children who were raising their the hands, the same way kids do in a classroom, after he rounded them up. He then kept firing. Both laughing merrily and casually at the recollection. In another documentary '1948: Creation & Catastrophe', a survivor speaks about women getting violated infront of their family members by iTf. She was a child at the time and still wept as an elderly woman. For more recent atrocities, "Breaking the Silence" record statements by the iTf themselves, they recount the events witht he same casualty their forebears do.
8:34 They just described operation Nakam, which had the full awareness of the prime minister at the time. Joseph Harmatz, posing as a Polish displaced person (DP) named "Maim Mendele", attempted to infiltrate the municipal water supply in Nuremberg;, Led by Abba Kovner, the group sought to kill six million Germans in a form of indiscriminate revenge, "a nation for a nation". "every accusation is a confession" Indeed.
16:39 had no idea the ottomans had such liberal policies with regards to land purchases / joke - This is myth had been debunked numerious times before, no one owned the land to be able to sell it. The ottomans ran a feudal system, the Sultan outrightly refused to sell the land, even if it meant debt relief for the ottomans. Hertzl himself begged him for it, he still was refused.
34:30 Nonsense. In the Tantura (2022) documentary there is a iTf man who says that they took a pregnant woman, made bets whether the baby is a boy or a girl, disemboweled and cut her stomach open to check who won, another one talking about school children who were raising their the hands, the same way kids do in a classroom, after he rounded them up. He then kept firing. Both laughing merrily and casually at the recollection. In another documentary '1948: Creation & Catastrophe', a survivor speaks about women getting violated infront of their family members by iTf. She was a child at the time and still wept as an elderly woman. For more recent atrocities, "Breaking the Silence" record statements by the iTf themselves, they recount the events witht he same casualty their forebears do.
eye opening? the word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” -1 Samuel 15:3 “Therefore I am full of the fury of the LORD; I am weary with holding in: I will pour it out upon the children abroad, and upon the assembly of young men together: for even the husband with the wife shall be taken, the aged with him that is full of days.” -Jeremiah 6:11 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.” -Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Deut 20:16-17) thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth - (Josh 6:21, 8:24-27, 10:, 11:11-14,21-22) And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword... And cut off their thumbs and their great toes... He left none remaining: - (Judg 18:27) And they took [the things] which Micah had made ...and came unto Laish ...and smote them with the edge of sword burnt city fire. - (1 Sam 15:1-9) Now go and smite Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have and spare them not but slay both man and woman infant and suckling ox and sheep camel and ass. - (1 Sam 27:9,11) And David smote the land and left neither man nor woman alive ... - (Esther 8:11, 9:1-19) Wherein the king granted the Jews which were in every city to gather themselves together and to stand for their life to destroy to slay and to cause to perish all the power of the people and province that would assault them both little ones and women and to take the spoil of them for a prey... . - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Because half of this union is already not Arab ( North Africa + Horn of Africa + Comoros ) and also the Arab states are just British-French made so yeah
The concept of “Arab” is flawed. It’s the equivalent to Latino used by the Americans. Just because they speak the same language doesn’t mean all these various people are one.
Arabs certainly have greater pan-national consciousness than Latinos do… this is really a faulty analogy. Pan-Arabism consistently had popular support throughout the 20th c. among the masses
Even then I would argue that all arab countries have different arabic basically kinda like how "pan-european languages" are so similar to eachother but they're not one language germanic, romance, latin whatever you can't just say a dutch and a german are speaking the same language Arabic in Morocco is not only different to Oman's but it has history attached to it words that come from the amazigh
Saudi rule over Nejd began in 1727 which is the worthless part of Nejd the Ottomans controlled the Arab Gulf Coast and Hejaz then the Egyptians and Ottomans destroyed the Saudis and after WWI the Saudis acting as British pawns invaded Hejaz to prevent the establishment of a new Muslim Caliphate
That was the first Saudi state, not to be confused with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (which as I recall is the third Saudi state). British did come into being in 1707, though, with the unification of the kingdoms of England (which already conquered Wales and Ireland) and Scotland, hence Britain is the U.K. (United Kingdom).
Hey, make video about Islam in Indonesia please. As an Indonesian, Islam didn't really come with trade like most of popular historians believe especially to what happened with my ethnic groups, an indigenous ethnic group in the middle of North Sumatran jungles and Bukit Barisan mountain range near the largest vulcanic lake in the world. In 1539, Acehnese Sultanate invaded my ancestors's land when one of our king refused Islam. Aceh faced difficulties during the war then they bought & hired Ottoman weapons & mercenaries to invade us, our people freaked out then asked Portugal to help 'em to stop the invasion of Aceh and Ottoman Empire. In the 1810s during Padri War, an Islamic civil war in Minangkabau, Padri soldiers heard a cannibalistic pagan tribes in the middle of North Sumatra who remained as pagans, the Padris sent envoys to our kingdom to demand our people to leave our paganistic religion and became Muslims but got rejected. After the rejection, Padri soldiers invaded our kingdom and massacred 200.000 people and arrested our king, when he refused Islam, they executed our king for not accepting Islam, they brutally ransacked our villages/cities & massacred my ethnic groups who refused their religion. They were failed to conquer us when a cholera outbreak happened thanks to dead bodies that leaked cholera. After they failed to conquer us, our ancestors were devastated after watching our ransacked kingdoms and dead relatives even cholera outbreak happened and severely decimated our population. My ancestors became hostile towards outsiders/foreigners. Years later, a couple of US Baptist missionarists came and introduced Christianity. Too bad, the locals thought they were another hostile foreigners/outsiders and they caught & ate them. Before Christianity came, my people were pagans who had cannibalistic culture/rituals. My ancestors conducted cannibalism towards people who did terrible crimes such as rape, murder, or treason. A defendant was brought in front of judge, if the judge found the defendant conducted heinous crimes, he/she would be tied on an altar then a shaman who was also executioner would recited some mantras and slashed the defendant's body before beheading him/her and being eaten by people. POWs were also eaten back then. Before Christianity, my ancestors believed if we ate people, it'd grant us magical strength. We also did child sacrifice ritual by sacrificing li'l boys to gain black magic. Besides cannibalism and child sacrifice, my ancestors were known as jewellery makers and weavers. A German missionarist came and introduced Christianity among my people. He built schools, hospitals, etc. But a lot of kingdom citizens hated him coz Christianity could destroy our culture and religion such as our cannibalistic rituals. There're some reports that some people tried to assassinate him to stop Christianity from destroying our old faiths and culture but failed. Cannibalism and child sacrifice were eventually banned when Dutch colonial regime imposed anti cannibalism law towards us after annexing us in the 1907. If Christianity never came, perhaps my people would still do capital punishment in form of cannibalism and child sacrifice. Unlike other Indonesian regions which were colonized for 350 years, we only got conquered in 1907 when Dutch soldiers succesfully assassinated our priest king. Dutch faced difficulties at fighting a cannibalistic nation in the middle of Sumatran jungles near the largest lake in Indonesia
I didn't watch the video because I know as an Egyptian why the Arab unity failed. It failed because it doesn't make sense, Arabs are tribals, and the Egyptians are not. The Egyptians didn't think of themselves as Arabs, it didn't happen until Nasser came. He tried to use this idea to control the region, he called the Egyptians Arabs, and he named our culture Arab culture. But he didn't understand the difference between a non-tribal nation like Egypt and the tribal people in every country around us. He tried every trick in the book, by force or peace and promises, but it didn't work, and they had other ideas. In the end, it was us Egyptians who lost. Our country itself is called the Arab Republic of Egypt, and we Egyptians are called Arabs. Our culture is called Arab culture. Our traditions, our food, songs, movies, art, dances, clothes, and everything that is Egyptian now belongs to the Arabs. Some still believe that by doing this we will modernize the Arabs, make them more civilized, and force them to give up their primitive tribal culture. But, it was us who were infacted, because they used their money to spread their primitive Bedouin ideas inside Egypt through the Islamists, and all of this happened during the Saddat and Mubarak era. Now many Egyptians have an identity crisis, they don't know what they are, Egyptians or Arabs, most believe that we are Egyptians by Race and Arabs by culture, but even this is not true, because they took our culture and called it Arab, this is what happened. Now we are trapped, the Arabs have so much money, and they use it to influence our politics, bribe our people, and buy our Celebrities so that they can say and do what they want, they still fund propaganda campaigns about Arabization inside Egypt.
“Egypt is not tribal” how about upper Egypt, marsa matrouh, and Sinai. All tribal, egypt is much more than Cairo Calling Egypt not Arab is like calling the Texas not American, For most of medieval and modern history Egypt, the levant, Iraq and the peninsula were joined in one nation and people moved freely. Thats how you got Arab tribes like mutairi and hashamites in egypt and shammar and anazah in the levant and Iraq and even the banu hilal traib in north Africa. I advice you if u are Egyptian to read about your history and how all arab countries share the same roots. That being said, I personally dont think arab unity is a good idea, but i dont blame people who do. P.s. implying that tribal arabs are not civilized is a hugely racist remark as arabs are the ones who built islamic Cairo and Baghdad in the medieval period and cities like Riyadh, Dubai, Doha and jeddah in the modern one.
@@F901_ You made a big mistake claiming that upper Egypt is tribal. Yes there maybe some tribes in the desert around the Nile valley but most Egyptians in upper Egypt are not tribals. The Egyptian people don't share the same roots with the Arab Nations as you claim. Most Egyptian Muslims were Christians who converted to Islam and there is no way you could tell the difference between Egyptian Muslims and Christians based on looks or behavior but you can easily spot the difference between most Egyptians and any Arab from any Arab country. Lastly, it's wild from you to claim that Arabs built the Islamic civilization, yes they invaded but other people from every Nation in the area are onse who made things happen. The people who developed the Arabic language are not Arabs, and the language still contains the legacy of the original languages of these people in its dictionaries. Most words in the Modern Arabic language are not truly Arabic words.
51:00 This was supported by the government, such as the Lavon Affair. 52:58 this is correct as per historian Avi Shlaim who had access to declassified archives.
9:25 This is false. The verdict (paraphrased into English by me) was this: “Racism is an act against the constitution; but since there is no provision punishing this in the Turkish Penal Code, the defendants are to be acquitted.” CHP (which by now had to compete with other parties since the transition to multi-party democracy in 1946), never supported nor advocated for racism; and the final verdict of the trial wasn’t reached until 1947. İnönü, especially, was not happy with the conclusion of the trial.
The conclusion of the trial also came at a time where the political scene was liberalizing; which actually came with another trial, this time against the minister of education at the time. The trial happened because the Turkish Marshal Fevzi Çakmak stated in an open letter that “there are ministers who harbor and protect communists in state institutions”. Minister of Education Hasan Ali Yücel responded in an open letter of his own asking whom he is accusing, which was answered by a representative of the Democratic Party Kenan Öner; stating in an open letter of his own: “You are the one harboring them!”. Yücel opened a defamation suit that Öner won, where one of the topics pertained to the governments illegal trials of Racists-Turanists without any laws or precedent.
Well, at least pan-Arab would be a state with mutually intelligible dialects of the same language. That’s not the case with Romance, which while a language family, are a number of distinct related but not mutually intelligible languages.
@@katamattyon They are all mutually intelligible through writing more or less, a few vocab differences, but it's all still the same language at the end of the day, not different enough to be considered a different language. Although maybe that classification means nothing, as I speak both Arabic and Spanish, yet I could never understand a Moroccan but I'll get the gist of what an Italian is saying. A pan romance state is a beautiful idea though. I live in Alexandria, so I'm more partial towards a pan Mediterranean state 😂
Spanish and French speakers dislike one another. It wouldn't work. Better a pan-Iberian state, which includes the Spanish and Portuguese speaking countries, the Philippines, and maybe Morocco
@@katamattyonTrue... As a Lebanese, I can only understand Syrian (except for the region bordering Iraq), some Egyptian, some Libyan, some Khaliji/Jordanian, and a little bit of Iraqi. However, I would guess the same exact Modern Standard Arabic is used in legal documents, and news broadcasts...
Not the same: europe is several national and linguistic identities. Mena region had a linguistic, religious and identity commonality for the majority of the population.
@@puraLusaone that was imposed upon them. There is deep internal resentment between the previously diverse people, who were forced into assimilation. There is also a sectarian component to it as well, not just Shia/Sunni, but schools of Sunni thought, Ideologies like Wahhabism or Salaffiya, and the historical precedent set by the late Ottomans of regional self-rule and the fuedal system. The vast majority of the people in these regions are still tribal and liberalization erodes whatever pre-existing Islamic cultural unity there was. At best, they share music and food. You cant unite countries on this basis, otherwise Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Russia would all be reunited.
Why should they unite? Central and most of South America share the same religion and language but they are not united. Each area or country is unique in its own way.
It would maybe work as three separate states, one for the north africans, another for the sham people and iraq, and another for the khaleejis and yemen
Unfortunately, I do not need to watch the video to answer the question in the title. Arabs haven't been truly united since the medieval age, recently (as in, lets say the last 100 years) however I think the following points are main reasons: - Sectarian/religious/ethnic differences (yes not all arabs are the same) this is imo the #1 reason - Insanely corrupt or bad leadership, example: the PLO consistently picking the wrong choices for over half a century - Inability to organize efficiently, or at all in some regions (cough Somalia) - Poor economic decisions, examples: Egypt putting itself in huge amounts of debt to build a city or the stupid mega projects the Saudis are trying to do - The population being generally unrealistic and sometimes utterly delusional - Rampant corruption on every level of governments. An Iraqi ex-minister literally admitted to stealing state funds in a TV interview, nothing happened to him. - Foreign meddling, I don't think I need to elaborate this point I could go on but I'm tired of writing, I have little hope of peace in the middle east simply because it was never peaceful. You can pick any year in history and there would be either a war, civil war, or some sort of revolt or mass human unaliving event happening in the middle east. Just watch this very series from the beginning and you will understand, Jabzy did a great job.
@@puraLusaIt is my understanding that somalis/somalians think that they are. i’m not one to care about what someone’s ’lived experience’ or someone’s subjective opinion - I just care what is, but aren’t somalis considered (or at-least consider themselves) if not arab, part of the arab world?
@@oliverwortley3822 they consider themselves part of the islamic world, but they have a distinguished somali identity. U might be confusing with a group of sudanese (who have had the sudanese political power), those yes, have an arab identity, but that cause they descend from a mix of sudanese with arabs who settled there.
On the 7th, it is crucial to understand that there were no direct attacks on civilians, only collateral damage. Out of the 1148 total names on haaret dataset, 473 military and 675 were civilians. Ratio of civilians to military personnel killed on the 7th was 1 . 4 : 1 - lower than any of the iTf "mowing" operations, which has a ratio of 7 : 1 According to UN OCHA data from 2008 to 2022; The collateral damage on the 7th was significantly lower than any of the ITf "mowing" operations, which had a ratio of 7:1 with 1,023 military personnel out of 6,541 total. On the 7th, with 473 military (418 were iTf military personnel, 55 belonged to the police) out of 1148 total, the ratio of civilians to military personnel was a mere 1.4:1 When including all casualties, not just deaths, the collateral damage ratio of the "mowing" operations is a staggering 162:1 From the 161,233 accumulated civilian casualties over only 14 years of "mowing" operations. A 162 :1 ratio means that for every 162 civillians, 1 military personnel is a casualty. The 7th had a ratio of 1.4:1, more than a hundred times lower. The 473 are - 55 soldiers, 13 privates, 59 corporals, 200 sergeants (45 of whom were sergeant majors), 48 commanders, 32 lieutenants, 5 lieutenant colonels, 6 colonels, 37 officers, 10 inspectors, 6 intendents, and 2 Lance Corp. This was a military defeat, and they are taking it out on the rest. The reported (not all have ages listed) ages of the victims are as follows: 0-4: 2 civilians 5-12: 8 civilians 13-17: 14 civilians 18-25: 132 civilians 26-40: 119 civilians 41-60: 55 civilians 61+: 40 civilians Active duty military personnel: 18-25: 258 active duty military personnel 26-40: 60 active duty military personnel 41-60: 17 active duty military personnel 61+: 1 active duty military personnel haaretz datasheet titled title: xsraxl's Dead: The Names of Those Killed in Hxmxs Attacks, Mxssxcres and the xsrxel-Hxmxs Wxr There is a more detailed report of of oct 7th titled "I scrapped the information about 1096 of the 1460 killed on 7th of October Attack. Children Less than 1%" -Yocheved Lifshitz account - 'they treated us well' -Yasmin Porat account - 'i.T.f kxilled my husband' Civilians were taken to have swaps for the civilians rotting in prisons without charge on the other side. An excess of ten thousands, all before the seventh UN Human Rights Office (UN OCHA) PA Civilians 2008-2023: 2008 - 2,325 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,440. 2012 - 3,992 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 255. 2014 - 17,533 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,492. 2018 - 31,259 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 300. 2019 - 15,491 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 138. 2020 - 2,581 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 30. 2021 - 19,183 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 349. 2022 - 10,345 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 191. 2023 up to September - 8,508 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 227. civilian deaths on the other side - 2008: 3 , 2012: 6 , 2014: 73 , 2018: 9 2019: 10 , 2020: 0 , 2021: 9 , 2022: 26 Total; 2008 up to September 2023 - 161,233 PA Civilian Casualties, 1,023 military personnel. Wounded includes: amputees from the deliberate targeting of knees by snipers, white phosphorous third degree body burns, etc Even with being very very generous in extending the "civilian" nomenclature to those that are reservists. Not to mention ignoring the fact that the majority of the attacks were done in by their own forces inorder to prevent their capture, it is still incomparable to what was done in prior years. In the Tantura (2022) documentary there is a iTf man who says that they took a pregnant woman, made bets whether the baby is a boy or a girl, disemboweled and cut her stomach open to check who won, another one talking about school children who were raising their the hands, the same way kids do in a classroom, after he rounded them up. He then kept firing. Both laughing merrily and casually at the recollection. In another documentary '1948: Creation & Catastrophe', a survivor speaks about women getting violated infront of their family members by iTf. She was a child at the time and still wept as an elderly woman. For more recent atrocities, "Breaking the Silence" record statements by the iTf themselves, they recount the events witht he same casualty their forebears do. The "Costs of War" study by brown in 2021 has these figures for the past 20 years of engagement of US policy: indirect deaths 4.5-4.7 million, direct 905-940,000 , in other words 6 million deaths and 38 million displaced. This is relevant because of the Oded Yinon Plan. More on the Oded Yinon plan - According to the founding father of zionism, theodore hertzel, the area of the jewish state stretches from the brook of Egypt to the Euphrates; the promised land extends from the river of Egypt up to the Euphrates and includes parts of Syria and Lebanon; when viewed in the current context including the siege on Gaza the zionist plan for the middle east bears an intimate relationship to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the 2006 war in Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya and Syria and the continued crisis in Iraq and Yemen, not to mention the political crisis in the kingdom of saudi Arabia. In the 1980s an article written by a former senior official with the israeli foreign ministry in which israel shahak wrote a forward to which says "in my opinion the accurate and detailed plan of the present zionist regime of ariel sharon for the middle east which is based on the division of the whole area into small states and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states."
Great video. It's clear that such a union was simply unfeasible due to sociocultural, historical and geographic issues. Why are Arab countries poor(ly managed) even today? As a Nigerian, here's my simple answer: Bad geography, poor social and economic systems, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others.
Not only that even Short answer would be history, religious rule, the british, corruption, nationalism (ofc), failure of the soviet union, and plane old hate I even skipped on many events but that's the short of it really
There is a difference between the nationalism of the colonial/imperial powers and nationalism of the oppressed. "National liberation" May be preferable for clarity.
Tbh pan arabism not working out was for the best. Every group of people living in each arabic nation clearly had leaders and goals for their own respective nations and peoples. Like when Egypt and Syria united into the UAR. Egypt basically turned Syria into an Egyptian province which angered a lot of Syrians. (I'm obviously oversimplifing what happened but you guys know that.) The Arabic nations deciding to work together diplomatically and commercially and to raise each other up through trade and cooperation in the modern day seems like a better strategy than politically uniting prematurely. Great video as always Jabzy.
The premise of the video is false. Much of the territory was held by UK and France after the fall of the Ottomans, but otherwise it was all a contiguous piece of land under the old empire..
16:39 had no idea the ottomans had such liberal policies with regards to land purchases / joke - This is myth had been debunked numerious times before, no one owned the land to be able to sell it. The ottomans ran a feudal system, the Sultan outrightly refused to sell the land, even if it meant debt relief for the ottomans. Hertzl himself begged him for it, he still was refused.
That only supports what I said. If it were owned by individuals, wholesale of an island would not h ave been feasible. Nevermind the fact that they couldn't defend it properly.
Actually, land was indeed purchased by Jews, including large amounts of land bought from the Sursock family. You can even visit the Sursock Palace in Beirut! Other families involved in land sales include the Tuqan, Abdel Hadi, and Khuri families. Those people still exist today, the documents still exist- it is not ancient history. Additionally, a significant portion of land was acquired or leased from various church institutions. It still happens today- and currently there's a big issue about sub-lease in a whole neighborhood in Jerusalem. So, the claim that no land was sold isn't quite accurate.
But mamluks destory mongols in ayn jalut 1260 ad And ottomans destoryed britsih in gallipoli war in didfirently that middle east push sh*t brtisih empire fallen in ww2.
@@SSMasseus British Empire didn't fell because of the middle east, Instead the unrest from India, and because of the Germans, devastating the British Empire, it couldn't manage the vast lands after WWII, ////
@@lotcam4046 middle east rebellion from 1920 To 1970 okey Jihadist horrible rebellion guys then alliance of germans for weapons and birtish not easily live in region like in afghans beat brtisih more likely.
@@SSMasseus boy, had you been slipped and hurt your head, Resources run an Empire, there was nothing in the middle-east to procure to run an Empire, Even the Brits called India a jewel in the Crown, I am sure in your fantasy world, Empires run on sand, Also defeats in the middle east means nothing when money and resources are flowing in their(British Empire) pockets, they(British Empire) can organize again and again and again, like the SPQR against the Greeks, they(SPQR) never ran into shortage of men in the battlefield, upon which a hired General from Greeks said they(SPQR) are like hydra(multi-headed mythical creature), It was the outdated organizational structure which couldn't contain such land mass in the London's control,
Many of the ruling parties of Arab countries though preached Pan-Arabism, like the Baathists and Nasser for example. There's no Indonesian party that speaks of unity with Nepal.
@@JabzyJoe Japan wanted to unite all Asia and so did the mongols. Europe was almost united by the Romans, napoleon, and Hitler conquered huge chunk of Europe. But even if Arabs wanted to unify the practical concerns outweighs all. Who would rule? Like is Saddam Hussein going to rule? Nasser? House of Saud? This Arab state has no unifying ideology or leader. Unifying ideology - like Islam? Which type? Sunni, Shia, alawite? How to govern? Monarchy? Fascism, communism, democracy? All Arab countries have huge differences and they wouldn’t give those differences up without a lot of struggle.
@@gj1234567899999Japan said they wanted to unite all of Asia, but really just wanted all of Central and East Asia under Japanese colonial rule. The Mongols weren’t Pan-Asianist and didn’t want to unite Asia, they wanted a Mongol Empire. They even invaded Europe and almost invaded Africa. The Romans, similar to the Mongols, weren’t uniquely European either as they invaded Asia and Africa and never had a Pan-European agenda, but an agenda of Roman imperialism/dominance. Napoleon was, similarly, a French imperialist and not a Pan-European. Hitler was a Pan-Germanist, Pan-Germanicist, and Aryanist and believed and enforced the German imperialist and colonialist idea of Lebensraum. If he was a Pan-European, he would’ve seen the Slavs, Balts, Uralics, Romans, Celts, Albanians, Basques, and Hellenes as equals to the Germanic people or the “Aryan race”.
@@gj1234567899999Islam isn’t an ideology, but a religion, and there were many different Pan-Arabist ideologies to choose from. Nasser’s Arab Socialism (AKA Nasserism), (Aflaq’s, later Saddam’s) Ba’athism, and Neo-Ba’athism.
@@gj1234567899999Also, yes, Arabs would absolutely be willing to unite. Pan-Arabist, particularly Arab Socialist movements, were extremely popular particularly in the culturally dispersed countries of Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Oman. Ever heard of the UAR?
@@johngeren1053 Which is irrelevant, as demonstrated by the number of individual nations that share common languages with others. The Arabic speaking states can no more unite than the English, French, Spanish speaking ones. Plus things get more dubious with regards to what language people actually speak in some parts of the "Arab" league
@@FMJIRISH The Arab states are contiguous, unlike Anglo, French Hispanic ones. Standard Arabic is taught in schools and written material is equally legible from Baghdad to Fez. That is why Arab nationalists emphasize literacy.
Those Arab countries were a whole new country that formed disregarding a lot of ethnic and religious differences. That's what happened when an Arab culture colonize vast areas and still wanted to rule it after losing wars.
The closing of the Village Institutes in Turkey was one of the biggest failures of that time. The US pressured Turkey to close them because they feared communists would be raised in these institutes instead the US supported Islamist's factions in Turkey since they were anti-comunist. Due to the closing of these institutes the rural anatolian population was robbed of education and remains very arrogant, conservative to this day sadly.
The idea that Palestinians left Haifa in April 1948 in response to Arab broadcasts because there was about to be a battle in Haifa between Zionists and Arab armies makes no sense. The Arab invasion hadn't started and would never get close to Haifa. There were other cities that were much closer to where the Arab armies would invade from and would more likely to become a battlefield and Palestinians didn't leave those cities. The arrival of a large force of Haganah troops in city with the aim of getting rid of the Palestinian population is a much more believable explanation.
I'd say that a desert region, without enough water resources for modern industry, or agriculture, is not capable of sustaining a state that is that large or complex.
Well gee, it's a wonder they don't want to unify with you when you talk about them like that. Obviously their rights and culture would be deeply respected. Seriously, look in a mirror.
@@samwill7259 we did not start to talk at them harshly like that since like 5 years, before that we mostly respected them, but after what they did with our countries I don't even want their unity anymore, what I want from them is mind their own buisness and not blame our leaders for their mistake, they always blame Sunni leaders for having relations with israel, we don't like them but Jews are waaaaay better than Shia's
bro remembered his password
you do realize it takes a lot of time to research for, write a script, film, and edit an hour long video?
@@enderman_666I think the original comment was meant to be a light joke
@@agni_oh ☝🤓
@@enderman_666 Especially if he keeps forgetting his password.
Unfunny kids write this joke under every video when the person doesn’t post once a week
Jabzy is back!
With a video about an inferior race
As some one on TH-cam said “and their leaders said: UNIFICATION! (But I’m in charge!)”
Yesss
Because each one of them had an empire that rule the middle east. And each one of them wants everyone else to return to their empire. And each one of them wants everyone to forget about their brutal empire and blame the West .
@@2livenoobDon't forget, they all hate each other
"Do you feel in charge?"
The post-WWII push for Arab unity reveals how complex and deeply fractured the region’s political landscape was. While some leaders like Nuri al-Said of Iraq envisioned an inclusive federation, others like Egypt’s al-Nahas sought to dominate the unity agenda for national interests. What’s fascinating is how external powers, particularly Britain, simultaneously supported and manipulated these movements, often hindering true collaboration. This pattern of conflicting ambitions mirrored in later Arab-Israeli conflicts-where territorial aspirations among Arab states undermined collective action-reminds us that both unity and discord were intricately tied to the ambitions of regional power players.
I really appreciate these videos and the work and effort put into them.
That was fascinating and well made, not biased and fair. Thanks!
Seems like nobody at this time had any idea what they were doing.
That's why history is so fun, it's relatable ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah they were trying every type of government, monarchy, dictatorship, democracy, theocracy(?) , a federation
@Mesopotamia-v6d They never tried theocracy, except for Iran, of course.
we still dont lol
West still doesnt have any idea what they are doing by destabilizing Syria Iraq Turkey Iran lebanon etc.
Maybe. Just maybe. A group broad enough to hold 400 million people in a dozen countries or more don't actually have that much in common.
Different histories, different politics, different schools of their religion, different minorities. Why would they WANT to be absorbed and boiled down into whatever the person in charge thinks "Pan Arab" is?
These are the exact reasons why a United States of Africa is ridiculous and doesn't make sense. Cramming over a billion people with thousands of languages and dialects, countlessly different and clashing cultures, and wildly different often poor economic conditions. Yet somehow, there are still ninnies who think it's possible. Truly baffling
Eeeehh you’re right to a certain extent
Exactly
"in a dozen countries or more don't actually have that much in common.
Different histories, different politics, different schools of their religion, different minorities"
None of it stopped German unification.
@AbyssIsSalvationHistory You didn't just seriously compare the union of an area the size of the US to the union of Germany, and the differences between Levantines, Arabians, Egyptians, Berbers and others to the differences between Hannoverians and Bavarians. That's not serious talk
your channel is one of my favourites. I do love watching your videos. Please continue to make videos!
Please Jabzy consider making a video about why an Assyrian country wasn't made after ww1.**
It would be a very short video😂
@@najabs123 why?
@@hegantank6495 Simply put the Assyrians were way too few in number to form a viable state. Add to that the fact that they were seamlessly integrated in to the society of the day, it just wouldn't have made sense. Most arguments would be based on the ethnic/religious tensions brought on by arab nationalism and further stoked by western meddling in arab internal politics.
@@najabs123 assyrian genocide in ww1 alone justifies them gaining an independent state along roughly the lines of the ancient assyrian heartland
@@hegantank6495
Being genocided is a horrible thing but it doesn’t automatically mean you deserve a gigantic state of your own.
The ottomans genocided nearly every single ethnic minority they had
I appreciate seeing this history summarized here. We hear a lot these days about national aspirations, but between ~1917 and 1948, most of the Arab population (excepting Egypt), at least as reported in the western press, thought of themselves primarily as Arabs, and aspired to be part of a larger pan-Arab nation. Although British and French machinations and Zionist complications certainly played a role in this never coming to pass, it was very largely infighting among those who aspired to lead such a nation that resulted in fragmentation of the Arab world.
Too many figures wanted to be the totalitatian/ authoritarian leader of said union, and none accepted someone else.
It’s basically as Lawrence described in his accounts of the Arabs, following his insurgency against the Ottomans. Everyone had to make an appointment at all, was because of them, and therefore they deserved to be in charge, because their people were the truest, most glorious, most brave and worthy Arabs. And because of this prideful and temperamental culture, nobody could get along and cooperate well enough to actually create a federation. He notes the fundamental culture of the Arabs is all about pride and hierarchy; they are extremely sensitive as to societal position and status.
As an Egyptian, I cringe when I hear someone call us Arabs, my grandfather was even angrier than I am, because he lived through all of this.
We should have never gotten into this dumb idea to begin with.
Nasser destroyed Egyptian nationalism for this, he brainwashed the Egyptians to think that they were Arabs.
@@mostafaabdelnaby6346 thanku for sharing ur perspective. Quite interesting.
This is literally just not true. Britain and France distributed land based on economic incentives. They had no care for the Arabs and guess what? The Arabs never actually desired a pan Arab state. It’s like people who think the United States of Africa is a good idea or desires by any Africans.
You are a really an enrichment to the History Szene the online one that Cover the History of the Staates and Areas that Not interesting for the West and the Media.
How many Channels have Videos about the same Wars and Events.
Really Great Job Guy ❤
Requesting a comparison video from last year’s plays vs this year’s plays.
Awesome work Samson Folk
whats the music you play in the background?? its kind of fire and honestly a big reason I love the videos.
Nevada city
@@JabzyJoe thank you 🙏
I’m glad Jabzy touched on the role of the Irgun and Lehi
He even got into the Lavon Affair; it’s impressive how comprehensively he covered the time period in question.
The UK recognized Ireland’s independence, in that same year (1948). 🇮🇪
You are incredibly fair and unbiased
Good luck keeping this monetized
(edit, fixed spelling, I accidentally called you fair and biased)
Fair, and unbiased? 😂😂
@@sumiahaltalhi4767 yeah he brings up all events and not just the ones who make one side look good. As too many people have a habit of doing.
This is a test comment because I think my account is flagged to where any risky speech is set to review by an ai, Israel, Palestine, Jew, Muslim. Well boys lets see if it works!
This is a test comment because I think my account is flagged to where any risky speech is set to review by an ai, Israel, Palestine, Jew, Muslim. Well boys lets see if it works!
@@sumiahaltalhi4767Lmao, I can tell you're a butthurt Muslim that's mad that the truth is being shown
It’s like saying why didn’t Europe unite when the Romans ruled most of Europe. Sovereignty rises as nations diversify. Slowly a nation has a harder time combining millions of diverse people which leads to utter chaos and eventually balkanization.
Watching this reminds me of the dummies who think a Pan-African state is possible. All the obvious, common sense reasons are there, yet they still persist in this delusion
I once heard that a Pan Indian state would have never happened on its own, but outside forces and governance is what made them close, barring the obvious outlier (Pakistan)
@thesenate1844 The thing is, India has a lot of cultural and religious similarities. The majority of the nation is Hindu, or something similar to it, and outliers being so small it didn't matter. Ethnic wise, it's sort of the same. Africa, on the other hand, does not have any of this. A good half of this continent is split between Islam and Christianity, and even then, there are more denominational splits. Massive, often competing, and potentially hostile ethnicities living in the same regions, example Rwanda and major language difference. I mean my country South Africa has 11 official languages, along with a whole bunch of others that aren't officially recognized because they aren't in large enough numbers. Furthermore, major economic differences. South Africa and Botswana are the two of the continents most developed economies. This isn't the case for the vast majority of Africa. If a Pan-African state were to emerge, then the burden of improving these poor states would fall on these developed economies disproportionately. It's just possible or practical
Have you seen the amount of terrorist group in India fighting to make one group free?
@lephinor2458 India doesn't have a terrorism issue, that's something their neighbours (Pakistan, Bangladesh) are struggling with majorly, one even aiding and abetting them. If you're referring to Hindutva, they're not nearly as bad. If I'm wrong please correct me.
@@mixkid3362A hypothetical Pan African state would by definition include all the countries more closely associated with the Arab world like Egypt. While a united high tech afrofuturist utopia would be awesome, its not going to happen. Thats like expecting all of Eurasia to unite purely because they share the same landmass.
Excellent presentation of the very complex issue
Jabzy we love you!
I don't think the video fully addresses the question, 'Why did the Arabs fail to unite?' To answer this, one must explore why the region wasn't unified into a single nation during Ottoman rule. Additionally, it's important to consider that large parts of the area were still under tribal rule, and sectarian religious factions dominated the landscape. This was not just a matter of personal ambitions and power politics.
Cmon Jabzy, don't do this to me. Im at work. I need to concentrate and focus on my work. You cant release an hour long video during work hours (9am-5pm). 😭😭😭😭
I MUST FOCUS ON WORK!!!!!
10:21 Small mistake, they were called Village Institutes, and they were modeled on an educational plan drafted by John Dewey during his visit to Turkey in 1925 at the invite of Atatürk.
The infrastructure for the plan began with Saffet Arıkan in 1937 when he started opening Teacher’s Schools to provide adequate supply of teachers for the upcoming educational mobilization.
With Hasan Ali Yücel and Ismail Haklı Tonguç, the project’s funding and the attention given to it increased drastically.
Hasan Ali Yücel also translated many philosophical works and classic literature into Turkish for the first time.
Some graduates of the Village Institutes are still alive, such as pianist İdil Biret.
As an amazigh moroccan, pan arabist has never happened and we will never allow it to happen. Every night i reread the 'Battle of Nobles' wikipedia page for goodvibes
Hahahahahahahaha
Oh no,like two desert inhabitants want to stop pan arabism,what are we gonna do
@@user-ci4hi2ui2kpan arabism is dead anyway
@@user-ci4hi2ui2k 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Egyptian here. Egyptians weren't, aren't and won't be Arabs. Egyptians are Egyptians only not anything else. Salute to you, Amazighs.
Would love to see a series on British history when this series is finished
Because it was the policy of tbe the British empire ( and every western power since), to keep the Arabs divided.
Also France, and since taking the reins from those former empires, the US has adopted the same policies with genocidal relish.
interesting, cause the entire video is Arabs fighting and deceiving one another to rule all lands..
Exactly. Just like was always the Arab and Islamic policy to keep Europe and the West divided.
@@drmodestoesqhow did the Arabs keep Europe divided?
Please explain.
Blame it on the West? Good. As long as you don't see your own faults, the problem will never get fixed.
Please make a video on why there wasn't an Assyrian state after ww1.*
Finally its Jabzy.
There was a UAR including Egypt, even had a postage stamp for the UAR as a youngun.
Curious to see what region is he gonna do a long form video series on.
Listenberg
Man thank you for continuing this series.
The prevoius clip three months ago😂
34:30 Nonsense. In the Tantura (2022) documentary there is a iTf man who says that they took a pregnant woman, made bets whether the baby is a boy or a girl, disemboweled and cut her stomach open to check who won, another one talking about school children who were raising their the hands, the same way kids do in a classroom, after he rounded them up. He then kept firing. Both laughing merrily and casually at the recollection. In another documentary '1948: Creation & Catastrophe', a survivor speaks about women getting violated infront of their family members by iTf. She was a child at the time and still wept as an elderly woman. For more recent atrocities, "Breaking the Silence" record statements by the iTf themselves, they recount the events witht he same casualty their forebears do.
Hey welcome back man!
Great video.
Looks like they needed an Arabic Bismarck just like the Germans
8:34 They just described operation Nakam, which had the full awareness of the prime minister at the time.
Joseph Harmatz, posing as a Polish displaced person (DP) named "Maim Mendele", attempted to infiltrate the municipal water supply in Nuremberg;, Led by Abba Kovner, the group sought to kill six million Germans in a form of indiscriminate revenge, "a nation for a nation". "every accusation is a confession" Indeed.
16:39 had no idea the ottomans had such liberal policies with regards to land purchases / joke - This is myth had been debunked numerious times before, no one owned the land to be able to sell it. The ottomans ran a feudal system, the Sultan outrightly refused to sell the land, even if it meant debt relief for the ottomans. Hertzl himself begged him for it, he still was refused.
Nice try with your lies. Millions of Jews dead and all you do is continue to smear Jewish people
34:30 Nonsense. In the Tantura (2022) documentary there is a iTf man who says that they took a pregnant woman, made bets whether the baby is a boy or a girl, disemboweled and cut her stomach open to check who won, another one talking about school children who were raising their the hands, the same way kids do in a classroom, after he rounded them up. He then kept firing. Both laughing merrily and casually at the recollection. In another documentary '1948: Creation & Catastrophe', a survivor speaks about women getting violated infront of their family members by iTf. She was a child at the time and still wept as an elderly woman. For more recent atrocities, "Breaking the Silence" record statements by the iTf themselves, they recount the events witht he same casualty their forebears do.
@@mznxbcv12345 wow my comment was deleted. Great Islamic censorship
eye opening? the word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.”
-Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
-1 Samuel 15:3
“Therefore I am full of the fury of the LORD; I am weary with holding in: I will pour it out upon the children abroad, and upon the assembly of young men together: for even the husband with the wife shall be taken, the aged with him that is full of days.”
-Jeremiah 6:11
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”
-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Deut 20:16-17) thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth
- (Josh 6:21, 8:24-27, 10:, 11:11-14,21-22) And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword... And cut off their thumbs and their great toes... He left none remaining:
- (Judg 18:27) And they took [the things] which Micah had made ...and came unto Laish ...and smote them with the edge of sword burnt city fire.
- (1 Sam 15:1-9) Now go and smite Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have and spare them not but slay both man and woman infant and suckling ox and sheep camel and ass.
- (1 Sam 27:9,11) And David smote the land and left neither man nor woman alive ...
- (Esther 8:11, 9:1-19) Wherein the king granted the Jews which were in every city to gather themselves together and to stand for their life to destroy to slay and to cause to perish all the power of the people and province that would assault them both little ones and women and to take the spoil of them for a prey... .
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
There is a successful pan-arab state, it's called the EU
😂😂
lol
Boooo
A joke's a joke, but come on. The EU is not successful
...?
Even if they want to unite, One nation will not allow them to
Where is the next video!?!
Jabzy, what music do you use please?
Nevada City
We’re so back
Because half of this union is already not Arab ( North Africa + Horn of Africa + Comoros ) and also the Arab states are just British-French made so yeah
Hebron was the reason palestinian arabs of the time often named when asked why they left.
Different geopolitical alignments during the cold war.
That’s like asking why there’s no united catholic nations💀
The concept of “Arab” is flawed. It’s the equivalent to Latino used by the Americans. Just because they speak the same language doesn’t mean all these various people are one.
Arabs certainly have greater pan-national consciousness than Latinos do… this is really a faulty analogy. Pan-Arabism consistently had popular support throughout the 20th c. among the masses
Even then I would argue that all arab countries have different arabic basically kinda like how "pan-european languages" are so similar to eachother but they're not one language germanic, romance, latin whatever you can't just say a dutch and a german are speaking the same language
Arabic in Morocco is not only different to Oman's but it has history attached to it words that come from the amazigh
@@fesyuki true enough
@@fesyukiyes but they all understand each other through msa arabic which all arab speaking countries speak in government
@@treeman12815 msa arabic is formal language just like how english (& sometimes French) is the formal language of europe
Saudi was established in 1727
before such thing called British 😢
Saudi rule over Nejd began in 1727 which is the worthless part of Nejd the Ottomans controlled the Arab Gulf Coast and Hejaz then the Egyptians and Ottomans destroyed the Saudis and after WWI the Saudis acting as British pawns invaded Hejaz to prevent the establishment of a new Muslim Caliphate
That was the first Saudi state, not to be confused with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (which as I recall is the third Saudi state). British did come into being in 1707, though, with the unification of the kingdoms of England (which already conquered Wales and Ireland) and Scotland, hence Britain is the U.K. (United Kingdom).
Ahh yes another day in "why the british empire was a mistake"
Hey, make video about Islam in Indonesia please. As an Indonesian, Islam didn't really come with trade like most of popular historians believe especially to what happened with my ethnic groups, an indigenous ethnic group in the middle of North Sumatran jungles and Bukit Barisan mountain range near the largest vulcanic lake in the world. In 1539, Acehnese Sultanate invaded my ancestors's land when one of our king refused Islam. Aceh faced difficulties during the war then they bought & hired Ottoman weapons & mercenaries to invade us, our people freaked out then asked Portugal to help 'em to stop the invasion of Aceh and Ottoman Empire. In the 1810s during Padri War, an Islamic civil war in Minangkabau, Padri soldiers heard a cannibalistic pagan tribes in the middle of North Sumatra who remained as pagans, the Padris sent envoys to our kingdom to demand our people to leave our paganistic religion and became Muslims but got rejected. After the rejection, Padri soldiers invaded our kingdom and massacred 200.000 people and arrested our king, when he refused Islam, they executed our king for not accepting Islam, they brutally ransacked our villages/cities & massacred my ethnic groups who refused their religion. They were failed to conquer us when a cholera outbreak happened thanks to dead bodies that leaked cholera. After they failed to conquer us, our ancestors were devastated after watching our ransacked kingdoms and dead relatives even cholera outbreak happened and severely decimated our population. My ancestors became hostile towards outsiders/foreigners. Years later, a couple of US Baptist missionarists came and introduced Christianity. Too bad, the locals thought they were another hostile foreigners/outsiders and they caught & ate them. Before Christianity came, my people were pagans who had cannibalistic culture/rituals. My ancestors conducted cannibalism towards people who did terrible crimes such as rape, murder, or treason. A defendant was brought in front of judge, if the judge found the defendant conducted heinous crimes, he/she would be tied on an altar then a shaman who was also executioner would recited some mantras and slashed the defendant's body before beheading him/her and being eaten by people. POWs were also eaten back then. Before Christianity, my ancestors believed if we ate people, it'd grant us magical strength. We also did child sacrifice ritual by sacrificing li'l boys to gain black magic. Besides cannibalism and child sacrifice, my ancestors were known as jewellery makers and weavers. A German missionarist came and introduced Christianity among my people. He built schools, hospitals, etc. But a lot of kingdom citizens hated him coz Christianity could destroy our culture and religion such as our cannibalistic rituals. There're some reports that some people tried to assassinate him to stop Christianity from destroying our old faiths and culture but failed. Cannibalism and child sacrifice were eventually banned when Dutch colonial regime imposed anti cannibalism law towards us after annexing us in the 1907. If Christianity never came, perhaps my people would still do capital punishment in form of cannibalism and child sacrifice. Unlike other Indonesian regions which were colonized for 350 years, we only got conquered in 1907 when Dutch soldiers succesfully assassinated our priest king. Dutch faced difficulties at fighting a cannibalistic nation in the middle of Sumatran jungles near the largest lake in Indonesia
How did you write this in 5 minutes
Islam came to Indonesia by Arab traders, espicially Yemeni Hadrami traders in Indonesia.
@@خالدعبدالله-غ9ث2ف different story with what happened to my ancestors
Bro is a bot, I see him everywhere repeating the same paragraphs
@@magma9000 bro, can't argue with my comment?
Now I would like a program on Arab Nationalism 1955-1967! Or, a rise and fall of regional Baathism.
I didn't watch the video because I know as an Egyptian why the Arab unity failed.
It failed because it doesn't make sense, Arabs are tribals, and the Egyptians are not.
The Egyptians didn't think of themselves as Arabs, it didn't happen until Nasser came.
He tried to use this idea to control the region, he called the Egyptians Arabs, and he named our culture Arab culture. But he didn't understand the difference between a non-tribal nation like Egypt and the tribal people in every country around us.
He tried every trick in the book, by force or peace and promises, but it didn't work, and they had other ideas.
In the end, it was us Egyptians who lost. Our country itself is called the Arab Republic of Egypt, and we Egyptians are called Arabs. Our culture is called Arab culture. Our traditions, our food, songs, movies, art, dances, clothes, and everything that is Egyptian now belongs to the Arabs.
Some still believe that by doing this we will modernize the Arabs, make them more civilized, and force them to give up their primitive tribal culture. But, it was us who were infacted, because they used their money to spread their primitive Bedouin ideas inside Egypt through the Islamists, and all of this happened during the Saddat and Mubarak era.
Now many Egyptians have an identity crisis, they don't know what they are, Egyptians or Arabs, most believe that we are Egyptians by Race and Arabs by culture, but even this is not true, because they took our culture and called it Arab, this is what happened.
Now we are trapped, the Arabs have so much money, and they use it to influence our politics, bribe our people, and buy our Celebrities so that they can say and do what they want, they still fund propaganda campaigns about Arabization inside Egypt.
Egypt is doomed.. muslim brotherhood erased your 6000 years of history and culture.
I wish it was different.. as soon as u accepted Islam .
I agree that Egyptians aren't Arab. Your people have great and distinct culture from Arab. Your ancestors built pyramids, sphinx, and many more
“Egypt is not tribal” how about upper Egypt, marsa matrouh, and Sinai. All tribal, egypt is much more than Cairo
Calling Egypt not Arab is like calling the Texas not American,
For most of medieval and modern history Egypt, the levant, Iraq and the peninsula were joined in one nation and people moved freely. Thats how you got Arab tribes like mutairi and hashamites in egypt and shammar and anazah in the levant and Iraq and even the banu hilal traib in north Africa.
I advice you if u are Egyptian to read about your history and how all arab countries share the same roots.
That being said, I personally dont think arab unity is a good idea, but i dont blame people who do.
P.s. implying that tribal arabs are not civilized is a hugely racist remark as arabs are the ones who built islamic Cairo and Baghdad in the medieval period and cities like Riyadh, Dubai, Doha and jeddah in the modern one.
@@F901_ You made a big mistake claiming that upper Egypt is tribal.
Yes there maybe some tribes in the desert around the Nile valley but most Egyptians in upper Egypt are not tribals.
The Egyptian people don't share the same roots with the Arab Nations as you claim.
Most Egyptian Muslims were Christians who converted to Islam and there is no way you could tell the difference between Egyptian Muslims and Christians based on looks or behavior but you can easily spot the difference between most Egyptians and any Arab from any Arab country.
Lastly, it's wild from you to claim that Arabs built the Islamic civilization, yes they invaded but other people from every Nation in the area are onse who made things happen.
The people who developed the Arabic language are not Arabs, and the language still contains the legacy of the original languages of these people in its dictionaries.
Most words in the Modern Arabic language are not truly Arabic words.
51:00 This was supported by the government, such as the Lavon Affair. 52:58 this is correct as per historian Avi Shlaim who had access to declassified archives.
We need pan berberism or tamazgha in northern africa
Nah we don't
9:25 This is false. The verdict (paraphrased into English by me) was this: “Racism is an act against the constitution; but since there is no provision punishing this in the Turkish Penal Code, the defendants are to be acquitted.”
CHP (which by now had to compete with other parties since the transition to multi-party democracy in 1946), never supported nor advocated for racism; and the final verdict of the trial wasn’t reached until 1947.
İnönü, especially, was not happy with the conclusion of the trial.
The conclusion of the trial also came at a time where the political scene was liberalizing; which actually came with another trial, this time against the minister of education at the time.
The trial happened because the Turkish Marshal Fevzi Çakmak stated in an open letter that “there are ministers who harbor and protect communists in state institutions”. Minister of Education Hasan Ali Yücel responded in an open letter of his own asking whom he is accusing, which was answered by a representative of the Democratic Party Kenan Öner; stating in an open letter of his own: “You are the one harboring them!”.
Yücel opened a defamation suit that Öner won, where one of the topics pertained to the governments illegal trials of Racists-Turanists without any laws or precedent.
Forget pan-Arab, where's my pan-Romance state at
Well, at least pan-Arab would be a state with mutually intelligible dialects of the same language. That’s not the case with Romance, which while a language family, are a number of distinct related but not mutually intelligible languages.
@@Cobra1597 Arabic dialects are not all mutually intelligible. In terms of mutual intelligibility perhaps the Scandis are closest
@@katamattyon They are all mutually intelligible through writing more or less, a few vocab differences, but it's all still the same language at the end of the day, not different enough to be considered a different language. Although maybe that classification means nothing, as I speak both Arabic and Spanish, yet I could never understand a Moroccan but I'll get the gist of what an Italian is saying. A pan romance state is a beautiful idea though. I live in Alexandria, so I'm more partial towards a pan Mediterranean state 😂
Spanish and French speakers dislike one another. It wouldn't work. Better a pan-Iberian state, which includes the Spanish and Portuguese speaking countries, the Philippines, and maybe Morocco
@@katamattyonTrue... As a Lebanese, I can only understand Syrian (except for the region bordering Iraq), some Egyptian, some Libyan, some Khaliji/Jordanian, and a little bit of Iraqi.
However, I would guess the same exact Modern Standard Arabic is used in legal documents, and news broadcasts...
It's like trying to unite Europe.
Not the same: europe is several national and linguistic identities. Mena region had a linguistic, religious and identity commonality for the majority of the population.
@@puraLusaone that was imposed upon them. There is deep internal resentment between the previously diverse people, who were forced into assimilation.
There is also a sectarian component to it as well, not just Shia/Sunni, but schools of Sunni thought, Ideologies like Wahhabism or Salaffiya, and the historical precedent set by the late Ottomans of regional self-rule and the fuedal system. The vast majority of the people in these regions are still tribal and liberalization erodes whatever pre-existing Islamic cultural unity there was.
At best, they share music and food. You cant unite countries on this basis, otherwise Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Russia would all be reunited.
Nothing to do with that. Arabs are just far more individualistic.
Europe had united though, one currency, free flowing borders, etc.
Why should they unite? Central and most of South America share the same religion and language but they are not united. Each area or country is unique in its own way.
Because they were ruled by parties that sought to unite... Baathists, Nasserites etc. It was the goal of many of the leaders.
They are too busy fighting each other.
It would maybe work as three separate states, one for the north africans, another for the sham people and iraq, and another for the khaleejis and yemen
Unfortunately, I do not need to watch the video to answer the question in the title. Arabs haven't been truly united since the medieval age, recently (as in, lets say the last 100 years) however I think the following points are main reasons:
- Sectarian/religious/ethnic differences (yes not all arabs are the same) this is imo the #1 reason
- Insanely corrupt or bad leadership, example: the PLO consistently picking the wrong choices for over half a century
- Inability to organize efficiently, or at all in some regions (cough Somalia)
- Poor economic decisions, examples: Egypt putting itself in huge amounts of debt to build a city or the stupid mega projects the Saudis are trying to do
- The population being generally unrealistic and sometimes utterly delusional
- Rampant corruption on every level of governments. An Iraqi ex-minister literally admitted to stealing state funds in a TV interview, nothing happened to him.
- Foreign meddling, I don't think I need to elaborate this point
I could go on but I'm tired of writing, I have little hope of peace in the middle east simply because it was never peaceful. You can pick any year in history and there would be either a war, civil war, or some sort of revolt or mass human unaliving event happening in the middle east. Just watch this very series from the beginning and you will understand, Jabzy did a great job.
small detail: somalis aren't arabs.
We shouldnt look for reasons, we should just thank Allah for the fact that the crazy buggers are not capable to unite!
@@puraLusaIt is my understanding that somalis/somalians think that they are. i’m not one to care about what someone’s ’lived experience’ or someone’s subjective opinion - I just care what is, but aren’t somalis considered (or at-least consider themselves) if not arab, part of the arab world?
@@oliverwortley3822 they consider themselves part of the islamic world, but they have a distinguished somali identity.
U might be confusing with a group of sudanese (who have had the sudanese political power), those yes, have an arab identity, but that cause they descend from a mix of sudanese with arabs who settled there.
On the 7th, it is crucial to understand that there were no direct attacks on civilians, only collateral damage. Out of the 1148 total names on haaret dataset, 473 military and 675 were civilians.
Ratio of civilians to military personnel killed on the 7th was 1 . 4 : 1 - lower than any of the iTf "mowing" operations, which has a ratio of 7 : 1
According to UN OCHA data from 2008 to 2022; The collateral damage on the 7th was significantly lower than any of the ITf "mowing" operations, which had a ratio of 7:1 with 1,023 military personnel out of 6,541 total. On the 7th, with 473 military (418 were iTf military personnel, 55 belonged to the police) out of 1148 total, the ratio of civilians to military personnel was a mere 1.4:1
When including all casualties, not just deaths, the collateral damage ratio of the "mowing" operations is a staggering 162:1
From the 161,233 accumulated civilian casualties over only 14 years of "mowing" operations.
A 162 :1 ratio means that for every 162 civillians, 1 military personnel is a casualty. The 7th had a ratio of 1.4:1, more than a hundred times lower.
The 473 are - 55 soldiers, 13 privates, 59 corporals, 200 sergeants (45 of whom were sergeant majors), 48 commanders, 32 lieutenants, 5 lieutenant colonels, 6 colonels, 37 officers, 10 inspectors, 6 intendents, and 2 Lance Corp. This was a military defeat, and they are taking it out on the rest.
The reported (not all have ages listed) ages of the victims are as follows:
0-4: 2 civilians
5-12: 8 civilians
13-17: 14 civilians
18-25: 132 civilians
26-40: 119 civilians
41-60: 55 civilians
61+: 40 civilians
Active duty military personnel:
18-25: 258 active duty military personnel
26-40: 60 active duty military personnel
41-60: 17 active duty military personnel
61+: 1 active duty military personnel
haaretz datasheet titled title: xsraxl's Dead: The Names of Those Killed in Hxmxs Attacks, Mxssxcres and the xsrxel-Hxmxs Wxr
There is a more detailed report of of oct 7th titled "I scrapped the information about 1096 of the 1460 killed on 7th of October Attack. Children Less than 1%"
-Yocheved Lifshitz account - 'they treated us well'
-Yasmin Porat account - 'i.T.f kxilled my husband'
Civilians were taken to have swaps for the civilians rotting in prisons without charge on the other side. An excess of ten thousands, all before the seventh
UN Human Rights Office (UN OCHA) PA Civilians 2008-2023:
2008 - 2,325 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,440.
2012 - 3,992 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 255.
2014 - 17,533 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,492.
2018 - 31,259 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 300.
2019 - 15,491 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 138.
2020 - 2,581 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 30.
2021 - 19,183 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 349.
2022 - 10,345 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 191.
2023 up to September - 8,508 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 227.
civilian deaths on the other side -
2008: 3 , 2012: 6 , 2014: 73 , 2018: 9
2019: 10 , 2020: 0 , 2021: 9 , 2022: 26
Total; 2008 up to September 2023 - 161,233 PA Civilian Casualties, 1,023 military personnel.
Wounded includes: amputees from the deliberate targeting of knees by snipers, white phosphorous third degree body burns, etc
Even with being very very generous in extending the "civilian" nomenclature to those that are reservists. Not to mention ignoring the fact that the majority of the attacks were done in by their own forces inorder to prevent their capture, it is still incomparable to what was done in prior years.
In the Tantura (2022) documentary there is a iTf man who says that they took a pregnant woman, made bets whether the baby is a boy or a girl, disemboweled and cut her stomach open to check who won, another one talking about school children who were raising their the hands, the same way kids do in a classroom, after he rounded them up. He then kept firing. Both laughing merrily and casually at the recollection. In another documentary '1948: Creation & Catastrophe', a survivor speaks about women getting violated infront of their family members by iTf. She was a child at the time and still wept as an elderly woman. For more recent atrocities, "Breaking the Silence" record statements by the iTf themselves, they recount the events witht he same casualty their forebears do.
The "Costs of War" study by brown in 2021 has these figures for the past 20 years of engagement of US policy: indirect deaths 4.5-4.7 million, direct 905-940,000 , in other words 6 million deaths and 38 million displaced. This is relevant because of the Oded Yinon Plan.
More on the Oded Yinon plan - According to the founding father of zionism, theodore hertzel, the area of the jewish state stretches from the brook of Egypt to the Euphrates; the promised land extends from the river of Egypt up to the Euphrates and includes parts of Syria and Lebanon; when viewed in the current context including the siege on Gaza the zionist plan for the middle east bears an intimate relationship to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the 2006 war in Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya and Syria and the continued crisis in Iraq and Yemen, not to mention the political crisis in the kingdom of saudi Arabia.
In the 1980s an article written by a former senior official with the israeli foreign ministry in which israel shahak wrote a forward to which says "in my opinion the accurate and detailed plan of the present zionist regime of ariel sharon for the middle east which is based on the division of the whole area into small states and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states."
Whey aye lad
Ha, not everyone can guess the accent.... good shout.
@@JabzyJoe I am from Hebburn myself so familiar with it
beautiful interaction
Because they aren't one people to begin with.
Talking about USSR, you acused them of supressing ethincic identities, which was false in 99% of cases.
No, it isnt
i want what youre smoking
Great video. It's clear that such a union was simply unfeasible due to sociocultural, historical and geographic issues. Why are Arab countries poor(ly managed) even today? As a Nigerian, here's my simple answer: Bad geography, poor social and economic systems, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others.
As a Syrian, I am glad it didn’t happen. The idea of Arabization and pan-Arab unity is a disease.
شاطر يحماده يا ليبرالي يا مثقف يا متنور
Too late. The 'lingua franca' of the entire Fertile Crescent has been Arabic since long before the advent of Islam.
@@abdelrhmangamal4829 اشطر من راسك المصري 🧑🏾🦱🐪
@@alkha4711 »اشطر من راسك المصري
حرفيا طفل عنده ١٦ سنه علي الكييورد هيلاقي رد احسن وده بيثبت حاجه او حاجتين
I agree
asking why there isn’t an arab union is like asking why there isn’t a sanskrit union, or why village people dont use the internet
Villagers with internet access have entered the chat
there is an arab union though, well an arab league at least but ye
😂😂😂
31:58 we didn't launch it ! it was a contingency if things were desperate.
Why is there no pan slavic state? Lol
Bro honestly. 😭😭
RIP Yugoslavia man.
@@bcvetkov8534 he is bosnia kosovo etc good.
Video idea: why there is no pan turkic state?
cmon bruh that’s obvious
Suspicious Lack of Iraqi politics tho.
Short answer, nationalism.
Not only that even
Short answer would be history, religious rule, the british, corruption, nationalism (ofc), failure of the soviet union, and plane old hate
I even skipped on many events but that's the short of it really
There is a difference between the nationalism of the colonial/imperial powers and nationalism of the oppressed. "National liberation" May be preferable for clarity.
Your attempts at Hebrew names are too amusing to correct, no one tell him
Better question, why would there be?
We’re good we just need to work together
Tbh pan arabism not working out was for the best. Every group of people living in each arabic nation clearly had leaders and goals for their own respective nations and peoples. Like when Egypt and Syria united into the UAR. Egypt basically turned Syria into an Egyptian province which angered a lot of Syrians. (I'm obviously oversimplifing what happened but you guys know that.) The Arabic nations deciding to work together diplomatically and commercially and to raise each other up through trade and cooperation in the modern day seems like a better strategy than politically uniting prematurely. Great video as always Jabzy.
i think if a unity between arab nation really happened it would be better if it was a confederation or something like that not a single one state
The premise of the video is false. Much of the territory was held by UK and France after the fall of the Ottomans, but otherwise it was all a contiguous piece of land under the old empire..
Source for that 1948 partition plan?
16:39 had no idea the ottomans had such liberal policies with regards to land purchases / joke - This is myth had been debunked numerious times before, no one owned the land to be able to sell it. The ottomans ran a feudal system, the Sultan outrightly refused to sell the land, even if it meant debt relief for the ottomans. Hertzl himself begged him for it, he still was refused.
What? You know that even the entire island of Cyprus was sold to the British right? Just an example
That only supports what I said. If it were owned by individuals, wholesale of an island would not h ave been feasible. Nevermind the fact that they couldn't defend it properly.
Actually, land was indeed purchased by Jews, including large amounts of land bought from the Sursock family. You can even visit the Sursock Palace in Beirut! Other families involved in land sales include the Tuqan, Abdel Hadi, and Khuri families. Those people still exist today, the documents still exist- it is not ancient history. Additionally, a significant portion of land was acquired or leased from various church institutions. It still happens today- and currently there's a big issue about sub-lease in a whole neighborhood in Jerusalem. So, the claim that no land was sold isn't quite accurate.
Actually nomore than 2% was purchased. Mainly under the table deals with corrupt officials.
Actually nomore than 2% was purchased. Mainly under the table deals with corrupt officials.
Long story short, ethnic cleansing/counter-cleansing, and a whole bunch of guys advocating for unity if they themselves were the leader of that unity.
Algeria is not Arab
Are they historically and rightfully Berber? Yes
Are they logically Berber? No
🇩🇿🇩🇿🇩🇿☪️☪️☪️❤️❤️❤️
Mongols finished off a declining Abbasid Caliphate. Brits finished off a declining Ottoman Sultanate.
But mamluks destory mongols in ayn jalut 1260 ad And ottomans destoryed britsih in gallipoli war in didfirently that middle east push sh*t brtisih empire fallen in ww2.
@@SSMasseus British Empire didn't fell because of the middle east,
Instead the unrest from India, and because of the Germans, devastating the British Empire, it couldn't manage the vast lands after WWII, ////
@@lotcam4046 middle east rebellion from 1920 To 1970 okey Jihadist horrible rebellion guys then alliance of germans for weapons and birtish not easily live in region like in afghans beat brtisih more likely.
@@SSMasseus boy, had you been slipped and hurt your head,
Resources run an Empire, there was nothing in the middle-east to procure to run an Empire,
Even the Brits called India a jewel in the Crown,
I am sure in your fantasy world, Empires run on sand,
Also defeats in the middle east means nothing when money and resources are flowing in their(British Empire) pockets, they(British Empire) can organize again and again and again, like the SPQR against the Greeks, they(SPQR) never ran into shortage of men in the battlefield, upon which a hired General from Greeks said they(SPQR) are like hydra(multi-headed mythical creature),
It was the outdated organizational structure which couldn't contain such land mass in the London's control,
There is no Arab superstate for the same reason Europe hasn’t united or Asia united.
Many of the ruling parties of Arab countries though preached Pan-Arabism, like the Baathists and Nasser for example. There's no Indonesian party that speaks of unity with Nepal.
@@JabzyJoe Japan wanted to unite all Asia and so did the mongols. Europe was almost united by the Romans, napoleon, and Hitler conquered huge chunk of Europe.
But even if Arabs wanted to unify the practical concerns outweighs all. Who would rule? Like is Saddam Hussein going to rule? Nasser? House of Saud? This Arab state has no unifying ideology or leader. Unifying ideology - like Islam? Which type? Sunni, Shia, alawite? How to govern? Monarchy? Fascism, communism, democracy? All Arab countries have huge differences and they wouldn’t give those differences up without a lot of struggle.
@@gj1234567899999Japan said they wanted to unite all of Asia, but really just wanted all of Central and East Asia under Japanese colonial rule. The Mongols weren’t Pan-Asianist and didn’t want to unite Asia, they wanted a Mongol Empire. They even invaded Europe and almost invaded Africa.
The Romans, similar to the Mongols, weren’t uniquely European either as they invaded Asia and Africa and never had a Pan-European agenda, but an agenda of Roman imperialism/dominance. Napoleon was, similarly, a French imperialist and not a Pan-European. Hitler was a Pan-Germanist, Pan-Germanicist, and Aryanist and believed and enforced the German imperialist and colonialist idea of Lebensraum. If he was a Pan-European, he would’ve seen the Slavs, Balts, Uralics, Romans, Celts, Albanians, Basques, and Hellenes as equals to the Germanic people or the “Aryan race”.
@@gj1234567899999Islam isn’t an ideology, but a religion, and there were many different Pan-Arabist ideologies to choose from. Nasser’s Arab Socialism (AKA Nasserism), (Aflaq’s, later Saddam’s) Ba’athism, and Neo-Ba’athism.
@@gj1234567899999Also, yes, Arabs would absolutely be willing to unite. Pan-Arabist, particularly Arab Socialist movements, were extremely popular particularly in the culturally dispersed countries of Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Oman. Ever heard of the UAR?
Последний раз ближе всего к панарбскому государству была Великая Порта.
Because there is no pan Arab nation or people. Most of the "Arab" states aren't Arab.
This is such a dumb argument. Whoever speaks Arabic and consider themselves Arab is Arab. No one has ever cared about weird racial theories there.
The primary definition is linguistic. Therefore all 20-odd Arab states are Arab.
@@johngeren1053 Which is irrelevant, as demonstrated by the number of individual nations that share common languages with others. The Arabic speaking states can no more unite than the English, French, Spanish speaking ones.
Plus things get more dubious with regards to what language people actually speak in some parts of the "Arab" league
@@FMJIRISH The Arab states are contiguous, unlike Anglo, French Hispanic ones. Standard Arabic is taught in schools and written material is equally legible from Baghdad to Fez. That is why Arab nationalists emphasize literacy.
@@FMJIRISH There is also the historic fact that former European colonies generally have adopted the colonial languages. The Arabs did not.
Those Arab countries were a whole new country that formed disregarding a lot of ethnic and religious differences. That's what happened when an Arab culture colonize vast areas and still wanted to rule it after losing wars.
Yugoslavs, not Jugoslavs. Korps, not Corps.
The closing of the Village Institutes in Turkey was one of the biggest failures of that time. The US pressured Turkey to close them because they feared communists would be raised in these institutes instead the US supported Islamist's factions in Turkey since they were anti-comunist. Due to the closing of these institutes the rural anatolian population was robbed of education and remains very arrogant, conservative to this day sadly.
The idea that Palestinians left Haifa in April 1948 in response to Arab broadcasts because there was about to be a battle in Haifa between Zionists and Arab armies makes no sense. The Arab invasion hadn't started and would never get close to Haifa. There were other cities that were much closer to where the Arab armies would invade from and would more likely to become a battlefield and Palestinians didn't leave those cities.
The arrival of a large force of Haganah troops in city with the aim of getting rid of the Palestinian population is a much more believable explanation.
Egyptians are not arabs
I'd say that a desert region, without enough water resources for modern industry, or agriculture, is not capable of sustaining a state that is that large or complex.
You never been to the area, huh?
Never read history huh
You’re very wrong and slow the regions of the coastal plain are very fruitful
Ummayads caliphate was a pan Arab state and it will come back again
And it fell miserably after the people of the regions they conquered started revolting
Ya right
What a nice short Video 👍
(but I really love the >3h ons)
Could there yet be a pan-Arab state?
There could, but it’s definitely not happening soon.
Because every single time it was sabotaged.
Doubt it, people just hate people from other places just look at city rivalry.
700+ civil wars says otherwise just like europeans you people love to off each other
They’re all just too peaceful to unite!
As an Arab, there are three reasons
1- Shia's
2- Shia's
3- Shia's
I am a sunni and wtf is wrong with you
@@magma9000he is right thought ngl
@@magma9000 isnt everyone supposed to follow muhammads teachings and not the 2 others that split everyone?
Well gee, it's a wonder they don't want to unify with you when you talk about them like that.
Obviously their rights and culture would be deeply respected.
Seriously, look in a mirror.
@@samwill7259 we did not start to talk at them harshly like that since like 5 years, before that we mostly respected them, but after what they did with our countries I don't even want their unity anymore, what I want from them is mind their own buisness and not blame our leaders for their mistake, they always blame Sunni leaders for having relations with israel, we don't like them but Jews are waaaaay better than Shia's
Everything was fine when the Byzantines were running things........
No everything was much better under the OTTOMANS TURKS were running things..........
Hadrian cries everyday
Lets just forget the 600 year war they had with Persia shall we?
@@eatthebourgeoisie5230 yeah but map simulators are fun
Another foreign imperial power ? Absolutely not, nothing's like the Rashidun Caliphate 💯