• Table of Content
• Initial Formation
• The Palestinian National Resistance
• The Crucial Formative Years
• The Arab Movement and the Palestinian Resistance
• The Arabs and World War I

CHAPTER TWO

THE CRUCIAL FORMATIVE YEARS

The late 19th Century constituted a crucially important new era in the history of Arab nationalism, an era that witnessed the transformation of Arab activism from politicized literary and linguistic works to a more politically orientated form. In this respect, it is important to emphasize two major developments that could help in understanding the newly emerging stage of Arab activism. The application of Midhat Pasha's Constitution of 1876 and Sultan Abdul Hamid II's despotic rule - which are often blamed for hindering the Arabs' effort to achieve nationalist goals - diminished the liberal atmosphere that had provided the Arab leaders with a platform of openness and free thinking. The constitutional and parliamentary life of the Ottoman Empire could have created the channels through which Arab leaders might have obtained some gains for the Arab people and region. It could have directed Arab activism toward the means to redefining the Arab-Ottoman relationship. The adoption by Sultan Abdul Hamid II of the idea of the Islamic league must have been looked upon as an additional obstacle in the nationalist struggle with the Turks, as it entailed the creation of a new unifying framework for the different ethnic religious groups in the Empire. This, of course, contradicted the Arabs' adoption of the nationalist ideology. It was frequently regarded as hindering Arab nationalism as a political ideology from gaining legitimacy amongst the masses, the majority of whom adhered to Islam.

The late 19th Century witnessed the formation of the Charity Society of Damascus. Although its declared goals were charitable, it was, in fact, a secret society that was originally formed by Tahir Al-Jazairi. Its main political objectives were the reinstallation of the frozen Ottoman Constitution and the reactivating of the shura (consultation) rule in the in the Arab region. The founders of this society had contacts with the leaders of the movement of Young Turks who later led the constitutional coup of 1908.

The members of the Society were from a wide range of professions. Among its ranks were 'ulama, reformers and famous writers; intellectuals like Sheikh Jamal Ad-Din Al-Qasimi, Sheikh Abdul Razeq Al-Bitar, and Sheikh Salim Al-Bukhari. Later, Rafiq Al-Azm, Mohammed Kurd Ali, Fayez Al-Khoury, Abdul Hamid Az-Zahrawi, Shukri Al-Asali and other intellectuals joined the Society.
Salim Al-Jazairi and Sa'ad Darwish, senior Arab officers in the Ottoman army were active members of the Society, as was Hussein Awni Bek, an intellectual and an officer in the Department of Education.7

The program of the Society highlighted an intellectual reform-oriented trend within the Arab nationalist movement, which surfaced in the early stages of the politically oriented movement. It placed, for example, great emphasis on the need to restore the Constitution and to reinstall the parliament in Ottoman political life as a means of coping with the ills of the Empire. In other words, the members of the Society seemed to perceive themselves as integral to the Empire. They did not necessarily demand the fragmentation of the Empire along nationalist lines but rather the preservation of the Empire along with inevitable reform. This early tendency could be viewed as the basis for the eventual development of the idea of decentralized Ottoman rule in the Arab region, where an Arab political entity was to be created and whose relationship with the Ottoman Empire would be based on the issue of the Ottoman decentralized authority, similar to the model of the Hungarian-Austrian confederate monarchy.

This trend, which was very strong at the time of the 1908 constitutional coup and thereafter, acted prior to the coup as an impetus to the concerted efforts of some Arab intellectuals and Young Turks to bring about serious changes in the political life of the Empire. Although these two groups differed in their ideology, despotism and a lack of freedom, in addition to opposition to the rule of Abdul Hamid II, united them in their bid to facilitate change.

In 1906, Jam'iyyah Watan, the 'Motherland Society', was formed in Damascus. With branches in Jaffa and Jerusalem, its members came mainly from the officers of the fifth brigade. Among the early founders of the society was Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, the founder of the Republic of modern Turkey. Other members included Suleiman Bek and Haj Mustafa.

The early 20th Century, prior to the 1908 constitutional coup in Turkey, provided the intellectual setting for the emergence of another intellectual trend within the Arab nationalist movement, which was characterized by a well-defined stand on the issue of the Arab-Turkish relationship and the inevitability of Arab independence from the Ottoman Empire. This can be attributed to Abdul Rahim Al-Kawakibi, a prominent leading figure in the Arab liberation movement.
Al-Kawakibi descended from the Al-Ashraf family in Aleppo and worked as an editor, first of Al-Furat and then of Ash-Shabba' newspapers. He also held certain official posts and later worked as a lawyer. It is worth noting that Al-Kawakibi wrote two major works in his lifetime, Taba'a Al-Istibdad and Um Al-Kura. He created an intellectual awakening in the Arab region, emphasizing in his writings the necessity of standing against Turkish despotism. His main theme centered on the importance of the Arabs regaining the Caliphate from the Turks.

Between 1902-1903, Al-Kawakibi, in his writing in Al-Manar, pointed out the means to remedy the ills in the Arab World. Although he called for Muslim unity from Morocco to China through an Islamic league, his main concern was the Arab region and the progress of the idea of Arab nationalism. He emphasized the distinct Arab role in the history of the region, through which he attempted to show how the Arab people had been treated badly and how, based on the Arabs' history, they should be considered a candidate for facilitating the progress of Islam. In short, Al-Kawakibi, although a true Arab nationalist, acknowledged the Islamic union and league. In this respect, it is important to indicate that Al-Kawakibi distinguished between Muslim and Arab. Consequently, he called for the administrative demarcation between the Turks and the Arabs through the adoption of a decentralized rule as a step towards the eventual Arab independence from the Turks.

The installation of an Arab Caliphate in Mecca was a major theme in Al-Kawakibi's thinking. He favored an administrative demarcation among all ethnic minorities within the Empire, which would allow them to enjoy some autonomy on the basis of nationalism through a decentralized Ottoman rule. He was known for having a friendly relationship with people from different ethnic and denominational backgrounds, his nationalism always superseding denominational differences.

Najib Azuri, an Arab nationalist, treated the early 20th Century in terms of two struggling trends affecting the Arab question, i.e., the tension between the Ottoman ideology of preserving the Empire and Arab nationalism in its battle to gain a political identity and entity. As far as Azuri was concerned, both trends put high priority on the need to modernize the region in keeping with the trend in Europe, but while recognizing the dangers posed by that part of the world. Azuri's acknowledgment of the Arab liberation movement with respect to its relations with Europe and European dangers did not deter him from valuing the French intellectual and cultural impact on the region. In fact, he supported the French occupation of Algeria and called upon the French to increase their influence and role in Syria and Palestine.

One might say from Al-Kawakibi and Azuri's thoughts that the Arab nationalist movement in the early 20th Century was suffering from a state of confusion, ambiguity and intellectual non-cohesiveness. The two men could easily have defined Arab nationalism, but they were still under the influence of competing Islam under Ottoman rule with Arabism.

The definition of Arab nationalism given by Mohammed Izzat Darwazih, an Arab nationalist, best demonstrates the Arab nationalist's self-perception and consciousness. Darwazih stated that the idea of nationalism aimed at the establishment of a united Arab entity in which the units descended from the same origin or inhabited the same country, spoke a single language, and shared the same interests and ends. In his view, the Arab World that existed then was the motherland of the Arab race. It had also been the land of the Arab Semitic immigration waves that had come from the Arabian Peninsula to various Arab regions. Arab blood is still present in the Arab Peninsula, whose inhabitants always had contact with the people of the different Arab regions in Greater Syria, Iraq, the Nile Valley and North Africa. It had been and still was the supplier to the Arab World of waves of immigration.

The study of the idea of Arab nationalism and its formulation in the early 20th Century is highly significant, especially when one acknowledges the importance of its intellectual formulation in relation to the organizational formation of the Arab movement. The formulation of Arab nationalism was affected by two major factors. First, the Arab movement with respect to the issue of nationalism and the Arab nation came as a response to a threat and a challenge, posed by the Ottoman's attempt to 'Turkify' all the subjects of their empire, which targeted the very existence of the Arabs as a nation and an entity. Second, the Arab leaders dealt with the issue of Arab nationalism from its political angles. However, this approach lacked a comprehensive program or the means to accomplish the objectives assigned to the Arab liberation movement. These factors may explain why Arab nationalism could be described as being foggy, ambiguous and non-cohesive.

The idea of Arab nationalism and Arab independence from the Turks could be seen as revolutionary. The factors and the conditions as discussed above reduce it to an extremely reformist level. They also made it difficult for the nationalist leaders to define the best way to go about materializing their goals.

In light of this argument, one can easily understand the Arabs' response to the constitutional coup of 1908 in the Ottoman Empire. Their interest in change, which they perceived as a vehicle for carrying the idea of nationalism to fruition, framed their response to this coup. Although Arab nationalists stood against the policy of 'Turkification' and Ottoman despotism, they supported the constitutionalists of 1908, despite the fact that the Arab attitude was divided on this issue.

The confusion and the lack of adequate assessment on the Arab side in 1908 had a serious impact on the Arab nationalist movement. Arab nationalists supported an Ottoman constitutional movement, which later acted vigorously against Arabs and Palestinians. Considering the fact that the constitutionalists were Turkish nationalists, their main concern was to impose the Turkish will and nationality upon others while resolving the financial and economic problems of the Ottoman Empire. The Arab-friendly and supportive relationship with the constitutionalists was short-lived.

First and foremost, Al-Ittihad Wat-Taraqqi (The Society of Union and Progress) included in its ranks both Turks and Arabs. It started with declared literary intentions, but at the same time acted as an underground political organization working against the rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II. Its membership was composed of Arabs and Turks who descended from upper social classes, among whom were Kamal Bek Diya Pasha, Mustafa Fadil Pasha, Shafiq Isma'il, the Egyptian Khadiv, and Fawzi Bek. Among its members were experts on literature, intellectuals, politicians and military officers, such as Khalil Ghneim, a Christian from Beirut and a representative of Syria in Majlis Al-Mab'uthan (the Ottoman Parliament).

The Arab support of the constitutional coup of 1908 and the desire to improve the Arabs' conditions stimulated Arab enthusiasm for a joint effort with the Turks to reform the socioeconomic, political, administrative and judicial situation. After the constitutional movement had succeeded in dethroning Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the Syrian Turkish Reformation Committee (Lajnit Islah At-Turkiyyah Suriyyah) was formed. Founded by Amin Arsalan, its main target was to improve conditions in the Ottoman Empire in general and in the Arab region in particular. Furthermore, in 1908 Jam'iyyat Al-Ikha Al-Arabi Al-Uthmani (Society of Arab Ottoman Brotherhood) was established. The founders of this society were Arab intellectuals from various Arab wilayats and in particular the Syrian Arabs, the most prominent being Sadiq Pasha, Shafiq Al-Mu'ayyad and Shukri Bek Al-Husseini. The main task of the society was to facilitate Arab cooperation with the Turks in order to achieve internal reform.

The completion of the picture can only be achieved by showing the other side of the coin. Although a great number of Arabs supported the constitutional movement of 1908, others stood firmly against the Society of Union and Progress, with whose ideology they disagreed. They might have favored the policy of Sultan Abdul Hamid II over the unionist stand, although it could be viewed as regressive. The society of Al-Jam'iyyah Al-Islamiyyah (The Islamic League in Constantinople) is a case in point. With the aim of countering the unionists and their activities, its prominent Arab leaders included Shekib Arslan, Ash-Sheikh Abdul Aziz Jawish, Abdul Rahman Al-Yousef, and Mohammed Al-Azm. In addition to this, a local society, Jam'iyyat Al-Iha Al-Arabi (Society of Arab Brotherhood) was formed in Aleppo in 1908 and subsequently adopted a vehement opposition stand to the Unionists and their ideology. The constitutional movement of 1908 shortly after its success faced the threat of the counter revolutionaries, especially among the supporters of the dethroned sultan who, in 1909, launched an unsuccessful counter coup in an attempt to bring Sultan Abdul Hamid II back to the throne.

Although this attempt was short-lived, it attracted the attention of various groups in the Empire, some of whom supported the counter coup and some of whom opposed it. It is worth noting that the conservative sheikhs and local leaders in the Empire received with pleasure the movement carried out by the counterrevolutionaries in the Capital in March 1909. The following example from Nablus best illuminates the picture: At the time of the Sultan Abdul Hamid II and the successful coup, the conservative regressive figures in Nablus became very active, holding meetings in different circles every night and calling on the people to commit themselves to being obedient to the Caliphate and to support the shari'a (Islamic jurisdiction). They were also urged to curse infidelity and infidels. It seems that the cabinet that the Unionists imposed after their successful coup against Sultan Abdul Hamid II revealed to the people the state of affairs in the capital. At the same time, the countercoup called upon the people to support the Sultan's bid for a return to the Caliphate. It is significant, therefore, to note that this movement in Nablus was not alone in its rise and impact.

The movement in Nablus was led by Tawfiq Hammad, who was known for his descent from the upper middle class. He was a pious man, modest in his education and intelligence, and showed a good mastery of Turkish. In the early stages of his career, Hammad worked as a clerk in the Mutasarrifyah and soon became the popular leader of the clerks group. Together with his colleagues in Nablus he formed jam'iyyah (a society). Among those leaders were Al-Sheikh Umar Zitir, Al-Haj Badawi 'Shur, Al-Haj Abdul Hadi Al-Qasim, Abdul Hadi and Hafez Pasha Al-Mohammed, Abdul Hadi and Abdul Rahman Al-Haj Ibrahim, mayor of Tulkarem. Prior to the constitution, they were part of the struggle within the Al-A'yan circle in the Nablus metropolitan area. This group of men stood mainly against the Al-Qasem family in Jamma' since this family was the most dominant and influential among its peers. The group constantly wrote to the Ottoman Government complaining about the acts of the Al-Qasem family until they succeeded in making the Ottomans restructure the administrative establishment, which led, eventually, to a decline in the influence of the Al-Qasem family.

This group, significantly, sent a telegraph of support and congratulations to the constitutionalists upon the success of their movement in 1908, signing it "Jam'iyyah" (Society). Al-Haj Tawfiq Hammad had the kind of charisma that made people respect him, even if they did not particularly like him. He was known for being loyal, strong, and stubborn, and when he became the Mayor of Nablus, he made a considerable contribution to the organizational efficiency of the municipality. He also became a member of the administrative council of Nablus, and his status greatly enhanced the position of the Jam'iyyah.

The support of Mr. Hammad and his colleagues for the March 1909 counterrevolution provoked the leaders of the Society of Union and Prog ress, who regained control following the dethronement of the Sultan. Consequently, the unionist government acted against the administration of Beirut and Nablus and oppressed these administrations. Moreover, the Unionists accused the supporters of the counterrevolutionaries of being corrupt and acting in defiance of the law and security needs. Some of those leaders were deported to Beirut and tried there.

The Ottoman authorities in Nablus, Jenin, and Tulkarem continued to harass the leaders, working against their interests. In fact, the Ottoman authority tried to undermine the A'yan leaders through supporting local A'yan families, who would join the Ottoman authority in harassing the disloyal leaders and their families. In the second parliamentary election, the Ottoman authority decided to harass the family of Al-Haj Tawfiq Hammad by promoting Haidar Bek Tuqan's candidacy for the parliament seat. Hammad's opportunity to rid himself of such an awkward situation came with the fall of the unionist government and the formation of the cabinet by the Opposition Party. In so doing, Hammad succeeded in becoming the representative of Nablus, where he stayed until the end of the parliamentary term, which had a great impact on promoting Hammad's role as a political figure and one who would become prominent during the British Mandate. During the British period, Hammad headed the Islamic Christian Society in Nablus where he displayed great hostility towards both the British and the Zionists.

The failure of the March 1909 countercoup brought the Unionists back to power, thereby ending the Arab-Turkish honeymoon. The unionist government outlawed all active Arab societies, including the Society of Arab Ottoman Brotherhood, and prohibited the issuing of several Arab journals and newspapers. In a sense, they attempted to silence all voices calling for independence and liberty and to enthusiastically 'Turkify' all the subjects of the Empire. These measures, not surprisingly, stirred hostility towards the Turks again and elevated the nationalist fervor for achieving independence and freedom.

In 1909, the Unionists' return to power could be considered a crucial turning point in the history of Arab nationalism and Palestinian resistance to Zionist immigration to and settlement in Palestine. The limitations put on political and intellectual liberty and the policy of Turkification must have had a great impact on the active Arab nationalists. The Ottoman need for the Zionists' financial support in balancing the budget inspired negotiation with the Zionist leaders, which led to a loosening of Ottoman regulations prohibiting the influx of Jews to Palestine. Eventually, all such regulations were canceled.

This must have represented a huge setback for the Palestine Question and the resistance to Zionist immigration. Both the Arab nationalist movement and the Palestinian resistance to Zionists between 1909 and 1914 gathered more momentum in an attempt to enhance their bid to accomplish their goals.

The period under focus indeed carried with it the transformation of the Arab nationalist cause into a well-defined political movement, which this time adopted an underground form of activism, due to the seriousness and sensitivity of the period. They had figured out that secrecy under an authoritarian regime and constant surveillance of policy best preserve organizational goals and serve to enhance political activism.

This period witnessed the formation of secret societies through which the Arab and Palestinian activists decided to channel their activism. Although the Unionists' measures should have unified Arab activists, the movement suffered from deeper fragmentation with regard to the level of patriotism, nationalism, and ideology.

For example, in the Lebanese capital of Beirut, a commercial and intellectual center, the political movement was composed of two conflicting political ideologies, both of which, however, were united in the call for a Lebanese political entity. The first group could be seen as regionalist and was composed of Christians from the mountains of Lebanon, who emphasized the need for the establishment of an independent political entity under French protection. The other trend was Arab nationalist and was comprised mainly of Arab nationalists who obtained their education from both ahliyah (popular) schools and private schools, namely, Al-Ulliyyah Al-Uthmaniyyah Al-Islamiyyah (the Islamic Ottoman College), which was known for its role in supporting and enhancing Arab nationalism. This political group supported the idea of having Lebanon as part of the Arab ummah. The call for decentralization could hardly be noticed among the needs of the above-mentioned ideologist groups.

The two major newspapers issued in Palestine prior to World War I and after, namely Al-Karmel and Filistin, represented the two existing intellectual and political tendencies. Najib Nassar, the owner and editor-in-chief of Al-Karmel could be considered a Palestinian national who prompted Palestinian action in resisting Zionism. Issa Al-Issa, the owner and editor-in-chief of the newspaper Filistin, meanwhile, could be viewed as an Arab nationalist who looked upon Palestine and the Palestine Question as an issue before the Arab nationalist movement.

Furthermore, Al-Hizb Al-Watani (the National Party) could be seen as a demonstration of the trend of local politics and patriotism that existed in Palestine. Al-Sheikh Suleiman At-Taji Al-Farouqi was the founder of this party, which was formed as a political body whose goals included resistance to Zionism. It also considered the need for locating resources as a means for developing Palestine. Moreover, it took responsibility for utilizing legal means in encountering the Zionist intrusion into Palestine, always endeavoring to enlighten the ummah and raise its awareness of the dangers of Zionism. The leaders constantly reminded the Ottoman Government of its responsibilities toward Palestine as part of the Empire in regard to its responsibility for enacting and enforcing laws prohibiting Zionist immigration.

Localism and patriotism did not hinder the efforts of the Arab nationalists. In the period 1909-1914, the Arab nationalist movement took a serious course. The chauvinistic approach adopted by the Turks from 1909 onward elevated nationalist enthusiasm while pushing the Arab leaders to act more vigorously and in a more organized manner. This period, therefore, witnessed the formation of Arab secret societies that called for Arab independence from the Turks.

Al-Jam'iyyah Al-Arabiyyah Al-Fateh (the Young Arab Society) came into being as a result of the effort of its three cofounders, namely, Ahmad Qadri, Awni Abdul Hadi and Rustum Haidar, who agreed to commit themselves diligently to serving the ummah and the motherland. The number of members of this society increased rapidly to 20 men, and in 1911, an administrative body for the society was established in Paris. The main goal of the Society was to accomplish an Arab renaissance that could aid the Arab ummah in reaching developed and advanced nations. Its leaders did not include the word "independence" in the programs and publications of the Society, though they acted secretly to achieve the goal of Arab independence.

The preconditions for joining the ranks of the Society were confidentiality, faithfulness, adherence to the ideology, Arab nationalism, and accepting decisions taken in accordance with the view of the majority without reservation. Due to these preconditions, the Society was well organized and characterized by secrecy, which succeeded in deterring the Ottoman Government's constant attempts to infiltrate it. The headquarters of the Society, for security reasons, stayed in Paris until 1913 and then moved to Beirut, from where the Society moved to Damascus one year later.

While Al-Fateh was a political society, Al-Ahd represented the Arab military elite. Formed as a secret society in 1913, its membership was composed mainly of Arab military officers in the Ottoman army, which is why it is sometimes referred to as the military wing of the Arab nationalist movement. Among its leaders and founders were Aziz Ali Al-Misri, Awni Al-Qadamani, Salim Al-Jazairi, and Nuri As-Said. Its main objectives could be summarized as the call for Arab independence and total respect for Islamic values and the institution of the Caliphate.

Hizb Al-Lamarkaziyyah Al-Idariyyah Al-Uthmaniyyah (a Party for the Decentralization of Ottoman Administration) was formed in Cairo in 1912 as a non-secret society. Its main objectives were twofold. Firstly, it intended to demonstrate to the Ottomans the need for decentralized rule. Secondly, it took charge of gathering the support of the Arab masses for the idea of a decentralized Ottoman administration. Its main leadership body was composed of 20 men known to possess knowledge, experience, and strong personalities. Although they resided in Egypt, this body was to choose an Executive Committee of six leaders and had branches in all the main cities of Greater Syria, all of which were in constant contact with other Arab societies in the region.

Among the founders and leaders of this party were Rafia Al-Azm, a Muslim from Damascus, Rashid Rida, a Muslim from Trebili, Iskandar Ammun, a Lebanese Christian and Fuad Al-Khatib, a Lebanese Sunni Muslim. Among the Palestinian members were Salim Abdul Hadi, a Muslim from Jenin, Hafiz As-Said, a Muslim from Jaffa, and Ali Al-Nashashibi, a Muslim from Jerusalem.

Al-Muntada Al-Adabi (The Literary Gathering), which was established in Constantinople, was in contact with various Arab societies in Syria. Although it started as a literary society, it was designed to be a political forum with apolitical objectives. In other words, it acted in accordance with opposing groups to the Ottoman establishment. It initially included among its members politicians, officials, parliamentarians, some army officers in the capital, Muslim ulama, some Arab members of the Parliament who supported and sympathized with the society, and the leaders of the Arab nationalist movement from Palestine, Syria and Lebanon. Among the members from Palestine were Arif Al-Arif, Rushdi Ash-Shawwa, Bassem Bseiso, Mustafa Al-Husseini and others. This club continued with its activities until the Ottomans closed it down in 1915.

The Arab students from Palestine established a students society in the Ottoman capital in September 1912. The society named Al-Alam Al-Akhdar (The Green Flag) aimed at strengthening the ties between Arab students in different high schools, educating them, and preparing them for developing their society. Among its founders were Bassem Bseiso, Mustafa Al-Husseini, and Shukri Gushih. The society issued the journal Lisan Al-Arab.

Thus far, Arab nationalists had practiced political activism secretly or overtly through the formation of societies and parties. The organizations as platforms were also designed to serve as vehicles that allowed for the sharing of views and the gathering and spreading of the idea of Arabism. The fragmentation within the movement resulting from the variety of ideas and organizational forms, however, necessitated the search for a new platform to harmonize the movement. This could only be achieved though extensive discussion and the formulation of a program or scheme to bring about independence from the Turks. It required the formation of a united Arab political entity.

The Arab leaders at that time called for holding an Arab Congress to discuss Arab issues and problems in relation to the Turks. However, this congress could not be convened in the Ottoman Empire. The Arab intellectual and nationalist leaders decided, therefore, to hold the First Arab Congress in Paris in 1913, the idea being that they would meet and discuss and make decisions pertaining to important issues far away from Ottoman harassment.

At the Congress, the Arab nationalist leaders agreed to call on the Ottoman Government to improve the conditions of its Arab subjects and to consider Arabic an official language, as it is the language of the Qur'an. These demands were subsequently submitted by the Congress to the Ottoman Government. In short, one may say that the program and the decisions adopted by the conferees were general and vague. The Palestinian issue, meanwhile, was noticeably marginalized by those leaders in their discussion of topics that were of greater importance to the Arab ummah.