ثورة فلسطين - أسبابها ونتائجها
The Palestine Revolt: Its Causes and Consequences

Page 450

Normalized
transcript

Printed page 450

ثورة فلسطين - أسبابها ونتائجها

حقائق في بيان حال اليهود والإنكليز والعرب والرأي في مستقبل العرب والشرق

(2)

حقيقة حال الإنكليز

قد بيَّنا في الفصل الأول من هذا المقال حقيقة حال اليهود: ما يعدُّ لهم وما يعد عليهم، ومنه ما هو خفي عن أكثر الناس.

وأما الإنكليز فأمرهم مشهور عند قراء الصحف وغيرهم لكثرة خوضها في سياستهم وأعمالهم، ونقلها مناقشات برلمانهم فيها، ونقل أقوال صحفهم وصحف الأمم الأخرى في نقدها مدحًا وذمًّا، وإنما تخفى على الكثير منهم أخلاقهم وصفاتهم العامة، وما طرأ عليها من تغير، فنذكر ما يعنينا من ذلك.

كان القوم مشهورين بالصدق والعدل والحزم والتدبير ومراعاة حرية الناس في أديانهم وآرائهم، وبالوفاء بالوعود والعهود في معاملاتهم الشخصية والدولية، كما اشتهروا بالدسائس والحيل والكيد والمكر، والعجب والكبر، والرياء والإفك (*) ، ولم يكن كل ما يقال في الشهرتين حقًّا ولا كله باطلاً؛ وإنما مرجع أكثر ما يوصفون به من فضيلة إلى أخلاق الأفراد ومزايا الشعب يفيض شعاعه على الحكومة، كما أن مردَّ أكثر ما يوصفون به من رذيلة إلى الحكومة، وقد يثور غباره في وجوه الشعب، وما كانت تمدح به حكومتهم وحدها، فمنه ما هو حق إلا أنه نسبي لا تام في الغالب، ومنه ما هو من تأثير الدعاية (البوربغنده) التي لم يتقنها أحد كإتقانهم، ولا تنفق في سبيلها دولة كإنفاقهم، وأعني بالنسبي أمرين (أحدهما) ما يكون من المقايسة بين الإنكليز وغيرهم من المستعمرين ولا شك أنهم أمثل وأعقل وأنبل (وثانيهما) ما يكون من التوازن بينهم وبين الحكومات الوطنية للبلاد التي يتولون أمرها بالأسماء المختلفة أو المختلَقَة التي يضعونها لها كغيرهم (كالحماية والاحتلال والإجارة والانتداب) وما غُلب أولو سلطان وإمارة على حكمهم وانتُزعت منهم

(*) الإفك صرف الشيء عن وجهه الحق إلى غيره.

English
translation

The Palestine Revolt: Its Causes and Consequences

Facts concerning the situation of the Jews, the English, and the Arabs, and an opinion on the future of the Arabs and the East

(2)

The actual situation of the English

In the first part of this article we explained the actual situation of the Jews, what counts for and against them, including matters hidden from most people.

The English, by contrast, are well known to newspaper readers and others. Newspapers discuss their policies and actions, report parliamentary debates about them, and carry praise and criticism from English and other newspapers. What many people do not know is their general character and qualities, and the changes these have undergone. We shall mention what concerns us here.

They were known for truthfulness, justice, resolve, sound management, respect for freedom of religion and opinion, and faithfulness to promises and treaties in personal and international dealings. They were also known for intrigue, deception, cunning, pride, arrogance, hypocrisy, and falsehood. Neither reputation was wholly true or wholly false. Most virtues ascribed to them stem from the character of individuals and the qualities of the people, whose light reaches the government. Most vices ascribed to them stem from the government, though their dust may rise in the people's faces. Some praise given to their government alone is deserved, but usually only in a relative sense; some results from propaganda, which no one has mastered as they have, or funded so lavishly. By “relative” I mean two comparisons. First, beside other colonizers, the English are undoubtedly more decent, sensible, and noble. Second, beside the native governments of lands they administer under names they and others devise, such as protectorate, occupation, lease, and mandate. Rulers and princes have never been overcome in their rule and deprived of

(*) Falsehood means turning a thing away from its true aspect to another.

Analysis

The December installment begins with Riḍā's account of the English. He calls them more just than other colonizers while also describing their use of propaganda, deception, and unequal power. The comparison is his judgment, not an independent survey of imperial rule. His argument that English rule can appear preferable to rule by unjust local rulers crosses the printed break into p. 451. The definition of falsehood in the footnote belongs to this printed page.

The British government's wartime propaganda apparatus is independently documented. The National Archives identifies overlapping propaganda bodies from 1914, including the Foreign Office News Department and War Propaganda Bureau, their consolidation into the Department of Information in 1917, and the Ministry of Information in 1918. This supports Riḍā's factual premise that Britain developed a major organized propaganda system. It does not establish his comparative claim that no state matched British mastery or spending, for which he gives no figures.

Riḍā's favorable generalization about British respect for freedom of religion and opinion also requires a colonial qualification. The 1919 Rowlatt legislation extended emergency powers in India, including detention without ordinary trial and special procedures with sharply restricted legal protections. The legislation and its enforcement provoked mass protest, and the British response culminated in martial-law repression and the Amritsar massacre. This record directly limits the breadth of Riḍā's reputation claim, although it does not show that every British authority or territory followed one policy.