The Rise and Fall of a Palestinian Dynasty (31 page)

Like any politically aware person in Palestine, al-Hajj Amin realized the importance of sending a Palestinian delegation to the conference. However, to do this in an international forum, it was necessary to create, almost from nothing, a local organization that could claim to represent the wishes of the native population. While it was obvious that only the notable families would take part, it was imperative to achieve a consensus among them regarding the Palestinian position.

Sykes–Picot Agreement, 1916

Al-Hajj Amin stayed only a short time in Damascus because Haddad was dispatched by Faysal to London and his successor, Ahmad Lahon, did not keep al-Hajj Amin on. The young Husayni returned to Jerusalem and gradually built up his position as head of the family, and the idea of ‘Southern Syria’ was replaced with that of ‘Independent Palestine’.

With his Damascus career at an end, al-Hajj Amin turned his attention to Zionism. In later years, he would claim that the question of how to stop Zionist settlement had preoccupied him since boyhood. But as noted in the previous chapter, it was only in Cairo that he had begun to think of Zionism as an enemy. Al-Hajj Amin’s brief stay in Damascus prepared him not only to become an inspiration in the
struggle against Zionism, but above all to be the first of the Husaynis to enter the modern politics that developed in the Arab world after the Great War. Although other young Husaynis studied the intricacies of local and regional
siyasa
(politics), al-Hajj Amin was the most skillful, and his talent enabled the family to translate its social standing into modern terms of political parties and organizations.

Many family members did not adjust to the change and chose other modern careers: Ishaq Musa al-Husayni chose literature, Ibrahim Said (brother of Raja’i) chemistry; Abd al-Salam III (great-grandson of Umar) became a journalist and essayist, Salim III an archaeologist and Musa Abdullah (another son of Musa Salih) a historiographer. Thus, despite the temptation to go into modern politics, Hassan’s scholarly bent, Tahir’s curiosity and Ismail’s studiousness were passed on to the family’s intellectual branch.
¹³
But before this division occurred in the family – after centuries of representing the local aristocracy – all the inhabitants of Palestine, Jews and Arabs alike, had to adjust to the new British military occupation (1918–20) that was forced upon them.

Having conquered the country, the British authorities did not assume legislative powers but administered it in accordance with the laws of its previous overlords. There was no civil law or judiciary, only the decision of the military governor (three army generals held this post in those two years: Mooney, Watson and Bowles) or of the local military governor (for example, Ronald Storrs in Jerusalem). The British were chiefly concerned with improving the infrastructure. The homes of the Husaynis and other Jerusalem notables were linked for the first time to modern sewerage and water supply systems. The city’s main streets were cleaned once a week, and public sanitation reduced the death rate, which delighted tourists, many of whom had been to Jerusalem in the past and were returning after the war.
¹⁴

Maintaining the status quo was not an easy matter, given the conflicting British promises regarding the future of Palestine. Would it become part of Greater Syria? Or would it become a ‘Jewish national home’, as implied by the Balfour Declaration of 2 November 1917? A year later a new declaration stirred the anxieties of political activists in Jerusalem and elsewhere about the future of Palestine. On 8 November 1918, the governments of Britain and France proclaimed the right of the peoples of Iraq and Syria to self-determination, but they excluded Palestine, probably because of the Balfour Declaration.
¹⁵

It is important to distinguish between people’s preoccupation with the problems of their daily lives and their concerns about the great
issues of the day. Palestinian leaders were not always aware of the rapid pace of political developments that would affect their country’s future. In this, they were at a clear disadvantage compared to their Zionist opponents who, with an energy and decisiveness that astounded the colonial officials, harnessed every possible act to help fulfill the Zionist dream. Kamil al-Husayni witnessed this himself.

On 27 April 1918, a few months after the British occupation began, Kamil and the leaders of all the other communities of Jerusalem were invited to a garden party at the house of Governor Ronald Storrs. At this time a delegation from the Zionist Congress led by Menahem Ussishkin was permitted by the military authorities to come to Palestine, tour the country and study the prospects of laying the groundwork for the ‘Jewish national home’. Ussishkin was the paragon of the new Zionist leader. Unlike some of his colleagues, he openly discussed Zionism as a colonialist project and declared on more than one occasion that any indigenous resistance to the Jewish colonization of Palestine would have to be met with force, coercion and even expulsion. One doubts how much of this Kamil knew, but he did go to Storrs’s meeting willingly and was curious to hear what this Jewish leader, whom he had never met, would have to say. To his dismay, the Zionist spokesman expressed support for the united Arab kingdom but without recognizing Palestine as part of it. Rather, he went on at length about Jewish plans for the development of the country and the joy of the people of Zion at the return of the Jews. Kamil stood up and was about to leave.
¹⁶
He was persuaded to stay, though, and heard a milder statement from Chaim Weizmann, who said that the Zionists had no intention of taking over the country. In time, Palestinians would prefer the direct approach of the future Ussishkins and find it hard to confront the doubletalk and dishonesty of the future Weizmanns. At the meeting, Kamil responded with a measured, noncommittal statement. Weizmann later wrote in his diary that Kamil had been polite but disbelieving – and for good reason.
¹⁷

Perhaps it was this occasion that prompted the younger Husaynis to organize the struggle against the implementation of the Balfour Declaration. Or it may be that they wished to help Faysal resist the French effort to dislodge him from Syria. These young men were not content with symbolic gestures, and they began to prepare for national action. Yet they tended to occupy themselves with minor matters, unlike the Jews, who were laying the foundation of their state. Al-Hajj Amin, twenty-one years old and with unusually red hair and deep blue
eyes, was the spirit of the young Palestinians’ movement. When they formed an active organization called ‘The Arab Club’ – named after the famous club in Damascus where al-Hajj Amin had stayed with Faysal’s entourage during the Arab Revolt – they chose al-Hajj Amin as its president. This was not al-Hajj Amin’s only occupation. After his return from Damascus, he remained loyal to Faysal’s government and obeyed its instruction to join the British administration, which made him an official in the town of Qalqiliyah. Damascus’ secret directive was to use this post to recruit young Palestinians for Faysal’s army to counter a possible French invasion of Syria.
¹⁸

Al-Hajj Amin’s closest friends were his brother Fakhri and his cousins Jamil, Ibrahim, Said, Hilmi and Tawfiq. They were joined by Ishaq Darwish and Muhammad al-Afifi, who were related by marriage to the Husaynis. Tawfiq was known for his community work – he opened and ran an orphanage in Jerusalem, an institution that still symbolizes the Husayni family’s social commitment. But the principal activities of the Arab Club were political rather than social, and its members hoped that the British authorities would allow it to function as a literary-political association supporting the union of Palestine and Syria and opposing the expansion of the Jewish presence. The mentor of the group was Sheikh Abd al-Qadir al-Muzafir, an activist of the Arab national movement during the war who had been deported for his activities. (As mentioned in the previous chapter, al-Muzafir was also an unexpected guest at the first and only collaborative meeting between the Zionists and the Husaynis.)

The young Nashashibis, however, had no use for the Hashemi Amir or Damascus, and they joined the rival Literary Club to demonstrate their different political position. They were a relatively new presence on the Jerusalem stage, and it had taken the earthquake effect of the Young Turks’ revolution to translate their economic power into political power. The year 1908 had been especially important for Suleiman al-Nashashibi and his sons Rashid and Uthman, who represented a transition in the family’s career as it became an influential social-political factor after the advent of the Young Turks. In later years, however, they would not constitute a substantial political force: at the end of the British Mandate, when the political vacuum offered an opportunity for action, they would have neither the power nor the drive to lead the Palestinian people. But in the period under discussion, the two families were on friendly terms, especially since Jamil al-Husayni was one of the leading members of the rival club, which was named after
the famous literary club in Istanbul that he had been part of in 1909. During the course of that year, several Husaynis, including Fakhri, joined both clubs.

In the beginning members of the Arab Club were content to paint the slogans ‘Our Land Is Ours’ and ‘Palestine Is Southern Syria’ (that is, part of the Kingdom of Greater Syria to be ruled by King Faysal). Later they organized petitions and even enlisted some of the city’s notables to support their activities. The famous six of St George’s School – Hilmi, Fakhri, Ibrahim, Tawfiq, Said and Jamal – formed the core of this organization. Those who had got safely through the war, even in the Ottoman army, tended to follow the ideas and activities of the
mufti
’s younger brother al-Hajj Amin and the leadership of Musa Kazim, who became mayor after Hussein’s death. In 1918 the older activists included such experienced figures as Bullus Shehadeh, Yusuf Yasin and Hassan Abu al-Saud, whom the younger men described as the leaders of the Arab Club. Some time later they joined the Husaynis, not because of family connections but because they supported the positions taken by Musa Kazim, Jamal and Amin al-Husayni on the future of Palestine. Joining a group for ideological reasons was a novel feature in the lives of Palestinian notables.

Political restlessness was not confined to Jerusalem: young people and notables in other cities and towns sought to help the national movement and even to lead it. On 8 May 1918, a group of prominent Jaffa townsmen, both Christian and Muslim, met in a café to revive the idea of the three teachers who had met at Anaste’s café (see the previous chapter) and created Jaffa’s Muslim-Christian Association. This was the first time an association was formed on the basis of national rather than religious solidarity. Such ideas had been proposed in the past but never taken shape, and now the Jaffaite al-Hajj Raghib al-Dajani and his Christian friends brought it off. In November 1918, a branch of this association opened in Jerusalem, and before long branches appeared all over Palestine. In January 1919, the first general conference of all the Muslim-Christian Associations was held in Jerusalem. To give it an all-Palestine stature, the organizers invited the associations of the young Jerusalemites, and indeed the event came to be known as ‘the first Palestinian Congress’ after they decided to hold it every year.

Other political meetings took place in Jaffa in May 1918. At al-Hajj Amin’s request, or at least with his approval, some young men from Jaffa formed an underground group that they called ‘The Black Hand’. They later chose a new name that would become a national Palestinian
label:
al-Fida’iyya
(‘The Self-Sacrificers’). It set up branches all over the country and served al-Hajj Amin as the operative arm of the national organization. (It would be disbanded in 1923 and replaced by rather ineffectual attempts to create a more orderly Palestinian fighting body.
¹⁹
But at this point, the group’s work was principally channeled towards the first conference in Jerusalem.)

The first Palestinian Congress opened in Jerusalem on 27 January 1919 and lasted about a week. Twenty-seven delegates from all over the country attended. Arif al-Dajani, founder of the Muslim-Christian Association in Jaffa, presided over the conference, and the retired judge Hassan Abu al-Saud was his deputy.
²⁰

Organizing this conference had not been an easy matter. Before it got under way, a sharp dispute broke out between the ‘unionists’ supporting unification with Syria and those who favored a struggle for independence within British Palestine. The most prominent unionists were the Husaynis – Fakhri and al-Hajj Amin, who benefited from Khalil al-Sakakini’s sound advice. Since the attempts to create a unified kingdom with Syria were backed by an orderly political party, and since most of the leading members of the family were part of it, the family became the strongest player in the new political arena delineated by the British authorities and the Zionists in Mandatory Palestine. It was no longer sufficient to be an Ashraf family or to hold a senior religious post – if the Husaynis did not wish to abandon the field to other families or political factors, they needed a modern political organization with national and patriotic platforms.

Al-Hajj Amin was a prominent and active unionist, and he devoted most of his energies to persuading Jerusalem’s Muslim-Christian Association to support union with Syria.
²¹
As we have seen, the first Palestinian Congress was convened not only in response to the Balfour Declaration but as the first political attempt to present the Palestinian position in public. Besides al-Hajj Amin, many others were active behind the scenes – indeed, it is doubtful that al-Hajj Amin was the chief player or even the leading Husayni activist at that first conference. The young Husaynis very skillfully persuaded some of the leading delegates, such as Sheikh Said al-Karmi, Isa al-Isa and Izzat Darwaza, to ensure that the resolutions would conform to the idea of unity with Syria. Al-Hajj Amin proposed allowing the opposition to present its argument, which called for the destiny of Palestine to be separate from that of Greater Syria. He argued that only by hearing both arguments could the participants weigh the two platforms and discover
the weakness of the pro-Palestine idea. As we shall see, the time would come when he would adopt his opponents’ position.