This 1929 massacre is key to understanding Israel
One deliciously cool evening in east Jerusalem I sat with two elderly men, one Jewish and one Palestinian, who seemed angrier with their respective leaders than with each other.
Suddenly the Israeli said to me: 'It's all about Hebron in 1929 you know. It all began then.' I looked at his Arab friend, expecting dissent, but he nodded. 'Yes, he's right, he's right.'
The Hebron massacre in 1929 isn't widely known any more. Younger Israelis increasingly see the years before 1948 as ancient history, and their Palestinian peers have been fed an alternative narrative. As for the weekend warriors of the anti-Israel Left, their ignorance of the history of the region is notorious.
In brief, on August 24 1929, in the city of Hebron, over 60 Jews were murdered; many others were horribly wounded and sexually mutilated; women were raped; and homes and synagogues were destroyed.
A British police officer wrote that: 'On hearing screams in a room, I went up a sort of tunnel passage and saw an Arab in the act of cutting off a child's head with a sword. He had already hit him and was having another cut.'
British High Commissioner, Sir John Chancellor, also later wrote: 'The horror of it is beyond words. In one house I visited not less than twenty-five Jewish men and women were murdered in cold blood.'
Many of the reports sound horribly similar to those from October 7 2023.
The Jewish community in Hebron back then was divided between Ashkenazi Jews who had lived there for a century and Sephardim who had been there for 800 years. The latter spoke Arabic and adopted Arab customs, and both groups were more religious than political.
But Jewish immigration was increasing elsewhere in Palestine, and extremists such as Hajj Amin Al-Husseini, who would later praise and support Hitler, claimed that the Jews of Hebron were intent on conquering the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The propaganda was eagerly received.
435 Jews survived the pogrom, some of them hidden by Arab neighbours – though recent scholarship questions just how many of these cases there were, and it seems that it was the British police who saved most lives.
Those who did live through it all were removed to Jewish areas for their own safety. The direct result was that the long history of a Jewish presence in Hebron, a deeply holy place for Jewish people, was ended in the summer of 1929 until Israel won the Six-Day War of 1967.
The longer-term consequences were arguably more dramatic. Shortly before the massacre, Zionist defence leaders had visited Hebron and offered protection.
Rumours were already spreading of what might happen, and it was suggested that a squad of armed men from Haganah – the Jewish paramilitary organisation – would be sufficient to guarantee safety.
The offer was refused because the Jews of Hebron believed that their Muslim and Christian friends would not let anything happen. They believed in co-existence.
Hebron wasn't the only religiously mixed town, and from this point on the Jews of Palestine for the most part lost all confidence that they could be safe in majority Arab areas.
As for the Haganah, which would eventually coalesce with other groups to become the IDF, they increased in size, efficiency, and organisation. They also embraced a philosophy that their role was to protect all Jews, even those who might be naïve enough to assume that they weren't in any danger.
David Ben-Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, was a socialist who had imagined a joint society of Jewish and Arab workers sharing in the struggle for human dignity.
Hebron shocked him into a new realisation that the Jewish people couldn't rely on foreign cooperation or protection. It was something his rival Menachem Begin, whose party is now led by Benjamin Netanyahu, had long argued.
Less than seven years after the massacre the Arab Revolt began, and for more than three years there would be urban warfare.
Any hope of a working relationship between Jews and Arabs, one that was once far more viable than we might now assume, had died in the streets and homes of Hebron in 1929 – and by 1948, after Britain's withdrawal from the region, the cycle of wars between the State of Israel and its neighbours began.
By the way, one of the synagogues abandoned in Hebron after the 1929 massacre dated from 1540, built by Jews expelled during the Spanish Inquisition. These Israeli colonial settlers – will they never learn?
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Asylum seekers are not to blame' say campaigners during large protest
Anti-racism campaigners confronted demonstrators protesting outside a hotel used to house asylum seekers, saying those seeking refuge are 'not to blame'. Hundreds of people gathered outside Highfield House Hotel on Sunday evening. Anti-immigration and anti-racism protestors were kept on opposite side of the road by police during the large-scale protests. Nathan Parris said Southampton does firmly not stand for any hate, adding it is 'not fair to blame the asylum seekers' in the Portswood hotel. He said: 'Days like today make me really proud to be a part of Southampton. 'Whenever there is a far right protest organised in the city we always have a great showing. 'People are angry in this country and looking for someone to blame. It's not fair to blame the asylum seekers in the hotel.' He added: 'We understand the group on the other side have been made up of numbers from other cities such as Portsmouth. 'I think that goes to show we have the numbers.' Those protesting the housing of refugees said the number of British nationals on our streets is 'appalling' and should be the priority. Andrea and James Edsell (Image: Newsquest)READ MORE: Hundreds line the streets for large scale protests - live Andrea Edsell said: 'We want to get Britain back on the straight and narrow. 'I used to work for a homeless charity and the number of veterans and British nationals on our street is appalling. 'We choose to put foreigners up in hotels and give them money. I think it's outrageous. 'We have been talking about coming to one of these demonstrations for a while, so I'm so pleased we finally made the decision to do it and come down here to make ourselves heard.' James Edsell added: 'Keir and his Labour Party are absolutely destroying this country. 'I think the Tories did start going wrong, but Keir Starmer has pressed the fast forward button.' Both groups could be heard chanting on both sides of the road, with the Stand Up To Racism group shouting: 'No hate, no fear - refugees are welcome here." John Jess said people should learn to be more accepting and tolerable towards those living in the hotel. The Southampton local said: 'Britain has played a huge hand in some of the conflicts we have seen over the last 25 years and it's no surprise that people want to flee those countries and find sanctuary for them and their family. 'I think the other side needs to learn to be a little bit more tolerable.'


Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Trump says Zelenskyy can end Russia war 'almost immediately' before hosting seven European leaders
President Donald Trump said Sunday that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy could end the war with Russia "almost immediately" if he wanted. Trump's comments come ahead of his scheduled meeting with Zelenskyy and several European leaders in Washington, D.C. on Monday. "President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!" NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and Finnish President Alexander Stubb confirmed Sunday they would attend the meeting in Washington. Their joint presence underscores Europe's push to present a united front as Russia's war drags on. Zelenskyy met von der Leyen in Brussels ahead of the Trump talks to set priorities for the White House meeting, focusing on long-term military aid, Ukraine's EU ambitions, and bolstering transatlantic solidarity against Russian aggression. Von der Leyen said at a joint press conference she was glad to join Zelenskyy and other leaders in Washington on Monday. Trump called it a "great honor." "Big day at the White House tomorrow. Never had so many European Leaders at one time. My great honor to host them!!!" he said in another post on Truth Social. "The Fake News has been saying for 3 days that I suffered a 'major defeat' by allowing President Vladimir Putin of Russia to have a major Summit in the United States," Trump said in another post. "Actually, he would have loved doing the meeting anywhere else but the U.S., and the Fake News knows this. It was a major point of contention! If we had the Summit elsewhere, the Democrat run and controlled media would have said what a terrible thing THAT was. "These people are sick! They even want CRIME IN D.C., and other BLUE Cities throughout our Country, but don't worry, I won't let that happen," the president continued. "Just like our now secure Southern Border (ZERO illegals in last 3 months!), our cities will be Secure and Safe, and D.C. will lead the way!" Zelenskyy's White House meeting follows Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage on Friday, where Trump dropped his ceasefire demand and urged a final peace deal. After meeting with Putin, Trump said the Russian leader was willing to end the war in exchange for key Ukrainian territorial concessions. He added that Kyiv should take the deal because "Russia is a very big power, and they're not." Zelenskyy and European leaders consistently reject proposals to surrender Ukrainian land to Russia.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Why in the world is Trump punishing Moldova with tariffs?
President Trump's tariff blasts continue. The White House released its latest list on July 31 and it is clear that no nation is safe — not allies, enemies, neighbors or distant lands. No menacing power escapes the vigilance of the president's team, ever alert to those 'ripping off' the United States of America. Case in point: Moldova. Dominating both sides of the Dniester River — well, one side actually — this Eastern European colossus of 2.3 million people (about the size of Houston) could inflict mortal damage on the American economy. In 2024 alone, the U.S. bought nearly $136 million (with an 'm') worth of goods from the Moldovans, whereas they bought only $51 million from us. With the U.S. economy valued at more than $30 trillion (with a 'T') we could probably only bear such abuse for … well, forever. In a July 9 letter to Moldovan President Maia Sandu, Trump made clear that America will not be bullied by Moldova any longer. He imposed a tariff of 25 percent on every bottle of wine or fruit juice the Moldovans force us to buy. Calling the deficit with Moldova a 'major threat to our Economy and, indeed, our National Security!' the president warned of even higher tariffs if Moldova retaliates or tries to send goods into the U.S. through transshipment. The letter accuses Moldova of taking advantage of us for 'many years.' Tariff rates are one of Trump's favorite weapons, employed under the dubious premise that the U.S. faces a trade deficit 'emergency.' The legality of such action aside — the Supreme Court has yet to rule — the president uses this weapon for a variety of non-economic goals. He has threatened Canada for indicating it might recognize a Palestinian state, and Brazil to try to save former President Jair Bolsonaro from prosecution. Moldova has committed no such offenses — at least none charged — but Trump wants trade with Moldova and a host of other countries to be based on 'reciprocity.' Whatever the precipitating dynamics, punishing Moldova for its involvement in international trade serves no reasonable Western security or broader policy interests. It undermines them. Sandwiched between Ukraine and Romania, Moldova has a long history of not being a country. The people of this region, who were unwillingly traded between Romania and Russia for nearly a century, gained independence from a collapsing Soviet Union in 1991. With a population that is 75 percent Moldovan-Romanian, some within the Russian and Ukrainian minorities feared the country's absorption into neighboring Romania. During a brief internal war in 1992, Moscow positioned a 'peacekeeping force' on the eastern side of Dniester River to guard the self-proclaimed state of Transnistria — which is still there, not recognized even by Russia. This force is small, locally recruited and considered less than formidable. But it is part of a sustained campaign by Moscow to prevent Moldova from embracing the West. This same motive drove Vladimir Putin to unleash a brutal invasion and occupation of much larger Ukraine. If victorious there, he is unlikely to be more accommodating toward Moldova. Moldova is the poorest country in Europe, and its elected leaders and population have been seeking stability. After Russia invaded Ukraine, Moldova applied to join the EU. It was quickly granted candidate status, and negotiations for membership began. In 2024, the country reelected pro-EU President Sandu and in a referendum enshrined the country's 'European course' in its constitution — despite massive Russian interference and disinformation. The EU has not been cowed by Moscow and developed a generous aid and development package. Most Moldovan goods enter the world's largest trading bloc duty-free, a policy that was further extended to agricultural products last month. Under President Biden, the U.S. had been similarly supportive, providing more than $400 million in military and humanitarian aid in part to help reduce the country's dependence on Russian gas. Trump sees no need for aid to Moldova, or indeed for most foreign assistance. Other moves supporting Trump's 'America First' orientation also penalize Moldova. Eliminating the U.S. Agency for International Development meant the loss of virtually all projects in Moldova — including for democracy promotion and economic and energy development. At the same time, cutting resources for election monitoring and an independent press leaves the field open for Russian interference. Such indifference, along with Trump's shifting attitude toward Ukraine and transactional foreign policy, leaves Moldova exposed. A study by the Stimson Center concluded, 'With a White House that seems increasingly eager to align its perspectives with Moscow at the expense of traditional allies, its willingness to support Moldova's democratic transformation in the face of Russian opposition is now uncertain.' Neighboring Romania, a member of both the EU and NATO, has a huge stake in the fate of Moldova. An intimidated or occupied satellite country — a second Belarus — on the Alliance's more than 400-mile border would dramatically change the strategic equation. This should get Washington's attention — at least of those willing to honor the American commitment to NATO. Preserving an independent and economically healthy Moldova thus serves European and American interests. Increasing the cost of doing business with the U.S. and damaging democratic efforts there does not. Supporting Moldova costs the U.S. very little. Excusing a tiny trade deficit to a strategically important democracy does not make Americans suckers. Helping Moldova does not require a military commitment. The country has been cooperating with NATO but is constitutionally neutral. Rather than punishing the country, the U.S. could and should offer support. This could be based on a view of the geopolitical map — or, even better, from an appreciation of a resilient people's desire for democratic choice. Ronald H. Linden is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Pittsburgh, where he directed the Center for European Studies and the Center for Russian and East European Studies. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword