A fact-checking exposé on Doug Saunders’s 1948 claim
Doug Saunders recently wrote that “in May, 1948, Israel declared its sovereignty and immediately launched military raids on the lands separating its strips of land, forcing hundreds of thousands of Arabs to become refugees.”
It is a powerful sentence — simple, dramatic, and evocative. But it is also historically misleading. Compressing the events of 1947-49 into this single causal chain flattens a complex war into a single-villain narrative and omits the realities documented in archives, eyewitness reports, and decades of scholarship.
Honest Reporting Canada: Globe And Mail Columnist Doug Saunders Rewrites History To Blame Israel
Going back in history, Saunders wrote that: “in May, 1948, Israel declared its sovereignty and immediately launched military raids on the lands separating its strips of land, forcing hundreds of thousands of Arabs to become refugees.”
This is highly misleading. As noted by Saunders, in 1947, the United Nations voted to partition the British Mandate into separate Jewish and Arab states, a proposal that was accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. Following this, Arab militias launched a low-level war on the nascent Jewish country, seeking to strangle it before it was even born, launching attacks and blockades of roads.
On May 14, 1948, Israel formally declared its independence, and was immediately attacked by its neighbouring Arab states, including Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and even Iraq. This is exactly the inverse of Saunders’ retelling, where Israel, upon declaring its independence, simply attacked its neighbours and was therefore the aggressor.
Context matters: a war in two phases
The British Mandate in Palestine ended on May 14, 1948. That night, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel. Hours later, armies from five neighboring Arab states — Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq — invaded with the explicit goal of crushing the nascent state and reversing the UN Partition Plan.
This was not the start of violence but an escalation of it. For months prior, Palestinian Arab militias and Jewish defense groups had been locked in a brutal civil war triggered by the UN’s November 1947 decision to partition the land. By mid-May, hundreds of villages had already been attacked, thousands had fled, and the social fabric had begun to collapse.
Why it matters: Saunders’ phrase “immediately launched military raids” implies Israel unilaterally started a new offensive right after declaring statehood. In fact, hostilities before and after 14–15 May must be seen in two layers: (a) months of inter-communal/paramilitary fighting after the UN Partition vote (late 1947), and (b) the interstate phase that began when Arab armies entered after the declaration. Summarizing all of that as “immediately launched military raids” compresses a complex, multi-phase conflict into an inaccurate single-act narrative. The Guardian
The refugee crisis: multiple causes, contested history
There is no dispute that more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were displaced during the 1947-49 war. The question is why.
Some expulsions were carried out by Jewish forces, particularly in strategic areas or amid fierce battles. At the same time, fear of massacres like Deir Yassin prompted panicked flight. In other cases, local Arab leaders urged temporary evacuations, expecting to return after an anticipated victory by invading Arab armies.
Historians remain divided. Ilan Pappé has argued that these events constituted a coordinated campaign of ethnic cleansing. Benny Morris, among others, documents numerous expulsions but concludes that the exodus resulted from a chaotic mix of wartime decisions, local factors, and the collapse of Palestinian leadership. Both interpretations acknowledge expulsions — but differ dramatically on intent and scale.
Saunders’ sentence presents only one side of this scholarly debate, and in doing so it reduces a complex human tragedy to a simple morality play.
Saunders’ original phrasing was challenged and corrected publicly
Independent watchdogs and commentators flagged Saunders’ line as an inaccurate condensation; in at least one public response the Globe and Mail issued a correction/amendment to the phrasing so it read that the declaration “was followed by two events that reshaped the map” and went on to describe both Arab armies’ attacks and later Israeli military actions. That correction underscores that the original wording invited misreading of who acted when and why. (See public responses and the itemized correction.) Honest Reporting Canada+1
Why precision matters
Language shapes how readers understand the past. By writing that Israel “immediately launched military raids” that forced the refugee crisis, Saunders removes the role of the Arab invasion, the earlier civil war, and the agency of Palestinian and Arab leaders.
A more accurate, nuanced summary might read:
“Following months of brutal civil conflict, Israel declared statehood on May 14, 1948, triggering an invasion by five Arab armies. During the 1947-49 fighting, hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled, driven by fear, violence, and strategic wartime actions by all sides — a tragedy whose precise causes remain debated by historians.”
This formulation is not perfect, but it acknowledges what serious scholarship has shown: that history is rarely as simple as a single sentence can capture.
The responsibility of writers
Journalists have a duty to inform, not inflame. The story of 1948 is a foundational narrative for both Israelis and Palestinians, and it remains deeply painful. Oversimplifying it does not serve readers — nor does it help the prospects for honest dialogue today.
If we want peace built on truth, our first step must be to tell that truth as fully and faithfully as the record allows.