"Israel made the desert bloom."

Argument

Supporters claim that “Israel made the desert bloom,” highlighting its agricultural innovation, drip irrigation systems, and reclamation of arid land. They argue that pre-state Palestine was barren and underdeveloped, and that Israeli efforts turned the land into a productive, green landscape, symbolizing progress and modernization.

Counterpoint

This narrative erases the long history of Palestinian land cultivation. Prior to 1948, Palestine had a thriving agricultural economy with citrus groves in Jaffa, olive orchards in the West Bank, and grain cultivation in the plains. Palestinian farmers practiced sustainable land use and export-based agriculture, especially under the Ottoman and British Mandates.

The “desert” Israel claims to have bloomed was not empty, it was depopulated. Hundreds of Palestinian villages were razed, and in their place, afforestation and irrigation projects often covered ruins. Additionally, state-led development favored Jewish settlements, while Palestinians, both inside Israel and under occupation, were denied water access and agricultural support. The bloom came at the cost of dispossession.

Spin

  • Mythologized progress: Frames colonization as environmental achievement while hiding the displacement beneath it.
  • Erasure of agriculture: Suggests Palestine was barren to justify development as civilizing rather than dispossessing.
  • Greenwashing: Uses environmental imagery to legitimize structural violence and settlement expansion.
  • Selective innovation: Ignores that Palestinians were barred from accessing many of the same technologies and water infrastructure.

Sources