By way of a friend, A Cursory View of Benny Morris's forthcoming book, One State, Two States
Morris argues against both a two-state and a one-state solution, and in favor (though he thinks it a remote possibility) of an Arab confederation that would include and assimilate the Palestinians. Most of the book is given to a defense of Israeli conduct since 1948 and a root-and-branch condemnation of Palestinian savagery. The Dennis Ross-Bill Clinton version of the negotiations of 2000--that Barak made generous concessions beyond all expectation, while Arafat was first unstable, then treacherous--is here presented as simple historical truth.
A final chapter offers a grim prognosis:
"So, if a one-state solution is a nonstarter, what are the prospects for a two-state solution? Put simply, they appear very bleak. Bleak primarily because the Palestinian Arabs, in the deepest fibers of their being, oppose such an outcome, demanding, as they did since the dawn of their national movement, all of Palestine as their patrimony." (pp. 193-94)
This makes an echo of the formulation by General Moshe Yaalon regarding the Israeli reprisals in Gaza in 2002: that victory for Israel would only come with the "deep internalization" of the idea in "Palestinian and Arab consciousness" that the Palestinians could never win. What concern certain Israelis show with "Arab consciousness" and "the deepest fibers" of Palestinians! Who was it that used to speak in a similar way about Jewish consciousness and the very "being" of Jews?
Decolonisation is another option, and a better one.
1 state, 2 states? 2 states. palestinians in palestine. jews in jersey or hell.
does the anguish-of-the-jewish-soul film, waltz with bashir, show the jewish terrorists defecating. with the number of participants and resulting tonnage, should be film's dominant theme.
this is what Suzanne is saying too; she wants to pay 'the Arabs' to enslave the Palestinians, and keep them out from under the ever expanding footprint of 'the Jews'. I don't know what she wants to pay 'the Arabs' with, seriously; renmimbi?
Benny Morris is the dried up turd of the Israeli Left. Might as well ask Lieberman…
Rowan, I had the same thought–Morris directly echoes Suzanne. Basically the idea is all arabs are interchangeable–oddly, the same idea Hitler had about the Jews. And like him, he first wanted them transferred, and later, caught up in fighting a war on two fronts against the other Power nations (exempt Japan) and having to deal with the problems of occupation, we know where the Jews ended up. Looks to me like Israel, with a much less real scenario of "being pushed into the sea" or non-existence, is a copy-cat, though unlike Hitler's Germany, Israel always needs more PR to keep the USA tax dollars and UN vetos
flowing right along.
I mean, what does she want to do (assuming she doesn't like my original suggestion which was a bit crude); print some more funny dollars?
"the Palestinian Arabs, in the deepest fibers of their being, oppose such an outcome, demanding, as they did since the dawn of their national movement, all of Palestine as their patrimony."
Funny how that statement contradicts every bit of the evidence, including poll after poll after poll. The majority of Palestinians (not all of whom are Arabs) want to have self-determination in their own state. The majority of Palestinians (not all of whom are Arabs) accept that their state would be in the West Bank, Gaza, and have East Jerusalem as its capital.
The quote is an assessment that contradicts scores of polls, old and new, that show that the vast majority of Palestinians would accept a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders. Morris's words should be called a false, not grim, prognosis.
Confederation is an interesting idea… provided you add a tiny additional twist at the end: Jeff Halper also proposed a confederation as an improvement on the one-state idea, only with all of Israel included.
Tuyzent, pls elaborate. Thxs.
Morris is a hack. He is like Christopher Hitchens. But his ideological shift was less dramatic.
He probably realized that by speaking the truth, he was lending a particular dimension of support (that is, the sort where the Establishment admits to a 'truth' and can be quoted constantly in a 'I-told-you-so!'-fashion) for the Palestinian cause. Specifically his comments on the Nakba.
Shirin, don't you mean "Palestinians, not all of whom are Muslim" instead of "Arab?" Because Palestinians are certainly Arabs; for example, I've never met any Asian ones.
No Ana, I do not mean Muslim, I mean Arab. Not all Palestinians were or are Arab. There are, for example, Maronites, Armenians, Circassians, and other non-Arabs who are Palestinians. .
This is the Zionist heart. Chained and hardened. Read and thank God you sould was saved from the disease of Zionism:
Interview with Benny Morris:
Ben-Gurion was a "transferist"?
Benny: "Of course. Ben-Gurion was a transferist. He understood that there could be no Jewish state with a large and hostile Arab minority in its midst. There would be no such state. It would not be able to exist."
I don't hear you condemning him.
Benny: "Ben-Gurion was right. If he had not done what he did, a state would not have come into being. That has to be clear. It is impossible to evade it. Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here."
Including the expulsion of Israeli Arabs?
Benny: "The Israeli Arabs are a time bomb. Their slide into complete Palestinization has made them an emissary of the enemy that is among us. They are a potential fifth column. In both demographic and security terms they are liable to undermine the state. So that if Israel again finds itself in a situation of existential threat, as in 1948, it may be forced to act as it did then. If we are attacked by Egypt (after an Islamist revolution in Cairo) and by Syria, and chemical and biological missiles slam into our cities, and at the same time Israeli Palestinians attack us from behind, I can see an expulsion situation. It could happen. If the threat to Israel is existential, expulsion will be justified."
http://www.deiryassin.org/bennymorris.html
Of course Ben Gurion was a transferist! No one who has seriously studied his history can doubt it. And the saintly Rabin was not interested in a Palestinian state, either. Oslo was nothing more than a ploy to buy time for Israel to create more facts on the ground that would make a Palestinian state impossible.
@Citizen, The idea of working towards a regional confederation that includes Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria is mentioned here . It would accept the 'facts on the ground', settlers and stuff, but would allow everyone to live and work where they want, be it Beirut, Ariel or Tel Aviv. Obviously it's not a zionist idea and not a short term plan either.
What Morris appears to do is take some of the benefits of the confederation idea but minus a sanctuary type Israel, one which will be exclusively for Jews. So you get some odd similarities between Morris's thinking (probably building on the old conception of the "Israeli Arab" as a generic arab creature) And Halper's, who's at the other end of the spectrum.
Or maybe such similarities are not that odd. After all, nearly everybody across the spectrum supports the two-state solution nowadays – at least if you allow them to pick their own definitions.
It would accept the 'facts on the ground', settlers and stuff, but would allow everyone to live and work where they want, be it Beirut, Ariel or Tel Aviv. Obviously it's not a zionist idea…
come one, please, don't insult our intelligence. This is zionist 'subtlety', about as subtle as a wailing siren.
I don't intend to insult your intelligence Rowan. I mean, how could I… let me try to put my understanding in words without using the word 'zionism'. There's a concept that is shared by many people in Israel, and by all the major political parties. That is, that the land belongs to jews only. Anyone else is welcome – as a visitor. Nice and leftist people are happy if this people of land is small. Others like it bigger. This concept is quite unfair to anyone else for whom this results in being chased away or collected in pens. Halper's proposal works on this sting, so I believe that the idea would be quite upsetting to many people in Israel(it it were taken seriously). The part that a great many people immigrated there and behaved badly is not touched upon, which can also feel pretty unfair – letting them get away with it. But there is also a "massive immigration" factor in this that is a legitimate act even if it doesn't feel so.
From my outsider armchair intellectual position I appreciate the idea of a confederacy. I also wonder though about a scenario where there is the appearance of acceptance of the Halper idea but it's quietly subverted into the Morris design.