Back in January, in the wake of the carnage in Gaza, we posted a video featuring Ali Abunimah, Mark Green, and Katrina vanden Heuvel, where Abunimah challenged progressives to speak out more on Israel/Palestine. Green was defensive (and offensive) whereas vanden Heuvel was silent. At the time I thought it was maybe because she knew Abunimah was right.
Well, congratulations and thanks to The Nation for publishing a great article from Abunimah in their May 28 issue. Focused on Mahmoud Abbas’s visit to Washington, he outlines the challenges in front of Obama, and specifically the obstacles Netanyahu is putting in the way of meaningful negotiation. Here is Abunimah talking about the Israeli demand that Israel be maintained as a Jewish state:
But can Israel’s demand be justified? A useful lens to examine its claim is the fundamental legal principle that there is no right without a remedy. If Israel has a “right to exist as a Jewish state,” then what can it legitimately do if Palestinians living under its control “violate” this right by having “too many” non-Jewish babies? Can Israel expel non-Jews, fine them, strip them of citizenship or limit the number of children they can have? It is impossible to think of a “remedy” that does not do outrageous violence to universal human rights principles.
What if we apply Israel’s claim to the United States? Because of the rapid growth of the Latino population in the past decade, Texas and California no longer have white majorities. Could either state declare that it has “a right to exist as a white-majority state” and take steps to limit the rights of non-whites? Could the United States declare itself officially a Christian nation and force Jews, Muslims or Hindus to pledge allegiance to a flag that bears a cross? While such measures may appeal to a tiny number of extremists, they would be unthinkable to anyone upholding twenty-first-century constitutional principles.
But Israeli leaders propose precisely such odious measures.
This is an important sign of how the discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is changing. Thank you to The Nation for changing with the times, hopefully other publications on the left will follow.
Any Zionism apologist worth their salt will point out that Israel is but one Jewish state surrounded by many Islamic theocracies. That makes it OK.
Texas and California no longer have white majorities. Could either state declare that it has "a right to exist as a white-majority state" and take steps to limit the rights of non-whites? Could the United States declare itself officially a Christian nation and force Jews, Muslims or Hindus to pledge allegiance to a flag that bears a cross? This is exactly the dilemma of the David Duke type of anti-zionist. In fact, now I think about it, people like Duke aren't really anti-zionists at all; they are anti- the influence of zionism in the US, not anti zionism as such, which, as ethnic territorial nationalists, they should logically be in favour of — if it could only stand on its own two feet, instead of riding on the USA's back.
The odious measures are proposed and rejected, but by slimmer and slimmer margins. Likud is still NOT a majority party. It took a very odd collection of bedfellows for them to create a government. The dilemma for any that prefer civil democracy over either nationalist partitions, and/or religio-nationalist approaches, is that as Ali refers, the "rejected" groups are the ones having 5 – 10 babies per family. Religious Palestinians (the cosmopolitan ones have 2 – 3, same as the west) and religious Jews. Its a dilemma for the single-state proposal as well, but on only slightly different terms. Hamas Palestine and Fatah Palestine also form (and enact) odious and racialist law as well. For example, the provision against selling land or homes to Jews in the West Bank is not all that appealing to universalistic values. At least in Israel there is a 20% non-Jewish minority that is protected by a fundamental law that includes equal due process under the law. In Palestine (West Bank and Gaza), there is a .01% Jewish minority. The more important work is reconciliation, and development of real-world (rather than solely political) cross-cultural interaction and collaboration. For all the criticism of Oslo, between 1993 and 1997, there was significant cooperation for Palestinian development and some for cultural integration. Prior to the first intifada, there was much more cross-cultural interaction, though Palestinians were clearly subordinated politically. I spent time with my Israeli Zionist folksinging family visiting some of their Palestinian folksinging friends in 1986. Those relationships were shattered in the 1987 intifada, as much of an awakening as it was.
When the history books are written about the I/P conflict, the turning point may very well have been Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in December. Imagine being Obama and you have this humanitarian disaster created in the days leading up to your inauguration — using US taxpayer-funded dollars to massacre 1,400 innocent civilians with white phosphorus weapons and limb-shearing DIME bombs. Even now, the Israelis continue to disrespect Obama — calling the two-state solution "childish" . . . accelerating settlements the weekend before Bibi meets Obama for the first time . . . quibbling over "natural growth" in existing settlements . . . allowing Lieberman to tell the Russian press that the "US will do whatever Israel wants to do." The arrogance and crass posturing of "our only friend and democratic ally in the region" points out the myth of the "special relationship." Time for Israel to get with the program, or to be isolated from the world community.
But Witty, Israel is supposed to be better, no it is better, than the rest of them Arabs, remember? The only democracy in the Middle East? That's why our tax dollars go to their greedy groveling hands every year, it's a light in a sea of darkness. Make up your mind. Israel has been good to it's Jewish population but never to the non-Jewish ones since its inception. It is exactly like the rest of the Middle East countries. They torture populations under their contril, hold people without trial, murder pregnant women, kill children, bomb ambulances and live off of American wellfare checks. Israel is no different than the other regimes in the region, and what with the new proposals comming out, it's getting ever closer to a typical MidEast regime. :)
Actually, Israel has been moderately good to its non-Jewish population, but could be much better. I agree with you that with the loyalty-oath type stuff that actually gets close to passing, it is upsetting. It would get referred to the Israeli Supreme Court and likely get thrown out, as other less severe Israeli laws that are similar in tone have. The "equal due process" provision in the fundamental law is very important, and is at the level of a constitution. It is not easily amended, and likely won't be. I wish there were similar in Palestine, in Lebanon, in Syria. You do get that "equal due process under the law" is 180 degrees different from "the punishment for land sale to a Jew is death".
Oslo was the turning point. That was the point that the Israeli government acknowledged that there was a Palestinian people and a deserving Palestinian state. It was also the time when the "sole representative of the Palestinian people" similarly acknowledged the existence and validity of Israel. Those are principles that deserve the light of day, each day.
The odious measures are proposed and rejected, but by slimmer and slimmer margins. That's why we are saying that Israel is sliding towards fascism, and not saying that it is already fascist. Likud is still NOT a majority party. Parties with Knesset representation following the 2009 elections Party and constituents Leader Seats Kadima Tzipi Livni 28 Likud Binyamin Netanyahu 27 Yisrael Beiteinu Avigdor Lieberman 15 Labor Party Ehud Barak 13 Shas Eli Yishai 11 United Torah Judaism Yaakov Litzman 5 United Arab List – Ta'al Ibrahim Sarsur 4 National Union Ya'akov Katz 4 Hadash Mohammad Barakeh 4 New Movement-Meretz Haim Oron 3 The Jewish Home Daniel Hershkowitz 3 Balad Jamal Zahalka 3 source (reliability unkown): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_pa... Likud has only one less seat than Kadima. Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu collectively have one more seat than Kadima and Labor. It is disengenuous to say that Likud is not a majority party. Israel has a parliamentary system. There are no majority parties. The punch line is that fascists have a very strong representation in government. They are not the majority, but they are most certainly the single most powerful bloc. Hamas Palestine and Fatah Palestine also form (and enact) odious and racialist law as well. This is true, but how is it relevant to American interests? At least in Israel there is a 20% non-Jewish minority that is protected by a fundamental law that includes equal due process under the law. This is true in theory, but not in practice. In Palestine (West Bank and Gaza), there is a .01% Jewish minority. There are at least 475,000 Jewish colonists in the West Bank, including Arab East Jerusalem. A Palestinian census in 2007 showed 2,345,000 Palestinians in the same area. The Jewish minority is therefore roughly 16 percent, not 0.01 percent. The more important work is reconciliation, and development of real-world (rather than solely political) cross-cultural interaction and collaboration. I agree that this is critical, but it cannot take place during ongoing Israeli ethnic cleansing and colonization. I spent time with my Israeli Zionist folksinging family visiting some of their Palestinian folksinging friends in 1986. Those relationships were shattered in the 1987 intifada, as much of an awakening as it was. It is certainly unfortunate when cross-boundary relationships are sundered during wars. Perhaps if Israel hadn't been ethnically cleansing and colonizing Palestinian villages, the uprising would not have happened.
Moderately good compared to…..? Other Arab regimes? What Palestine, Witty? Palestine is a memory and then a dream that people have been trying to achieve ever since 1948 with the deaht of historical Palestine and the violent birth of Israel. I can understand their law. If I were a Palestinian, still without a state, looking on as Israelis build illegal settlements on the land of my grandparents, and a collaborating neighbor who still has his under his name, decides to sell it to a Jew then I don't fucking need a law to tell me what should be the fate of that collaborating piece of shit. When Palestine is a state, with Israel recognizing it's right to exist peacefully and free of terror and infringement, and has a judicial system set up, then you can try and challenge that law and I will support your (or whoever) challenge.
Please take you message to Natenyaoo. I don't think he understands what Oslo was supposed to be.
There he goes again, Witty, pretending that the Israeli Supreme Ct has ultimate jurisdiction over Israel's non-existent Constitution and nonexistent Bill Of Rights–the basic laws are a feeble caricature of same, and the impotence of the Israeli "Supreme Court" are legendary by now. There is no practical equal process under law in Israel. BTW, how much of Israeli land is devoted legally to the Israeli jews? Israel, with its power leased for free from the USA, does not need to punish land sale to arabs as death since with ultimate power comes also the more indirect use of license, privilege, etc. This is the same old Witty, pretending power is equal when clearly it is not. The discrepancy in power reality makes the difference between your freedom fighter and my terrorist. Sad to say, Witty should know this–he does not even have the decency to admit it like Begin did. What can you expect from an accountant, one who admitted in times past on the blog that from time to time he shaved the edges for his clients, in the best interests of his own family of course. The Old Nazi world is full of good family men, Nazis all…
He only understands what he learned when he was in the USA–Jews rule our government as they are the most single issued focused and have tons of campaign money. NEXT!
Thanks Adam for the GRIT-TV Post. I couldn't find any debate back then on the Gaza attack. It was truly sad. The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, have Friday discussion of politics with Brooks & Shields and they didn't even speak of it. It was humiliating and embarrassing. Mark Green looks like a Hasbara dope in the video. Vanden Heuvel looks angry sitting next to GreenShe is always a lively, but seems to bite her tongue on Israel/Palestine.
Or, Rowan, what they perceive as the influence of Zionism. Do you think David Duke has enough mental wattage to see beyond his own demons and illusions?
Thanks, CPAUSA. The "hang time", the amount of time between Witty posting a comment, and a commenter noting the essential flaw or mendacity in his post is getting shorter and shorter. But he never stops, he just pours on the unction cause the brain and heart won't function.
"I spent time with my Israeli Zionist folksinging family " The mind reels! (to the tune of "Edelwiess") Set-tl-ments! Set-tle-ments! Every morning you greet me. Stealing land, it feels grand. Beating Pals, poisoning wells We're building our on little shtetl
I think the Gaza assault was indeed an important turning point.
My impression is that he is trapped in a basic contradiction, because of his inability to grasp that, while Jewish culture contains an ethnic territorial nationalism of its own, instead of using that as a means of escape from the previous Jewish, diasporic, supra-nationally-organised mode of existence, it has used it as a pretext to reinforce this mode. In retrospect, given the fact that the real power-centres of Jewish culture remain supra-national, being based as they are in world banking, one can see that this was bound to occur, unless, as most pre-ben Gurion labor zionists presumably thought, global capitalism and its empires were doomed to collapse anyway, in which case the zionist entity would have taken its place among the proletarian national states dreamed of by Leninists.
I raised similar points about this very issue in an earlier post some weeks ago. i am glad it is being discussed for what it means rather than just waved aside as a cynical distracting ploy, even if this is indeed a convenient side benefit.
That's just cruel, Mooser. Lol. Of course I couldn't hold back a laugh.
to get back to mister abunimah. He advocates a single state solution. How long will that single state follow the path of democracy? not very long. it will soon become the islamic republic of palestine. i guess most of the commentators see no difference between the islamic republic of palestine and the current situation. but to the jews living in israel there will be a big difference and that is why they do not choose that direction.
For a number of fairly obvious reasons, a single democratic state between the river and the sea would be much less likely to become an "islamic' (i.e. shari'a) state than the existing Jewish state is likely to become halachic.
I can understand their law as well. It makes sense that they would be angry and seek protection from potential and likely abuses. And, at the same time, it CONSTRUCTS the opposite of what a humanist could possibly propose, as ALL REACTIONARY approaches do.
Of course the significance of actual interpersonal relationship was lost on you. I thought you proposed integration, and peer status.
It is however a stacked nationalist deck nevertheless. If democracy is only referenced to the past (the population of 1948, or emigration quotas from the 1910's), then CURRENT citizens, current residents, get short-changed. Democracy is of the present, who IS in the land, not who was. And, if the people themselves don't desire to merge into one people, then until there is a compelling sentiment to, the proposal is an IMPOSITION, not a solution. I like that there is the suggestion of actually working towards a goal, which is heads and shoulders improvement over strictly complaint, as little constructive as I see or hear about. I personally don't think that Ali Abunimeh has concluded which is more important to him, his goal or his anger.
Witty, I'm sorry. You need to take a firm stand about issues. You whitewash Israeli-everything while ciriticizing Palestinians about everything. After your cruel comment aobut Phil's other post about Gazans being alive and well….well, you just lost my respect. I know you are a father to children and I don't understand how a parent, who has been blessed with kids could not have a soft heart. Can you imagine living with your children in a cage like Gaza? How would you explain to them that they can never be out as long as Israel controls the air, the sea and the borders? They even control the food coming in and what kinds of food can come in? I need an ignore button, fast.
Likud is a small minority party. 27 of 110. It requires extreme compromise to form a government. It has very limited authority. That is actually a problem and contributes to Abbas' description "we have noone in authority to negotiate with". The left however is the uniquely failed part of the equation in both Israel and in Palestine. The left would naturally form liberal civilist parties, parties that are minimally nationalist, minimally religious. But, that is NOT the case in either Israel of Palestine. The only Palestinian civilist parties are very small, comparable to the size of Balad in Israel. Colin, Somehow my proposal that Israel/Palestine be defined at the green line missed your ear, accompanied though by the acknowledgement/choice for Jewish settlers to remain in geographic Palestine as Palestinian citizens. That would be consistent with your assessment of 16% Jewish residence in proposed and accepted Palestine. When the attitude shifts to "we accept you" from "we reject you, and seek for you to leave your homes", in both communities, then peace would be possible. Tangible questions would be reconciliable, most anyway. That is the commitment of the peace movements in the world. Live and LET LIVE. The commitments of solidarity isn't exactly that.
trying to imagine the consequences of a one state solution- i guess some result similar to lebanon would be the quicker result rather than the islamic state of palestine. there certainly is little question that there are not many models amongst the Arab countries that inspire confidence in the stability or the democracy of such a future. plus: even if much of the hatred towards the zionists and jews was inspired by jewish/zionist actions rather than by ideology, this does not really lessen the fear of that hatred. the suicide bombers in the current tense in iraq and the suicide bombers just a few years ago in israel, certainly did not increase the appetite to experiment with a one state solution.
I don't think that many of the recent Russian (or Ethiopian) immigrants have any good reason to be there — they were imported as cannon fodder, frankly. They aren't even 'Jewish' in the normal sense — assuming that was your criterion to begin with.
." it will soon become the islamic republic of palestine" Hey, you're the ones who wanted so badly to be there, who petioned the world to have a state there, were so willing to kill even ostensible allies who got in your way of you Zionist dreams. And now you're maybe getting a glimpse that maybe "the Jews" or Zionists don't really have the resources or methods to sucessfully complete the project? Shoulda taken more care to follow UN Resolutions or something. You made your bed, now lie in it. Please don't expect anyone to feel sorry for you.
Zionists! They whine when they don't think they're getting enough land, and now they're whining cause they got too much. You can't please 'em.
Which is fine, Mooser, except that your Jewish brothers and sisters are going to become wanderers again, and there will be no refuge when Ed decides you're not a "real American." I always assumed as a Jew I would die in the Islamist conquest of Israel. You will die as Holocaust bait. Kiddush HaShem is nothing new.
the aspiration for a democracy similar to the democracy of america is understandable, yet the fact that the zeitgeist of the arab world is in the direction of islamism and that the sole multicultural societies that exist in the arab world are represented by the havoc of lebanon and the havoc of the new iraq do not encourage the calm acceptance of the dream of a binational state only to be stuck with suicide bombings in the market place.
i have arrived at this web site recently and am still at the "dialogue is possible" level. you seem to have left dialogue behind (if you ever believed in it.) i will clarify my position: herzl was a prophet who foresaw the doom coming the way of the jewish people and did something about it. we are currently in a situation where the european doom is apparently in the past tense and there are other newer challenges. facing those challenges will require insight into the mindset of the other. people like mister abunimah are doing nothing to come to terms with the mindset of the other. and frankly mockery is much easier than dialogue. have a nice day.
What question are you asking, Saleema? You think that I'm callous in some way? I think it is callous to invoke angers repeatedly, that have the practical effect ot deterring sensitivity to the other.
First of all, Phil's original statement is exactly what pisses off many people about Jews bringing the struggle over Palestine to the U.S. and using it to distort politics, culture and identity in whatever way they find convenient. Of course there is no need in the U.S. for massive immigration, whether legal or illegal, or any of the changes that it is supposed to bring. And there is no need for the U.S. to be caught in a struggle for Palestine, ideologically or otherwise. Secondly, to oppose massive immigration and to favor a continuance of a White majority and White cultural norms doesn't put people on the level of David Duke. To be honest, I don't know much about David Duke, but I would guess that the anti-White bigots, and the ethnic lobbyists of the Left have more in common with Duke than do the majority of Whites who are simply tired of intentional Balkanization, massive legal and illegal immigration (for no reason other than to change demographics) and government approved discrimination against Whites.