I am continually impressed, as so many contributors to this site are, by how advanced the world conversation on Israel/Palestine is, and how far behind the American conversation is. The explanation is, per Shlomo Sand in his amazing book, The Invention of the Jewish People, that Israel replaced the idea of aliyah with diaspora– it gave up the idea of bringing Jews to Israel and instead based its future on Jews in the U.S. maintaining the support of the superpower. That’s a lot of responsibility; and god knows we have shouldered it. Witness Richard Cohen in the Washington Post raging at the use of the word "apartheid"–when Israeli leaders use that word all the time.
The Swedish writer Henning Mankell, whose mysteries my wife adores, also uses the word apartheid, repeatedly. He went to the Palestine Festival of Literature and got an eyeful of the occupation, from Hebron to Jerusalem, and wrote a piece for Aftonbladet, translated here. Excerpt:
What I saw during my trip was obvious: the state of Israel in its current form has no future. Moreover, those who advocate a two-state solution have not got it right.
In 1948, the year of my birth, the state of Israel proclaimed its independence on occupied land. There are no reasons whatsoever to call that a legitimate intervention according to international law. What happened was that Israel simply occupied Palestinian land. And the amount of land under possession is constantly growing, with in the war in 1967, and with the increasing number of settlements today. Once in a while, a settlement is torn down. But it is just for show. Soon enough, it pops up somewhere else. A two-state solution will not be the end of the historical occupation.
The same thing will happen in Israel that happened in South Africa during the Apartheid regime. The question is whether it will be possible to talk sense into the Israelis in order for them to willingly accept the end of their own Apartheid state. Or if it this has to take place against their own will. Nor can anyone tell us when this will happen. The final insurrection will of course start from within. But emergent political changes in Syria or Egypt will contribute. Equally important is that, probably sooner than later, the United States no longer will afford to pay up for this horrible military force that prevents stone throwing youths from having a normal life in freedom.
When change is coming, each Israeli has to decide for him- or herself if he or she is prepared to give up their privileges and live in a Palestinian state. During my trip, I met no anti-Semitism. What I did see was hatred against the occupants that is completely normal and understandable. To keep these two things separate is crucial….
The state of Israel can only expect to be defeated, like all occupying powers. The Israelis are destroying lives. But they are not destroying dreams. The fall of this disgraceful Apartheid system is the only thing conceivable, because it must be.
The question, therefore, is not if but when it will happen. And in what way.
I don’t see where Henning Mankell’s views are “advanced”. Is mere opposition to the existence of the state of Israel all it takes to be considered advanced. I would think that some thought process beyond: the Israelis will have to decide for themselves whether they want to live in Palestine, would be necessary before earning the appellation advanced. How about a prediction of how the war before this beautiful ending will play out. How about a prediction of how many will die before this beautiful ending will play out? How about a description like the one that was attempted here a few weeks ago about building a one state solution that is based on federalism of some sort. Nope, nothing like this. Just the Jews will give up and that’s that. Sounds advanced to me. Not.
The war is going on now, WJ, and the people are dying. Only they are mostly Palestinians, so this doesn’t apparently bother you as much as the prospect of Jews being killed.
Palestinians being slaughtered in numbers doesn’t seem to bother WJ at all, in point of fact.
I am bothered by the deaths of Palestinians, that’s why I was against the war in Gaza (after the fact) and looked to Yossi Alpher and Larry Derfner to define my position.
I myself do not believe that we will see a one state solution in the next 40 years. But if we would, the casualties on both sides that would precede such a solution would make the 1400 deaths in Gaza seem like a minor skirmish. If you can imagine a one state solution without such a war, please draw me that scenario.
“I was against the war in Gaza (after the fact)”
Very helpful. I’m sure the Palestinians are duly grateful.
“If you can imagine a one state solution without such a war, please draw me that scenario. ”
It would require a great change in the ideas of Israelis. They would have to admit that Zionism was a wicked idea, that the concept, creation, and conduct of the State of Israel were all evil. They would have to give up the idea of a Jewish State. They would have to want the new state.
Are Israelis so corrupt, so brainwashed, so insane that such a change of heart is not possible? Perhaps. But if so, your 40 year war is inevitable.
You are in Israel, so it is up to you to start changing your fellow Israelis. (I cannot do it from Australia.) If you do not start changing them, you are dooming them to the 40 year war.
They rationally adopt Zionism.
It is equally incumbant on you to persuade the Arab and Palestinian world to accept Israel, if you are interested in avoiding the divisions that lead to 40 more years of war.
Surrounding and harrassing Israel will not accomplish the “victory” that you seek.
RoHa- One person accuses me of being insensitive to the deaths of Palestinians and when I say I am sensitive, you react, “Gee whiz, you’re sensitive. Goody for you.” Upshot: It doesn’t pay to react to those who hate Israel.
“They rationally adopt Zionism.”
They rationally adopt a doctrine that says that Jews matter more than anyone else?
“to persuade the Arab and Palestinian world to accept Israel,”
In a one-state scenario, what the Arabs need to accept is that the Jews born in what is now Israel have the right to live in the new state as equal citizens. Your Israel would not exist.
“It doesn’t pay to react to those who hate Israel.”
But those are exactly the people you have to make peace with if you want to solve the problem.
I will make peace with the Palestinians, not with Australians on this web site who say that the Jews don’t have a right to self determination.
“I will make peace with the Palestinians, ”
That’s great! When are you going to start?
“not with Australians who say that the Jews don’t have a right to self determination.”
Of course, you aren’t going to present a rational argument for that alleged right, are you?
At this point of time, the need for the Jews to have a right of self determination would deal specifically with the Jews in the I/P area where there is a dispute regarding territory and the Jewish right to self determination would clash with the Palestinian right to self determination and thus something would have to give and I could accept the rationality of preferring the rights of the recent indigenous (Palestinians) rather than the rights of the too recent indigenous (Israeli Jews) or the rights of the too ancient indigenous (Israeli Jews) or the rights of the unspecific indigenous (the rights of Mizrahi Jews).
But I think that any discussion of the rights of Jews to self determination should include the history of the previous century and specifically the Jews of Eastern Europe who were separated in the Pale of Settlement by the Czars of Russia after the seizure of the territory from Poland in the late 18th Century. These Jews definitely deserved a right to self determination that should not have clashed with the rights of the nonJews that lived in the same area.
“You are in Israel,”
The hell he is! He most certainly is not, and the Israelis who do post here have completely different views.
In fact, I would say that “wondering Jew’s” views show him to be a ziocaine-huffing American everytime he pisses through his pen.
You have a habit of confusing “self-determination” and “the spoils of war or right by conquest”
You really should learn the difference.
And BTW, idiot, “the Jews” didn’t self- determine anything, as I remember, England regained control of Palestine, and permitted increased Zionist immigration.
” the Jews in the I/P area ”
So you are, right now, just talking about the rights of the Israeli Jews to self-determination, and not all Jews in the world? O.K. But surely the relevant right would be that of all the inhabitants of Israel, and not just that of the Jews. (Of course, I know you really believe that Jews are more important than non-Jews, but try to pretend you don’t for the moment.)
“clash with the Palestinian right to self determination ”
If the Palestinian right to self-determination had been honoured in the 1920s, Israel would not exist. Since the Zionists did not give a hoot about the Palestinain rsd then, why should anyone give a hoot about a Jewish rsd?
” Jews of Eastern Europe who were separated in the Pale of Settlement by the Czars of Russia after the seizure of the territory from Poland in the late 18th Century. These Jews definitely deserved a right to self determination that should not have clashed with the rights of the nonJews that lived in the same area”
You will have to spell out why they deserve a rsd, why it would not have clashed with the rights of the non-Jews, and whether such a right should apply to any territory other than that which they inhabited, or involve any other Jews anywhere.
As it stands, you seem to be making a blanket claim about a right without any substantial support.
So just another fraud lying for Israel, then?
The necessity of such a war seems to be based on the refusal of Israelis to agree to the solution. This is not a drawback of the solution, but of Israeli intrasigence.
In fact, there seems to be no possible scenario that doesn’t involve Israel killing lots of people, because Israel refuses to stop killing. In short, there is no solution, there is only continual war.
The key ignored by WJ is the end of the APARTHEID state. It’s the adjective, not the noun that is what has to be eliminated. Analog: It was Jim Crow, not the USA that had to be eliminated.
I assume Henning Mankell is a good writer. But there was no evidence in his article that he had spent more than six days in the region. Nor that he had visited places in Israel itself, but only the West Bank. Nor that he had even deemed fit to talk to any Israelis. He seems to have seen Syrian passports on his bus. Syrian passports in the West Bank?! I don’t even think this is possible. South Africa had a nine to one ratio of blacks and coloreds to whites before it fell. I am worried about Israel’s future, but to cite a writer (even one’s favorite) who has spent a week in the region? Seems flimsy to me.
And how many days have you spent in the West Bank?
Time spent in settlements doesn’t count.
http://fasttimesinpalestine.wordpress.com
Pamela,
My knowledge of the Palestinian plight in Gaza and the West Bank, even in East Jerusalem is poor. But my words are not taken as seriously as Mankell’s and he should devote a little more time to the region and to both sides of the conflict before he pontificates before his opinion is deemed “advanced”.
got news for you WJ, it is going to more like 4 years not 40 that this change takes place – the tide has turned and zionists are the last to get it and the momentum grows and builds exponentially
… not one person need be injured or killed if during the change if only the occupiers decided to live as neighbors and work toward living in peace together and sharing rather than dominating, controlling, crushing, coercing and generally just being fascist thugs
radii- halfway between 4 and 40 is 22 years. We’ll see in 22 years who is closer to the truth prediction wise.
This time can be cut short easily if Uncle Sam would cut off the dole (perhaps merely threaten to do so) to Israel. Sam has done this forever since Sam came to world power, e.g., Sam did it (via Truman) by threatening those handful of US economically dependent states (such as Haiti) that tipped the vote for UN recognition of Israel, despite the opposition of every middle east state at the UN.
Uncle Sam could also use the other weapon up its sleeve, the US veto in the UN Security Council–why not for once not veto a resolution against Israel?
Beyond the likely war associated with a prospective single state solution, the reality for Palestinians in a truly democratic single state will plausibly be further subordination and frankly isolation from one another, as the floodgates to Jewish settlement in the West Bank will open wide.
The only way that wouldn’t happen would be if ethnically reserved (ethnically cleansing) laws were passed prohibiting individuals from specified ethnicities from purchasing land in a locale.
Only if racial/ethnic restrictions are codified into law, would there be any protection from free residence. And, if racial/ethnic restrictions are what results in a bi-national state, then the “progressive” approach would have instituted Jim Crow, MORE than they opposed it.
Integration would occur in Israel and settlements, as it would similarly be illegal for racial segregation there, but Palestinians would be the minority of property, if not of numbers. They would have to integrate into Jewish society still.
The question cannot be avoided. Wondering Jew’s question of “what is meant by the Palestinian flag”? is a real one.
IF the “transition” is four years off, then the proposal is real now.
“the reality for Palestinians in a truly democratic single state will plausibly be further subordination and frankly isolation from one another, as the floodgates to Jewish settlement in the West Bank will open wide.”
So the “demographic bomb” threat isn’t real after all?
“ethnically reserved (ethnically cleansing) laws were passed prohibiting individuals from specified ethnicities from purchasing land in a locale. ”
Does not Israel have such laws now, and would they not be revoked?
In a truly democractic single state the Palestinians could actually be empowered to
negotiate at the same level for the purchase of their land. The state would no longer be basically able to confiscate it, or inhibit cultivation of its fruit. Further, Palestinian claims to title going back to the Ottoman Empire would have to be addressed in new
equal protection laws. The question of what is meant by the Palestinian flag is easily addressed: it originated as the symbol of Arab resistence to Ottoman Rule, and was
refined as time went on, for the Palestinians, into a symbo of resistence to Zionist rule, in turn symbolized by the the flag of the state of Israel, which adopted the Zionist flag.
We all know how this works. No U.S. money, no Israel. When the U.S. bankrupts and is no longer able to support 750 or so military bases around the world, or the $1,000,000 per year per G.I. in Iraq/Afgh, then the U.S. begins to become a normal country and Israel will have to become one also. No more exceptionalisms.
You see the Arab world as normal countries, Lebanon as a normal country, Syria?
Nope, no racism there, huh.
Gosh, I wish I could go to an ashram have all kinds of outer-body exoeriences, and be able to define which countries are “normal”.
Funny how that universal humanism Witty espouses enables one to do that.
Nobody in the Western world sees the Arab countries as normal in terms of Western civilization. And you know it, Witty. So what’s your point except to divert the thrust of stevelaudig’s comment? Further, Everything the Arab regimes get from the USA is paid for quid pro quo (and at the expense of the Arab masses). In great contrast,
Israel is gifted the lions share of US foreign aid, and on terms we all wish we could get from our bankers–Israel gets the biggest US welfare check with no strings attached, and get to charge Uncle Sam interest on money gifted up front and without interest.
Not to mention the many memorandums that assure Israel, e.g., the best trade advantages, and a fuel guarantee that puts priority over USA needs in behalf Israel.
If New Orleans was located in Israel, it would already be a renewed city and envy of the world; and its inhabitants ditto.
And all paid for with US tax dollars.
“If New Orleans was located in Israel, it would already be a renewed city and envy of the world; and its inhabitants ditto”
On the other hand, if it were located in Lebanon, Hezbollah would have renewed it in short order, but the Western world wouldn’t be told about it.
stevelaudig- The day after America cuts off its financial support to Israel, then the Prime Minister of Israel will tell the Chief of Staff to send the army home and invite all the inhabitants of Gaza to come and take over Ashkelon? Will he invite Hamas leader Meshal and take him down to Dimona and hand him the keys to the A bombs? Not likely. Your scenario has a beginning but not a phase two.
To be specific: the exceptionalisms of Israel that are priorities from an Israeli standpoint are the army and the borders. How are these going to change? What is the Israeli government budget and how will a loss of 3 billion dollars going to effect it? A direct loss of 3 billion dollars does not mean an immediate disbanding of the army and abandonment of the border crossings. You have not thought through your scenario.
“The day after America cuts off its financial support to Israel, then the Prime Minister of Israel will tell the Chief of Staff to send the army home and invite all the inhabitants of Gaza to come and take over Ashkelon?”
It may take a bit longer than that, but however long it does take, I won’t be paying for it. As a Jew, this is very important to me.
And as a simple non-Jewish American taxpayer, it’s also important to me. Remember, truth, justice, and the American way? Notice how they are glued together. Further, direct aid to Israel is 3 billion a year, but another 3 billion
is given too–just less directly.
If you don’t believe in the cause as implemented, even a penny taken from you for it is disturbing–even pennies add up, as every non-profit charity knows; that’s why they set out those cans.
Who would deny that banking, arbitrage and usury depends on every penny?
Did you happen to notice the Israeli economy is booming. Approx 200 billion GNP. They just discovered huge natural gas deposits that will take care of their energy needs for years. Why would the Israelis want to become another 3rd world Arab State?
Since Henning Mankell seems to think the change will come from within I can tell him now the last time I was in Israel, less than a year ago there was virtually zero support for his idea.
Israel will have to steal the natural gas, it is actually part of Gaza.
Anyone else as utterly shocked as I am that “liberal” Witty and neocon Julian are on the same wavelength for denigrating Arab countries?
Good. So let’s cut off aid to Israel and all those US govenment assurance memorandums securing Israel at the expense of US needs, and also let’s cut off
all those sweetheart trade deals with Israel doing the same thing.
It seems to me that the point is that Israel has lost control of the conversation.
It has lost it from a million pinpricks brought of by extreme arrogance. Peace could
have been made any time since ’67. Israel instead used the time to continue to
encroach on Palestinian property, push, shove and humiliate on a daily basis under a
cloak of darkness maintained a compliant press. They keep it up until a group or
individual Palestinian pushes back and suddenly all the news declares the reaction to
oppression is an act of terrorism while the terrorism of the Israelis is concealed and
the world is supposed to condemn the nasty Arabs trying to hurt the poor Jews who after all “just” suffered so tremendously from the holocaust.
It seems that now this ugly scenario is being exposed to the light of day and it
doesn’t extol the virtues of Zionism but rather shows the moral depravity of the
Israelis. Mainstream Jews have allowed the situation to deteriorate over time by their
blind adoration of some dream that is becoming a nightmare by ignoring the reality of
“facts on the ground”. By allowing the settlers to enact their twisted dream of Eretz
Israel, even after the assassination of Yitzak Rabin with the complicity of the parts
of the rabbinate and the adoration of Baruch Goldstein, Israel and especially Jews of
America will be exposed as frauds.
It is likely too late for a two state solution (it’s not for me to say) and the
possibility of a one state is difficult to imagine. Just think of disarming the settlers
and arranging an equitable distribution of the resources is beyond anything I can foresee. Maybe the dissolution of the state has become inevitable. Who knows? It is maybe like the so-called perfect storm.
As to Western Europe as the area where Israel’s arguments are not accepted (anti-Semitism under the carpet) there is an incisive article by Yonatan Mendel in London Review of Books for March 11.
“The day after America cuts off its financial support to Israel, ..our scenario has a beginning but not a phase two.”
It is not my position as an American citizen and taxpayer to concern myself with how the Israeli government or state reacts to no longer getting my money. Their existence is their concern. How it deals with its neighbors is its concern not mine. Sitting in the U.S. with crumbling infrastructure and failing public schools and a collapsing health care system means these are my concerns.
“To be specific: ….You have not thought through your scenario.” I assume by “scenario” you mean a “projection for the future” or a “desired result”. No actually I have, from the point of view of an American citizen placing the interests of myself and my fellow Americans first. I don’t have a “scenario” for the Israeli state. My “scenario” is that the Israeli state has its problems and that those problems are not my problems and that I have neither a duty nor even an interest in continuing to fund the Israeli state, or the Egyptian state or any other state except perhaps the Mexican state, which if it fails can create extreme problems for myself and my fellow Americans. Even assuming there is some legitimate American interest in funding the Israeli state it is less significant the funding the Mexican state [and certainly less than funding the bankrupt state of California or the bankrupt school districts in Kansas City I just heard about].
Pingback: Israel’s existential crisis comes to New York