Israel makes it clear it views ‘Israel/Palestine’ as one state

on 12 Comments

The anti-boycott law that passed the Knesset this week has been a clarifying moment in several regards. Mairav Zonszein has a good post on +972 about how the law reveals the one-state reality in Israel/Palestine. From her post:

Everyone who is up in arms about the passing of the boycott law this week has been emphasizing the severity of its violation of freedom of expression and dialogue. While this is of course true, what is even more alarming about the law, which has gone largely unmentioned in the press or by organizations opposing it, is what it says about the State’s relation to the territory under its control: The boycott law makes no distinction between Israel and the Occupied Territories and thus is in effect a legalization and normalization of the occupation, the total erasure of the Green Line and the moratorium on the two-state solution (in case this was not already clear).

No one should be alarmed that the boycott law passed because it is merely retroactive legislation for an already existing, de facto reality, just as the government’s recent expropriation of uncultivated Palestinian land was simply a formal approval of the daily reality of the settlement project.

The boycott law, like other laws, such as the Citizenship Loyalty Law that passed last March, as well as other imminent bills and remarks by government committee heads – such as Danny Danon’s recent demand that birthright trips “stop boycotting Judea and Samaria” –  is the government’s way of taking advantage of its power to formally cement its hold on the West Bank, and with it the Palestinian people.

If Israel were in any way interested in a two-state solution, it would be legislating laws geared at diminishing Israel’s institutional presence in the West Bank, not further deepening it. Instead of the principles of democracy and the desire to remain a Jewish state dictating its actions in the West Bank, what we see is the discriminatory, militant practices of how Israel runs the West Bank seeping into Israel proper, turning the whole area into one giant mold of apartheid jello.

About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

12 Responses

  1. seafoid
    July 15, 2011, 12:25 pm

    Tell me how this ends- Petraeus

    • Citizen
      July 16, 2011, 8:03 am

      He ended it himself–by putting what he knows in a drawer dedicated to his official paper records & speaking lies to Congress that his drawer records negate. All that US Army brass, only following orders from the Israel First PTB.

  2. sycamore
    July 15, 2011, 1:42 pm

    There needs to be some care taken here. Because Kadima, and various other “left” parties of the Knesset voted No for this in blocks. From your reasoning that would appear to indicate that they support a “two state solution”. Whatever that vague assembly of words now means, Kadima claims to be in support of a “two state solution”, though I’m sure they imagine something along the lines of what already exists in the West Bank and Gaza, codified into a permanent solution.

    I think it’s quite likely the law will be overturned in the court, and that the “left” will declare it as a victory of the Democracy that all Israeli functionaries are always going on about. The government of Israel doesn’t support an anti-boycott law as a whole, because they don’t need to. They have other ways of undermining the boycott, while maintaining the veneer of democracy over their rotting apartheid fiefdoms.

    • seafoid
      July 15, 2011, 5:32 pm

      Kadima isn’t in favour of 2 states. Zippy Livni told abbas to forget about international law and that Ariel was Israeli. Kadima offers the Palestinians the purgatory of the endless no peace all process but with a smiley face. and white phosphorous if anyone gets uppity.

      • Sumud
        July 16, 2011, 1:47 am

        The Wikileaks US Embassy cables had Netanyahu proposing a Palestinian state that is in essence a replication of Israel’s current impostition on Gaza, with borders a little more open, but still: full Israeli control over demilitarized Palestine’s sea- and air-space, borders and even electromagnetic spectrum. He bragged in the same cable that Livni was on board for his plan completely.

        Another cable had Livni proposing an interim agreement with Palestinians with the border of the Palestinian state being based on the path of Israel’s illegal apartheid wall, not the June 1967 borders. This, despite years of Israel claiming that the path of the wall would never be used in an attempt to pre-determine the outcome of any final status issue.

        Livni isn’t a moderate, but that’s how she markets herself. Never forget Kadima is Ariel Sharon.

      • Citizen
        July 16, 2011, 7:54 am

        Any lawyer who proclaims she doesn’t care about the law or give any credence to it, is no moderate. A lawyer is technically an officer of the court, at least in the USA. Is this also so in Israel?

      • Hostage
        July 16, 2011, 11:37 pm

        Any lawyer who proclaims she doesn’t care about the law or give any credence to it, is no moderate. A lawyer is technically an officer of the court, at least in the USA. Is this also so in Israel?

        It’s actually a hell of a lot worse than that Citizen. In the 30th and 31st governments, when these cables and the minutes of the meetings in the “Palestine Papers” were recorded, Livni was BOTH the Foreign Minister and the Justice Minister of the State of Israel.

      • Hostage
        July 17, 2011, 12:09 am

        P.S. The Law Courts of Israel are a unit within the Ministry of Justice. That means the Director of Courts is appointed by the Minister of Justice and the judicial system is actually headed up by the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court in accordance with the Courts Law (Consolidated Text) 5744-1984.

  3. Kathleen
    July 15, 2011, 2:00 pm

    I called into Friday’s international hour of the Diane Rehm show a new screener answered. Dorie Anderson had been there for years and has always been fair about letting a diversity of opinion through the phones. I was playing by the rules and had not called in for over a month. My comment and question to the screener was “This week the Israeli Knesset passed a bill that makes it illegal for any Israeli to take part in or even simply support any action construed as a boycott against Israel, or against illegal settlements. Can you guest please discuss this vote and the bill.”

    The screener responded “we are not talking about Israel today it is not on our list” I responded “you mean you get a list about what callers and countries callers can ask questions about during an international news hour?” I was in shock and called back to get clarification. The screener again said “the producers hand them (the screener) a list of what countries or international issues they will be talking about” And she repeated “Israel is not on the list” I responded “enough about the Murdoch scandal while it is important there are other critical issues” Made sure I had what she said right said “thank you” and let her know that I would be putting this new screening (censoring) approach be known.

    Now this is the first time I have ever heard this about the Diane Rehm show. I have noticed over the years they focus less and less on the conflict. Wondering if their funding is being threatened in any way? But to hear that the producers actually take Israel off the list. What the hell is this all about.

    Clearly the Diane Rehm show is becoming one of those live programs that you have to give the screener or producers what they want and then ask the question that you want to ask. That did not used to be the case. Sad. Very very sad.

    • Citizen
      July 16, 2011, 7:59 am

      Kathleen, Rehm’s no different than Cspan WJ. Both use to be havens for free critical speech. Both have now pretty much cut off such speech wrt criticism of Israel & US enablement of
      negative Israeli policies.

  4. gingershot
    July 15, 2011, 4:41 pm

    I think Zonszein really uncovered the core truth of the anti-boycott law
    - this is all about the push for consolidation of the Israeli Apartheid position prior to the September Declaration of the Palestinian state.

    The violation of freedom of expression aspect is the sideshow compared to this final push for the ‘One Apartheid State’ that this represents.

    Israel has pulled out all the stops – this is the Lieberman wet dream.

    Brilliant article

  5. MK_Ultra
    July 16, 2011, 1:55 pm

    By stealing all the Palestinian land, Israel has created a de facto one nation. However, here’s the conundrum, Palestinians are multiplying at a tremendous rate and it won’t be long before they are an overwhelming majority in Israel. At that point, I can only hope that the Palestinians can find it in their hearts to be more generous, humane and merciful to the Israelis than they have been to the Palestinians. How is that for letting greed cloud judgment?

Leave a Reply