Sam Bahour argues persuasively in The Guardian that one secular state is both the best – and the only – option.
Once this foredoomed move toward Palestinian membership in the UN runs its course, a new paradigm will take root, one that Israel dreads because it implicitly views Palestinians and Israelis as equals, as co-citizens, as partners. This new shift will see Palestinians dropping their desire for independent statehood in a fraction of their historic homeland and instead will find them, within a genuinely representative political structure, articulating their desire for self-determination within their historic homeland, even if that homeland today is called Israel.
The Palestinians are about to come full circle. They were correct, painfully so, to call for a secular democratic state at the outset of this conflict. Sadly, they wasted precious time and lost too many lives trying to accept unjust modalities of a resolution.
They should have done this YEARS ago…..F two states. People are people, end of story. They should have just said “fine, you win – its all yours, we want the right to vote” years ago, and we might be in a better spot than we are now.
Great essay btw
Yes, of course, but this is exactly what Israel does not want. A single state with a possibility of a non-Jewish minority over time. Crazy, but true. This is the Zionist talking point. They are frightened to death of a unified Palestine/Israel or Paisrael/Ispastine— whatever we want to call it.
Traditionally the Palestinian people have no problem with occupiers. It has been the status quo in that part of the world. But from the start, the most recent Zionist occupiers worked on cleaning the region of non-Jews.
ellen,
no doubt – i realize whats going on here.
How about naming the single state ” The artist formerly known as Israel?” :)
…or “California Too”….it’ll be awesome!
I think there are two major keys to this:
1) helping Israelis overcome the neurosis that makes them so afraid of Palestinians/Arabs and has become part of their collective identity over the years
2) helping Palestinians realize that there is an option other than the two-state solution that has been crammed down their throats for decades
Dex,
Perhaps you can help me as an Israeli overcome my neurosis. Having lived through the second intifada and seen up close the results of suicide bombings, I admit that I think Palestinian society is completely demented and untrustworthy and I would not want to be part of the same country with such a society. The majority of Palestinians are decent people, but in my opinion their society is easily hijacked by extremists that give others no other choice but to follow.
Palestinian society is no more or less hijacked then is Israeli society; would you agree with that?
Perhaps what you should do is twofold:
1) think about why suicide bombings take place to begin with. I think you will be surprised to know that virtually every suicide bombing has a political motivation, not religious. Thus, if you contextualize the events, it becomes easier to understand
2) visit/talk to Palestinians — not just those who are citizens of Israel — but those who live in the W.B., Gaza, and in refugee camps in other countries. Tough task, of course, but you get my point. In other words, you should try to humanize them. I get the sense from your reply that yours is a pretty typical orientalist attitude of the “other.” Don’t forget, it is your people that took their land, not the other way around. As such, the onus is on you, the side with 100% of the power, to understand the grievances and, consequently, actions of the oppressed.
Out of curiosity: were you born in Israel or do you have dual citizenship with another country?
LOL. Pathetic.
I have visions of eee as a child: “They slapped me back!!! How could you POSSIBLY expect me to live with them. I mean, all I did was stab them, break their arms and bash their heads in with a brick in order to steal their bicycles and lunch money. I didn’t deserve to get SLAPPED. What’s wrong with them???”
eee once again making very little sense….
so palestinian “society” is demented and untrustworthy, but the majority of Palestinians are decent people. You do realize that a “society” is made up of people, right?
of course, when you are a demented and untrustworthy zio-colonizer, you dont even think of why someone might blow themselves up, what kind of F’d up existence that person must have had to get to a place where they think suicide bombing is rational. I’ll give you a hint eee, its because people like you stole their land, their homes and their drinking water, leaving them with next to nothing.
Its a testament to the Palestinian people that there isnt MORE violence against jewish israelis – you should be kissing their feet. And you will be, once your disgusting lot is a permanent minority in the land Israel now controls.
Having seen close up the results of occupation, oppression and Israeli bombing I do NOT view the entire Israeli society as demented. I guess I’m not a racist bigot simply looking to justify my hatred which was there long before.
dex 250pm post- excellent suggestions and i am keen to see eee’s response to this post of yours… thanks for your comments…
Who do you think hijacked it? A Mossad agent gets arrested in Egypt recently for trying to pit Copts against Muslims. De-classified British documents say that PFLP was created by Mossad and the CIA. The Lockerbie bombing was blamed on Libyans after initially blaming PFLP. There is little real evidence the Libyans were responsible and they’ve been released, one for ‘medical reason.’ Blaming PFLP could’ve exposed a CIA/Mossad involvement in narcotics trafficking. A CIA agent was on that plane, maybe he was going to go rat out the op and the screener thought the bomb was the usual drugs which is how it got on board.
In 2002 just a short period of time after Ariel Sharon claimed Al Qaeda was helping Hamas in Gaza, Hamas arrested some Mossad Sayanim who were pretending to be Al Qaeda.
In 2001, Mossad agents were arrest on 9/11 and even said Palestinians were the enemy of the USA as if they were behind the thing. Interesting that the ‘celebrating’ Palestinian footage was shown that day (later retracted as fake). The only people celebrating were Israelis (the dancing Israelis). Federal agents even admit to Fox news “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.” Gee I wonder….
In the 90s, Israelis vandalized a grave yard with antisemitic messages, swastikas, and pro-Islam messages (and pro-Mubarak, Saddam, and Assad remarks). They said they were hoping Arabs would be blamed.
According to a former Mossad agent, they purposely stirred up violence between Maronites and Shias in Lebanon. They also withheld intelligence which led to the barracks bombing to get the USA involved in the conflict. Same thing they tried in 1967 after IDF nearly sunk the USS Liberty and murdered/wounded many of its crew. This behavior is not unlike the time they tried to blow up targets in Egypt to keep Western forces at the Suez Canal (Lavon Affair). The Revisionist Zionist terrorists (like Irgun which is basically Likud) set the early examples.
When all of this is taken into consideration, how are we to believe that the famous terror attacks, such as the suicide bombings of the 90s, weren’t a product of Mossad instigating?
Resistance is a natural response to oppression, especially so many decades of it. Violent resistance is normal although it is ineffective because the blame can be shifted to the victim as an aggressor as we see with the Palestinians. That is why current resistance is mostly non-violent with the majority of the violence coming from the face-mask wearing militants who many Palestinians believe are Sayanim for Mossad. Violent resistance is also suicide considering Israel’s military advantage.
Do you get it yet? Will you ever get it? There is enough actual and circumstantial evidence to implicate an Israeli involvement in many of these ‘terrorist attacks’ set up to frame or bait Palestinians. The occupation is also to blame. No doubt many attacks were real, but they were copy-cat attacks.
Extremism exists in all religions. Look at the violent Ultra Orthodox settlers, they are terrorists as are groups whose ideology still exists today in the form of revisionist Zionism like Likud.
You can’t blame an entire group of people for the actions of a few. Jews of all people should know the dangers of such thinking. Another huge problem is the whole ‘preemptive’ thing. AFAIK, Minority Report pre-cogs do not exist and people are not mind readers. If IDF starts shooting non-violent protesters under the pretense that the protests would eventually be violent, who would you think the real terrorists are?
Dex,
“Palestinian society is no more or less hijacked then is Israeli society; would you agree with that?”
No I don’t. Israeli society does not glorify “martyrs” like Palestinian societies.
I really don’t care what the motivation of suicide bombing is, I just will not accept a society that glorifies it. And I really don’t care that they think they are justified because “I took their land”. I am second generation born in Israel and did not take anybody’s land. Palestinians are humans but their society is completely screwed up. Many societies conducted wars against what they perceived as occupiers. The number of societies that targeted children on purpose (such as those standing in line to get into a disco ) are very few.
Woody, to be fair re eee, as a child he was not responsible for the source of the bike he got free to ride, nor the tasty lunch money he was given–as a child. However now that he is an adult, he is rather lacking in recognizing the source of his bountiful childhood. He’s like Donald Trump–he thinks he earned his position by pulling up on his own bootstraps. In blatent contrast, for example, young Germans accept the sins of their ancestors and willingly pay reparations although they were not alive during the Nazi era. Makes you wonder about all those stand-up comedians who yak about “jewish guilt.” Seems Germans have it a lot more in spades than any Jews.
Gosh eee, this sounds demented, when a nation’s leaders talk like this, don’t you think? What does this say about a society?
“There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies? Not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience. They are our neighbours here, but it seems as if at a distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy.”
Israeli president Moshe Katsav. The Jerusalem Post,
May 10, 2001
“The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more”.
… Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time – August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000
“[The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs.”
Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the Beasts”. New Statesman, 25 June 1982.
“The Palestinians” would be crushed like grasshoppers … heads smashed against the boulders and walls.”
Israeli Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988
“When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.”
Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
“How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to.”
Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.
“There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed.”
Golda Maier Israeli Prime Minister June 15, 1969
“The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war.”
Israeli General Matityahu Peled, Ha’aretz, 19 March 1972.
Did we actually need more evidence that eee is stark raving racist?
Israeli society not only glorifies terrorists it’s builds museums & statues venerating them, names streets after them and elects them to the highest office.
eee you are nothing more than a screeching bigot and I do not understand why you are allowed to pollute this site with your racism.
No, Israelis don’t glorify martyrs; they just glorify nameless, faceless pilots who drop 2 ton bombs on helpless civilians.
Well, if you are not willing/wanting to understand the motivation of the other side, then you are truly not interested in resolving the conflict. You seem to be rather interested in maintaining the status quo of walls, checkpoints, settlements, and bureaucratic obstacles for Palestinians. Why…because it’s convenient for your side, which holds all the power and doesn’t have to deal with any of these issues.
The reality is you (and most Israelis) live in close proximity to the conflict but your government goes to painstaking measures to keep you insulated from it. That is why it is so easy for you to go to the cafes and sandy beaches of Tel Aviv — pretending to be a Western country — while just a few minutes away your government is brutalizing another people because they are not the same religion as you.
You say you are a second generation Israeli. Fair enough, you have every right to be on that land. Now wouldn’t you say that a 1oth or 15th generation Palestinian has the same right?!
If that’s the problem then people like you should leave and go back to the countries where you came from in the first place or to other accommodating countries. A million white South Africans emigrated after the fall of apartheid, a million pied noirs left Algeria for France. Once the settlers in a colonial state face loosing their colonial privileges more often than not they don’t want to live in the same country which proves they never really belonged there in the first place.
eee, you guys elected BEGIN (a fascist terrorist). you have museums glorifying the irgun. you have ACTIVE terrorists in the settler fringe operating daily in the west bank, under the *protection* of the IDF and border police. some settlers revere baruch goldstein, and the guy who killed rabin.
but it gets worse…. and more widespread…
after cast lead, various actions of the IDF are clearly seen as state terrorism (they had enough “events” before, but cast lead was clearly a war crime, state terror, and aimed at the society writ large, aka terrorism). i would be a refusenik, but on my travels in israel, almost ALL israelis looooooove the IDF, and rever it, and praise it, and call it the “most moral army ever”. puke.
look in the mirror, most all israelis do not realize the sick hypocrisy. exactly what they level at the palestinians (writ large, in a form of bigotry), they have done. almost *every* charge, also applies to groups within israel, the history of israel as a state, and political platforms on the israeli right.
No I don’t. Israeli society does not glorify “martyrs” like Palestinian societies.
Wow, we’ve been there before.
As Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, gave Lord Moyne’s assassins a eulogy. The Two Eliahus (Eliahu Hakim and Eliahu Bet Zouri) were buried on Mount Herzl with full military honors in an area reserved for the nation’s eminent citizens. Here is an article about the streets in Israel named after those two terrorists and another, Shlomo Ben-Yosef. It also explains that they are included in the educational curriculum for eighth and ninth-graders about “those who ascended to the gallows” — 12 members of the Irgun and Lehi who were either executed or who committed suicide in prison. See “To the victor go the street names”
Similarly, the names of Moshe Marzouk and Shmuel Azar of Lavon Affair infamy are engraved on the walls of the Jewish state`s memorial in the intelligence agency’s “Center for Special Studies” – “Memory of the Fallen of Israel`s Intelligence Community” section. Most of the survivors of the Lavon Affair were given the honorary rank of Lt.Col. (reserve), although they had not served in the IDF. They are similarly the object of Zionist “educational programs”, e.g. See the “Lavon Affair” page authored by the Pedagogic Center of the Education Department of the Jewish Agency for Israel, and the Haaretz article regarding the educational presentation about the 1954 Lavon affair prepared by the Military Intelligence History and Heritage division.
People like the late Dead Sea Scrolls scholar, Manfred Lehmann, and thousands of Kahanists have eulogized Goldstein; sing his praises on Purim; and have turned his grave into a site of pilgrimage. Lehmann and others attempted to rehabilitate Goldstein’s reputation. He noted that the Shamgar Commission’s report had stated that
So, even the original state inquiry portrayed Goldstein as a misguided hero.
@eee, great, you rule Palestinian society for 44 years then say it’s completely demented and untrustworthy. Maybe because of its rulers?
“virtually every suicide bombing has a political motivation, not religious”
That’s why their homicide bomber videos feature them holding the Koran and chanting all kinds of prayers to Allah. That’s why the Hamas Charter calls all of Israel their land because it’s Muslim land.
“your people that took their land”
Actually, that is not true either. Egypt occupied Gaza and Jordan the West Bank, that’s who Israel fought in 1967, when the mobs in Cairo and Damascus were screaming “Slaughter the Jews”
So, those statues of Jewish “freedom fighters”, building and streets named after Jewish freedom fighters…are not glorifications of violent people?
No, that’s why a DOD funded study of every suicide attack in the last 30 years has revealed, much to the surprise of the researchers, that 95% or more of suicide attacks are not motivated by religion.
Likud refers to all of Palestibe as their land too. Are you saying Likud is like Hamas?
Try and pay attention LLI and stay awae if possible.
1. Egypt administerered Gaza. They did not occupy it.
2. There never was a Jordanian “occupation” because the government of the new state was composed of the legal representatives of the inhabitants of the Arab portions of the former Palestine mandate. You can’t “occupy” yourself with your own armed forces.
3. No one in Cairo and Damascus were screaming “Slaughter the Jews”.
Seek meduical attention, or at least ask your shrink to change your prescription.
I think Shalit would disagree on that. Israelis seem perfectly satisfied making him a martyr.
That’s why their homicide bomber videos feature them holding the Koran and chanting all kinds of prayers to Allah.
Zionist historian Walter Laqueur dismissed the notion that the ideological motivation of the majority of the terrorists was Islamic fundamentalism or a clash with Islamic civilization. He noted that even an incomplete survey of suicide terrorism shows that many, perhaps most, suicide attacks were carried out by groups that were secular (page 84).
Abdel Bari Atwan, the editor-in chief of the London-based newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi has explained that suicide attacks, like the Japanese Kamikazes, are not a uniquely Muslim tactic. He has also noted that the only essential factor necessary to bring about suicide attacks in our times is an occupation force. The Tamil Tigers and the Viet Cong weren’t Muslims after all. He cites the example of a Palestinian father of a suicide bomber who explained that his son “wasn’t a radical, he was radicalized by the anger and humiliation – we are all living in a jail”.
Actually, that is not true either. Egypt occupied Gaza and Jordan the West Bank,
Sure, just like the Canadians assigned to the North American Aerospace Defense Command’s Cheyenne Mountain Complex are foreign invaders too. The new political entity named “Jordan” was created through a union between Arab Palestine and Transjordan after the Jericho Congress. In accordance with the constitution, 20 of 40 seats in the lower house of the Jordanian Parliament were reserved for the elected representatives of the West Bank. Electronic Intifada founder Ali Abunimah’s father was a member of the Jordanian UN delegation for heaven’s sake. Do you suppose he was a hostage? Bottom line: the legal inhabitants of a country, together with their military allies, are never considered a “belligerent occupation” regime – except in Zionist daydreams.
The Foreign Relations of the United States records a conversation between President Johnson, King Hussein, and Secretary of State Dean Rusk. King Hussein said the phrasing of the draft resolution 242 calling for withdrawal from occupied territories could be interpreted to mean that the Egyptians should withdraw from Gaza and the Jordanians should withdraw from the West Bank. Hussein said this possibility was evident from a speech that had just been given by Prime Minister Eshkol in which it had been claimed that both Gaza and the West Bank had been “occupied territory”. President Johnson agreed, and promised he would talk to Ambassador Goldberg about inserting the word Israel in the withdrawal clause (and that’s exactly what happened). See Foreign relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XIX, Arab-Israeli Crisis and War, 1967, Document 515 Resolution 242 required Israel, but not Jordan or Egypt, to withdraw armed forces from the occupied territories.
Yup, Charon, our Mossad is behind it all, including the recent drop in the Dow. I love it when people like you post this nonsense on MW, it surely enhances the reputation of this site.
Charon, do you have any links regarding the Mossad agent being arrested and anything else regarding Copts and Muslims in Egypt?
the only arrest i heard about was Ilan Chaim Grappelli/Grapel but that was not in relation to the alexandria bombing.
link to en.wikipedia.org
We all know of the stories of women pressured to become homicide bombers or face an Honor Killing.
See also Brides of Allah
Egypt administerered Gaza. They did not occupy it.
Oh, that’s nice then.. How come they didn’t give it to the Palestinians as their state?
No one in Cairo and Damascus were screaming “Slaughter the Jews”.
Right, I must have dreamt it.
Egypt administerered Gaza. They did not occupy it.
Oh, that’s nice then.. How come they didn’t give it to the Palestinians as their state?
They did stupid. The State of Palestine was a full member of the League of Arab States. Egypt helped administer Gaza as a trustee on behalf of the League, in which the Palestinians were always fully represented. Egypt established the All-Palestine government under League auspices and subsequently recognized the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine.
So how many did that make LLI? Three?
And still, it does not prove that those forcing them to do so were motivated by religion. All it proves is that they were threatened with murder if they didn’t do as they were told.
Nice try, but fail.
They already recognized it as “part” of the Palestinian state.
Seeing as you obviously have no evidence to prove it, we can safely assume you did.
“helping Israelis overcome the neurosis that makes them so afraid of Palestinians/Arabs and has become part of their collective identity over the years”
I don’t believe you can ‘help’ them out of it. For several reasons, the main one being ‘it works’ for the zionist and Israeli leaders.
They aren’t going to give up having an enemy, enemies are as necessary to them as breathing. The whole concept of zionism is based on Jews always having enemies. Without that the leaders lose the rationals for and reasons to solicit money and support and protectors for the zionist vision as it is now and whatever it may keep evolving into.
Maybe you could help some Israelis out of it, some are already out of it, but not that many by all accounts. But you can’t help the true Zionist out of it, you can only defeat them. If Zionist ideology is not defeated it will be passed on and on as we see by their efforts to instill the idea of fear and enemies into new generations of Jews.
It’s not too late – it would still be a much better strategy to campaign for the vote rather than stolen land, etc.
The “stolen land” argument will always be met by Israelis with a certain cynicism and argument about facts, believing, rightly or wrongly, that justice is with them.
But a mass movement for the vote and citizenship will really be hard to counter and will push the point home very clearly that democracy is at stake here.
The campaign should be: “No to independance, yes to citizenship and the vote” or “no to violence, yes to the vote”
The right in Israel won’t know how to deal with this as they have campaigned for annexing territory – and now the Palestinians agree with them!
All claims of ROR or stolen land or international law should be put on hold, tactically and strategically, and concentrate on democracy only. Think what 40 or 50 members of the Knesset could achieve as opposed to what 44 years of resistance to occupation couldn’t even scratch!
Yes, yes, yes. -N49.
Excellent article.
One secular, democratic state is inevitable, and has long been in the making (by Israel’s own doing, might I add). The question then becomes: how do we transition the struggle from the anacrhonistic two-state paradigm that has long focused on “self-determination” to the one-state paradigm that is more rights-based, focusing on equality for all those between the Med. Sea and the Jordan River?
I think the biggest obstacle is the neurosis of fear that permeates Israeli society; it was founded in fear and has been living with this pysche for over 60 years.
One of the clearest pieces I have ever read. He sure lines up with Mearsheimer in many ways. The apartheid situation will become even more evident to the world. Israel has never wanted a two state solution. They have boxed themselves into a corner as the Palestinian population grows and they will be out numbered.
“Israel, with blind US support, has succeeded in removing a two-state solution from the feasible options.
The new Palestinian leaders, those whom the Israeli negotiators have not yet met, see the larger picture and refuse to believe that Israel desires to live in peace when every indication for 64 years has shown the opposite. The emerging Palestinian leaders see Israel for what it is: a settler, colonial, apartheid movement clinging to a racialist, exclusivist ideology that neither wishes nor intends to allow another state to emerge between the Mediterranean sea and the Jordan river, let alone allowing Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and be compensated for their hardships, as was stipulated as a condition when the UN accepted Israel as a member state on 11 May 1949.”
Its a repetition.
The two-state approach remains the only possible political solution, as the people themselves do not think of themselves as one nation.
The distrust born of the issues that Balhour sites, but ALSO born of repeated intimate terror over an extended period, and continued expression of hatred for current Israelis cannot just magically disappear.
If that expression of hatred were not apparent, and acted on, then he would have a good point.
The land of historical Palestine has always been multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multi-cultural. Therefore, Israel’s project to homogenize a land that has never been monolithic is doomed to fail. It is merely a blip in the history of Palestine.
The clear answer is for all those living on the land to remain there, and to allow those who were expelled to return, and to live with equal rights. It is not rocket science for heaven’s sake.
Telling that you mention the supposed hate of current Israelis, but not the hate by those Israelis of Arabs generally and Palestinians specifically.
And they don’t need to think of themselves as one nation, merely recognize that two nations have equal rights to live free in that land and if one nation expands its state to encompass all the land, then both nations must, under international human rights principles, be given full political, civil and human rights and full equality in that state.
You are a repetition. Wakey, wakey, the 2ss, however desirable, has been nuked by your friends in the Israeli war state. Perhaps you could try reading Mondoweiss for further elucidation? Then get back to us, but only then.
RW, if you choose to conventionality believe tha, then it is solved with “re-education” of BOTH sides. ….so there!
Concerted -reeducation programs have been conducted before. We are talking about relatively small populations of people in a small space. It is easily done with proper leadership. (Something lacking on both sides.)
Or you can choose to believe in the power of hate and let it dictate. Is that a way to live?
(And by all evidence, Zionism exerts a hate-based policy onto all Palestinians.)
Oh yeah! Because only Palestinians express hatred and have used terrorism and violence! Israelis are pure as the driven snow! Israel was founded on terrorism! Israelis have used violence and terrorism in many ways throughout the years!
AND ISRAELIS SURE KNOW HOW TO HATE!
Here are some examples:
Dumping their sewage on Palestinian farmland
Humiliation at checkpoints
Segregated roadways
Demolition of Palestinian homes
Occupation of Palestinian homes
Theft of land
Destruction of olive trees and fruit orchards
Theft of water to use for swimming pools
Torching mosques and farmland
NEED ANY MORE EXAMPLES???
Slow motion murder of Arafat, Devout zionist shark attacks in Egypt, earthquakes, and baking unleavened bread with kiddie goyim. Other than that, we’re wonderful people. I typically don’t type on the Sabbath, but our clique is working on sending the check to Standard and Poor’s for their downgrade and worshiping Paul Wolfowitz.
Uri Dan, longtime and now deceased confidant to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, claims that Sharon killed Arafat.
Did you write the Elder Protocols, biorabbi? You sure sound like it.
But they ARE one nation. It has taken me years to realize this, but nationalism is terrible. It’s natural for humans to stick together when they have a lot in common. This is obvious in the case of culture, nationality, race, and religion.
In the USA we see such groups settle in clusters (like in NYC for example) and for the most part we all get along as one nation. There are still bigots and extremists, but not very many. USA isn’t a nationality in the sense of say Italy.
Separating nations makes it easier to condemn an entire people for the actions of few. External pressure can easily manipulate such nations into believing one is superior to the other and breeding conflict. The Aremenian genocide is a very curious example of an extreme measure of nation building and I do believe it was created externally and not because of Turkish nationalism or because they were considered traitors. Kurdistan did get screwed, but I have a feeling the Kurdish nationalism in Turkey and Iraq is manufactured externally.
You’re right about such issues not magically disappearing, the USA has been through something similar. It takes years. Promoting coexistence via TV, school, groups, etc. helps too. Eventually they will realize they’re both human beings and have common interests and feelings.
“but I have a feeling the Kurdish nationalism in Turkey and Iraq is manufactured externally”
Maybe encouraged from outside, but not manufactured. Also, Turkey’s treatment of the Kurdish minority has been absolutely shameful, they have basically tried to eliminate the Kurdish language, literature, and culture, and force Kurds to assimilate. Incidentally, the idea of creating a Kurdish state would not have been possible were it not for the Armenian genocide.
As always, Witty blames the Pslestinians exclusively. No mention of Israeli violence, occupation, ethnic cleansing, land theft – obviously because Witty considers all of these necessary.
Does that mean that all Jews should be deported from the US Witty, seeing as Jews regard themselves as a separate nation?
Seriously Witty, the only repetition is your tone deaf responses and illiteracy.
>> The two-state approach remains the only possible political solution, as the people themselves do not think of themselves as one nation.
>> The distrust born of the issues that Balhour sites, but ALSO born of repeated intimate terror over an extended period, and continued expression of hatred for current Israelis cannot just magically disappear.
RW, as you well know, I also believe that a two-state solution – two secular, democratic and egalitarian states – is the only viable solution. But could you please – please! – stop being such a f*cking dick that you can’t express a single anti-Israel / anti-Zionism / pro-Palestinian sentiment without following it up with / burying it within an anti-Palestinian sentiment, almost as though you need to cleanse yourself of some sort of betrayal of your collective?
Damn you, Hamas!!! RW would be such a nice guy if it weren’t for you! Sure, he’d still approve of past ethnic cleansing and, sure, he still wouldn’t rule out future ethnic cleansing, but at least he’d rule out ethnic cleansing in the present as “currently not necessary”.
>> Damn you, Hamas!!! … at least [RW would] rule out ethnic cleansing in the present as “currently not necessary”.
And not have to blame you for every wrong Israel commits, as though Israelis / Zionists / Jews can’t be assholes like everyone else, and fuck people over like anyone else would, because that’s the nature of humans (whether supremacist Zionists or us reg’lar folk).
I didn’t mention Hamas Eljay.
“I didn’t mention Hamas Eljay.”
If you click “Richard Witty” over his comment, it links to Richard Witty’s archive of over ten thousand comments. You will have no difficulty determining for yourself whether he will “mention Hamas” or not.
>> I didn’t mention Hamas Eljay.
I didn’t say you mentioned Hamas. What I did do – in response to your comment…
“… ALSO born of repeated intimate terror over an extended period, and continued expression of hatred for current Israelis …”
…was to plead for you to stop burying even the slightest amount of criticism of Israel beneath a mountain of anti-Palestinian sentiment, almost as though you need to cleanse yourself of some sort of betrayal of your collective.
Not surprisingly, you evaded the point of my previous post. I guess it’s just not in you to stop being a dick.
Oh, well… :-\
“The distrust born of the issues that Balhour sites, but ALSO born of repeated intimate terror over an extended period, and continued expression of hatred for current Israelis cannot just magically disappear.
If that expression of hatred were not apparent, and acted on, then he would have a good point.”–Richard Witty August 5
“I didn’t mention Hamas Eljay” Richard Witty August 6
The criticism of you here is that you condemn the terrorism of the Palestinians and say nothing now or ever about the larger scale terrorism of the Israelis. You then respond to criticism with a silly claim that you didn’t mention Hamas. Well obviously you were referring in large part to Hamas.
If you had a single consistent standard on human rights you wouldn’t have to troll. You might even make some legitimate points–any real reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians will involve admissions of guilt on both sides, even if the Israelis have much more to admit. Until you adopt a consistent standard, though, you’re just going to continue to represent the worst tendencies in liberal Zionism.
“If you had a single consistent standard on human rights you wouldn’t have to troll.”
Oh, I don’t know, I thought that Richard’s declaration on “holding his nose while others do what I can’t” was a pretty succinct summation of his human-rights philosophy.
Yep, Mooser, Himmler gave a motivation speak to his SS officers to encourage them to do more than he personally could do to make the final solution come true. He told them to hold their nose, but they just also had to do what was needed in behalf of the homeland and the Aryan people. That’s self-governing for you. If Witty had been born German (with uncontested Aryan credentials) and was there at the time, he would’ve been Himmler’s clerk.
I am describing the factors that have made the Palestinians’ cause gain no traction.
A community that deserves sympathy and tangible support, has lost the majority of what was potential.
I guess that is “demonizing Palestinians” in some eyes, partisan eyes only though.
>> I am describing the factors that have made the Palestinians’ cause gain no traction. A community that deserves sympathy and tangible support, has lost the majority of what was potential.
It’s true. Just as the victim loses “tangible support” every time she punches the rapist who has raped – and who continues to rape – her. It’s a shame her actions “gain no traction”.
The only thing one can do is shrug one’s shoulders. The rapist – fear-scarred as a result of the victim’s “aggression” – certainly cannot be expected to stop raping (even though it is entirely within his power to do so). And the victim, well, she just won’t stop punching the rapist, so she has “lost the majority of what was potential”.
Just think what could be accomplished if only she and “dissent” would stop delegitimizing the rapist!
Where are the votes and Palestinian support behind this proposal? Sam is speaking for himself and a few other leftists. The majority of Palestinians do not want to be part of Israel and the Jews do not want a bi-national state. Plus, this proposal totally ignores the complexities associated with Gaza. Whatever the people there want, Hamas do not want a secular one state solution and they are still in power.
Untrue. The reality is Palestinians have never been given the choice. But because of Israel’s unwillingess to stop expanding its territory, let alone simply freeze settlement construction, we are left with two options: the status quo or the one-state solution. Now given this choice, which do you think Palestinians will choose?
There are no complexities associated with Gaza. The people there are just like any other Palestinians, except for the fact that they are blockaded. End the blockade and you’ll find how “normal” they are.
You’re right: the difficulty will come from Israeli Jews, but remember whites in South Africa were opposed to integration too. In fact, they were most fiercely opposed to it right up to the very end of apartheid. Israeli-Jews are in the same position. They can resist the inevitable or they can accept it. Either way, they are going to have to acknowledge that that land belongs to the Palestinians as well, and until they are given the same rights as Jews, there will be no peace. Full stop.
Dex,
What do you mean Palestinians have never been given a choice? They voted in free elections (the one Hamas one) and no party supporting the one state solution even ran. In fact there is no Palestinian party that I know of that plans to run in the future under the secular one state banner. If I am wrong, just point me to this party and to any indication that they have wide support.
Perhaps what we can agree about is that unless there is a negotiated solution, there will be no peace. The Palestinians can resist the inevitable or accept it. Israeli Jews will overwhelmingly prefer no peace to the one state solution.
I mean precisely what I wrote. The question of one state for both people has never been an option given to Palestinians. Historically, it was discussed here and there, and was even part of the offical PLO charter in the 60′s (though Zionists, of course, claim this was a tactic for the ‘destruction’ of Israel).
Any discussion or possibility of this option was effectively vanished under the Oslo Accords. But because Israeli policies have effectively removed any chance for any viable Palestinian state to emerge (no longer a controversial point, we are left with three options today:
1) Israel completely removes Palestinians from the land and take over the empty territory or
2) a continuation of the status quo, i.e. the apartheid of today
3) one state
The world will not allow the first to occur; the second is not sustainable; the third will be difficult but will be the inevitable option.
I will repeat this as long it is necessary:
1930 Simpson – Hope report
(iii) THE EFFECT OF THE JEWISH SETTLEMENT ON THE ARAB.
P.I.C.A.’s relations with the Arab.In discussing the question of the effect of Jewish Settlement on the Arab it is essential to differentiate between the P.I.C.A. colonisation and that of the Zionist Organisation.
In so far as the past policy of the P.I.C.A. is concerned, there can be no doubt that the Arab has profited largely by the installation of the colonies. Relations between the colonists and their Arab neighbours were excellent. In many cases, when land was bought by the P.I.C.A. for settlement, they combined with the development of the land for their own settlers similar development for the Arabs who previously occupied the land. All the cases which are now quoted by the Jewish authorities to establish the advantageous effect of Jewish colonisation on the Arabs of the neighbourhood, and which have been brought to notice forcibly and frequently during the course of this enquiry, are cases relating to colonies established by the P.I.C.A., before the KerenHayesod came into existence. In fact, the policy of the P.I.C.A. was one of great friendship for the Arab. Not only did they develop the Arab lands simultaneously with their own, when founding their colonies, but they employed the Arab to tend their plantations, cultivate their fields, to pluck their grapes and their oranges. As a general rule the P.I.C.A. colonisation was of unquestionable benefit to the Arabs of the vicinity.
It is also very noticeable, in travelling through the P.I.C.A. villages, to see the friendliness of the relations which exist between Jew and Arab. It is quite a common sight to see an Arab sitting in the verandah of a Jewish house. The position is entirely different in the Zionist colonies.
link to unispal.un.org
Dex,
In short, you cannot point to one significant political party that supports the one state. How is it even an option then?
As for 1 not happening because the “world won’t allow it”, don’t be so sure. If Israel retreats unilaterally to the security fence, and the settlers and Palestinians devolve into a civil war, what is exactly the world going to do about it? Nothing.
eee, am sure Israel would love to see Palestinians sucked into some kind of civil war with the Settlers. There are ongoing attempts to provoke this and you know it.
Tell us what will happen when there is civil war between the settlers and the rest of Israel? What will the word do? Take sides? Hardly. Israel will be alone on that one.
That is not the Palestinian dog fight.
As for 1 ["1) Israel completely removes Palestinians from the land and take over the empty territory"] not happening because the “world won’t allow it”, don’t be so sure. If …
eee, that is why I like your coming around here — you really do open the door into the soul of a true Zionist. We all need to be reminded about the mentality that we are confronting. And, unfortunately, you guys still have those 400 nuclear weapons to use against any outsiders who may oppose your plans.
eee: If Israel retreats unilaterally to the security fence, and the settlers and Palestinians devolve into a civil war, what is exactly the world going to do about it? Nothing.
Ahh, so that’s the plan then. Bookmark this comment. -N49.
I don’t know what the Hell Israel is thinking. They are aggressively working to prevent the possibility of a two state solution via settlement expansion and erecting walls to divide the Palestinians. Yet the last thing they want is one state for two people which brings the real possibility of becoming the minority due to millions of displaced refugees pouring in.
Do Israelis actually think that Palestinians will agree to have an independent state in 5 or 10% of ancient Palestine? Even after they have successfully completed the settlement enterprise or stealing the most resourceful land for themselves. It will be war after war after war. All because the Israeli govt is unable to maintain a real democracy and fulfil their duties as elected officials to listen and work for the majority instead of the minority.
You’re right. Israel had the golden opportunity of somehow, someway — b/c of realpolitik — to take 78% of someone else’s land, and have it completely legitimized by the entire world, including the entire Arab League. All it had to do was give up the Occupied Territories, and couldn’t even do that.
Now, in an ironic twist of fate, they will have to accept Palestinians as equal citizens in a single state (I think it should be called Palestine-Israel, but really don’t care about what the name is), and allow for the full return of refugees. The only other option is to remove Palestinians from the land, something the world will not allow.
Israel’s current leaders are Revisionist Zionists. Sharon had to create a new party to dismantle settlements. Bibi’s father would kill him if he caved into anything resembling the two-state solution. The only two state solution these people support is Israel/Jordan.
They want the status quo to be legal and permanent. Officially letting go of Gaza, and areas A and B of the Oslo Accords while annexing the rest. This would leave the Palestinians with tiny enclaves not unlike bantustans. They would be enclaved on all sides by Israel with no easy way to travel from one to the other because of the settlements and Jews-only roads. Check points would be indefinite.
The international community would never go for it, but the Likudites are serious. They wouldn’t be occupiers, wouldn’t be violating international law, and wouldn’t be responsible for aid. They could cut off water and other utilities, and who knows how far they’d take it. Wouldn’t doubt if a genocide plan existed.
Israeli land theft and ultimately the inability to compel the settlers to return to Israeli land have made the two-state solution impossible.
Given this reality the one-state seems to be the only option – however, can anyone explain how an acceptance of one state for the Palestinians and Israelis will come about.
I have always been for two states. And always said that Israel should be put back into the original lines the UN established which would mean giving up all their illegal settlements. That is the only fair and just way to settle it– to go back and begin at the beginning.
“If” there was one state the conflict would stay and be “internal”–think the situation in Syria today—and much harder to interfere with–even if some wanted to act on it. It would be even easier for Israel to keep Palestines down within their system without interference.
It would be Apartheid because the nature of the Jewish State isn’t going to change– Israel could keep the Palestine in basically the same situation they are in today. If one state was declared the Palestines wouldn’t magically be integrated into Israel society with the same right and opportunities as Jewish citizens. To overcome Apartheid as was done in SA would take a long time.
The problem is and always has been Israel wants the land and resources of Palestine without the Palestines. If they won’t accept two states you know damn well they won’t accept one state with millions of Palestines.
I have said before, and others with more knowledge than I have have said, that there will be no solution unless one is ‘forced’ on Israel from the outside.
Everyone can talk and surmise but the reality is Israel has never and will never agree to anything — not two states or one state—while everyone talks and agonizes about a solution they will keep on settling and building in Palestine until there is no Palestine left to talk about.
That’s the game plan, always has been.
I wonder what you guys think of this proposal, uniting the majority of the west bank (minus the major settlements) with Jordan (and Gaza) under a democratic secular state?
Why not merge Israel with Palestine and Egypt?..rotflmao
I know! I know! Why not merge the United States, Mexico and Canada! Because Mikey is talking about as nutty as a trilateralist.
At least the US, Mexico, and Canada aren’t at war. But heck, why would that matter?
Jordan is war? Egypt is at war? With whom, pray tell? Let me know which nation Israel considers itself at war with, and with which army they are meeting on the battlefield. Thank you in advance.
Actually, in Mexico, there is a kind of low-level civil war going on because of the drug trade.
Chaos, Israel is at war with the Palestinian militias.
Cant be in war with non-state actor. Wars are between states.
No Michael,
As Mordachai Gur said, Israel is at war with all Palestinians.
Even with those in the Knesset?
Yes, even with those in the Knesset? Not only does Israel freuquently victimize those in the Knesset, but it has legislated that they remain powerless by banning their right to form any coalitions.
“banning their right to form any coalitions.”
I don’t think you know how the Israeli political system works. The Arab parties never get enough seats to “form” a coalition, and their platforms are farther than all of the other parties. So why would any the leading party (the one that “forms” the coalition and gets the PM office) give a seat in the cabinet to someone who is going to disagree with them at every turn?
I don’t think you know how the Israeli political system works.
If the Arabs could field a list of candidates based upon a party platform that called for the establishment of both a Palestinian and Jewish homeland in Israel it would get a lot more seats than the Atzmaut party. The latter is indispensable to the current coalition.
A party’s ability go “get” seats has little to do with its value to a coalition. The number of seats a party gets has to do with how many votes it gets.
As Hostage has demomnstrated, ity is you that has no idea of how the Israeli political system works. One does not need any specific number fo seats to form a coalition and as Hostage has explained, the Arabs could easily form a larger coalition than the current one.
Which arab party could possibly be described as “the leading party”?
Please try and give an inteligent answer Michael. Thus far your comments have been rediculously ill informed and incoherent.
Are you that desperate to prove what kind of an idiot you are? Trust us Michael, we already got that.
Since when are votes and seats mutually exclusive? Of course, your desperate attempt to derail the argument does not change the fact that votes or no votes, Arab parties are not allowed to form coalitions. Are clear apartheid and undemocratic policy to maintain their ineffetiveness.
By coalition, do you mean the Arab parties forming a bloc within the Knesset opposition?
So if Palestine isn’t / shouldn’t be a nation, how can Israel declare war on Palestine? Michael you can’t have it both ways. Either Palestine is a state, in which case it behooves the UN to acknowledge that and give them a proper seat, or they are not, in which case Israel is merely in the process of exterminating a native population in the land it controls.
This is why the Israeli perspective doesn’t get respect, only deference out of fear. Your perspective is illogical. Seriously. It contradicts itself. EVERY TIME.
Palestinian isn’t a state. Palestinian right to a state is a legitimate cause recognized by international consensus. Israel never declared war on the State of Palestine. Regardless, it has been at war with countless Palestinian militias.
The Palestinians aren’t being exterminated. In Israel proper and in the territories, their populations keep growing. If Israel is committing genocide, they are the worst at it in the history of the world.
Chaos, people think your perspective is illogical and contradictory. It only seems so black and white to you because you read Mondoweiss all day where you reinforce you perspective. If you were at any real debate setting with random people, your fanatical view of the issue would be rebutted at every turn.
michael, can you get a new script. this one is boring, it’s won’t get better with age.
Rubbish.
Since 1948, we have been fighting against a population that lives in towns and villages.
Mordecai Gur(Israeli politician and the 10th Chief of Staff of the IDF)
They are are being ethnicaly cleansed you idiot. Ethnic cleansing does not require a population to be reduced, but removed.
Only pro apartheid fascists like you Michael, who’s idelogy is based on myth and lies. Those who proptected Jews in Nazi Gemrnay were labelled illogical and contradictory.
In reality, it is you that is the fanatic.
Fascist? If I’m fascist, Israel is 80+% fascist. Amazing how it still has a functioning parliamentary democracy. You guys use that word willy nilly. It stopped having many in these forums.
I’d modify your proposal to INCLUDE the major settlements and all of the west bank. return Golan to Syria, and we’d have a deal.
Great idea Michael W, but WITH the settlements and East Jerusalem.
How bout this proposal. Making Israel and all of historic Palestine the 51st state of the US of A with all the ‘freedom’ that comes along with it. No more Mossad or IDF, no more mandatory conscription, no more checkpoints, no more nukes, no more occupation, no more 3 billion in aid, etc.
Or maybe make three American states based on 1967 borders. Since they’re all American states, there would be no need to patrol their internal borders. They would all be part of one nation and subject to our laws. All refugees would automatically be Americans. They could live here or anywhere in historic Palestine. Hate crimes and terrorism would be punishable according to American law.
It’s better than your idea
Ha, you really expect the wide eyed Israeli fundamentalists and lunatics to hand over the West Bank to Jordan? Have you asked Jordan about this? Perhaps you missed it, but Israel already considers the River Jordan its border and ‘Judea/Samaria’ as its own. In other words, Israel has already implemented the one state solution. However, it maintains a fictional space where if you are non-Jewish you do not live in Israel and thus have no human or civil rights, you are a non-person, your property and land liable to be removed at any time. This is what Israel wants to maintain and rechristen the 2 ss solution, where Palestinians live in enclosed ghettos with no freedom, economy or rights. It is more accurately called the 2 state strangulation policy, where Israel keeps everything and Palestinians are strangled until they leave/vanish, become invisible, give up their right to exist and are wiped off the map. Gaza is the model.
Let us not forget one of the major consequences of Israel’s peace treaty with both Egypt and Jordan is that it essentially sealed the outer borders of Palestine-Israel, ensuring that Israelis and Palestinians are, for lack of a better term, stuck together.
This constant attempt to push Palestinians off onto Jordan is an impossibility.
@Michael W : I think you’re trolling. Or you haven’t been reading this thread.
Israel had the opportunity as Dex said to create a “two state solution” on most of Palestine, but their greed brought them to this: more and more of the world realizing the bankruptcy of modern day two-state apartheid.
I’m just trying to provide a fourth solution. Since I think one-state is impossible, and you guys think two-states is impossible, and neither of us want the status-quo, why not be think of new ideas?
We shouldn’t act like the US Congress, like fanatics. How about compromise? Stop thinking that one side can just simply solve the problem. Give and take, the art of compromise, listen and learn.
But heck, what do I know? I’m not Dex.
Why is one state impossible? What quality do you think makes Jews impossible to live with other people? And then tell me how that differs from what Nazis had to say on the topic.
Your new idea is as impossible as is the two state solution. Don’t you get it yet. The settlements in the WB belong to Israel, they will no more likely yield them to the Jordanians than to the WB Palestinians.
Chaos, Fatah and Hamas don’t want it. No Israeli political party of any weight wants it. Therefore it is impossible.
ToivoS, that’s why I mentioned that the major settlements that border the Green Line stay in Israel.
Nobody WANTS it, but Israel is giving nobody a choice on the matter. Israel is a vicious colonizer and it DOES NOT EXIST without colonization.
So since the colonization won’t end, and Israelis will never stop at any border, Israel has no option but to fold into the native majority. It’s really that simple. You want a nation? You need borders. You won’t accept borders? Goodbye nation.
Fatah and Hamas don’t want that either, so what makes your suggestion more credible?
So there is no consensus on any solution except the two-state solution which is becoming less and less likely every year/month. Even with the rising obstacles to the two-state solution, those obstacles are minuscule compared to the obstacles to the one-state solution.
Rubbish. The one state solution is a foregojne conclusion. It already exists for all practical purposes. All it requires is for Isrle to grant citizenship to those not already citizens.
Convincing the Israelis to grant citizenship to the West Bank Palestinians (and perhaps also the Gaza Palestinians) is a greater obstacle than convincing them to withdraw from the settlements. You want proof? Just ask the Israelis.
Also, don’t forget that according to international law, Israel is prohibited from annexing the West Bank.
Also, don’t forget that according to international law, Israel is prohibited from annexing the West Bank.
Annexation is irrelevant. The final political status of Israel can only be determined through a negotiated settlement under the terms of the 1949 Armistice Agreement. The Palestinians can demand immediate emancipation or enfranchisement. You forgot to mention that, according to international law, attacking or occupying the territory of another UN member state in violation of Security Council resolution 73 was, and is illegal. Security Council Resolution 228 (1966) condemned Israel for “the grave Israeli Military action which took place in the southern Hebron area [of the West Bank] on 13 November 1966″ saying that it … “constituted a large scale and carefully planned military action on the territory of Jordan by the armed forces of Israel”. That illegal action only lasted a few hours. The General Assembly subsequently declared Israel’s continued occupation of the Arab territories a violation of UN resolutions that constituted the crime of aggression in accordance with General Assembly resolution 3314, Definition of Aggression. The ICJ also ruled that Israel’s administrative regime in the West Bank is illegal and that Israel is illegally interfering with the Palestinian majority’s right of self-determination.
So Israel no longer has the boundless discretion to continue doing exactly as it pleases.
It is also prohibited from annexing the East Jeruslam, buildin settlements, and ethnic cleansing, but it hasn’t stopped them.
Then WITHDRAW YOUR SETTLEMENTS! Seriously.
Hostage, The only member state that is occupied by Israel is Syria. And maybe also a speck of Lebanon. Palestine is not yet a state.
Yes, Israel has been very bad to the Palestinians, so why would you want to put them together in one state?
Shingo: “It is also prohibited from annexing the East Jeruslam, buildin settlements, and ethnic cleansing, but it hasn’t stopped them.”
I agree.
Chaos, when have I ever been against withdrawing settlements? That’s a major part of the two state solution which I have been arguing for. I’m not PM Bibi, which I have never liked. I only have one vote, and Abbas refuses to sit with Bibi. Welcome to the real world.
Abbas refuses to sit with Bibi
triple yawn. new material please!!!!!!
Hostage, The only member state that is occupied by Israel is Syria. And maybe also a speck of Lebanon. Palestine is not yet a state.
Sorry pal the United States legally recognized the State of Palestine in 1932. It also formally recognized the State of Israel within the boundaries of the UN resolution after it announced its secession; and it formally recognized the political union between Arab Palestine and Transjordan, a.k.a “Jordan” after the Jericho Congress. 122 other countries legally recognized the State of Palestine after the Jordanian union was dissolved too. So, even if its statehood is disputed, the majority of the international community of states have already accepted its existence with all of the rights and duties of other states. Unlike Syria and Lebanon, the government of Palestine has accepted the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court for all of the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on its territory since 2002.
Yes, Israel has been very bad to the Palestinians, so why would you want to put them together in one state?
You Zionists always compare yourselves to other settler colonial societies that have incorporated their indigenous peoples in one state, but balk at doing the same thing yourselves. The law is clear, you either emancipate them, or you have to enfranchise them, but you cannot control their territory and oppress them under the illegal status quo of apartheid.
Recognized the State of Palestine in 1932? I’m sorry, but can you please cite me to an article or something. I tried google for a minute and only found out that two things were founded in 1932.
1. The Palestine Post, later renamed the Jerusalem Post
and 2. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Please provide detail to your claim.
Recognized the State of Palestine in 1932? I’m sorry, but can you please cite me to an article or something.
Surely. A Palestinian filed a lawsuit against the US Secretary of State in 1953 claiming that Palestine was not a foreign state. The United States District Court for the District Of Columbia ruled that:
The Permanent Court of International Justice ruled that Palestine was a successor state of the Ottoman Empire and many other courts ruled that the Mandates had the character of regular States. Those decisions cited the Treaty of Lausanne. There is a list with citations here.
Compromise? Do you know what PA was willing to give up – read the Palestinian papers! One side has been willing to give up almost everything and it’s still not enough because what the Zionists want and will not compromise on unless forced is what Golda Meir claimed – “A land without people for a people without land”. Until of the Palestinians are dead or have left they will never be satisfied.
“But heck, what do I know? I’m not Dex.”
Nor are you any of the other commenters who are better informed and have a much more honorable ethical outlook. But yes, you are far, far behind Dex, for one.
Who knew the real “road map” would be presented by the Palestinians!?
Bravo.
Declare statehood. Accepted or not, the move is made and the world imparts legitimacy of statehood in a de facto sense upon Palestine whether the US/Israel can block it technically or not … then, call for a unified secular state … er, like all others (mostly) and the whole notion of “Jewish exceptionalism” is put in the ash-bin of history where it belongs
As for a name for this unified secular state, what about The Land of Olive Trees ? here it is in Arabic (as done by Google Translate):
الأرض من أشجار الزيتون
“As for a name for this unified secular state, what about The Land of Olive Trees”
I would vote for “The Repbulic of the Levant”
But we all know that once there was one person, one vote the name would be Palestine!
Canaan? We could all be Canaanites together again…
Zionists are selfish and greedy. They don’t want to stop their land theft; they don’t want a viable Palestinian state, they don’t want to do right by refugees and they definitely don’t want a one-state for all with rights for everyone!
What they want is this: TO HAVE THEIR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO. Because Zionists think they’re reinventing the wheel. That’s how self-important they are and how consumed by their greed they are.
There’s lots we don’t know, e.g., what is this video about? Can anyone translate? link to youtube.com
Residents of Hama, Syria, chanting: “with blood, with soul, Hama we’ll protect you – god is with us”.
Pardon me Taxi but a correction has to be made here. It’s a Friday rally organised in support of the city of Hama by the residents of the (small) city of Jableh.
Thanks for the addition thankgod. (Hey how you been?!)
Really I shoulda added that the audio was scratchy and windy and the only bits my foreign ears could decipher were the repeating chants in support of Hama.
long time no see thankgodimatheist.
;)
Zionism and zionists will never be allowed to be a permanent fixture in the mideast. Zionism is a foreign ideology to the region that’s impossible for the natives to embrace and assimilate.
Historic Palestine belongs to Palestinian moslems, Palestinian christians and Palestinian jews. Justice, which is the only thing that will lead to a real and enduring peace, means giving EVERYTHING back to these original victims.
Why should Palestinians give an inch of their land to their european torturers, murderers and thieves?
Would any of us let a violent burglar live in our house even if he agreed to surrendered his weapon?
Taxi: “Historic Palestine belongs to Palestinian moslems, Palestinian christians and Palestinian jews. Justice, which is the only thing that will lead to a real and enduring peace, means giving EVERYTHING back to these original victims.”
I’m not which Palestinians you speak for, but presumably not for Sam Bahour who ends his Guardian article with:
“Now, the sooner Palestinians and Israelis realise that our destiny is to live together as equals, the sooner we can begin to rehabilitate our communities and build a single society whose citizens are all equal under law and equal as human beings.”
I think we need to accept that the emerging Palestinian leaders are ahead of us in their thinking. And they are rejecting the position and language that you articulate along with many Zionists who believe the Palestinians are out to “push them into the sea”.
The black South Africans had the maturity not to kick out their former oppressors. Why should we expect the Palestinians to behave differently?
Typo correction: I’m not sure which Palestinians…
I personally don’t know a single victim Palestinian whose ultimate dream is to ‘share’ with his oppressors. I know there’s probably some out there – but I’ve never met them and I highly doubt they represent the majority of Palestinians.
Besides, israel’s legitimacy isn’t just up to the Palestinians. There are other players whose desires also need to be considered. The majority of Lebanese, Syrian, Egyptian and Jordanian people want the euro zionists to get the heck off their lands and out of the region.
Now I have no doubt that Sam Bahour is sincere, I’m sure there are thousands of Palestinians just like him too. But most middle easterners (millions of them) don’t believe they can ‘negotiate’ anything with zionists in good faith. And they’re basing this on israel’s behavior for the past 65 years – that’s why I wouldn’t call them ‘extremists’. They’re your average person whose grown to distrust and despise a brutal occupier over a long period of time.
If you find their rhetoric ‘out of fashion’, I can only say that you would be foolish to ignore what I consider to be the legitimate writings on the wall: the desire of the majority of the region not to live with or be neighbors with the implanted state of israel.
And btw, no one cares what the israelis fear – the pushing into the sea business and all that poppycock. Just look how close INTO the sea Gazans are today being pushed by the zionists.
Peace with Palestine is just ONE of the many peaces that israel has to achieve before there’s a genuine peace in the middle east. You honestly think israel’s capable even of a single one of them? You honestly think israel will give up ANY of its stolen loot at this stage of the game when their society, civic and military, is so drunk and disorderly on masada wine? You think israel gives a figzleaf for the goodwill that Sam Bahour feels for israeli society?
Yeah sure we should always be talking and trying to achieve peace, but we should also always be prepared for war too – just in case the enemy breaks it’s word. Which in the case of israel, well…..
Also, Libra, the I/P conflict has an explosive religious zealotry characteristic that South Africa (thankfully) lacked. This changes everything – to the worse in my view.
Sure, but how many would prefer to live as equals among those currently oppressing them than livinng permanently under occupation? The back citizens of South Africa learned to live with their oppressors, because onve the oppression has ended and the laws grant all citizens equal rights, the problem no longer exists.
I believe the Palestinians are fed up being forced by the west to choose between living under occupation or living WITH their cruel occupier.
Man! They just want to be FREE to choose – they want the freedom to choose NEITHER. They simply want their land back and to be left alone to tend to it like their ancestors always have.
I can’t say I blame them. Who the heck wants eee or that other foreigner Avingor Leiberman for a frigging next-door neighbor?!
The majority of South African whites and blacks shared the same religion: christianity – I believe the ‘jesus’ thing they shared helped them find a common ground. Palestinians on the other hand have to deal with the added complexity of religious discrimination against them – nay a zealot occupier who believes in holywars and masadas.
Yes it would be ideal for the israelis and Palestinians to hold hands and sing kombaya – seriously, I ain’t being sarcastic. But put yourself in the victim’s shoes here and keep them on for 64 years and you’ll see how the idea of ‘sharing’ starts to sound like it’s just another arm, another part of the ‘package of occupation’.
Some might say…look what happened the first time zionist moved in.
Why should we keep doing the same thing?
Sam Bahour is a wonderful voice of reason.
To date, there have been no negotiations there has only been bargaining. There are two main types of bargaining, one where the price goes down until agreement is reached and the other where it goes up each time agreement is close. The Israelis specialise in the latter. A negotiated solution is not possible because Israelis possess neither the intellectual flexibility demanded of negotiation nor the will to achieve a solution. By intellectual flexibility, I mean the approach proposed by Chaim Ganz in his OUP book A Just Zionism which is essentially an Hegelian dialectical approach where each side acknowledges the rights of the other until they progressively rise above them towards accord.
A two state arrangement might have been workable in the past, for instance if the UN had started off with discussions with the Palestinian and Jewish occupiers of the land after WWII and reached an understanding on the establishment of a state for Israel and another for the rest with clearly defined borders, and if the refugee Jews had then arrived in the friendly, neighbourly spirit most of us adopt moving into a new area. However, there is no way two states can resolve the situation on the ground today. There has to be one occupancy of the land and resources by various tribes. This will not happen until Israel becomes a thorn in the bosom of US foreign policy like Saddam after the Iraq/Iran war or the Taliban after the departure of Russia from Afghanistan, or any one of the innumerable examples with which history abounds. This process will take place over time and is arguably already under way, and it is not susceptible to long-term deviation either by Israel, AIPAC or anyone else. I believe that Obama is well aware of this and that his policies will one day be seen to have been the best way simply to let things happen. It is the sensitivity of the US bosom to the Zionist thorn that those keen on a resolution should seek now to enhance.
“… if the refugee Jews had then arrived in the friendly, neighbourly spirit most of us adopt moving into a new area.”
I’ve actually heard many, many Palestinians and other Arabs say that if the european jews had knocked on their doors before entering instead of blowing them up, they would’ve been received with the customary warm and gracious Arab hospitality, as befits their tribal and religious traditions. Many of them express bafflement at the violent method chosen by the european jews. They don’t understand why the ashkanazi jews chose to victimize them instead of befriending them.
If the european jews had ‘ingratiated’ themselves into mideastern society instead of stomping their jackboots over crop and house and child, why I believe that a stable/democratic/prosperous multi-ethnic and multi-confessional middle east would indeed be in existence today – and blogs like Mondoweiss would have no reason to exist I suppose.
A “secular democratic” state? That’s an oxymoron like a “Jewish democratic” state.
Surely the voters in the one state should DEMOCRATICALLY decide whether the state is secular or not? Chances are that the vote will be for some sort of bi-religious Jewish-Muslim state with a small christian minority.
Does a “secular democratic state” exist anywhere in the world today? I think not, and Israel-Palestine is the last place on earth where it would be suitable with such deeply felt religious affiliations of all its inhabitants, Arab or Jew alike.
“Does a “secular democratic state” exist anywhere in the world today? I think not,”
Really? And what religion, would you say, is the established one in America?
“Christian”? Catholic ot Protestant?
I am always amazed at those how measure religiousity by a man’s eagerness to commit violence on other men, but never consider that religiousity might consist of sharing with other men.
Samuel, you are a fraud.
What a strange reply, Mooser!
I didn’t write anything about religiousity or violence or anything that resembles fraud. You must have misread or misunderstood. I certainly have nothing against sharing, religiously or otherwise
America is certainly not secular. As far as I remember even its currency is emblazoned with “in god we trust” and if TV shows are accurate witnesses are sworn in with “so help me god”. I think even the President is sworn in with a mention of god. You’ll have to ask an American if that’s accurate.
I don’t think that could classify it as being a “secular” democracy with god showing up so often.
I also don’t think there should be a pre-condition to “one state” of not mentioning god at all and being secular. That’s for I/P to decide by democratic means.
But I assume as you didn’t comment on the rest of what I said about the one state solution and making it a democracy without fixing its secular nature then you agree with that. So that’s good news.
And seeing that “minhag hamakom” (the local custom) on this blog is to insult the person you comment on, I feel obliged to act as a Roman in Rome, so here goes: “You’re a real Jerk” (that must have really hurt you, no?)
Nothing strange about Mooser’s reply at all, Samuel. While the trappings of non-atheism are intact in those governmental ceremonies & coinage you point out, SCOTUS has a well-established case record separating church and state; federal appeals & lower court cases affirming separation of religion and state are in the ten thousands. There clearly is no established state religion as well. People of all faiths and no faith at all are equal before US law.
Maybe he is right, after all, Citizen! I mean, what are the three expressions you hear in the good ‘ol USA more than anything? “Goddamit!” and “Holy Shit!” and “Jesus Christ!” as an oath.
And seeing that “minhag hamakom” (the local custom) on this blog is to insult the person you comment on
The understatement of this post
Tal, I make you the same promise I made the others: You let me know where Phil and Adam are keeping you chained to a computer screen, forcing you to read and comment at Mondoweiss, and I and my all-Jewish sport-bike posse (The Litvaks) will ride on over and bust you loose!
It breaks my heart when I think you are forced to read and comment on a website you despise, and I will do something about it.
yes, a single society whose citizens are all equal under the the law and equal as human beings
even better, one world whose citizens are all equal under the law and equal as human beings
but how?
in the spirit of those eighteen magical days in tahrir square, that’s how
perpetually & universally
Great idea. Let’s start with a one state solution between the USA and Mexico. No more border issues – Mexicans endlessly trying to steal the border into the US. All Mexicans will get a vote for congress and presidency. Down with Apartheid border between USA and Mexico!
I must be dreaming. You supremacists americans will never agree to let all these mexicans enter your holy land. Heck, you came uninvited to the region, you got rid of the native american indians, you would never let in these mexicans who most of them are descendants of inter-marriages between indians and whites.
there is so much wrong with this comment, where to begin is an exhausting thought.
Ok so just answer this – Are Americans any less nationalist than Israelis? Would they ever agree to become one state with Mexico? What gives you the right to demand from the Israelis what you’d never expect your own people to agree to?
The only thing which you have a moral right to demand from israel is to end the occupation of Palestinians in the west bank and to treat all it’s citizens equally. That’s it.
No, but American nationalism is not tied to being white or Christian. Nor does America define itself as a Christian state.
You Ziofascists are incredibly tone deaf.
What gives you the right to demand what Iran can and can’t do with it’s nuclear enrichment program – especially seeing as Israel has nukes and Iran has signed the NPT?
What gives you the right to bleed the US taxpayer of billions a year in welfare and free weapons, and still dictate who the US government can and can’t sell weapons to?
What gives you the right to demand that Hezbollah and Hamas be disarmed while you demand to be armed to the teeth at the expense of Americans?
No idiot. We have the moral right to demand anything we want while your poor excuse for a state sucks blood from US taxpayers.
We have the moral right to also demand you allow refugees to return, to lift the blockade of Gaza, to end the occupation of East Jerusalem, to return the Golan, to withdraw from Shabaa Farms and to deconstruct every illegal settlement you’ve built.
Would they ever agree to become one state with Mexico?
you mean would we ever colonize most of mexico, start building towns there and push all the people into little enclosed areas all walled up?
i don’t think so! as for the mexican people, quite a few of them come and live here and become citizens just like all the other people here. most of them are from families who have been here much longer than the average californian, many before california became a state and we didn’t round them up or kick them out when we joined the nation, or massacre them to inspire them to leave on their own.. calif is almost 40% mexican americans and we are better for it. there’s no comparison to the US relationship to mexico and israel’s colonization and apartheid. none
“Idiot”?
“Ziofascist”?
“Bleed the US TaxPayer”?
You are a shameless anti-semite who exploits the discrimination in MW against people who are not anti-zionists. My full opinion about your dubious character was sadly rejected by the moderator.
I have no discussion with your ilk.
You already colonized America. Now that you’re done and got away with exterminating all the native american indians you think you deserve a medal for granting citizenship to whats left of them.
Calif is almost 40% mexican american? Why are you so proud of yourself? Wow… Good for you. The Galil in Israel is almost 40% arab Israelis.
The fact remains – Americans would never agree to replace the USA with a one state “Amerixico”. Israelis would also never agree to a Palestine-Israel in which Israelis would be treated like jews were treated in arab countries before Zionism – as “dhimmi”(link to en.wikipedia.org)
Tal, you are the anti-Semite. You’re the one who seems to be suggesting that the entire focus of Judaism is Israel — and ergo the entire focus would be ethnic cleansing, blowing up mosques, using fake passports to kill people anywhere in the world, setting fire to children with white phosphorous, harvesting BILLIONS from the US government and investing millions back into a lobbying / campaign donation graft scheme, etc.
If you’re going to suggest that all there is to being Jewish is pledging loyalty to a terrorist colonial state, Tal, than you are the one who is making the anti-Semitic caricature.
Israelis would be treated like jews were treated in arab countries before Zionism – as “dhimmi”
well that’s interesting. from what i heard, before zionism iraqi jews were very comfortably situated in baghdad.
Why are you so proud of yourself?
i like the multi culturalism where i live. i noticed you didn’t answer my question:
There is no need for it. Both states already exist.
Don’t you mean Israelis would also never agree to a Palestine-Israel in which Israelis would be treated like Palestianians are treated in Israel?
Now that you’re done and got away with exterminating all the native american indians you think you deserve a medal for granting citizenship to whats left of them
The majority of Jews immigrated to the US between 1880 and 1914. and never had a hand in the Indian genocide or their displacement. Native Americans and other US citizens co-exist peacefully in the same society today. Conversely, Jews in Israel today are solely responsible for on-going and illegal expropriations, home demolitions, evictions and for imposing a four decade-long occupation and apartheid regime. When you try to justify that behavior by appealing to the past, you just come across as a backward sociopath.
Nobody is granting native Americans citizenship in this day and age. The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 was adopted nearly 90 years ago and many native Americans had already become citizens by other means before the act was adopted. Israelis sure as hell don’t deserve any medals for ethnically cleansing the majority of your Arab citizens and continuing to shoot “Palestinian infiltrators” who are simply trying to return to their homeland. There is no legal barrier to Native Americans or Mexican Americans residing anywhere in the United States.
Americans would never agree to replace the USA with a one state “Amerixico”.
The United States is not trying to prevent the existence of the State of Mexico or to legally oppress the Mexican people. Historically speaking, our own native Hispanics, together with Hispanic immigrants, comprise about a quarter of the US population and share the same values, beliefs and norms as other Americans. BTW, the US, Canada, and Mexico have examined the possibility of forming a North American political union and currency union on a couple of occasions, but those proposals and studies are no longer active or under review. The US has added 37 new states since it was founded. It could theoretically add 37 more without harming the political or civil standing of its existing citizens.
I understand your cynicism but having tasted many* of the revolutions of the last century,
when the moment is right
in a flash
take care of number one
gives way to all for one and one for all
and there is no greater high
*cuba, vietnam, nicaragua, grenada, mozambique, west beirut, the first intifada, the civil rights & anti-vietnam war movements
Great idea. Let’s start with a one state solution between the USA and Mexico. , . . you would never let in these mexicans who most of them are descendants of inter-marriages between indians and whites.
The Tejanos who colonized the Southwest in the Spanish Colonial Period established their own governments in places like Texas, and eventually fought for their own independence from Mexico. Today, about 10 percent of the US population are Mexican Americans. Unlike Israeli policy on the Palestinians, the US allows Mexicans to legally visit, be employed in, and immigrate to the United States.
you got rid of the native american indians
You need to come out of your cave and join us in the 21st century. I have several first cousins who are citizens of the Cherokee Nation and live within its jurisdiction. They would tend to disagree with you about the claim that we’ve gotten rid of the native american indians.
The USA, along with many other Western countries, has a history of oppression, ethnic cleansing and, in some cases, genocide. The point is, they have changed, and Israel has not. The Western countries forced Rhodesia, South Africa and the American South to abandon overt white racial supremacy, but all of them support overt Jewish racial supremacy, against their principles and totally against their interests. The Australian government needs to do more than apologize to the Aborigines, the USA could do more for Native Americans, but Israel is in a different category altogether. The West should impose a one-state solution like it did with South Africa.
The Palestinians haven’t yet asked for a one-state solution, so why would the West want to? South Africa was always one state. The international community never recognized Israel’s right to the West Bank and Gaza, so why would it now do so after 4 decades of saying otherwise?
The international community never recognized Israel’s occupation to the West Bank and Gaza, because such an occupation denies the rights of non Israeli citizens. If Israel were to change that policy, then the international community would certainly change it’s tune.
“The international community never recognized Israel’s occupation to the West Bank and Gaza, because such an occupation denies the rights of non Israeli citizens. If Israel were to change that policy, then the international community would certainly change it’s tune.”
Again, I don’t think you know what you are talking about. Israel has no right to annex any territory it gained from the 1967 war unless agreed upon by the parties involved. UNSC Resolution 242 describes it in legal terms better so you should read that. Even if the Israelis acted like angels towards the Palestinians, it wouldn’t mean that Israel has the right to the West Bank and Gaza. That land is still mandated for the creation of a Palestinian state (once it goes through all the legal and political hoops).
Resolution 242 states that Israel MUST withdraw from occupied territory in a timely fashion.
Israel is in violation of Resolution 242. And by extension, has been continuously breaking the Camp David Accords, for that matter.
Israel made peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan prior to the withdrawal of troops. That’s the only way it is going to happen with the Palestinians too.
MW, you think the US can economically and diplomatically afford to bribe the Palestinians as it did Egypt & Israel for those 30 years of peace between them? And don’t you think the Arab Spring has sprung in Palestine yet? Maybe not as it has in Egypt yet, but the Palestinians are getting a good whiff. Got ya worried, eh?
Citizen, I’m not worried at all. I’m actually quite happy with the Arab Spring.
“Eh?” Is that Canadian?
Israel made peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan prior to the withdrawal of troops. That’s the only way it is going to happen with the Palestinians too.
When did Israel withdraw troops from Jordan? You obviously think Israel can violate international law with impunity. So did the Afrikaners. What else is new?
Technically, Israel did control a sliver of Jordan east of the river which it gave back to Jordan. Actually, my kibbutz now leases land (i.e. it pays the Jordanian government) from Jordan.
The Palestinians haven’t yet asked for a one-state solution, so why would the West want to? South Africa was always one state. The international community never recognized Israel’s right to the West Bank and Gaza, so why would it now do so after 4 decades of saying otherwise?
Correction, in South Africa, Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda, and Ciskei (the “TBVC States”) were declared independent. Ten bantustans were established in South Africa, and ten in neighboring South-West Africa (aka Namibia). South Africa tried to illegally annex the mandated state of Southwest Africa; imposed a policy of apartheid in Namibia and the TBVC states; and continued to illegally occupy Namibia after its mandate there had been terminated.
All of the citizens of the mandated state of Palestine demanded their immediate emancipation. Only the minority represented by the Jewish Agency requested that Palestine be partitioned into two separate sovereign states. The majority of citizens favored a single or bi-national state with cantons joined in a federal union – based upon the US constitutional model and equal rights. See the discussion, citations, and links here
While eee, hophmi, and others claim that there was no support for a bi-national plan, it is a matter of public record in the US and UK that Dr Weizmann had spoken in favor of the plan a few months before the UNSCOP commission was created, i.e.
The PLO was forced to accept the two state solution as a precondition for negotiations. It had previously called for a one state solution which incorporate the indigenous Jews. PA officials have subsequently stated that Jewish settlers could become citizens of a Palestinian state.
hostage, have i told you lately how much i love you? don’t ever die. what where how would could we be without you?
don’t ever die.
The feeling is mutual. You must be made of much stronger stuff than I am, because the Mondo Zionist talkback coterie and their asinine defense of the “status quo” bored me to death ages ago! …;-)
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: I don’t know where you find the patience.
There is something I don’t understand here. Why do you guys think that the obstacles to the two-state solution are greater than the obstacles to the one-state solution?
If you claim that Israel doesn’t really want to give up the West Bank, what makes you think it will agree to the one-state solution? Israel has a very easy and simple defense to mass Palestinian call for Israeli citizenship and annexation of the West Bank and Gaza. If Palestinians ask for one-state, it turns Palestinian nationalism into a joke.
Why are you trying so hard to play dumb? The one state option is practically a done deal, so it would be far easier to achieve that than a 2ss.
The one state option is not a done deal, the status quo is. The goal of peace is to change the status quo so that the rights and freedoms of the parties involved are negotiated to the their satisfaction.
Obstacles to the one-state solution:
1. Palestinian nationalism.
2. International Law
3. Zionism
4. International consensus
5. Sectarian tensions
The two state solution negates these obstacles:
1. A fractions of Palestinian nationalism
2. All of International Law
3. A fraction of Zionism
4. All of International consensus
5. Reduce sectarian tensions
Obstacles to two-state solution:
1. Settlements
2. Palestinian disunity
3. Political will
4. Security concerns
The only obstacle negated by the one state option is:
1. Settlements
What do you think of my analysis? And please, how about some support points instead of name calling?
The one state option is not a done deal, the status quo is.
In case you were in a coma back in 2004, the status quo was described in UN fact finding reports as a policy of Bantustanization and the Court’s findings of fact contained references to all of the necessary elements and constituent acts of the crime of apartheid.
Michael W. :
Obstacles to the one-state solution:
1. Palestinian nationalism.
2. International Law
3. Zionism
4. International consensus
5. Sectarian tensions
++++ I dont know why international law is mentioned in here per se. It just gives right to self-determination, not separate one or two states. “States” in fact are not mentioned in that section at all. It is players themself decide which one. Nor i see palestinian/zionism nationalism either valid point, what will happen if more broad options are presented to both. I just dont see it so black & white, but maybe its just me.
The two state solution negates these obstacles:
1. A fractions of Palestinian nationalism
2. All of International Law
3. A fraction of Zionism
4. All of International consensus
5. Reduce sectarian tensions
++++ Sectarian tensions will lower in time when agreement is done. It just cant go away before any agreement.
Obstacles to two-state solution:
1. Settlements
2. Palestinian disunity
3. Political will
4. Security concerns
++++ Palestinian disunity ? If same thing would be applied to every forming state, we wouldnt have a single state at all in the world.
The only obstacle negated by the one state option is:
1. Settlements
++++ Both in two or one state.
The status quo is practically a one state solution. There is no possible way to wrestle that from Israel now. Changing the status quo won’t lead to peace becasue any attempt to change it will lead to war. That’s what Isral has always done.
As for your so called obstacles to the one-state solution:
1. Palestinian nationalism was only a reaction to Zionist ambitions to dissenfranchise Palestinians. Prior to the 1900′s, Palestinians had lived under Romand, Ottoman and British rule.
2. International Law has never affected Israeli policies.
3. Zionism is on life support.
4. International consensus is driven entirely by justice. The one state solution is actually more just than a two state one.
5. Sectarian tensions will exist, whether a one or two or withut
Two state solution does not negate:
1. Palestinian nationalism
2. International Law
3. Zionism
4. International consensus
5. Sectarian tensions
Obstacles to two-state solution:
1. Settlements
2. Palestinian disunity
3. Political will
4. Security concerns
5. Israeli expasionist policy
6. Zionism
The obstacles negated by the one state option are:
1. Settlements
2. Zionism
3. Israeli dependence on water resources
4. The Israeli unity government
Infantile.
To mig and Shingo,
International law and consensus: International law might aspire to justice and self-determination, but in reality, it does little to aspire and enforce it. The UN is subject to the desires and interests of its members, like China and the US. The UNSC is the only body that makes resolutions that are binding. And thus far, every country agrees that it can’t gain territory through war, which is what happened in 1967. The international community isn’t backing out of partition. You guys have to realize that no matter how much injustice you think it has caused, the world cares very little. What the world cares about becomes international consensus. The world you guys describe is a fairy tale.
Palestinian nationalism and Zionism: Palestinian nationalism is a subgroup of pan-Arab nationalism. When Palestinians talk to a larger Arab group, they always mention how they are part of the greater Arab nation. You guys are only delegitimizing the Palestinian cause when you say it was only a response to Zionism. As for Roman rule, those pesky Judeans were a rebellious bunch, although extremely unsuccessful in the face of the Roman army. Look at the polls, how many Israelis and Palestinians don’t hold views that are nationalistic? Israel is as strong as ever.
Palestinian disunity: Fatah and Hamas hold two separate territories. They each have members of the other side in their respective jails. They have killed each other even though their greatest enemy is right outside the window. Their reconciliation process keeps stalling. The Republicans and the Democrats don’t have any of these problems.
i’ll believe you when hasbarists stop posting here. as long as reut claims we’re a threat i’ll assume the goi considers us a threat. if the goi thought the international consensus supported them they wouldn’t be bothering with this.
MW: “Palestinian nationalism and Zionism: Palestinian nationalism is a subgroup of pan-Arab nationalism. When Palestinians talk to a larger Arab group, they always mention how they are part of the greater Arab nation.”
Israel and the Jews: Zionist Israel nationalism is a subgroup of pan-Jewish nationalism. When Israel defines itself, and when Jewish Israelis and the Jewish diaspora establishment talk to anyone about anything Israel, they always claim to speak in behalf all Jews in the world and assert that Israel is the single and only state of the Jews.
Citizen, my statement about Palestinian nationalism is meant to serve as a support to the point that it wasn’t simply a reactionary movement to Zionism, but a movement that rose because of a real Palestinian Arab identity like the real national identities found in many states across the globe.
Seriously Michael,
Lisstening to you lecture about international law is like listening to Forrest Gump giving a talk on quatum mechanics. So having talked BS about law all this time, your position is that international law doesn’t matter coz no one is willing to enforce it.
That’s becasue the Republicans and the Democrats both have a state and are not struggling to survive. And there Chinese and the Saudi’s are not brobinmg either side to got to war with the other.
International law and consensus: International law might aspire to justice and self-determination, but in reality, it does little to aspire and enforce it.
That was true before 1998, but the majority of states have formed an international criminal court outside of the UN organization. Anyone who reads the Israeli press knows that the prospect of being tried by the ICC or one of its members courts frightens your leaders and politicians. The members have started enforcing the laws against war crimes and crimes against humanity. Beginning in 2017 States will be able to opt-in to legal protection against on-going wars of aggression or military occupations that target their territory. Investigations and prosecutions will not require the approval of the Security Council either. Countries have every incentive to join the ICC based upon the failure of the Security Council to end the impunity enjoyed by a handful of countries like Israel and the US.
Palestinian nationalism and Zionism: Palestinian nationalism is a subgroup of pan-Arab nationalism.
Every time the United States talks to the members of the Organization of American States it talks about Pan-Americanism, WTF is your point?
We’re Americans. (Most of us.) We believe that all men are created equal and we believe in citizenship that is independent of ethnic or religious identity.
We believe in a one state solution because we live it and we know that it works.
Chaos, then why haven’t the US given citizenship to all those Latinos yet?
Where did you get that idea Michel? Latinos are demographically forecast to overtake white Americans and guess what, no one has a problem with it.
So why haven’t you given all those undocumented Latinos citizenship?
“So why haven’t you given all those undocumented Latinos citizenship?”
So you think the Palestinians are “undocumented” aliens on their on land?
So why haven’t you given all those undocumented Latinos citizenship?
FYI, we did grant 3 million of them amnesty and citizenship back in the 1980s. link to npr.org
We will probably be doing the same thing again. There is general agreement that there has to be a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. Neither the Democrats nor Republicans want to offend voters who are members of an ethnic minority with illegal racial profiling and so forth in a heavy-handed attempt to address the problem. e.g. link to cfr.org
Michael W, it’s not because of their religion or Latino ethnicity, but because the US has a legal process for obtaining citizenship that is not related to the ethnicity/race/and/or religion of any foreigner in the USA, whether they are now here legally or illegally according to that process. Further, Palestinians are natives, not foreigners in the former Mandate of Palestine.
“South Africa was always one state”… and a bunch of Bantustans. Just like Palestine today. There was a proposal for a white and a black state, but the West rejected it. But arguing for a two-state solution in Israel/Palestine, or a ‘bi-national state’ because the Palestinians and the Jews don’t want to live together (Chomsky) is considered progressive. The same position is treated as progressive in a Jew, irrational in an Arab, and fascism in a white European. Palestinians would jump at the chance to live in a state with equal rights for all – it would be a tremendous improvement on their current position. They are not as dumb as liberal Jewish supremacists suppose.
“Palestinians would jump at the chance to live in a state with equal rights for all”
That’s great, but Israel can’t annex the West Bank and Gaza. South Africa was always one state. It didn’t win the Bantustans in a war with its enemies.
“They are not as dumb as liberal Jewish supremacists suppose.”
Whether they are dumb or intelligent doesn’t matter. Israel just has to deal with what they (Fatah and Hamas etc.) say.
Israel didn’t win them either. There is no such thing as winning territory by means of war. UNSCD 242 stated that such acquisition is inaddmissible.
Israel has never given any consideration to what Fatah and Hamas say.
What about the Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms? What are your opinions on those occupied territories, Michael, and whether they can be annexed by Israel?
Chaos, no, I don’t believe they can be unilaterally annexed.