The two-state pipedream: Israel will move 100s of 1000s of settlers

Israel/Palestine
on 84 Comments

Today I read Isabel Kershner’s very good report in the New York Times saying there are serious reasons to doubt the Israeli government’s commitment to investigate and prosecute Jewish terrorists — including “price tag” criminals who murder Palestinian villagers as a message to the government against even trying to restrict Jewish colonization of the West Bank. The article underlines the view that:

Israeli law-enforcement authorities have for years acted with laxness and leniency toward Israeli citizens.

And while Kershner does not adequately consider the backing for these radicals inside the Israeli political structure, she unwittingly raises a burning question that liberal Zionists and other advocates of the two-state solution must answer:

Two-state advocates have to convince us that an Israeli government that has proven ineffective to do anything to stop a pattern of terroristic activities by Jews far away from the settlements can project the physical force necessary to move hundreds of thousands of settlers back into Israel.

Reflect that liberal Zionists tell us that a two-state solution is still possible, that most Palestinians and Israeli Jews support it. But to create a viable Palestinian state, large number of settlers will have to move — or be moved — back across the Green Line into pre-67 Israel.

There are well over half a million settlers across the Green Line, and whole communities would have to be uprooted.  Large numbers of often-religious nationalists would have to leave the territory of the new Palestinian state.

I think the answer is that Israel can’t pull that off — not even to move the 100,000 settlers that supporters of a bare-minimum Palestinian “entity” envision — without provoking a civil war among Jews.

Who’s going to force the Jewish settlers to move back into Israel? Hard-core Jewish nationalists, long supported by the Israeli government, have already proven that they’re going to kill, bomb and burn to hold on to what they call biblical lands, and they don’t mind murdering Jews to do so. Anyone who’s serious about this should study the history of the French in Algeria; when calls for Algerian independence gained traction in the 1950s, the French nationalist OAS, or Organisation de l’armee secrete, tried to hold the line against any French concessions on Algeria by committing terrorist acts across Algeria and inside France too, by trying to overturn the French government, and by attempting to kill French President, Charles de Gaulle. Jewish nationalist radicals are capable of the same violence. In fact they already did murder Israel’s leader. Twenty years ago, one of them, Yigal Amir, killed the Israeli Prime Minister for talking about giving up West Bank lands, and he is a hero in right-wing circles.  Today there are many rightwing leaders inside the Israeli political establishment who are one degree of separation from these fanatics — and quietly respect them for helping to shatter the idea of a Palestinian state.

Israel will not be able to move even 10,000 settlers, let alone 100,000, without creating a bloodbath.

Advocates of two states sometimes say those who call for one state are utopians.  But isn’t the belief that Israel will force hundreds of thousands of settlers to leave the occupied West Bank just as utopian?

About James North

Other posts by .


Posted In:

84 Responses

  1. Mooser
    August 3, 2015, 1:49 pm

    See, there is such a thing as bride that is too beautiful.

  2. Pretext
    August 3, 2015, 2:27 pm

    I think it would have been good to bring up why moving West Bank settlers wouldn’t be like moving Gaza settlers. I suppose it’s a moot point though. Letting go of the West Bank was never on the table in the first place.

    • ziusudra
      August 4, 2015, 3:13 am

      Greetings Pretext,
      The priveleged settlers will not move voluntarily & not w/o a fight.
      They are, but pseudo mercenaries, not even comparable to militia in fighting capability. It would be an easy win for Israel when they decide to do it.
      Israel can spare the rod, but stop paying the bills, they’ll come home before the cows do.
      ziusudra

    • italian ex-pat
      August 4, 2015, 12:47 pm

      Pretext

      The Gaza settlers were only a few thousands, and PM Sharon decided it was too expensive to mantain a substantial military presence to protect them. Besides, he already had his eye on the bigger prize, the West Bank. But even he faced strong opposition within his own party, notably from B. Netanyahu himself.
      I agree with Mr. North that removing hundreds of thousands of settlers from the WB would be impossible; they are fanatic, violent and well armed. They will not go without a fight, and frankly I doubt most soldiers in the IDF would use force to remove them. They also know, and we know, that the majority of citizens in Israel proper will be on their side, as they see them as the front line in the battle for total takeover of all the land they call Greater Israel.
      No Israeli government is going to allow a bloody civil war in the interest of a Palestinian state, which they are opposed to anyhow, and the US are certainly not going to side against Israel in support of Palestinian rights now, after decades of taking the opposite position. So it is left to Europe and the rest of the world to take some kind of action. It would seem that one state with equal rights for all, with Jews and Arabs free to live anywhere in the country, is the only answer.

    • diasp0ra
      August 4, 2015, 1:21 pm

      Regarding the Gaza settlers:

      Sharon Aide Dov Weisglass:

      “The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process, and when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress. That is exactly what happened. You know, the term `peace process’ is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The peace process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails. The peace process is the evacuation of settlements, it’s the return of refugees, it’s the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen…. what I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is the significance of what we did.”

      • Hostage
        August 4, 2015, 4:20 pm

        what I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns.

        Like the Finns who invented the Molotov Cocktail and fought the USSR to a stalemate before and during WWII? If so, then the Palestinians have long-since filled that square on the checklist.

  3. amigo
    August 3, 2015, 4:24 pm

    Every new illegal settlement built across the Green line was built to achieve this very outcome.Every successive Israeli Gov has contributed to Ben Gurion,s plan to take over the whole of the so called “Greater Israel”.,

    If there is to be a bloodbath , then so be it.No one but those perpetrating and supporting this 60 year crime of ethnic cleansing is to blame.One thing is sure , the status quo cannot continue and as BDS bites harder and Israel becomes more and more isolated , nothing can stop the inevitable mayhem that will ensue.Maybe all those 2SSer,s/ Israel apologists in the US with dual citizenship will don their olive uniform and go and put their bodies where their mouths have been.

    It is not as if they have not been warned.

    My thoughts would be with those Jews who had the courage to act and speak out against this criminal enterprise.

    • inbound39
      August 8, 2015, 12:24 am

      Theodore Meron the legal advisor to the Eshkol Government in 1967,advised that settlements violated the explicit principles of the Fourth Geneva Convention which Israel had signed and ratified. They ignored him and went ahead anyway. So the problem is of Israels own making and for Israel to rectify and no-one else but we can assist them in arriving at a no other choice option.

      • Hostage
        August 8, 2015, 4:21 pm

        Theodore Meron the legal advisor to the Eshkol Government in 1967,advised that settlements violated the explicit principles of the Fourth Geneva Convention which Israel had signed and ratified. They ignored him and went ahead anyway.

        That’s not quite correct. Meron’s cover letter advised his superiors that settlements would violate the Geneva Conventions, but his attached memorandum suggested the best strategy to go ahead and do it anyway. See Theodor Meron’s ’67 memo provided legal rationale for settlements http://mondoweiss.net/2013/06/provided-rationale-settlements

      • inbound39
        August 10, 2015, 1:35 am

        I will take your point though I got the information some time ago from a Haaretz Journalist. Either way though Israel cannot claim ignorance.

  4. yonah fredman
    August 3, 2015, 4:31 pm

    The value of the two state solution is that it is well delineated: if one accepts the Geneva Accord of 2003. It is also backed by the US, Russia, China, France, Germany and Japan among others.

    The question regarding the two state solution is how? and it is a good question.

    The value of the one state solution is it aims at perfect justice. The question regarding the one state solution is how? and it is a good question. (When I offered the first step as an annexation of the west bank by Israel, which someone admitted later is the obvious first step towards a one state solution, i was roundly excoriated for being a colonialist and a right winger.)

    How do you envision your one state solution coming about, James North? Or is this merely: you call us utopian, well you’re no closer to reality than we are? Is that the only takeaway here.

    • talknic
      August 3, 2015, 9:57 pm

      yonah fredman “When I offered the first step as an annexation of the west bank by Israel,”

      Why shouldn’t Palestine annex Israel?

      • just
        August 3, 2015, 10:55 pm

        Now you’re talking.

        ;-)

      • hophmi
        August 4, 2015, 3:02 am

        For the same reason Mexico should not annex the United States.

      • Mondowise
        August 4, 2015, 10:46 am

        all of izrael is Palestine, the stolen lands of Palestine. it’s already a ‘one-state’… it’s the state of Palestine.

      • aloeste
        August 4, 2015, 2:20 pm

        as mondowise meant, all of palestine is Eretz Yisrael , stolen from the jews thousands of years ago…

      • Mondowise
        August 4, 2015, 4:36 pm

        @aloeste – stop speaking for me. don’t steal my human rights, too (which is all you know). what i said is very clear, and it is not what you said.

        your words are nothing more than the typical feeble, limp hasbara of a zionist criminal. i can’t even say nice try because it’s just too lame. are you being paid to mangle truth to spew your garbage? sure glad i don’t have that immoral, dishonest, unethical, ugly, filthy illegal, criminally slanderous job!!!

      • just
        August 4, 2015, 4:37 pm

        aloeste, you’re lost.

        Let me help you to find your way out of the haunted forest~ here’s a map, a history book, some UN resolutions and a primer on international law as well..

      • Mooser
        August 8, 2015, 10:19 pm

        “as mondowise meant, all of palestine is Eretz Yisrael , stolen from the jews thousands of years ago… “

        Okay, then, let’s have it: How much do we owe you? Just take the number of acres of land stolen from you, and the price in today’s market, and submit your claim.

    • Sibiriak
      August 4, 2015, 2:42 am

      yonah fredman: The value of the two state solution is that it is well delineated: if one accepts the Geneva Accord of 2003. It is also backed by the US, Russia, China, France, Germany and Japan among others.
      ——————————
      Not just France and Germany, but the EU as a whole.

      The only way to resolve the conflict is through an
      agreement that ends the occupation which began in 1967,
      that ends all claims and that fulfills the aspirations of both parties. A one state reality would not be compatible with these aspirations.

      (emphasis added)

      http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/israel/documents/press_corner/20140722_en.pdf

      And crucially, a two-state solution based on 1967 borders (with swaps) has been backed by the Palestinian leadership.

      For us Palestinians, the reconciliation agreement concluded between Fatah and Hamas in Gaza two weeks ago was a necessary condition for moving on from the past. The agreement brings our main political players to the same side, namely to the side of a historic agreement with Israel.
      The terms of agreement includes recognition of the 1967 borders . Hamas’s political leaders, moreover, are willing to back the Arab peace initiative of 2002, which is the clearest sign I know that their readiness to sign off on the 1967 border is not a mere tactical move but reflects deeper strategic calculations.

      (emphasis added)

      http://www.haaretz.com/beta/1.589343

      Furthermore, a host of states have not only backed a two-state settlement, but have officially recognized the State of Palestine:

      Of the 193 member states of the United Nations, 135 (69.9%) have recognised the State of Palestine as of 30 October 2014. Their total population is over 5.5 billion people, equaling 80 percent of the world’s population.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_the_State_of_Palestine
      ———————————
      yonah fredman: The question regarding the two state solution is how?

      Enormous pressure must be put on Israel via a combination of international court actions, Palestinian resistance on the ground, a boycotts, divestment and an international regime of sanctions, their removal being conditioned on Israeli acceptance of a two-state settlement based on something like the Geneva Accord or the recent Saudi Plan, both of which allow major settlement blocs to be annexed by Israel. This is obviously not something that is going to happen in the short term.

    • RoHa
      August 4, 2015, 5:41 pm

      “all of palestine is Eretz Yisrael , stolen from the jews thousands of years ago…”

      Those Jews turned to dust thousands of years ago. But modern Jews are, right now, stealing the homes of living Palestinians.

      • jeff_davis
        August 6, 2015, 5:07 pm

        The idea that the Jews have a right to Israel because several thousand years ago they lived there in sovereign possession for a moment is absolutely ridiculous. The Jewish Bible was written, and later chapters added to became the Christian Bible. Powerful Western nations ascribe to this religious cultural tradition founded on the Judeo Christian Bible, and consequently we’re supposed to believe that the Bible is to be viewed as a source of real estate authority. Few criminal delusions rise to this level of nonsense. “ It’s mine because my God and my Bible say it’s mine.” Really? You want me to take this seriously? You want the rest of the world which has its own Bibles to take this seriously?

        In the sweep of history might has always made right. Violence has always been the ruling principle. You “owned” something only if you had the power to take it and then successfully defend your possession. The realpolitik notion of conquest was the operative rule; the law-based concept of ownership did not exist. And this is the rule that continues to this day, despite the smoke and mirrors by which the ruling elites seek to gull the gullible into believing that there is something called “law and property”.

        Check this link: http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/imperial-history.html

        Over the course of 5,000 years the “Levant” has changed hands, by my count, 16 times. And in that period of five thousand years the Jews ruled for a mere 230 years. And that was 2000 years ago. By any right of historical possession 15 other ethnic or national groups have a greater claim to Palestine then the Jews.

        In any event, the Jews have it now — in accord with the law of violence — and will stay there until the rest of the world decides [……]. Endeavor to persevere.

      • yonah fredman
        August 6, 2015, 5:51 pm

        jeff davis quote: the Jews have it now — in accord with the law of violence — and will stay there until the rest of the world decides, as it has repeatedly in the past, that Jewish bad behavior requires correction. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/08/pipedream-israel-settlers#comment-151192
        Jewish bad behavior repeatedly in the past required correction. What does this mean? Jewish bad behavior required: pogroms, a holocaust, expulsions, ghettos, quotas or threats. Or am I misunderstanding you. if so, please explain. if not, moderators please explain your tolerance for this comment.

      • CigarGod
        August 6, 2015, 11:19 pm

        Blind as a bat, and deflecting as a duck as always, Yonah.
        Behavior toward the Palestinians…using those methods you just listed.

      • tree
        August 6, 2015, 6:04 pm

        I’d agree with most or all of Jeff’s comment except the very end…

        and will stay there until the rest of the world decides, as it has repeatedly in the past, that Jewish bad behavior requires correction.

        I think its an overgeneralization, oversimplification and just plain faulty history that does a disservice to Jews and to “the rest of the world” as well.

      • just
        August 6, 2015, 6:07 pm

        “I’d agree with most or all of Jeff’s comment except the very end… ”

        Agreed.

      • Mooser
        August 7, 2015, 10:41 am

        “Jewish bad behavior repeatedly in the past required correction. What does this mean? Jewish bad behavior required: pogroms, a holocaust, expulsions, ghettos, quotas or threats”

        If you say so, Yonah. If you say so.

      • Annie Robbins
        August 7, 2015, 12:33 pm

        moderators please explain your tolerance for this comment. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/08/pipedream-israel-settlers/comment-page-1#comment-787973

        hi yonah, i just saw your comment and the several others calling attention to this comment. i am the person who cleared that comment. now that i read it again i see your point but in all honesty when i read it the first time although the ending stuck out for me and i didn’t agree with it (“the world”) i didn’t think it was against comment policy because i didn’t read it the way you did.

        sometimes while moderating we miss thoroughly examining the full implications of every single line in every comment (skimming) especially at the very end of a long-ish comment. and in the context of the rest of the comment, (the repetition of words/phrases such as; “conquest” – “sovereign possession”- “Violence has always been the ruling principle” – “ownership” – “the “Levant” has changed hands”) i didn’t think of the holocaust or pogroms. i thought of (solely) of “past” as references pertaining to how jews lost sovereignty over the holy land in the past.. the zealots, the romans, things like that (actually my history from that era is not so hot).

        anyway so sorry it has offended. i will removed that part of the ending.

        and thanks to everyone for being more alert than i was.

      • eljay
        August 7, 2015, 12:54 pm

        || yonah fredman: Jewish bad behavior repeatedly in the past required correction. What does this mean? … ||

        Dunno about “Jewish bad behaviour”, but past and on-going (war) crimes committed by hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists and their oppressive, colonialist, expansionist, belligerent, intransigent and supremacist state do require correction.

      • Annie Robbins
        August 7, 2015, 12:57 pm

        and certainly i do very much hope the world will step in to make necessary corrections.

    • zaid
      August 4, 2015, 11:23 pm

      Roha +1

      Aloeste

      Actually it was the land of Canaan.

      So technically it was not yours then (you stole it) and it i not yours now (you stole it).

      and this is assuming you are their descendants which you are not.

      • CigarGod
        August 4, 2015, 11:50 pm

        But, don’t you love the consistency of the old and new methods?
        Get a vision from God, wipe out as many as you can, and take their stuff.

      • bintbiba
        August 6, 2015, 5:48 pm

        + 100 jeff_davis !

        Well stated…. ..

        …….”And that was 2000 years ago. By any right of historical possession 15 other ethnic or national groups have a greater claim to Palestine then the Jews.

        In any event, the Jews have it now — in accord with the law of violence — and will stay there until the rest of the world decides, as it has repeatedly in the past, that Jewish bad behavior requires correction. Endeavor to persevere .”

        – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/08/pipedream-israel-settlers#comments

      • bintbiba
        August 6, 2015, 6:40 pm

        ” ……that Jewish bad behaviour requires correction …….”

        Same as Iranian bad behaviour , Ukranian bad behaviour , Assad bad behaviour , Da’esh bad behaviour, North Korean bad behaviour, Saudi Arabia bad behaviour ,etc. etc. etc..

        It is in that context that I understand bad behaviour to stand corrected by the rest of the world. Non violent Sanctions …BDS. US non-veto at the UN !

        Nothing as horrid as that which Israel metes out to the Palestinians !

  5. hophmi
    August 3, 2015, 4:35 pm

    No, because Israel has done this before, in 1982, when it removed settlers from Sinai, and during Disengagement in 2006. Neither event resulted in bloodshed.

    When you make silly assumptions, you end up with silly arguments. Though settler violence is a serious problem, it remains the province of a tiny fringe of the settler community, most of which is not ideological. Most settlers live in the blocs, not in far-flung places, and they will move as long as the government takes care of paying them for their trouble. The rest are not going to take up arms against the IDF. Mostly, it would be like Disengagement multiplied by a factor of 10. Lots of civil disobedience, lots of crying, but not civil war.

    The much more important question is whether the Palestinians themselves can function as a state in a polity where the Palestinian government may not have a monopoly on the use of force, since Palestinian society suffers from its own profound divisions.

    The one state solution, which would repeat, yet again, the mistake of placing two peoples who don’t like each other in the same political entity, continues to be a bad idea (utopian is a misnomer; it’s better described as offensively stupid) that not only has little support among the people in the region, but a track record of abject failure there and everywhere else; it led to civil war in Lebanon, civil war in Iraq, dictatorship by minority and now civil war in Syria, civil war in the former Yugoslavia, civil war in Yemen, and civil wars throughout Africa. The one state solution is not utopian in nature, actually. It is the most colonial of colonial ideas.

    And perhaps the reason offensively stupid ideas like these come from the West is that Westerners don’t ever have to practice what they preach; Europeans live largely in homogeneous states where the population is 80 to 95% Christian and White, and the moment there is any chance of those numbers changing, they fall into political disarray and can’t handle it. An entire political party in the United States wants to stop immigrants from coming over the border; it’s a baldly racist campaign against Brown people. Right-wing, anti-immigrant (read anti-Muslim) parties are surging in Europe, and will only continue to do so as the number of Muslim immigrants rises.

    • Mooser
      August 3, 2015, 7:02 pm

      “Though settler violence is a serious problem, it remains the province of a tiny fringe of the settler community, most of which is not ideological.”

      Oh, no, deciding to settle illegally, in a coordinated campaign of settlement and military repression, isn’t ideological. Not at all.
      Being an illegal Jewish settler in Palestine as part of Israel’s intransigent expansion was simply what their high-school aptitude tests said they would be good at. Along with their kids, of course.

      Yeah, Hophmi, we know “normal” settlers. They’re just in it for the money.

    • Annie Robbins
      August 3, 2015, 7:36 pm

      ah the tiny fringe argument. uh huh. i just listened to Max livestreaming from glasgow earlier today.

      he made the point that these terror attacks serve to legitimize the rightwing in israel thereby pushing society more to the right.

      portions of the right come out and denounce the attacks which makes them seem sympathetic, but the government doesn’t do anything to alleviate the situation so it just gets worse. meanwhile, israelis can pat themselves on the back for all the nice words they use.

    • talknic
      August 4, 2015, 12:06 am

      hophmi “No, because Israel has done this before, in 1982, when it removed settlers from Sinai, and during Disengagement in 2006. Neither event resulted in bloodshed”

      A) AFTER Israel withdrew ENTIRELY from all territory sovereign to Egypt, were peaceful relations assumed, not before. Read the AGREEment

      B) Count the Palestinian bodies since. It enabled Israel to unbridle it’s human slaughtering machinery in Gaza anywhere, at any time on whoever and however without regard for illegal Israeli settlers.

      “When you make silly assumptions, you end up with silly arguments. Though settler violence is a serious problem, it remains the province of a tiny fringe of the settler community, most of which is not ideological… etc etc etc … “

      They were helped get where they are supported and even encouraged by the ELECTED ISRAELI GOVERNMENT and its military, who as an Occupying Military Power, have a duty to protect ALL civilians. That means especially the Occupied, because Israeli civilians are not supposed to even be in Occupied Territories

      “The one state solution, which would repeat, yet again, the mistake of placing two peoples who don’t like each other in the same political entity, continues to be a bad idea (utopian is a misnomer; it’s better described as offensively stupid)..”</em.

      A Greater Israel… "offensively stupid" indeed

      “The one state solution is not utopian in nature, actually. It is the most colonial of colonial ideas.”

      Indeed … http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8632-jewish-colonial-trust-the-judische-colonialbank

      “And perhaps the reason offensively stupid ideas like these come from the West is …etc etc …”

      The Zionist Federation/Herzl were from … ?

      The rest of your post has no valid, moral or legal reason why the Palestinians should not be afforded their legal rights according to the laws Israel obliged itself to uphold as a state and as a UN Member state (declared, recognized and accepted into the UN while at war with Jewish forces in territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine” . Territories it has never annexed or acquired by any legal meanst, from which it has never withdrawn and in which it has purposefully and illegally settled Israeli citizens

      • hophmi
        August 4, 2015, 3:05 am

        OK, talknic. You let me know when you’re actually ready to respond, rather than spouting your usual ideological nonsense.

      • Mooser
        August 5, 2015, 9:20 pm

        “You let me know when you’re actually ready to respond, rather than spouting your usual ideological nonsense.”

        Yeah, all those primary documents “talknic” links to, will never match the non-ideological force of your unsubstantiated asseverations.

      • talknic
        August 6, 2015, 1:58 am

        @ hophmi

        Your inability to accept factual information is predictable. Nothing must be allowed to stop the flow of your precious Ziopoop

    • Hostage
      August 4, 2015, 5:06 pm

      The one state solution, which would repeat, yet again, the mistake of placing two peoples who don’t like each other in the same political entity, continues to be a bad idea (utopian is a misnomer; it’s better described as offensively stupid) that not only has little support among the people in the region, but a track record of abject failure there and everywhere else; it led to civil war in Lebanon, civil war in Iraq, dictatorship by minority and now civil war in Syria, civil war in the former Yugoslavia, civil war in Yemen, and civil wars throughout Africa. The one state solution is not utopian in nature, actually. It is the most colonial of colonial ideas.

      It’s offensively stupid to claim that Jews had always had a “continuous presence” in Ottoman Asia without explaining how they managed to avoid triggering civil wars there until the era of the LoN Mandates? There sure as hell hasn’t been a moment of peace and quite there, since the day the region was first partitioned to suit Zionist and foreign interests.

      BTW, many of those states in your list are still in existence. Maybe you’d better emigrate out of the USA lickity-split? After all, we had a civil war too and its a veritable wall-to-wall multinational nightmare. Albert Einstein gave some well-known advice against establishing a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power. He also said to:

      Remember that Switzerland represents a higher stage of political development than any national state, precisely because of the greater political problems which had to be solved before a stable community could be built up out of groups of different nationality.

      — See “ADDRESSES ON RECONSTRUCTION IN PALESTINE (page 177) in his “Ideas and Opinions” http://www.amazon.com/Ideas-And-Opinions-Albert-Einstein/dp/0517884402

      • RoHa
        August 4, 2015, 6:01 pm

        But, Hostage, haven’t you seen how successful a peace-keeping method partition has been elsewhere? India/Pakistan, Korea, Vietnam (now reunited) are all shining examples. And look how much happier the world became with the partition of Sudan!

      • Hostage
        August 4, 2015, 8:07 pm

        And look how much happier the world became with the partition of Sudan!

        Many Germans, Greek bankers, and just about everyone that can be threatened by the nuclear-tipped Popeye sea launched cruise missiles on those Israeli Dolphin class submarines wish that Chancellor Angela Merkel was still living in East Germany too. But sometimes you just have to take the bad with the good.

      • hophmi
        August 5, 2015, 11:24 am

        “It’s offensively stupid to claim that Jews had always had a “continuous presence” in Ottoman Asia without explaining how they managed to avoid triggering civil wars there until the era of the LoN Mandates?”

        How “they” managed? Jews are responsible for the civil wars throughout the Middle East? Jews are the ones responsible for Shia/Sunni fighting?

        “BTW, many of those states in your list are still in existence”

        Still in existence? Are you nuts? Yeah, Syria is still a UN member. It still “exists.” Yugoslavia was broken apart. Iraq still “exists” too.

        “Maybe you’d better emigrate out of the USA lickity-split? After all, we had a civil war too and its a veritable wall-to-wall multinational nightmare. ”

        Yeah, but our war was not over ethnicity or religion or even competing nationalisms, so I’m not sure what your point is.

        “Albert Einstein gave some well-known advice against establishing a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power”

        Fortunately, Albert Einstein was smart enough to come to the United States to argue against the idea of a Jewish state, instead of remaining in Europe, where he would have become the Holocaust victim who came up with the theory of relativity. Just as fortunately, Albert Einstein was a physicist, and not a politician or political theorist. Mahatma Gandhi thought Jews should have fought the Nazis with nonviolence. Great men, wrong on this issue.

        “Remember that Switzerland represents a higher stage of political development than any national state, precisely because of the greater political problems which had to be solved before a stable community could be built up out of groups of different nationality.”

        Yes, Switzerland, great and evolved polity, granted women the right to vote in the year of their Lord (it’s about 80% Christian, after all), 1959. Switzerland, famous for holding Holocaust assets and telling surviving relatives to produce death certificates. Switzerland, famous today for passing racist legislation against the construction of minarets (because, gasp, Muslims make up 8.3% of the population there), is a real diverse place. Yeah, it’s “multinational.” It’s about 2/3 German, and 1/5 French.

        Modern Switzerland is founded upon the idea that ultimately, no one messes with a country that is essentially a large and stable bank for a diverse group of rich people, including and especially despots, who all run there to deposit their kleptocratic winnings. What a wonderful place. Switzerland avoided Nazi invasion by extending lines of credit to the Nazis. What an evolved place!

      • Hostage
        August 5, 2015, 5:06 pm

        How “they” managed? Jews are responsible for the civil wars throughout the Middle East? Jews are the ones responsible for Shia/Sunni fighting?

        Yes, the Zionist movement and Israel were up to their eyes in starting a civil war in Palestine in the 30s, 40s, and in 2007. They were, and still are guilty of fomenting unrest in and against Arabs or Persians living in Iraq, Egypt, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. They’ve exploited events in those countries for propaganda purposes; to help depopulate those country’s Jewish communities; and to justify the acquisition or occupation of additional territory. Some of the so-called “Major Knesset Debates” chronicled by a former Secretary General of the Knesset involved embarrassing revelations regarding those activities and the fact that Israel was supplying arms to the Portuguese and South African apartheid regimes, as well as belligerent groups in Latin America.

        Israel has carried out conventional and terror attacks in Iran, Syria, and Lebanon during the former and current civil wars. It was up to its eyes in the Iran/Contra scandal. The UN observers in the Golan have reported that Israel is working with Syrian Jihadis, including groups aligned with ISIS.

        Hostage: “Maybe you’d better emigrate out of the USA lickity-split?… Hophmi: Yeah, but our war was not over ethnicity or religion or even competing nationalisms, so I’m not sure what your point is.

        [sarcasm on] Oh no, there was no religious or ethnic aspect to the abolitionist movement and the issue of slavery had nothing to do with the civil war, because the Missouri Compromise worked out so well here in my home state of (Bloody) Kansas with folks like John Brown. [saracasm off].

        Einstein … Mahatma Gandhi … Great men, wrong on this issue.

        No, you’re wrong. The crimes in Europe that you keep reciting and relying upon as a tu quoque argument do not justify Zionists committing the very same crimes against humanity in Palestine. Most of us learned that two wrongs don’t make a right without ever having to study the law. In case you haven’t heard though, the ICTY, the ICTR, and the ICC do not accept it as a criminal defense. Yee, Sienho, The Tu Quoque Argument as a Defence to International Crimes, Prosecution or Punishment, 3 Chinese JIL (2004), 87 (June 1, 2004). Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 3, p. 87, 2004. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2028215

        FYI, Mahatma Gandhi publicly condemned the Zionist enterprise in Palestine. He said:

        It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct … Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.

        – See Homer A Jack (editor), The Gandhi Reader: a source book of his life and writings, By Mahatma Gandhi, Grove Press, 1994, page 318

        Yes, Switzerland, great and evolved polity, granted women the right to vote in the year of their Lord (it’s about 80% Christian, after all), 1959.

        FYI, the UN partition plan required Ben Gurion to give women the right to vote. If it hadn’t he would have probably conceded the issue under the terms of the Status Quo Agreement with Agudat Yisrael. The so-called “Womens Equal Rights Law” of 1951 specifically excluded marriage and divorce laws from Israel’s guarantees of “equality” and laid the ground rules for the subsequent subordination of equality to medieval religious values in the entire Israeli legal system. Every subsequent attempt to adopt a bill of rights has foundered on that point, i.e. deference to Judaism and religious institutions over the principle of human equality. See Dinstein, “Israel Yearbook on Human Rights, Volume 25 (1995)”, pages 210-212. –

        You still haven’t explained how the Swiss have managed to avoid civil war.

      • just
        August 5, 2015, 5:27 pm

        Kerpow! It’s education time, courtesy of Hostage.

        “You still haven’t explained how the Swiss have managed to avoid civil war.”

        lol.

      • Hostage
        August 5, 2015, 8:03 pm

        It’s education time

        I doubt it in Hophmi’s case. Any lawyer who argues that race, religion, and nationality had nothing to do with the US Civil War has undoubtedly forgotten his or her education on the subject already.

        The 13th and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution were adopted, precisely because:

        * In Dread Scott v Sanford, the Supreme Court held that blacks could not be, and never had been, considered US citizens and were not entitled as such to the protections afforded by the US Federal Courts.
        * The Confederate States of America established a new constitution and nationality that effectively deprived all of their inhabitants of any rights, immunities, and citizenship they had previously enjoyed under the Constitution of the USA.

      • Sibiriak
        August 6, 2015, 12:18 am

        hophmi: Yes, Switzerland, great and evolved polity, granted women the right to vote in […] 1959.
        ———————–

        1971, actually.

        Women’s suffrage in Switzerland was introduced at the federal level for the first time after the February 7, 1971, voting in the inverse proportion of that reported at the time of the February 1, 1959, voting (rejected 2 to 1)….”.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerland#Advances_and_resistance_1900.E2.80.931959

    • diasp0ra
      August 4, 2015, 6:11 pm

      Hophmi, even you must realize that moving a few thousand is not the same as moving hundreds of thousands.

      • hophmi
        August 5, 2015, 11:27 am

        “Hophmi, even you must realize that moving a few thousand is not the same as moving hundreds of thousands”

        I realize that. My argument is that most of these hundred thousand or so (and most solutions put the number at less than that) would go willingly, so you’re really talking about a small number.

      • Mooser
        August 5, 2015, 5:24 pm

        “I realize that. My argument is that most of these hundred thousand or so (and most solutions put the number at less than that) would go willingly, so you’re really talking about a small number.”

        Yes, the flood of links you supplied to settler leaders proclaiming their readiness to abandon their homes if it would be good for Israel’s Left is quite impressive.
        In fact, don’t most settlers say they only went to the settlements so they could abandon those settlements at a time advantageous to certain political factions in Israel?

    • bintbiba
      August 6, 2015, 8:15 pm

      correction re comment at 6: 40 pm…

      …..”That the Jewish State of Israel ‘s, ( as it wishes to be called) bad behaviour requires correction ….”

      This is the correct way to say it. This ought to be the correct way.

      • Mooser
        August 8, 2015, 10:26 pm

        “This is the correct way to say it. This ought to be the correct way.”

        I wish it was the only correct way to refer to them. But it doesn’t include the international support Israel and Zionism receives. That international network of Zionist support is intimately involved in a lot of the bad behavior.

  6. Boomer
    August 3, 2015, 7:43 pm

    Mr. Netanyahoo has said that the Palestinians can have their own state, with “their flag, their anthem, their administration.” He didn’t say they could have their land (or water, control of their borders, air space, freedom to travel, military, etc.) So why should any settler move?

  7. Bornajoo
    August 3, 2015, 8:21 pm

    “Most settlers live in the blocs, not in far-flung places, and they will move as long as the government takes care of paying them for their trouble. The rest are not going to take up arms against the IDF. Mostly, it would be like Disengagement multiplied by a factor of 10. Lots of civil disobedience, lots of crying, but not civil war. (Hophmi)

    Bullshit Hophmi! It will lead to civil war and it will be other’s turn to munch popcorn while watching the whole gruesome show take place. That’s why a 2ss will never happen

    Thank you James, you are absolutely spot on

    • hophmi
      August 4, 2015, 3:07 am

      It will not lead to civil war, Bornajoo, although it’s obvious why one state advocates would suggest this.

      • Mooser
        August 4, 2015, 2:30 pm

        “It will not lead to civil war, Bornajoo, although it’s obvious why one state advocates would suggest this.”

        C’mon, settlers! Any settlers reading, especially you “normal” non-ideological settlers reading, this is your chance to back Hophmi up, and flood the thread with comments explaining how you plan to move, vacate lock, stock and barrel, as soon as the Israel Government makes a request.

      • Mooser
        August 7, 2015, 10:46 am

        BTW, all you settlers, it would be of tremendous benefit, both practical and symbolic, if you guys would stack all your arms outside the settlement gates, so the IDF could pick them up. Knowing you were disarmed would make the entire process easier.

        You guys can start on that any old time.

      • Hostage
        August 7, 2015, 9:24 pm

        BTW, all you settlers, it would be of tremendous benefit, both practical and symbolic, if you guys would stack all your arms outside the settlement gates, so the IDF could pick them up.

        Careful now, any civilian openly carrying an assault rifle outdoors is a valid military objective during an international armed conflict. The IDF routinely drops 2000 pound bombs on apartment blocks in Gaza, where it suspects armed Palestinian civilians to be hiding. It seems to be lawful to do that if you recite the formula that “the collateral damage wasn’t disproportionate to the military advantage obtained”.

      • Mooser
        August 7, 2015, 10:26 pm

        Yup all the settlers will dance the hora and sing “We Only Came To Say We Must Be Going!”

    • diasp0ra
      August 4, 2015, 6:09 pm

      It cost Israel billions to move a few thousand settlers from Gaza, now multiply that by a hundred when talking about the West Bank and it is clear to see that Israel does not have the political or economic budget to vacate settlers.

      • CigarGod
        August 4, 2015, 7:51 pm

        They will move themselves…just like the Palestinians vacated their own land…or so says Israeli legend…

      • inbound39
        August 8, 2015, 3:26 am

        Whatever the cost Israel knowingly allowed settlers to illegally colonise the West Bank therefore they are now obligated to put that right and if the consequences puts Israel through the floor then the problem is Israel’s. No-one forced them to commit illegal actions.

  8. zaid
    August 3, 2015, 9:26 pm

    Here is a sample of these settlers.

    • just
      August 4, 2015, 12:01 am

      Evil incarnate. They look like middle- aged men, don’t they?

      Which brings to mind this bit:

      “Analysis Are Murderous Jewish Extremists Really a Gang of Kids?

      The Shin Bet security service’s claim that a ‘pacifier-and-diaper’ underground is behind recent Jewish terror attacks strains credibility.”

      read more: http://www.haaretz.com/beta/.premium-1.669416?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it

      ugh. Thanks, zaid.

      • Annie Robbins
        August 4, 2015, 12:39 am

        a ‘pacifier-and-diaper’ underground

      • just
        August 4, 2015, 5:49 pm

        Touché, Annie!

      • Mooser
        August 7, 2015, 10:52 am

        “Hophmi”, “Jon s” (especially) and “Yonah” should all be able to link us to settler leaders proclaiming their willingness to move, and Israeli writers saying moving the settlers will be easy!

        C’mon fellows, do the Veibernik Rag: substantiate, substantiate, substantiate!

  9. CigarGod
    August 4, 2015, 10:26 am

    Well,
    Israel already has a lot of experience putting populations “on a diet”; and the worlds shot callers don’t care that dear sweet Geneva is daily raped in the streets.

    So, clearing isolated hilltops…one by one, should be a simple exercise. Messy, but simple.

    • just
      August 4, 2015, 6:00 pm

      +1, CG!

      It’s THEIR problem. How grotesque/evil that they lured these violent, illegal squatters to illegally inhabit Palestinian land and rob the Palestinians of their birthright and their rightful ownership of the resources and everything else…

      The Israelis deserve to have their Frankensteins in their own backyards and playgrounds.

  10. just
    August 4, 2015, 8:20 pm

    Very interesting article by Ali Abuminah:

    “Israeli general prefers Iran to nuke Tel Aviv than to allow Palestinian state

    … Though it still has not found the killers of Ali, it has even arrested the grandson of Meir Kahane, the founder of the racist and violent anti-Palestinian organization Kach.

    All of these gimmicks and the Israeli handwringing over “Jewish terror” are strictly for international consumption – to convince observers that Israel is a responsible state that abhors “terrorism” rather than practices it.

    As my colleague Rania Khalek has already noted, however, it is difficult to find a single Israeli cabinet minister who has not himself or herself openly incited or directly participated in racist violence against Palestinians. And of course their state-sanctioned, uniformed violence is always on a far larger scale than the attack on the Dawabsha family home in the village of Duma.

    Nuke Tel Aviv

    Israel’s sudden discovery of “Jewish terror” in a few “extreme” pockets is designed precisely to deflect attention from the religious fanaticism and violent ideologies that are foundational to the Zionist project.

    A case in point is Israeli army reserve Major-General Gershon Hacohen who is sympathetically profiled by The Times of Israel as “one of the most interesting figures to come out of the army in recent years.”

    In fact, Hacohen is a religious fanatic with alarming and dangerous views. He urges Israel to conquer every inch of historic Palestine, land “he believes God gave to the Jews.”

    That does not distinguish him very much from the rest of Israel’s mainstream political establishment, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

    But astonishingly, Hacohen states frankly that he would rather see Tel Aviv destroyed by an Iranian nuclear bomb than see the removal of even 100,000 settlers from the occupied West Bank and the creation of a Palestinian state.

    Israel is the only military force in the region that possesses nuclear weapons.

    He views the Israeli army as “holy” and describes it as “the most beautiful and most important thing created by the Jewish people in the last one thousand years.”

    Hacohen commanded the removal of several thousand Israeli settlers from the occupied Gaza Strip a decade ago, but now believes that the settlers should return to the besieged, overcrowded and devastated territory.

    “Beyond mentioning that he prefers an Iranian nuclear bomb on Tel Aviv to a two-state solution,” The Times of Israel states, Hacohen says “he would happily forgo prosperity … in exchange for the perpetuation of the status quo and that, in the future, in the face of pressure, he would be willing to grant all Palestinians the vote.”

    But his Jewish supremacist version of a one-state solution would offer a vote without power, for in his religious and messianic zeal Hacohen believes – hopes – that “a rise in anti-Semitism” or a rise in Zionism would bring 3 million Jews from the US to help colonize the country and “save the Jewish majority.”

    Arabs “primitive”

    In the long and ugly tradition of colonial warlords who view natives as noble savages – to be respected and displaced or exterminated – Hacohen says: “When I tell Arabs that I am a God-fearing man and they see that I am, as one might say, primitive, like they are, then they treat me with respect.”

    Arabs would have to be very primitive indeed not to see Hacohen and his ideology as anything other than a mortal, existential threat.

    Holy warriors

    This kind of religious extremism is known to be a growing problem at every level of the Israeli army, from rank and file members who vow to refuse hypothetical orders to evacuate settlements, to senior commanders. …”

    more @ https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israeli-general-prefers-iran-nuke-tel-aviv-allow-palestinian-state

    • hophmi
      August 5, 2015, 11:37 am

      Well, this is Ali Abunimah for you. He only knows negative spin, and can’t recognize when someone is taking his side. Here, his negative spin seems to lead to an implicit endorsement by him of the two-state solution.

      HaCohen seems to want the same one-state solution that you guys want; he’d create one state and give Palestinians voting rights. I’m not sure what power he’s depriving them of; his belief is that demographics would work in Israel’s favor in the long run. Maybe it’s messianic, but I can’t see how it’s any different than the one-state solutions proposed here. You seem to always forget that Palestinians who have proposed a one-state solution over the years have done so because they believe the mirror image of what HaCohen believes – that Palestinians will become the demographic majority.

      Ali, relying on his American audience to take an Orientalist approach to the Israelis, purposely distorts HaCohen’s use of the word “primitive” to suggest that HaCohen means it in a colonialist way. But HaCohen is suggesting that he’s primitive like they are. I don’t think colonial masters referred to themselves as primitive. This is something you hear often from Israelis who come from elsewhere in the Middle East as HaCohen does – that they understand the Arabs better because they are more similar to them in mindset than the Ashkenazim are.

      • RoHa
        August 5, 2015, 2:22 pm

        “You seem to always forget that Palestinians who have proposed a one-state solution over the years have done so because they believe the mirror image of what HaCohen believes – that Palestinians will become the demographic majority. ”

        1. Why does it matter whether we remember this or not?
        2. Why does it matter whether or not Palestinians believe this?
        3. What would be wrong with Palestinians becoming the demographic majority?

      • Hostage
        August 5, 2015, 3:44 pm

        HaCohen seems to want the same one-state solution that you guys want;

        I could care less about the number of states in Palestine. All fundamental human rights there were placed under UN guarantee long ago. Those rights included the right under customary international law for any displaced persons or their heirs to return and access their properties and exercise their unqualified, and inheritable rights.

      • Mooser
        August 5, 2015, 9:25 pm

        “Ali, relying on his American audience to take an Orientalist approach to the Israelis,”

        Good Gosh, Hophmi, is there nothing you won’t stoop to?

      • eljay
        August 7, 2015, 12:50 pm

        || hophmi: … You seem to always forget that Palestinians who have proposed a one-state solution over the years have done so because they believe the mirror image of what HaCohen believes – that Palestinians will become the demographic majority. … ||

        There’s nothing wrong with a demographic majority in any country as long as it isn’t achieved or maintained by means of:
        – ethnic cleansing, genocide or other (war) crimes; and/or
        – more/different/special rules or laws for the group comprising the majority.

        That’s part of the problem with Israel as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

    • inbound39
      August 8, 2015, 3:37 am

      Yes…I find it startling that when Kachs was outlawed the government assured the International community the Kahanist Jewish terror group would be not only outlawed but completely removed. The we see Avigdor Lieberman, a former Kachs member, if that is ever possible,elected to the Knesset then he gets the Foreign Ministers job and talks about beheading Palestinians and mass transfer of Palestinians out of Israel. Many settlers are Kahanists so I guess we take from that that the Kahanists like Lieberman et al are good terrorists and not bad terrorists……lol. Does Israel realise how buffoonlike their behaviour is to the rest of the sane World?

  11. Qualtrough
    August 5, 2015, 11:59 am

    Just — Thanks for sharing that. Suicidal ideation combined with nukes is a pretty frightening combination. The Masada Complex, the Samson option–Israel poses by far one of the biggest threats to the world.

  12. edwardm
    August 7, 2015, 10:29 am

    Strip them of citizenship. Remove the army. Cut off electricity and water. They will move themselves.

  13. Boomer
    August 7, 2015, 2:59 pm

    I don’t expect any settlers will need to move in order for Israel to create a Palestinian “state.” I don’t know what will happen, but it seems most likely to me that Israel won’t change its behavior without significant outside pressure. I don’t expect there to be significant outside pressure unless the U.S. stops supporting Israel’s actions by using diplomatic pressure, including the veto or threat of veto at the UN. If that ever were to happen, or appeared likely to happen, I expect that Israel would recognize a Palestinian pseudo state on whatever land remained under Palestinian control at that time. This would not grant them true independence, but they could have “their own flag, their anthem, their administration.” U.S. politicians and news media would praise Israel’s magnanimous, generous action. There would be no more pressure from the U.S. Palestinians on the West Bank might be marginally better off. Palestinian refugees in surrounding countries would be pressured to move to the new “state,” where they might also be marginally better off than their current miserable situation. Much would depend on the amount of foreign aid that was provided. Because the problem had been “solved,” the amount of foreign aid might decline. The biggest unknown in this scenario is Gaza. If Israel’s blockage were lifted and free trade were permitted, life there could certainly improve. If people were permitted to leave, some individuals certainly would seek better conditions elsewhere.

    • inbound39
      August 8, 2015, 3:43 am

      With regards to Gaza the International Community needs to come up with a plan that not only ends the occupation and blockade of Gaza but also guarantees no more carpet bombing of Gaza by Israel or there is no point rebuilding.

  14. just
    August 9, 2015, 11:12 am

Leave a Reply