Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 6 (since 2009-11-05 15:43:44)


Showing comments 6 - 1

  • Millions disenfranchised in Israeli vote due solely to ethnicity and geography
    • They've been nibbling around the edges (well, actually, quite a bit more than just the edges I suppose), I'm afraid they'll take all of it in one bite. I'm really just taking the zionist right at their word. I think anyone who sympathizes with the Palestinian plight dismisses their plan at their own peril.

      Essentially much of Israeli policy the last few decades have been aimed at squeezing as many Palestinians as possible out while grabbing as much land as they can. I think they're succeeding and yes, that worries me.

    • That is true, assuming Gaza can be considered to be under Israeli control. But that is the political logic. I was talking more of the legal logic under international law. Under international law, Zionism doesn't enter into it, there is just a state called Israel and that state would expand by annexing territories it conquered in a war. The demographic aspect, i.e. whether it's majority Jewish or Arab, wouldn't really matter. Of course, in international relations and in this case in particular, the political logic has always mattered more.

      My worry however, is that Israel will annex the West Bank in its entirety once it feels demographically secure enough to do so (given fallen Palestinian fertility rates and stable Jewish ones coupled with the relative emigration rates, that is not implausible in a decade or two). It is relatively easy for Israel to rid itself of any legal responsibility for Gaza by giving up the control it has now, and the Palestinians will be left with a small city-state. The logic of saying that Palestinians under occupation should have the right to vote in Israel might down the road play into Israel's hands.

      That is my prediction for what will happen eventually (but not my hope)

    • It was perhaps a bit glib of me to phrase it like that, but my point is that if you're saying that if the OPT should now legally be considered part of Israel, then Israel has effectively enlarged its territory through conquest. It sets a precedent for the admissibility of acquisition of territory by war.

    • I'm not sure if this line of thought is productive. If you're saying that the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza should have the right to vote, aren't you saying that the West Bank and Gaza are not in fact occupied but should be considered legitimately part of Israel, thus implicitly condoning the military conquest in 1967?

  • The limits of liberal Zionism: 'NYT' columnist Roger Cohen misrepresents the Nakba and the right of return
    • Refugees obviously have the right to return. However, the problem Palestinians face is that refugee is not a hereditary status under international law. The question of the descendants therefore becomes a political question rather than a legal one.

  • The reviews are in: 'Zero Dark Thirty makes me hate muslims'

Showing comments 6 - 1