Bruce Wolman writes:
This Haaretz author (Tzvia Greenfield) is not very enthralled with the "universalist left"–
with the Jewish identity of the Israeli state. Too many in that camp
are caught up in the illusion that Israel's Jewishness must be
exchanged for an open democracy that will protect the rights of all
those living between the river and the sea. This growing group knows
full well that the Israelis will sink to oppression, apartheid and
moral degradation before they hand their state over to the
Palestinians. But they still go on hoping that Barack Obama, the
Europeans, the rest of the world and sanctions will somehow shut down
the current Israel and build up a wonderful new democracy where
Palestinians and Israelis live in peace and quiet.
that we will all drown in a murky mire of Jewish dictatorship and the
entire region will go up in flames before Israel gives up its
sovereignty to the Palestinian majority doesn't appear to bother them
too much.
Interestingly, she thinks they are outshouting the supporters of the two-state solution.
So what is hindering Greenfield's "most decent and appropriate" two-state solution?
I'd gladly stay silent if they could assure me that would enable them to pull it off.
Weiss: Greenfield's piece shows that we really are winning this debate, cause we have the most powerful ideas. I'd add that one of my big problems with the Decent two-state solution types is that they proffer a process, and never any real idea of when things will change. And meantime, Israelis are living pretty well with no real incentive to change the status quo, and American peace types get to say, Oh we're for a 2-state solution. And right now in Palestine, the human rights violations are so horrifying and every child's horizon is darkened by oppression–that's what animates us. We want to do something!
