Trending Topics:

A solution to the conflict won’t come from the Israeli Jewish public

Israel/Palestine
on 37 Comments
settlements
(Photo: Reuters)

Is the Israeli Jewish public open to a two-state solution?

On Wednesday, I argued that if you take a close look at poll numbers detailing what the Israeli Jewish public thinks of a Palestinian state, you would find that the answer to that question is no. Others disagree, including Brent Sasley, the University of Texas professor who teaches Middle East politics and is a frequent contributor to Open Zion.

In a blog post on Mideast Matrix, Sasley argues that I make “several presumptions that I don’t think can be taken as indicative of Israelis’ or Israel’s final position on a peace agreement with the Palestinians.” But Sasley misreads some of my argument.

He writes that my argument is “based on the most recent poll by the Israel Democracy Institute.” But my post is not primarily based around that poll. My piece instead relied on several polls that show that when Israelis say they accept a Palestinian state, they mean a truncated and unviable state.

Specifically, Israeli Jewish citizens have told pollsters that they would agree to a Palestinian state–but this is a state in which the settlement blocs would be annexed to Israel, which poses a real problem for the contiguity of a Palestinian state. Polls show that the Israeli Jewish public is in support of a two-state solution that leaves a sliced-up Palestinian state. This is especially the case if you keep Ariel under Israeli hands, though Ma’ale Adumim to the south also poses a similar problem. 

Add the question of dividing Jerusalem–another prerequisite for a Palestinian state–and the picture is mixed. While one poll cited by Sasley in Foreign Policy shows that most Israeli Jews support dividing Jerusalem (with the caveat being that major settlement blocs around Jerusalem are annexed), other polls show the opposite. In 2011, a Truman Institute poll found that the majority of Israeli Jews reject dividing Jerusalem. In 2013, the right-leaning Jerusalem Post found that 74% of Israeli Jews reject a Palestinian capital in the holy city.

Sasley also argues that I assume “that public opinion polls determine outcomes.” But you would be hard-pressed to find that assumption in my piece. Indeed, my article is focused on public opinion polls, but not because I think they are determinative of a solution.

Rather, I focused on public opinion polls because they are routinely cited by those seeking to find hope in the hopeless peace process. Writers like Sasley try to bolster their case that a two-state solution is possible because of what the polls say. It’s fine to argue that a two-state solution is possible (I disagree for a variety of reasons, but that’s another point). What the polls simply show is that the Israeli Jewish public is not interested in a viable, contiguous state. And that’s what matters: what you mean by Palestinian state. If Ariel, Ma’ale Adumim and other settlement blocs are to stay forever in Israeli hands, then a Palestinian state will be beset by the woes that those settlements bring. It would mean, first and foremost, blocked routes between Palestinian cities. 

And it also matters greatly what Palestinians themselves want, since it is their rights that are at stake in these discussions and their rights being violated daily. The Palestinian population is simply not going to accept Israeli annexation of Ariel, Ma’ale Adumim and other settlement blocs.

There is no straight line from public opinion to what a government will do, as Sasley writes. But in this case, that question is somewhat irrelevant. The type of state the Israeli Jewish public accepts is in line with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vision of a Palestinian state.

All of this leaves us with a depressing situation, where the most powerful party in the conflict is unwilling to dismantle illegal settlements and allow a viable Palestinian state. But the situation is not hopeless. If change won’t come from within Israel, international action combined with a strong Palestinian movement could change the game. That’s a far ways off for now, but it’s one path towards a better future.

Alex Kane
About Alex Kane

Alex Kane is a freelance journalist who focuses on Israel/Palestine and civil liberties. Follow him on Twitter @alexbkane.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

37 Responses

  1. frankier
    frankier
    August 9, 2013, 12:26 pm

    Sadly, I say “no”, the Israeli public is not open to a viable Palestinian state. They might be open to a solution that it is not acceptable to the Palestinian people. De facto, however, that is tantamount to a “no.”

    And why would they? Any material impact from either the Palestinians (intifada, resistance, etc.) or the international community is basically non existent; they know that the Israeli supporters in the country that matters the most (the US) will go along with whatever the Israeli government wants, and they don’t even have to pay for the cost of the occupation which is generously, although mostly unknowingly, supplied by the US taxpayers.

  2. joer
    joer
    August 9, 2013, 12:27 pm

    With supporters like Dr. Oz, why should they? Here is a report about his recent visit to those lovely settlers in Hebron:

    http://972mag.com/dr-oz-dances-with-hebron-settlers/76690/

  3. NormanF
    NormanF
    August 9, 2013, 12:33 pm

    If the price of peace is a Judenrein Palestinian Arab state, virtually every Israeli Jew rejects it.

    There is no reason in the world the Arabs can’t have a state with a 20% Jewish minority when Israel has a parallel 20% Arab minority.

    Of course land swaps would place each minority into its respective state but the Arabs reject transferring their Arab brethren within Israel to their rule. A strange position to take if you genuinely seek self-determination for all Palestinians.

    But their opposition makes a lot of sense if they want to maintain an Arab Fifth Column within Israel to destroy the Jewish State later. The Jews do not want to be put in the position of the Czechs in the 1930s.

    Most Jewish Israelis doubt the Arabs really want peace. And with their absolute rejection of a Jewish minority living in Palestine, a contiguous state appears to be out of the question. But this has nothing to do with Jewish Israeli acceptance of a two states for two peoples formula. This has to do with Arab racism and intransigence.

    There has to be a sea change among the Arabs with their acceptance of the Jews sharing the land with them as a sine qua non for peace be possible. In our lifetime, that’s a pipe dream and for that reason alone, any putative two state solution is in fact a dead letter.

    • annie
      annie
      August 9, 2013, 3:19 pm

      norman, if you go back to the original partition lines then palestinians might look more amiably on a minority of jews in their state. but with such a tiny % of land left over for a palestinian state (especially when palestinians now make up over 50% of the population in the i/p region) sharing what’s left over with 700,000 jewish settlers is not an equitable comparison. suggesting otherwise is disingenuous.

    • frankier
      frankier
      August 9, 2013, 3:23 pm

      NormanF,
      Can you please remind us who is in violation of international law? Remind us who started ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians and terrorism against the Brits? And you say that “Most Jewish Israelis doubt the Arabs really want peace”?
      Please, spare us from the word salad and related dressing of hasbara flavor…

    • talknic
      talknic
      August 9, 2013, 4:13 pm

      NormanF

      “If the price of peace is a Judenrein Palestinian Arab state, virtually every Israeli Jew rejects it”

      FAIL : A) Abbas has said no “Israelis” B) Who cares what Israeli Jews think, Israelis have Israel, what the Palestinians do in their own state isn’t any business of Israeli Jews.

      “There is no reason in the world the Arabs can’t have a state with a 20% Jewish minority when Israel has a parallel 20% Arab minority”

      FAIL : Israel’s Arab population were from the territory that became Israel. The illegal Israeli settlers in non-Israeli territory are from Israel, the US, Australia, the UK etc

      “Of course land swaps would place each minority into its respective state”

      FAIL : Israel plans to swap Palestinian territory with the Palestinians for Palestinian territory so that Israel can keep Palestinian territory

      ” but the Arabs reject transferring their Arab brethren within Israel to their rule”

      FAIL : A) Why should they and B) Why would Israeli Arabs want to move from their homeland in Israel?

      ” A strange position to take if you genuinely seek self-determination for all Palestinians”

      FAIL : You were taking about Palestinians ruling Israeli Arabs who’re currently living in their homeland in Israel and who very likely would rather stay in their homeland in Israel. That neither want to live under the notions you’re suggesting IS self determination for Palestinians and for Israeli Arabs

      ” But their opposition makes a lot of sense if they want to maintain an Arab Fifth Column within Israel to destroy the Jewish State later”

      Scaremongering speculation can be fun … eh..

      “And with their absolute rejection of a Jewish minority living in Palestine”

      FAIL : They’re rejecting Israelis illegally living in Palestine.

      “But this has nothing to do with Jewish Israeli acceptance of a two states for two peoples formula”

      Correct… it has to do with Israel building more illegal settlements while pretending to accept a two state formula, after having illegally acquired Arab territory by war, illegally annexing, illegally settling

      “This has to do with Arab racism and intransigence”

      FAIL 1 : Israelis are not a race (nor are Jews) FAIL 2 : It has been Israel illegally acquiring, illegally annexing, illegally settling non-Israeli territory for 65 years.

      ” There has to be a sea change among the Arabs with their acceptance of the Jews sharing the land with them as a sine qua non for peace be possible”

      FAIL : In order for peaceful relations to be assumed with Egypt, Israel was first required to withdraw from all Egyptian territory.

      You fail all round, the Palestinian objection is not to Jews. They object to Israel and Israelis illegally acquiring non-Israeli territory, illegally annexing and illegally settling in Palestinian territory

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      August 9, 2013, 4:17 pm

      “If the price of peace is a Judenrein Palestinian Arab state, virtually every Israeli Jew rejects it.”

      You can tell when a zio is really a pitiful victim-monger when he starts using German when talking about the Middle East. Grow up, Norm.

    • yrn
      yrn
      August 9, 2013, 4:20 pm

      Norman

      Readers here can’t understand you.
      Most here are blocked in their definition of “Zionists” “Zionism” you name it.
      If they had a little common thinking about the “Real life” in the area.
      Well what’s the need of this blog………..
      They will get back and answer…… yes Zio’s are this and that and continue with the same routine, their reporters will pick up another check point that was not nice to an Arab and will make an article and have what to write about.
      “There has to be a sea change among the Arabs with their acceptance of the Jews sharing the land with them as a sine qua non for peace be possible. ”
      No one here even gave a thought regarding “If this is how they treat each other and their Muslim brothers all over the middle east….. how will they treat the Jews.
      Let’s hear some “TODAY” answer regarding Syria…….

    • Donald
      Donald
      August 9, 2013, 4:37 pm

      “There has to be a sea change among the Arabs with their acceptance of the Jews sharing the land with them as a sine qua non for peace be possible. ”

      So you favor a 1ss?

      Thought not. What you actually favor is that Israeli Jews be allowed to steal land for decades, using superior force, and then you favor whining about the Palestinian “bigots” who resent people profiting from land theft and ethnic cleansing.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      August 9, 2013, 5:10 pm

      NormanF: One of the problems with your position is that these are not just any old Jews, they (or most of them) are a bunch of vicious fanatics who terrorize their Palestinian neighbors, destroy their crops, harass and assault them, and generally make life miserable for them in the hope that they will go away. You surely know that. So isn’t it natural for the Palestinians to want to get rid of them? If you think it important as a matter of principle that there should be some Jews in the Palestinian state, then wouldn’t it make sense to replace the nasty lot there now with some decent ones?

    • Talkback
      Talkback
      August 9, 2013, 5:27 pm

      NormanF says: “There is no reason in the world the Arabs can’t have a state with a 20% Jewish minority when Israel has a parallel 20% Arab minority.”

      Quite strange that Jews in 1948 rejected excactly that scenario. A unitary state with 20% Jewish minority.

      “Of course land swaps would place each minority into its respective state but the Arabs reject transferring their Arab brethren within Israel to their rule. A strange position to take if you genuinely seek self-determination for all Palestinians.”

      Did Zionists genuinely seek self-determination for all Palestinians since 1919? As far as I know they keep most of them even expelled and denationalized.

      “But their opposition makes a lot of sense if they want to maintain an Arab Fifth Column within Israel to destroy the Jewish State later.”

      Like the opposition of the ‘Jewish Fifth Column’ within Palestine which destroyed it in 1948?

      “Most Jewish Israelis doubt the Arabs really want peace.”

      The doubts are understandable after everything they did and keep doing to Arabs. I would have the same doubts.

      “There has to be a sea change among the Arabs with their acceptance of the Jews sharing the land with them as a sine qua non for peace be possible.”

      It was the Zionists who didn’t want to share the land since 1919.

    • traintosiberia
      traintosiberia
      August 9, 2013, 7:02 pm

      Arab racism and. Israeli justice or Israeli democracy
      are the products of the forked tongue to confuse the reality of what ha s gone wrongs and going from bad to worse and where this would end up one day if not forcibly corrected
      Israel talks of hypothetical possibilities while creating the same reality for the racist and intransigent Arab
      Their worry of Jihadiam ofMB
      Sneaking into Israel is proved to be nothing but the continuation of the same

      kind of collective thinking carried on other by the recent Drone attacks in Sinai
      helped by the 5 th column inside Egypt known as
      Military who has restored democracy

    • Carllarc
      Carllarc
      August 9, 2013, 9:29 pm

      take another step; let the Palestinians take control of the the mess; the 2ss isn’t going to happen (obviously).

      so the Palestinians simply do the annexing of citizenship (thus, using the tried and true dual citizenship which Israel has used for foreign Jews) by granting Palestinian citizenship to all the so-called Jewish settlers and likewise for the Israeli Palestinians; then hope that local interests eventually prevail to merge into a single secular state.

  4. Obsidian
    Obsidian
    August 9, 2013, 12:45 pm

    1,000,000 Palestinians allowed entry into Israel during Ramadan month.

    http://972mag.com/from-the-checkpoint-to-the-sea-a-month-of-ramadan-photos/77133/

    Mondoweiss has nothing to say.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      August 10, 2013, 1:57 am

      @ Obsidian

      “Israel grants hundred of thousands of entry permits to West Bank Palestinians in order to pray in Jerusalem. It is estimated that as many as one million Palestinians entered Israel during Ramadan this year etc…”
      Let’s just make it clear once again: according to international law al-Aqsa is NOT in Israel but in occupied East Jerusalem, and if people only went to pray in al-Aqsa and then returned to the West Bank, they did NOT enter Israel.
      But isn’t it generous: the Zionists allowed a tiny part of the expelled indigenous population to put food on their native land…. for a whole day.

    • amigo
      amigo
      August 10, 2013, 10:02 am

      “1,000,000 Palestinians allowed entry into Israel during Ramadan month.”Obsidious

      Al Aqsa is not in Israel.It is in Occupied Jerusalem–East to be precise.

      Oh and how many suicide bombs went off with 1 million Terrorists let loose.

      How very generous of the Zionist entity allow Muslims to pray in their own land.

      Well at least once a year.

    • traintosiberia
      traintosiberia
      August 10, 2013, 10:32 am

      Well Did not the Roman allow continued praying at the Western Wall after they had destroyed the temple?
      It is the presence of the common human expectation and yearlings that is universal and evident here in this story that should be highlighted : ie – Palestinians. just like any other group love to have quality family time, spend time with their children, visit the beaches ,have fun, meet friends and enjoy a break from an otherwise gruesome daly oppression . They are human.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        August 10, 2013, 11:41 pm

        “Palestinians. …. They are human.”

        That is precisely what should not be highlighted. Let that idea get around, and someone might suggest that Palestinians have human rights. Can’t have that.

  5. American
    American
    August 9, 2013, 12:48 pm

    My overall impression from this and that poll, and statements, and most of the liberal zio group in and out of Israel is their position is that —- *Israel gets to take and keep whatever Israel wants first * —- and then if there is anything ‘left over’—- the Palestines can have it as some kind of ghetto or Gypsy camp.

  6. Reds
    Reds
    August 9, 2013, 1:10 pm

    Think about it as an Israeli Rightwing Jewish Zionist you have a Super Power that wouldn’t dare call you a racist, a bigot nor openly call out your policies. And the Liberal Jewish Zionist are fearful of criticizing you because it would destroy the myth of a liberal democracy state that gives equal rights to all or empower others to boycott your beloved state. Then you have an organization in the U.S. that blindly supports what these racist do sorely being that it’s Israel’s government that’s doing it

    Why in the world would the Right Wing of Israel really agree to anything? The right pretty much has free reign and can say and do for the most part what they want while the left is hamstrung to what they can actually say by Zionist on both the left/right in the U.S.

    Haaretz had a piece how some of the bills the Rightwing are trying to pass will promote fascism. Racism against arabs and Africans in Israel is now as common and acceptable as racism in the U.S. before the 1960’s and yet we have both the liberal and Conservatives Zionism supporting laws that would be rightfully considered racist in the U.S. especially if directed against Jews in the U.S.

    On top imagine a U.S. Congressman/women saying we have too many African Americans in the U.S. and they pose a demographic threat to the White Christian Majority?

    Yet the above is acceptable to even so-called liberal when it’s refering to Israel.

  7. Citizen
    Citizen
    August 9, 2013, 1:17 pm

    It figures. Open Zion has its head in the Zionist sand. It’s similar to J-Street in that it’s just another fool’s errand, pretending Zionism could have a human face, so to speak, when it’s rooted in 19th Century European racism and colonialism, or contemporary militaristic ethnic chauvinism, if you prefer. It would have no practical traction at all but for US taxpayer and diplomatic dollars. Israel is dragging the USA to a short-term future berift of its former “soft power” in the hearts and minds of the world. Too bad, since the former good reputation of the US, earned in two world wars by average American citizens’ blood and treasure (98% goy), is being squandered in behalf the Zionists’ view of the world, one where the goys are always ready to pounce on jews simply because they’re born jews.

  8. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    August 9, 2013, 1:57 pm

    RE: “I focused on public opinion polls because they are routinely cited by those seeking to find hope in the hopeless peace process. Writers like Sasley try to bolster their case that a two-state solution is possible because of what the polls say. It’s fine to argue that a two-state solution is possible (I disagree for a variety of reasons, but that’s another point).” ~ Alex Kane

    MY COMMENT: Uri Avnery highlights the fact that Israelis seem to support the idea of a comprehensive settlement based on the two-state solution (a theoretical Palestinian state), but they have been “brainwashed” to believe that such a settlement is not possible (due to Palestinian intransigence). If Israeli’s don’t believe that a comprehensive settlement based on the two-state solution is actually possible, then it makes it very easy (i.e. ‘cost free’) for them to support this theoretical two-state solution that they believe will never actually come to fruition (thereby eliminating the need for them to make the concrete sacrifices that would be necessitated by the theoretical two-state solution). Additionally, by virtue of theoretically supporting the two-state solution (that they are convinced will never actually come to fruition), the Israeli’s absolve themselves of responsibility for the “demographic problem” [i.e., the inevitability that Israel will eventually cease to be a democratic, Jewish state; and a system of apartheid will be the only way for Israel to remain a Jewish state)].

    SEE: “Israel’s Weird Elections”, by Uri Avnery, Counterpunch, 1/04/13:

    [EXCERPTS] . . . The Israeli media are already to a large extent neutralized, a creeping process not unsimilar to what the Germans used to call Gleichschaltung. [SEE: Gleichschaltung @ Wikipedia – J.L.D. ]
    All three TV channels are more or less bankrupt and dependent on government handouts. Their editors are practically government appointees. The printed press is also teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, except the largest “news” paper, which belongs to Sheldon Adelson and is a Netanyahu propaganda sheet, distributed gratis.
    [Naftali] Bennett repeats the ridiculous assertion that almost all journalists are left-wingers (meaning traitors.) He promises to put an end to this intolerable situation. . .
    . . . In the coming four years, the official annexation of the West Bank to Israel may become a fact. . .
    . . . If the government continues on its present course, this will lead to certain disaster – the entire country between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River will become one unit under Israeli rule. This Greater Israel will contain an Arab majority and a shrinking Jewish minority, turning it inevitably into an apartheid state, plagued by a permanent civil war and shunned by the world.
    If pressure from without and within eventually compels the government to grant civil rights to the Arab majority, the country will turn into an Arab state. 134 years of Zionist endeavor will come to naught, a repetition of the Crusaders’ kingdom.
    This is so obvious, so inevitable, that one needs an iron will not to think about it. It seems that all major parties in these elections have this will. Speaking about peace, they believe, is poison. Giving back the West Bank and East Jerusalem for peace? God forbid even thinking about it.
    The weird fact is that this week two respected polls – independent of each other – came to the same conclusion: the great majority of Israeli voters favors the “two-state solution”
    , the creation of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders and the partition of Jerusalem. This majority includes the majority of Likud voters, and even about half of Bennett’s adherents.
    How come? The explanation lies in the next question: How many voters believe that this solution is possible? The answer: almost nobody. Over dozens of years, Israelis have been brainwashed into believing that “the Arabs” don’t want peace. If they say they do, they are lying.
    If peace is impossible, why think about it? Why even mention it in the election campaign? Why not go back 44 years to Golda Meir’s days and pretend that the Palestinians don’t exist? (“There is no such thing as a Palestinian people…It is not as though there was a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away. They did not exist.” – Golda Meir, June 13, 1969) . . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/04/israels-weird-elections/

  9. Taxi
    Taxi
    August 9, 2013, 4:25 pm

    That picture above. Just look at it. Look at the prison-compound architecture. Prison pods.

    Even though the cunning thieves steal and plunder and accumulate more and more land loot, they still can’t live in relaxed, natural freedom. No peace, but fear. Even their houses look huddled up and scared. Such small windows. Says it all, really.

    Think of all the amazing architecture the Turks left behind in Palestine, exquisite French architecture in Lebanon, think of grand architectural Roman ruins all over the region – and now think of the hideous architecture the zionists will be leaving behind on those beautiful, raw, biblical hills in the picture.

    That’s one of the zionists’ quieter crimes actually: the uglification of an ancient, vestal landscape.

    If I owned all those hills in the picture, I would bulldoze the foreign uglies and build organic, sustainable and architecturally relaxed communities there – blend it in harmoniously with the natural environment. Like you see in villages all over the unoccupied parts of the Levant and Galilee. Like you used to see all over historic Palestine.

    Even the slums of Bombay look more colorful, more open and happier than what you see in the picture above.

    I mean it defies morality, defies logic and even art: the zionists killed all those Palestinians just so they could live in them ugly houses?!

    • Blank State
      Blank State
      August 10, 2013, 10:25 pm

      They look like Monopoly game pieces.

      Being in the trades, I understand the motive. Aesthetics cost time and money. When a society intends to expand exponentially, buying time before the inevitable global pushback slows thier consumption of land, such shitty looking unappealing cookie cutter hovels are the expedient solution. Bang….bang…..bang and bingo, another hundred acres of desert is turned into a section of the hive, seemingly as if by magic. These hovels are a perfect reflection of the nature of thier inhabitants.

    • mcohen
      mcohen
      August 11, 2013, 2:49 am

      Taxi says

       “them ugly houses?!”

      a friend just got back from cairo,said it was very beautiful,old houses with that white washed club med style,streets clean,no rubbish lying around,the pharoahs would be proud.
      on the other hand
      those ugly houses you refer to are being built for palestinians not israelis ,as part of an eventual settlement for property lost in 1948.

  10. anthonybellchambers
    anthonybellchambers
    August 9, 2013, 6:08 pm

    The state of Israel was imposed upon the Muslim Middle East, in 1948, by a then newly established United Nations that represented just a fraction of the international community. In other words it was a deeply undemocratic decision made for the sake of political expediency in order to satisfy the demands of the then emerging AIPAC lobby that was at that time known as the American Zionists, which name was subsequently changed presumably in order to avoid being designated and registered as a ‘foreign agent’ and being subject to political restriction.

    Since that time, successive American governments have all buckled to the political, economic and military demands of the lobby whose declared interest is not America, but the state of Israel. Meanwhile, the Israeli electorate, a majority of whom are right wing, Likud supporters, are unwilling to comply with international demands for a repatriation of all illegal settlers back to Israel. Their government is in gross breach of international law and the Geneva Conventions on Human Rights but, led by the US, the international community, sits on its hands and instead of breaking off trade and diplomatic relations with the offending state, carries on with bilateral trade.

    This is the crux of the matter. Why is Israel, uniquely among the free nations of the world, allowed to treat the United Nations with such clear contempt?

  11. James Canning
    James Canning
    August 9, 2013, 8:07 pm

    I am one who thinks Netanyahu does not want an independent Palestine. But he also does not want to annex areas of West Bank with too many non-Jews.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      August 10, 2013, 2:59 am

      “I am one who thinks Netanyahu does not want an independent Palestine. But he also does not want to annex areas of West Bank with too many non-Jews.”

      Not all that difficult a problem to solve, but for the sake of appearances it would be better to implement the solution on a dark night.

  12. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    August 9, 2013, 8:45 pm

    If Netanyahu feels that now is the time for a peace treaty and he feels that he got the best deal that he can get, he will present it to the public and he will win the vote in the Knesset (with the Arab MK’s) and in the referendum (with the Arab Israeli voters). For him to make the leap of giving up Ariel or Maaleh Adumim would be quite a scene and hard to imagine. But if he makes that leap, I think he could win the vote. He’s a better salesman than people give him credit for. I don’t think he will make that leap, but it won’t be for fear of not being able to sell it, it would be either that he feels that time is on Israel’s side or that he doesn’t want to go down in history as the man who gave up Ariel.

  13. Mike_Konrad
    Mike_Konrad
    August 9, 2013, 8:47 pm

    In 2011, a Truman Institute poll found that the majority of Israeli Jews reject dividing Jerusalem. In 2013, the right-leaning Jerusalem Post found that 74% of Israeli Jews reject a Palestinian capital in the holy city.

    Why do you think Jews should divide Jerusalem?

    I cannot see the Palestinian claim to the eastern half of the city as stronger.

    By the 1840s, the Jews outnumbered Muslims in the sacred precincts near the Temple Mount.

    As earlier as 1893, they had an absolute majority in the city.

    This did not change until they wer driven out in 1948, by British-trained and led, Jordanian troops.

    If you told me that Israel should stop house demolitions and tender more building permits to the Arabs, I might agree with you.

    But I cannot see splitting Jerusalem.

  14. mondonut
    mondonut
    August 9, 2013, 11:28 pm

    Add the question of dividing Jerusalem–another prerequisite for a Palestinian state–and the picture is mixed.

    Again with the proof by repeated assertion. Dividing Jerusalem is not a prerequisite, it is a demand of the Palestinians.

  15. Sibiriak
    Sibiriak
    August 10, 2013, 8:59 am

    several polls that show that when Israelis say they accept a Palestinian state, they mean a truncated and unviable state.

    Specifically, Israeli Jewish citizens have told pollsters that they would agree to a Palestinian state–but this is a state in which the settlement blocs would be annexed to Israel, which poses a real problem for the contiguity of a Palestinian state.

    Where’s the evidence that a non-contiguous state cannot be “viable”? Is this simply a matter of definition? This idea of non-contiguous = non-viable is repeatedly asserted, but without any supporting argument. I’m not saying such an argument isn’t possible–I’d just like to see it.

    That a truncated, de-militarized, semi-sovereign non-contiguous Palestinian “state” would be a grotesquely *unjust* outcome to the conflict is obvious to me.

  16. tommy
    tommy
    August 10, 2013, 12:06 pm

    I was greatly impressed with Paulo Freire’s theme only the oppressed can free themselves and their oppressors, which provides an optimistic comfort when faced with the state terror that now defines our times.

  17. gingershot
    gingershot
    August 10, 2013, 2:41 pm

    The solution to Apartheid will absolutely need to be FORCED on Israelis – externally forced on the people as well as her leaders – rather than something that comes organically from Israelis themselves. This is so abundantly clear that it startling.

    The remedy to the Apartheid One State ALREADY CREATED by Israel – methodically, deliberately, as slow motion ethnic cleansing over the last 70 years, is the REAL 1P1V1S One State Solution, forced upon her by the ICC rulings, BDS, and worldwide sanctioning (as expanded from the start the EU has already made)

    This 1P1V1S One State Solution will be a tremendous adjustment for Israelis and Israel as we know it today (Apartheid Israel, ‘Settler State Israel’) will be unrecognizable post-Apartheid, and thankfully so.

    After sending 100’000s of state-subsidized and often fanatic Jews over her *cough* borders as the war crime known as ‘settlement’ and ‘occupation’ – there would have to be an intra-Israeli Civil War (‘Settlers’ against the IDF, as well as ‘Settler/or Pro-Settler’ IDF factions against IDF factions) in order to extract the 100,000s of paramilitary settlers necessary for the 2ss to work. No Way.

    No Israeli PM will EVER do that – which is why so many now, even in Likud, know that the 2ss is now water under the bridge. The only question now is how long Israel can staave off the dismantling of Apartheid with operatives such as John Kerry and the US Congress

    Fortunately, Israelis have already built 10,000s of prison space beds – they’re going to need them because in the REAL One State Solution there will be thousands of the settlers who are going to need to be imprisoned for armed uprisings, crimes against the Palestinian people, as well attacks against the new government of Israel/Palestine.

    Undoubtedly there will also be a significant percentage of these Israelis who re-emigrate because they will refuse to live as civilized contributors to the new state.

    The time is long gone – 750,000 illegal war crimes prosecution-ready settlers worth – for Israel to come to her senses by herself.

    This is what Israel always wanted – ALL of it – – and she can no more let go of what she has stolen than let go of Israel itself.

    Israel deliberately made sure she never would be able to give any of it back. And then finally she couldn’t – even to save the lion’s share of what she had stolen. Stuck and fixed. What a disastrous strategy

  18. Truthbug
    Truthbug
    August 10, 2013, 3:10 pm

    “But the situation is not hopeless. If change won’t come from within Israel, international action combined WITH A STRONG PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT could change the game.” (caps mine).

    I think this movement must be a peaceful movement. There’s no chance terrorism or warfare could force Israel into moral action, and it makes the Jews look victimized, something which they can easily exploit with propaganda. Thus, a peaceful movement that will endear the world community to the Palestinian cause is the Palestinian’s only real hope. I wish them well.

  19. Sibiriak
    Sibiriak
    August 10, 2013, 3:35 pm

    gingershot:

    the REAL 1P1V1S One State Solution, forced upon her by the ICC rulings, BDS, and worldwide sanctioning (as expanded from the start the EU has already made)

    This is a beautiful dream, BUT: there have been no ICC rulings or worldwide sanctioning aimed at forcing Israeli into a one-state solution.

    EU sanctions are clearly aimed at illegal settlements impeding a TWO-state solution.

    Even BDS claims NOT to deal with either 1SS or 2SS, only “rights based” issues.

    Of course, this could change in 25-100 years, but there is no sign of it at the moment.

    Just recently, Merkel demonstrated the clear limits on European pressure on Israel:

    “…[Germany will] never be neutral and that Israel can be sure of our support when it comes to ensuring its security,” she said. “That’s why I also said that Germany’s support for Israel’s security is part of our national ethos, our raison d’être.”

    In the interview Merkel, who is believed likely to win her third term as chancellor next month, repeated her past criticisms of Israel’s settlement policies, but also blasted anti-Zionism.

    http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Merkel-Germany-will-never-be-neutral-on-Israel-322579

  20. mcohen
    mcohen
    August 11, 2013, 2:53 am

    Taxi says

     “them ugly houses?!”

    a friend just got back from cairo,said it was very beautiful,old houses with that white washed club med style,streets clean,no rubbish lying around,the pharoahs would be proud.
    on the other hand
    those ugly houses you refer to are being built for palestinians not israelis ,as part of an eventual settlement for property lost in 1948.

Leave a Reply