Trending Topics:

Avigdor’s triumph: Israel reportedly wants to transfer northern villages into Palestinian state

Israel/Palestine
on 85 Comments
Avigdor Liberman and Tzipi Livni in January 2013 (Photo: Flash90)

Avigdor Liberman and Tzipi Livni in January 2013 (Photo: Flash90)

The Israeli officials who gathered at West Jerusalem’s Inbal Hotel on June 21, 2008 had an idea to float: some Palestinian villages who sit partially in Israeli territory would be given to a future Palestinian state.  Palestinians with citizenship would no longer be residents of Israel; they would be transferred to the new state.

The plan, part of an imagined future peace deal discussed during the Annapolis negotiations while George W. Bush was U.S. president, never came to fruition.  But more than five years later, the idea of swapping Arab villages into a Palestinian state in exchange for Israel annexing West Bank settlements continues to rear its head.  It’s a plan that would bolster one of Israel’s central objectives: strengthen its Jewish majority by getting rid of thousands of non-Jewish citizens and holding onto large illegal settlements, which in turn would increase the amount of Israeli Jews.

The Israeli news outlet Maariv reported January 1st that Israeli negotiators had proposed giving a Palestinian state parts of the geographic area known as the Triangle–which encompasses Palestinian villages like Umm al-Fahm and Taibeh.  300,000 Palestinian citizens of Israel live in the Triangle.  In exchange for ceding the Triangle, Israel would annex the settlement blocs, which refer to major Israeli settlements like Ariel and Ma’ale Adumim.   According to news reports, the plan, which has only been discussed with American officials, did not detail what would happen to the Palestinians’ citizenship. But past remarks from top Israeli officials indicate that citizenship would be stripped. Palestinians would be transferred to a new state against their will.

Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s right-wing Foreign Minister, has long been the key figure associated with population and land transfers.  Under the “Lieberman Plan,” the Triangle would be given to the Palestinian Authority (PA).  25,000 Arabs would be stripped of their Israeli citizenship and forced to live under PA rule.  Lieberman’s not the only one pushing the plan, which has been derided and rejected by Palestinian citizens of Israel. It’s an idea that has been pushed by the likes of Tzipi Livni, the current Israeli Justice Minister frequently labeled a moderate in the American media.

Livni was one of the officials who sat in the Inbal Hotel in 2008.   After the Palestine Papers revealed Livni’s willingness to discuss the idea of transferring Palestinian citizens into a Palestinian state, Lieberman’s party, Yisrael Beiteinu, celebrated in response.  As Max Blumenthal’s new book documents, Robert Ilatov, the Yisrael Beiteinu chairman, said that “Livni’s proposal is consistent with the program of Yisrael Beiteinu  so we will be happy to hear the full details from her.”

Now, Livni’s in charge of the negotiations with the Palestinians, and her team is reportedly floating the population transfer idea.  Palestinian Authority officials swiftly rejected the proposal.  One official told the England-based Telegraph that the move would amount to “ethnic cleansing.”

The plan was also harshly criticized by Palestinian Knesset members.  “This is a bizarre offer which treats Arab citizens as a chess piece that one can move around and change,” Knesset member Ahmed Tibi reportedly told Maariv.

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:

85 Responses

  1. Walid
    Walid
    January 3, 2014, 10:10 am

    The transfer plan is more a concept of Livni than of Lieberman. It won’t fly, they’ll have to force the Palestinians off the land by going back to Lieberman’s loyalty oath scam.

    • Tuyzentfloot
      Tuyzentfloot
      January 4, 2014, 10:19 am

      The transfer plan is more a concept of Livni than of Lieberman.

      Attributing the ideas to Lieberman certainly makes them sound less mainstream than they are. Apparently the israeli side began to seriously consider the option in 2000. From disturbing-israeli-ideas-from-herzliya

      Following the 2000 conference, the organizers issued a report in which they made several recommendations to defuse the “demographic time bomb.” Many more Jewish immigrants had to be brought to Israel; the citizenship rights of some Israeli-Arabs should be revoked; and the Palestinian Authority had to be encouraged to accept “land swaps,” handing over areas adjacent to the West Bank heavily populated with Israeli-Arabs in return for much of the territory on which Jewish settlements have been built.

      It’s always the little triangle they’re thinking of.

    • AbeBird
      AbeBird
      January 4, 2014, 6:05 pm

      What’s wrong with handing Umm al-Fahm and Taibeh to the Palestinians under the PA state? Don’t these Arab Muslims want be a part of their national state and prefer to stay under the rule of their Jewish enemy?
      Something weird here.

  2. mondonut
    mondonut
    January 3, 2014, 10:17 am

    This is an absolutely terrible plan both because Palestinians do not want to be citizens of Palestine and the State of Palestine has no interest in additional territory.

    • OlegR
      OlegR
      January 3, 2014, 10:41 am

      But surely those Palestinians will be better off in a Palestinian state where they will be full citizens then in the terrible Israeli Apartheid State.
      Won’t they ?

      • Sumud
        Sumud
        January 3, 2014, 11:03 am

        You don’t really understand the significance of citizenship, a passport or the concept of civil rights, do you?

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 3, 2014, 11:21 am

        He’s a zio. Of course he doesn’t.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 3, 2014, 12:03 pm

        “You don’t really understand the significance of citizenship, a passport or the concept of civil rights, do you?”Sumud

        Sure he does except only as they apply to Jews.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 3, 2014, 11:20 am

        “But surely those Palestinians will be better off in a Palestinian state where they will be full citizens then in the terrible Israeli Apartheid State.”

        You don’t think that the israeli Jews aren’t planning an even grander Apartheid when they have all of the Palestinans rounded up in their Warsaw Ghetto in the West Bank?? Don’t be a fool.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        January 3, 2014, 12:06 pm

        @nakba denying, ziotroll,

        Those Palestinians are not thieves or immigrants and colonists like you. They have lived on that land for thousands of years and it doesn’t matter WHAT State or ideology controls the land at the moment.

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 3, 2014, 1:37 pm

        Cliff says: … it doesn’t matter WHAT State or ideology controls the land at the moment.
        =======================================
        Good to know. So apparently you are in agreement with Lieberman.

      • yrn
        yrn
        January 3, 2014, 3:42 pm

        Cliff

        “They have lived on that land for thousands of years and it doesn’t matter WHAT State or ideology controls the land at the moment.”

        What don’t your head get, they are not going to be moved anywhere, they are going to stay on the same land, the same house, as they always have been, the only change is that the border is going to be changed and they are going to become citizens and residents in their desired Palestinian state, they will be happily ever after residence and citizens of their desired Palestinian state, been ruled by their Palestinian brothers.
        They will sure be more happy in a Palestinian state then in the terrible Israeli (now you can put all your routine spew stuff………..)
        And then you and they are going to be happy.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 4, 2014, 5:34 am

        @ yrn
        They would be living in a rump entity, not even worthy of being called a state, with no protection from Israel. A Palestinian state to be actual must have all the powers that Israel has. Jewish Israelis would never accept such an entity for themselves because it would not be a sovereign state.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 3, 2014, 12:06 pm

        “But surely those Palestinians will be better off in a Palestinian state where they will be full citizens then in the terrible Israeli Apartheid State.”o,leg.

        Perhaps they believe they would be better off in a Israeli State with justice and equality for all.

        Not just for Jews.

        Or is that concept outside your ability to grapple with.

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 3, 2014, 1:39 pm

        OlegR – They may prefer to live in a state comprising all of their own lands. There is no need or justification for an Apartheid state anywhere. Just as you may not like being restricted to Birobidjan but would want to enjoy Federation citizenship.

      • bilal a
        bilal a
        January 3, 2014, 3:50 pm

        But past remarks from top Israeli officials indicate that citizenship would be stripped. Palestinians would be transferred to a new state against their will.

        Can we do the same to Single Loyalty co religionists, can we transfer them to Israel, surely they would be better off in their homeland?

      • Stephen Shenfield
        Stephen Shenfield
        January 3, 2014, 5:40 pm

        There is and will continue to be only one real state throughout post-mandatory Palestine, i.e., Israel. The apartheid regime in the West Bank is much more rigorous than the apartheid regime in pre-1967 Israel, so OlegR is right to imply that adjusting the border between the two zones (an internal not an international border, as Israel is in control on both sides of it) will leave these villagers with fewer rights. In particular, their movements will be much more restricted once they are no longer citizens. But this does not prove that Israel is not so terrible after all, because both of these apartheid regimes are designed and imposed by Israel.

      • AbeBird
        AbeBird
        January 4, 2014, 6:20 pm

        Is a Palestinian state without Jews not apartheid and Judenrein?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 5, 2014, 6:20 am

        Is a Palestinian state without Jews not apartheid and Judenrein?

        The BDS movement advocates equal rights for everyone in either a single or two state solution. Palestinian negotiators say the Israeli settlers were welcome to stay as Palestinian citizens or dual nationals under Palestinian jurisdiction, but that the settlements must be part of the Palestinian State. See for example “PA: Settlers can become Palestinian citizens: Negotiator Ahmed Qureia tells Haaretz that Ariel, Ma’aleh Adumim must be part of Palestinian state.” http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/pa-settlers-can-become-palestinian-citizens-1.276727

        The fact is that it was the Jewish Agency that demanded the partition of the country into two independent states, not the Palestinian Arabs. You are talking about an Arab majority country, where only about 17,000 Jews lived prior to the 1948 war.

        Those 17,000 Palestinian Jews who were registered as refugees with the UNRWA after the 1948 war and their descendants certainly should be repatriated. Just like the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arab refugees. Israel signed an Armistice agreement which stipulated that

        “Rules and regulations of the armed forces of the Parties, which prohibit civilians from crossing the fighting lines or entering the area between the lines, shall remain in effect after the signing of this Agreement with application to the Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI.”

        http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/arm03.asp

        The Peace Treaty with Jordan stipulated that it did not alter the status of any of the territory captured during the 1967 war.

        So there are hundreds of thousands of Jewish aliens, who are citizens and vote in Israel, with no right to live in the State of Palestine in light of the prohibitions contained in the Armistice agreement and the rules contained in the 4th Geneva Convention.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 3, 2014, 11:53 pm

        But surely those Palestinians will be better off in a Palestinian state where they will be full citizens then in the terrible Israeli Apartheid State.
        Won’t they ?

        No, because the proposal itself is a perfect example of Grand Apartheid in action stupid.

        I’m surprised the Israeli government hasn’t already demanded a permanent IDF presence there to counter the existential threat posed by this enormous population of new Palestinian enemies living right top of the indefensible Auschwitz borders.

  3. Woody Tanaka
    Woody Tanaka
    January 3, 2014, 10:21 am

    Well, I guess even the zio apologists have given up their usual lies about the Palestinians inside israel being full and equal citizens.

    I think that the old saying: “zionism = Racism” is fundamentally correct, but incomplete. Really, it should be “zionism = Fascism.” And the fact that the isreali people haven’t risen up in protest to this story demonstrates that the fascism isn’t limited to a few ministers, but pervades that entire sick society.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 3, 2014, 10:47 am

      @ Woody
      Yep.

    • AbeBird
      AbeBird
      January 4, 2014, 6:24 pm

      What fascism in letting the Arabs stay at their place and just move the border so that their national state will be also their home? I think the opposite, that this suggestion is moral and human of the most extant.

      • andrew r
        andrew r
        January 5, 2014, 4:56 pm

        What fascism in letting the Arabs stay at their place and just move the border so that their national state will be also their home?

        Denationalizing and ghettoizing them. Stripping them of citizenship on a racial basis. Of course if Israel ever decides to pull an Operation Barbarossa, Umm el-Fahm will be on the front lines.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 5, 2014, 6:55 pm

        “What fascism in letting the Arabs stay at their place and just move the border so that their national state will be also their home?”

        What’s fascist about it is because you’re doing it against their will and you’re doing it for racist reasons. Further, it’s no secret that the oppression that the zionist inflict on Palestinians who are israeli citizens is less than that inflicted on those who are not, so this can only be seen by any sane person as an attempt to expand the pool of potential people to be victimized by the zionist state.

        ” I think the opposite, that this suggestion is moral and human of the most extant.”

        Of course you do. You’re a zionist and therefore a fascist.

  4. Nevada Ned
    Nevada Ned
    January 3, 2014, 10:49 am

    This “transfer option” (ethnic cleansing) is part of the Allon Plan, proposed many decades ago by Yigal Allon, the Israeli foreign minister. The Allon Plan aims at incorporating the maximum amount of land, and the fewest Palestinians, into “Greater Israel”.

    Israeli policy has been pursuing the Allon Plan for a long time. Oddly enough, these important facts are omitted by the New York Times, because they are deemed Not Fit to Print by the Newspaper of Record.

  5. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 3, 2014, 10:54 am

    closer and closer to the only solution..one state

    • yrn
      yrn
      January 3, 2014, 3:59 pm

      closer and closer to the only solution..one state for the Israelis and One state for the Palestinians.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 4, 2014, 5:41 am

        @ yrn
        Not unless each of those states has the exact same features of sovereignty.
        And Israel doesn’t get to retain all the land with aquifers.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen
        January 6, 2014, 2:59 pm

        And that is not going to happen Citizen. One state for all people’s is the way it is headed. Which we know Israel will not go along with either completely exposing the all ready existing apartheid state. No going back

  6. HarryLaw
    HarryLaw
    January 3, 2014, 11:27 am

    There is nothing wrong with proposing solutions, like moving borders or people, provided the borders are moved with the consent of the governments concerned and the people moved, are willing to move, which is not the case with the Israeli Palestinians, what Lieberman and earlier Livnis proposals seem to amount to, is that the well documented war crimes of the settlement enterprise should stay in place, only for further war crimes to be committed,with the involuntary transfer of Palestinian citizens of Israel into another state. I don’t suppose either Ministers conducted a survey amongst the Palestinian citizens of Israel [which is the least that should be done] before floating such an obscene proposal. But then, when have Palestinian opinions been of any concern to Israeli leaders?

    • Walid
      Walid
      January 3, 2014, 12:16 pm

      “But then, when have Palestinian opinions been of any concern to Israeli leaders?”

      Harry, when have Palestinian opinions been of any concern to Palestinian leaders and leaders of other countries? It started with the aborted 1919 Faisal-Weizmann agreement in which the Saudi Emir Faisal had agreed to give all of Palestine to the Zionists. It was followed in 1933 and 1937 with Ben Gurion negotiating with the British to allow him to buy land in Jordan for Palestinians that would be transferred there and likewise in 1938 for land in northern Syria. In 1939, Ben Gurion negotiated with the Saudis to pay 10 million pounds to the Iraqis to transfer 100,000 Palestinians to Iraq and bring in Iraqi Jews to replace them in the Galilee and those also failed. In all cases, the Palestinian people were not consulted about what was being planned for them. The Zionists have had the transfer mentality even before the creation of their state.

    • JeffB
      JeffB
      January 4, 2014, 2:26 pm

      @HarryLaw

      States can choose to abandon territory that’s not a war crime. You are just making stuff up.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 6, 2014, 9:49 am

        JeffB: States can choose to abandon territory that’s not a war crime. You are just making stuff up.

        Denial of nationality as part of a policy to prevent members of a group from taking part in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country is apartheid. If you don’t think apartheid is a war crime, you need to reread Article 85 of the 1st Additional Protocol, because 173 states parties have agreed that it is one.

        Israel doesn’t have the right to alter the international boundary of another state in order to put Israeli Palestinians living in the triangle in a completely different country than their own Holy sites and family members living in Jerusalem or Nazareth. Any measure, including the creation of bogus national homelands, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group without their consent is apartheid.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 6, 2014, 10:57 am

        JeffB “States can choose to abandon territory that’s not a war crime”

        A) Is it actually Israeli territory the State of Israel is gonna abandon? Remember, it has been illegal to acquire territory by war, ANY war since at least 1933 http://pages.citebite.com/y1f0t4q1v4son and;

        B) Israel has never legally annexed any territory to its proclaimed and Internationally recognized borders of May 15th 1948 http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

        This map http://wp.me/pDB7k-Xk#googlemap shows within a few yards what is NOT Israeli territory according to Israeli Government statements and agreements http://pages.citebite.com/x1r0b4d1y6mkv

        C) Israel has no legal right to change the status of any territories, not even its own, without it being determined by the legitimate population of those territories. It’s called “self determination” a concept as far away from this ghastly f&*ked up Israeli plan as it is possible to get.

        Of course I don’t expect you to look and learn from any material provided you, it’s not within an Israeli propagandist’s brief, however other readers will. So thanks for affording the opportunity to present Israeli Government statements that show Israel is 1) LYING about its borders and 2) That you just make stuff up.

  7. David Doppler
    David Doppler
    January 3, 2014, 12:45 pm

    Has anyone polled the Israeli Arabs as to their preferences? A voice in the Knesset expressing opposition is not the same as detailed demographics. I would assume the population is divided on the subject, but can only speculate as to how it might be divided. Land swaps based on the 1967 borders has long been the US position, and would be acceptable to the international community. The question is how much land, which land, what sovereignty, and what other benefits the Palestinians might get from Israel and the world as part of a deal. Let’s not project our pre-suppositions onto them.

    On the Israeli side, a Labor-Likud-Yisrael Beiteinu coalition, a way to avoid another Intifida, a way to stop the downward BDS spiral, a way to keep most of the settlements while halting further settlement activity. A way to end the occupation and the deeply corrupting impact it has on the IDF and the broader population. I may be too optimistic, but I see the possibilities of a deal. Is there leadership on the two sides, and from the US, to pull it off?

    While there are racist features to this situation (duh), two states today could lay the foundation for a long-term peace, one in which new generations can grow up with better futures, and issues that divided past generations can fade out, like color-lines in affluent parts of California (what color-lines?).

    • Alex Kane
      Alex Kane
      January 3, 2014, 1:44 pm

      There has been polling on this question, and the majority of Palestinian citizens polled are against the plan. In 2011, in the wake of the Palestine Papers, Al Jazeera reported :

      “A December 2010 survey by the Brookings Institution found that 58 per cent of Israeli Arabs oppose the sorts of swaps proposed by Lieberman and Livni. The Jewish-Arab Relations Index, an annual publication from the University of Haifa, consistently finds majority support for that view (57 per cent in the most recent survey, in 2008). Similarly, a 2000 poll of Umm al-Fahm residents found that 83 per cent want their city to remain Israeli.”

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 3, 2014, 3:44 pm

        Alex Kane says: There has been polling on this question, and the majority of Palestinian citizens polled are against the plan.
        =================================================
        So given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Israel – they choose Israel. Makes you wonder if life in Israel is not as bad as the Mondos make it out to be.

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 3, 2014, 4:03 pm

        No, mondonut, they simply don’t want to give up their land by going along with the transfer. Why should they make it easy for the bad guys?

      • yrn
        yrn
        January 3, 2014, 4:10 pm

        Walid

        There is not going to be any transfer , they are going to stay in the same place, their Sovereign will be Palestinian, a desire they had all their life.
        If you think with your Long distance advice, they will not take the opportunity, you are dreaming.

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        January 3, 2014, 4:21 pm

        How drawing a border to the west of them would make them lose their land?
        The would stay on their land under the sovereignty of the new Palestinian state.
        Unless their new government would take it.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 3, 2014, 6:03 pm

        @yrn “their Sovereign will be Palestinian, a desire they had all their life”

        mondonut’s prior posts says otherwise //”given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Israel – they choose Israel”//

        You guys should coordinate your nonsense

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 6, 2014, 11:02 am

        yrn “There is not going to be any transfer”

        Of course there will be. With these schemes Israel hopes to keep territory that isn’t yet Israeli

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 3, 2014, 4:28 pm

        They are on their own land. All of what some call “Israel” is on their own land and they have seen what happens when they had to leave it in the initial wave of the Nakba.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 3, 2014, 5:00 pm

        So given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Israel – they choose Israel.

        Palestinians would not have actual self-determination in a “separate Palestinian state”, because they would have no military and the borders would still be controlled by Israel. The “separate Palestinian state” (aka Gaza II) would be completely at the mercy of Israel. Therefore, being a second-class citizen of Israel is less terrible than being no citizen of Israel.

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        January 4, 2014, 4:41 pm

        What if the final agreement were to give them all of those desires.
        Control of airspace water border an army even.
        Would you still oppose to such an agreement?

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        January 3, 2014, 5:06 pm

        nut,

        life in israel is better than life under israeli occupation and under constant threat of israeli aerial assault, night raids, indiscriminate fire by israeli troops, harassment by jewish colonists, etc.

        not to mention the palestinians in israel are not immigrants or jewish colonists

        your cult built a state on top of them

        why should they pack up and leave? they are home

        israel could vanish, and those palestinians would still be home

      • ritzl
        ritzl
        January 3, 2014, 5:24 pm

        Nailed it, Cliff.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 4, 2014, 5:18 pm

        @ Oleg (no reply button)

        Would you still oppose to such an agreement?

        Of course, I would still be against it. Here’s why:
        1) Israel would deprive 300,000 Palestinians of their Israeli citizenship against their will.
        2) The remaining Palestinian Israelis would still be second-class citizens in the “Jewish state”.
        3) Israel would still deny Palestinian refugees their right of return.
        4) Israel would still keep the West Bank settlements.
        In general, the creation of a separate Palestinian state would only benefit the Zionist regime. A separate Palestinian state would serve as a dumping ground where the Zionists can dispose of the demographic threat. The two-state solution is a Zionist solution. Its only purpose is to preserve the “Jewish state”.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 3, 2014, 5:49 pm

        mondonut “So given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Israel – they choose Israel. Makes you wonder if life in Israel is not as bad as the Mondos make it out to be”

        Your notion is really ^&*ing stupid.
        They’re Israeli citizens and;
        As Israeli citizens they already have their own state, Israel and;
        As Israeli citizens their self determination is to stay on their own land in their own state, no matter who the state is.

        Quite unlike the sicko Jewish colonizers who demand a non-Jew free Jewish state that encompasses not only Israeli territory given gratis for the Jewish state in 1948 but also huge chunks of illegally settled, non-Israeli territory

        “Makes you wonder if life in Israel is not as bad as the Mondos make it out to be.”

        No. It shows readers your powers of simple logic are non existant

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 4, 2014, 4:08 pm

        talknic says: Your notion is really ^&*ing stupid.
        =================================================
        This is a really simple concept, it is simply amazing that you and your friends just do not get it. According to the poll Israeli citizens who self identify as Palestinians were asked if they preferred their villages to be sovereign Israel or Palestine. By a large margin they chose Israel.

        Why is that so hard to understand?

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 6, 2014, 11:15 am

        mondonut “This is a really simple concept..”

        Yes, I’m sure Hitler though getting rid of Jewish citizens of Germany was a really simple concept

        According to the poll Israeli citizens who self identify as Palestinians were asked if they preferred their villages to be sovereign Israel or Palestine. By a large margin they chose Israel”

        The exact wording of this poll thx Because from Al Jazeera “I’m here in this state now,” said Jamil, the owner of a small bakery near one of the town’s green-domed mosques. “My family has been here since before 1948. I don’t want to go out to Palestine.”

        Furthermore non-Jewish citizens of Israel chose to become citizens of Israel. WTF would they want to be booted out by their own government?

      • Abierno
        Abierno
        January 3, 2014, 6:10 pm

        These people are all too familiar with what happens when Israel gives up land – the current proposal is simply to create a second Gaza out of the
        west bank: No freedom of ingress or egress, no freedom for imports or
        exports, no freedom for air, rail or highway transportation since there are no
        borders not controlled by Israel, import taxes controlled by Israel, all electro magnetic spectrum owned and controlled by Israel (so no free communications) ,regular incursions, killing, bombing, semi starvation – all occur under the guise of Israel’s security. Somehow, this does not appear to qualify as “self determination” as defined in the US constitution or meet the
        qualifications for “their own [independent] state. No one willingly signs on to such a situation.

      • tree
        tree
        January 3, 2014, 6:47 pm

        Mondonut, do you apply that logic to any other situation? For instance…

        “So given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Iran… Iranian Jews choose Iran despite the constant bribes they get to move to Israel. ”

        Does that make sense for you too, or is this another one of those case where it only applies if it seems to promote your argument?

        How about all the American Jews who are given a choice between “self determination” (under your definition) in Israel and living in the US and opt to stay in the US? American Jews choose to be a small minority in the US rather than be ruled by other Jews in Israel?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 4, 2014, 12:04 am

        Makes you wonder if life in Israel is not as bad as the Mondos make it out to be.

        Don’t be stupid. Life in Israel kept these people under martial law for nearly two decades, and the Lieberman offer merely proposed putting them right back under a regime of military occupation for many more decades, i.e.:

        *”Lieberman said a permanent Mid-East settlement could take decades and pressed a plan for transferring Israeli Arabs to any Palestinian state.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11429959
        * Lieberman: This generation will not see Middle East peace: Palestinian Authority is incapable of peace – but will not return to violence, says FM, calling for interim deal as substitute for final status agreement.
        http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-this-generation-will-not-see-middle-east-peace-1.312364

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 5, 2014, 9:22 am

        So given the choice between self determination

        Amazing mindset. Why don’t they want what we would have loved them to do from the very start, leave “our” ground Expel themselves? Even the few that happened to survive the war in 1948 in their own villages and towns. The “present absentees” are linguistically or legally absent from their possessions anyway. Why not leave altogether? We can offer them a piece of desert.

  8. yrn
    yrn
    January 3, 2014, 4:06 pm

    mondonut

    “So given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Israel – they choose Israel. Makes you wonder if life in Israel is not as bad as the Mondos make it out to be.”

    This is why I find this site amusing.
    they all fly in their assuming ideas and advice’s, that has nothing to do with reality.

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 3, 2014, 5:56 pm

      @ yrn “This is why I find this site amusing.
      they all fly in their assuming ideas and advice’s, that has nothing to do with reality”

      Failing together seems to be quite popular amongst apologists for Israel

      They’re Israeli citizens and;
      As Israeli citizens they already have their own state, Israel and;
      As Israeli citizens deciding to stay on their own land in their own state, no matter who the state is, IS self determination!

    • Hostage
      Hostage
      January 4, 2014, 12:24 am

      This is why I find this site amusing.
      they all fly in their assuming ideas and advice’s, that has nothing to do with reality.

      Well again, you are the ones avoiding reality. The Palestinian Israelis lived under martial law for near two decades in which they were considered one of the few examples of Apartheid Outside of Africa. http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/iicl2&div=8&id=&page=

      The Lieberman 2008 proposal was to incorporate as many of them as possible under the PA and Israel’s occupation regime as part of a longterm interim settlement. This is just a dickish proposal that would take away their freedom of movement to Al Aqsa and leave them stranded in a Bantstan.

  9. Jeff Klein
    Jeff Klein
    January 3, 2014, 4:37 pm

    Look, it’s no great mystery. People’s opinion about matters like this depends overwhelmingly on their perception of safety and standard of living — even in the face of discrimination. You think Latino citizens of Santa Fe want to be transferred to Mexican sovereignty? It’s not because they have equality or don’t face discrimination in the US, but because life in Mexico would be worse.

    It is a rational choice for Palestinian citizens to preserve residence in a developed country with modern infrastructure, and some, even if second-class, civil rights, rather than be transferred to an impoverished bantustan with no rights whatsoever and the constant target of Israeli settlers and security forces.

    By the way, Alex, a small point, but Um al-Fahem and Taibe are CITIES in the Triangle — or maybe (large) towns if you like, but certainly not “villages”.

    • OlegR
      OlegR
      January 3, 2014, 5:10 pm

      But the terrible fascist apartheid in Israel.
      Haven’t you read “Goliath” ?

      • Philip Munger
        Philip Munger
        January 3, 2014, 6:13 pm

        OlegR,

        You have got to be one of the most annoyingly obtuse commenters I’ve encountered on the tubez.

      • just
        just
        January 3, 2014, 6:53 pm

        I’ll second that, Philip.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 3, 2014, 6:56 pm

        @Philip Munger

        Annoying is a purposeful tactic intent on eliciting a frustrated outburst from intended the target. Not unlike the tactics used by serial abusers on their victims.

        It seems to be indicative of the types of people attracted by the Zionist colonial cause.

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        January 4, 2014, 2:29 am

        It is indicative and the bots have run out of anything reasonable to say so it’s their main tactic now.

      • Sumud
        Sumud
        January 3, 2014, 7:56 pm

        But the terrible fascist apartheid in Israel

        I’m sorry to say but I can’t tell if you’re acting dumb or are actually serious.

        The plan to unilaterally strip Palestinian Israelis of their citizenship is the most aggressive manifestation of apartheid [in Israel proper] that we have seen to date.

        Will any Israeli jews be stripped of their citizenship? No? Can you tell me why that is Oleg?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 4, 2014, 12:37 am

        But the terrible fascist apartheid in Israel.
        Haven’t you read “Goliath” ?

        Yeah I have. Thats why I know you only want to take away these people’s rights, like freedom of movement to the Haram al-Sharif, and stick them in a Bantustan where they have fewer rights that are still doled-out at Israel’s discretion. Gaza is the perfect example of Israel’s consideration for the citizens of a Palestinian state.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 4, 2014, 6:08 am

        @ OlegR
        I’m reading Goliath now. I’d like to see the contents discussed daily on US TV. Those who dissed the book admit the contents are factually accurate. These contents conjure up the atmosphere pervading Israel; this aggregate atmosphere is reflected in the aggregate Chapter titles.

        Israel is not only a waste of American taxpayer funds, it’s a moral and ethical drain on America and what’s left of America’s good reputation in the world. Knowing the truth about Israel, Every American I’ve ever known would not want to be complicit with Israel’s activities.

    • southernobserver
      southernobserver
      January 3, 2014, 5:49 pm

      Quite correct, a very believable incentive. I venture to suggest that this ethnic transfer would amount to being transferred from a developed country to a prison farm, with no freedom of movement and frequent raids and murder. The difference between serious discrimination and violent oppression. Why would anybody at all want this?

      More generally, there is a simple fraud. The Palestinians are not being offered a state, however, destitute. They are being offered in the indefinite and improbable a swiss cheese with no sovereignty whatsoever. It is commonly called here a Bantustan solution. I don’t like this term because as best I can tell, it would be far far worse. It is a self funded prison solution.

    • JeffB
      JeffB
      January 4, 2014, 2:36 pm

      Taibe population 2000. That’s not a city. The definitions overlap on purpose. But 2000 is not even too big for a village (over 10k). Um al-Fahem is a large town or district.

      • Jeff Klein
        Jeff Klein
        January 5, 2014, 11:24 am

        Sorry, you’re wrong. Maybe you are confusing the Taibe in the Triangle with the village Taibe in Galilee (there’s another in the West Bank too). Taibe’s population is almost 40,000 (and Um el-Fahem is bigger).

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        January 5, 2014, 11:37 am

        Didn’t realize there were 3 of them. Agreed on Um el-Fahem.

  10. ritzl
    ritzl
    January 3, 2014, 5:22 pm

    Palestinian-Israelis should make a concerted effort start voting at 100% turnout. If that happened they would have 25%+/- of the Knesset seats (largest assembled faction), depending on Jewish-Israeli turnout. Enough clout to counter some of this BS. Maybe enough to get the Nazareth Institute some funding.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      January 3, 2014, 8:36 pm

      There is a near-consensus among Israeli Jews that only a Jewish majority is legitimate (at least on important issues). In deference to this near-consensus, no party leader will consider inviting parties mainly or wholly representing Arab citizens to help form a governing coalition. A leader who did this would be deserted by his other coalition partners, so probably he would be unable to form a majority coalition, but if his party were strong enough to achieve a viable coalition with Arab parties alone it would generate such a backlash that his government would soon collapse. Unless and until a seismic shift in Jewish Israeli opinion destroys the existing near-consensus, the Palestinian citizens of Israel have no clout whatsoever.

      • ritzl
        ritzl
        January 4, 2014, 3:37 pm

        @Stephen – I understand that and have written it more than a few times. I believe that the situation is evolving.

        Israel’s economy and society has come to the point where the enfranchised v. disenfranchised may be coming to be as strong an influence on Israeli politics as Jewish v. non-Jewish has up til now. In the en v. disen contention, Palestinian Israelis both have allies and are allies to others. Especially with 30% of the MKs. They become a power bloc and unignorable. Maybe not so unignorable that they become part of a ruling coalition right away, but in the long view there are increasingly exploitable power-politics avenues for PalestinianJewish political cooperation, imho.

        I think opportunism has the potential to trump raw tribalism. Maybe.

  11. Mike_Konrad
    Mike_Konrad
    January 3, 2014, 8:37 pm

    The reality is that Israel will NOT surrender the Jewish communities no matter what the Palestinians do.

    So the addition of 300,000 Arabs to the PA is pointless.

    • Sumud
      Sumud
      January 4, 2014, 7:54 am

      The reality is that Israel will NOT surrender the Jewish communities no matter what the Palestinians do.

      You may wish and hope but actually, you can’t know the future.

      Stop pretending.

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        January 4, 2014, 9:05 am

        We can’t know the future but there is a high chance of a resurgence of antisemitism. There is no point in educating people about Auschwitz , never again and the evil of discrimination based on religion when the only Jewish state runs apartheid and is run by war criminals. “Fuck you” works both ways.

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 4, 2014, 9:26 am

        seafoid, Israel is about to encounter a bigger problem than antisemitism. Today, the head-cutting wahabists took control of Fallujah (population 300,000). This is part of the same group of fanatics currently fighting everybody in Syria and that promised to begin attacks on Lebanon and Israel. Ironic that in Syria, they are backed by the West and the Gulf states, and Israel. Turkey was also backing them but realized they were next on their list and stopped helping them. Israel is going to be wishing back to the old quiet days when it worried only about Hizbullah.

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        January 4, 2014, 9:49 am

        Is that ISIS , Walid ? The ones the tribes kicked out of Anbar a few years ago, the ones the Syrian opposition have been turning on? The friends of the ones dissing Fairuz?

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 4, 2014, 10:13 am

        Same general group, different section. Today, The ISIS people said they did the Beirut bombing a couple of days back. This afternoon, this ISIS group is raising hell on the Syrian-Turkish border because Turkey is not letting anything through anymore, and as you said 18 rebel groups including the Free Syrian Army united to fight the ISIS with rumours that Assad’s forces may join them in the effort. You need a road map to follow the different groups fighting. These ISIS people that sometimes call themselves ISIL with the L for the Levant are really bad news.

        ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi that declared war on Lebanon yesterday was killed in Syria today. Crazy people crazy world..

      • Sumud
        Sumud
        January 4, 2014, 9:55 am
      • seafoid
        seafoid
        January 4, 2014, 3:13 pm

        Sumud, it is blowback from ordinary people choosing to run cars on Saudi petrol. It is intimately linked to commuter lifestyles.

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 4, 2014, 4:58 pm

        The US is calling the takeover of Fallujah “barbaric”. Looks like the monster it created is out of control and making a mess of things in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Lebanon. Now the US appears to be wanting to pull the plug on this frankenstein but other sponsors are not yet ready to do it.

        You probably missed the short episode on Majed al-Majed. The man, a Saudi national, reportedly al-Qaeda’s number one man in Lebanon in charge of Abdullah Azzam Brigade that took credit for the Iranian embassy bombing of 2 months ago. He’s wanted in Egypt, Jordan Saudia, Syria and Lebanon and number one suspect in the Iranian embassy bombing. A week ago, the Lebanese army caught up with him when he returned from Syria for his dialysis treatments and arrested him. Pressure started mounting on Lebanon to extradite him by the Saudis, while equal pressure was applied by most Lebanese and Iranians to not release him to the Saudis because he had to be tried for crimes committed in Lebanon first. A couple of days back, the Saudis sent a team to meet with him at the military hospital and for some medical reason probably kidney failure, the man suddenly died this morning and that was the end of any prospect of getting information on the Iranian embassy and other bombings.

        http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/112555-majed-al-majed-dies-after-deterioration-of-his-health

  12. Talkback
    Talkback
    January 4, 2014, 6:34 am

    Nothing has changed. Like in 1948 the antigentile Junta of Palestine will not ask the resident Gentiles under what rule they actually want to live. They will continue to impose and strip off citizenship or residency rights for Gentiles as they please.
    I wonder if anyone ever did this to Jews. Not.

Leave a Reply