Trending Topics:

Netanyahu’s victory ‐ what is the cost?

Israel/Palestine
on 54 Comments

The victory of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel’s election may have come at a surprisingly high cost. Mr. Netanyahu publicly proclaimed what every thinking person on the planet always knew, but which most global world leaders chose to ignore: he will never allow the establishment of a free and independent Palestinian state. Now, world leaders, especially those in the United States who have fostered the farce of negotiations between Israel and Palestine, must see two unpleasant facts: 1) the Prime Minister has lied to them for years, and never had any intention of seriously negotiating with the Palestinians, and 2) The problem of the Israeli occupation of Palestine needs to be resolved.

These may seem simple or obvious, but are more complex than they may seem.

  1. Negotiations: The fact that Mr. Netanyahu never had any intention of negotiating in goodfaith should have been clear, since he continued building illegal settlements as so‐called negotiations continued. The Israeli military never slowed in their brutal oppression of Palestinians in the West Bank, never stopped arresting without charge men, women and children, and never stopped protecting the murderous crimes of illegal settlers. What sincerity and ‘good faith’ could possibly attend those actions?
  2. Ending the Occupation: This is a far more complex issue. For decades, the U.S. could say that Israel and Palestine merely needed to negotiate. One hesitates to explain, yet again, at the risk of boring the reader, that negotiations can only take place between two entities, each of which has something the other wants, that can only be obtained by surrendering something it has. Israel can take whatever it wants from Palestine with complete impunity, granted by the U.S. and condoned by the international community. Why should Israel negotiate? By doing so, it has something to lose, and little to gain. The status quo provides it with nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Global leadership may now take a closer look at the situation. Europe, Israel’s largest trading partner, has already indicated some skittishness about European countries doing business with Israeli companies located in the occupied West Bank. Many European countries have also voted positively on non‐binding resolutions to recognize Palestine. When Sweden last year officially granted diplomatic recognition to Palestine, Swedish Foreign Minister, Margot Wallstrom indicated that doing so would put each party on a level playing field and help move peace talks forward. Conservatives in Sweden were dismayed, saying that a negotiated settlement was the only way to establish an independent Palestinian state. Now, however, it is publicly acknowledged by the Israeli Prime Minister that negotiations are not now, and never were, a viable alternative.

Russian President Vladimir Putin stated in 2014 that Russia, which has long had friendly relations with Palestine, was prepared to recognize that country as soon as a negotiated settlement is reached. Now that it is known that there will be no negotiated settlement, it will be interesting to see how Russia reacts.

In South America, where most countries have already established diplomatic relations with Palestine, pressure on Israel is also sure to increase. And Israel’s petty criticism of Brazil in 2014, when Israeli spokesman Yigal Palmo called that nation a ‘diplomatic dwarf’, will not soon be forgotten. Now, knowing that Mr. Netanyahu has lied for years to the global community will only add to international frustrations with him and his policies.

And what of the United States? There are several areas where U.S. policy may be forced to change in terms of Israel:

  1. Negotiations: For many years, the U.S. has prided itself on its efforts to start, restart, sponsor and move forward nonsensical peace talks. U.S. elected officials, when asked about the brutal occupation, could always mouth worthless phrases about ‘returning to the bargaining table’. A new catchphrase will have to be established, but one thinks in vain to find one.
  2. International Law: Will the U.S. now put some pressure on Israel to abide by international law? The U.S. has used its veto power countless times to protect Israel from any consequences of its violations of law. The hypocrisy of doing so is clear. One example is telling. In February of 2011, then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, vetoed a resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity in occupied Palestine. In doing so, she said, astonishingly, that while the U.S. sees “the folly and illegitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, we think it unwise for this council to attempt to resolve the core issues that divide Israelis and Palestinians”. Since the fairy tale of negotiations has now dissolved, will the U.S. now think that, perhaps, ‘this council’ (U.N. Security Council) is indeed the place to ‘resolve the core issues that divide Israelis and Palestinians’?
  3. Human Rights of the Palestinians: Will the U.S. take a stand for Palestinian rights? Every time Israel implemented one of its brutal, genocidal onslaughts on the Gaza Strip, using U.S.‐ provided bombs to do it, U.S. officials could talk of Israel’s need to ‘defend’ itself. Yet former U.S. Secretary of State, and likely 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said this about Syria in 2011: “Now the United States believes firmly in the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all member‐states, but we do not believe that sovereignty demands that this council stand silent when governments massacre their own people, threatening regional peace and security in the process. And we reject any equivalence between premeditated murders by a government’s military machine and the actions of civilians under siege driven to self‐defense.” Can this not be applied to Palestine? It is now recognized by the United Nations. Over 120 nations individually recognize it. It’s ‘sovereignty and territorial integrity’ must be protected; the threats to ‘regional peace’ that are caused by the brutal occupation must be addressed and any equivalence ‘between premeditated murders by a government’s (Israel) military machine and the actions of civilians under siege (Palestinians) driven to self‐defense’ must be rejected. Will this now change? In the summer of 2014, the U.S. did offer some tepid criticism of Israel, when it bombed United Nations refugee centers. Yet that didn’t stop, or even slow, the shipment of more weapons to Israel.

So what comes next? Will Mr. Obama finally, with nearly two years of his term remaining, take some kind of semi‐principled stand? He might at least, one thinks, reconsider U.S. foreign aid to a nation that is in constant, serious violation of international law, and that accepts that foreign aid as it simultaneously spits in the face of the United States. Members of Congress, of course, will be difficult to convince. Human rights are not even on their radar when they are coupled with the possibility of losing campaign contributions. AIPAC (American Israel Political Affairs Committee) is very generous to those politicians who toe its brutal line. But even there, some new cracks, caused by Mr. Netanyahu’s speech to Congress earlier this month, seem to be widening.

One thing, at least, is clear: it will be difficult, although not impossible, for the U.S. to continue to conduct business as usual regarding Palestine and Israel. And if a new approach is forthcoming, it will be interesting to see what it is. Either way, the efforts of others throughout the world on behalf of Palestine will only increase now, and that can bring positive results. They won’t occur overnight, but they will occur. Palestine will be free.

About Robert Fantina

Robert Fantina is an author and activist for peace and international human rights. A U.S. citizen, he moved to Canada following the 2004 presidential election. His writing appears regularly on Counterpunch.org, Warisacrime.org, and other sites. Mr. Fantina resides near Toronto, Ontario.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

54 Responses

  1. just
    March 20, 2015, 11:57 am

    Thanks for this terrific article, Robert.

    It should make every American cringe with guilt, shame, and remorse.

    It should also mobilize folks to ensure that justice is done, and that the Palestinians are given their freedom (and all that freedom entails) back. Their freedom that was torn from them in terrible, horrible actions that occurred decades ago and continues today.

    “Palestine will be free.”

    Yes, it will.

    • jaspeace2day
      March 23, 2015, 4:19 pm

      Funny how the truth is always well said and I say well said Robert. Not a day goes by that I don’t think about how I’m made complicit in the killing of innocent Palestinian men, women and children because I pay taxes and where those tax dollars go….

  2. truth2power
    March 20, 2015, 12:12 pm

    When I first heard Mr Netanyahu’s appalling statements about ‘not on my watch’. I thought they were the words of a desperate man, thinking all was lost for him so he might as well declare himself truthfully at last (a truth that has been obvious to most of us for years and years). When I heard late into the night that against all predictions, he would have the greatest number of seats in the Knesset, I was near to tears of despair!
    If ever there was a stronger impetus for the UN, the U.S., the UK and the EU to stop dithering about recognising THE STATE OF PALESTINE (1967 borders) and do it – I don’t know when it could have been? Mr Netanyahu and his voters have admitted they are not interested in fairness and justice Now the world must declare loudly that it is very much interested and the world will have its way!

  3. pabelmont
    March 20, 2015, 12:14 pm

    Rice: The USA sees “the folly and illegitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, we think it unwise for this council to attempt to resolve the core issues that divide Israelis and Palestinians” .

    I agree that the council, or the USA, should not resolve the issues.. The slight-of-hand has been the suggestion — false on its face — that holding Israel to compliance with international law is about resolving the issues themselves, about negotiating the terms of a final peace treaty in any way. It is not.

    OTOH, requiring Israel, today, to remove the settlers and dismantle the wall and the settlements — all of which appears to me to be consistent with the ICJ legal analysis of the wall alone — might well do, today, what it might not have done in 1980 (say), that is, provide Israel with a MAJOR reason to negotiate a peace so as to avoid the cost and disruption of completing the removals of people, wall, and settlements. If Israel were given a time line, say one year or two, in which to gradually remove the settlers, wall, and settlements, and actually began the removals it is safe to assume that Israel would very much wish to avoid completing the removals. Hence Israel would have “something to lose” and negotiations might begin (and for the very first time) in earnest on both sides.

    But the USA would have nothing to say about the final treaty — merely serving, along with the rest of the international community, as motivators somewhat belatedly demanding a legal occupation.

  4. just
    March 20, 2015, 12:28 pm

    James Besser:

    “In my quarter century as Washington correspondent for Jewish newspapers, I frequently defended Israel against charges that it had created an apartheid system in the West Bank. But this week’s election, with Benjamin Netanyahu poised to serve another term with an even more hardline coalition, means that apartheid is the path Israeli voters have chosen. The inevitable results will include even greater international isolation for the Jewish state, a boost to efforts to apply boycotts and sanctions, diminished support from American Jews and endlessly intensifying cycles of violence.

    Since the Madrid peace process began in 1991, it was possible – though sometimes with great difficulty – to argue that Israel wanted to find some route to accommodation with the Palestinians. Sure, there were huge obstacles to overcome, not the least of which was a shortsighted Palestinian leadership and a volatile, nervous electorate in Israel.
    ……
    And he was returned to power after his crystal clear rejection of Palestinian statehood and the territorial compromise that most of the world believes is the only way to ensure a peaceful future for a democratic Jewish state. There were reports this week that Netanyahu was attempting to walk those comments back, but his credibility on the issue of Palestinian statehood, never strong, is nonexistent.

    In the absence of any willingness to work toward a Palestinian state in the West Bank, the future is clear: continuing occupation with no effort to find a way to end it, accelerating settlement construction and a hardening of policies toward Palestinians in the West Bank.

    In other words, apartheid.

    Mainstream Jewish groups go ballistic when they hear the term because of what it implies: an official policy of unfairness so profound that a fractious world unites against it with sanctions, boycotts and a pariah label for the perpetrators.
    …….
    Or they will say the no-statehood pledge was just politics as usual in Israel’s fractious democracy, as meaningless as most other campaign promises.

    And nobody outside an increasingly narrow pro-Israel tent will buy it. Because apartheid is apartheid, and that’s exactly what Israeli voters chose this week as a course for their nation.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.648006

  5. Kay24
    March 20, 2015, 1:21 pm

    EU report on Jerusalem does not look good. It seems it has come to the boiling point. Again, this is Netanyahu’s talent of taking a bad situation and making it worse. To think the majority in Israel support Netanyahu policies that end up in violence is unbelievable.

    “A hard-hitting EU report on Jerusalem warns that the city has reached a dangerous boiling point of “polarisation and violence” not seen since the end of the second intifada in 2005.

    Calling for tougher European sanctions against Israel over its continued settlement construction in the city – which it blames for exacerbating recent conflict – the leaked document paints a devastating picture of a city more divided than at any time since 1967, when Israeli forces occupied the east of the city.

    The report has emerged amid strong indications that the Obama administration is also rethinking its approach to Israel and the Middle East peace process following the re-election of Binyamin Netanyahu as Israel’s prime minister.”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/20/jerusalem-at-boiling-point-of-polarisation-and-violence-eu-report

    • bryan
      March 20, 2015, 4:16 pm

      Simply read the comments in response to this Guardian article to see the extent to which the Israeli government has alienated itself from world opinion! Wonderful and hopeful!

  6. amigo
    March 20, 2015, 1:39 pm

    Netnayahu,s back track on his ” No Palestine on my watch” needs to be met with some tough responses.

    1, Obama should tell him if he is serious about a 2SS then prove it by an immediate halt to the expansion of “Illegal Settlements.

    2, Immediately reverse the 50 plus discriminatory laws passed by the knesset.

    3 , End the ongoing night raids of Palestinians homes and imprisoning , without charge Palestinian men , women and children.

    4, End the aggression against peaceful demonstrators.

    That for a start and he should tell Netanyahu that until these demands have been met , all aid both monetary and military will be suspended as well as diplomatic protection at the UN.

    Obama should give him the WH phone number and tell him to call when he has something genuine to discuss.These are the only actions Israel understands.

    The Palestinians need to request the UN to recognise the State of Palestine so they can measure Obama,s sincerity in refusing to veto such a res.They also need to inundate the ICC with war crimes charges which should include each and every case of illegal transfer of Israeli citizens to Occupied Palestine.

    Hopefully Israel will begin to get the message that sticking their finger at the International community has consequences.

    Enough is enough.

    • just
      March 20, 2015, 2:11 pm

      +1!

      It’s a good start, amigo.

      • Bornajoo
        March 20, 2015, 4:25 pm

        + another 1 Amigo!

        Is there any way you can get a job at the White House?

  7. Eva Smagacz
    March 20, 2015, 2:03 pm

    I always felt that Obama is playing it long with Israel and american Zionist supporters. His strategy to concentrate on settlements and bring them to the attention of the world as “illegitimate” was, and is, a great strategy.

    He gave Netanyahu and his ilk all the rope they needed to hung themselves – and in this case – to expose Zionist Lobby and its poisonous interference with American foreign policy and to expose the impossibility of Israel being Jewish AND democratic.

    Who would have thought in the lull after Cairo lecture, that so much will change in the Middle East….

    • just
      March 20, 2015, 2:12 pm

      Great comment, Eva. I do believe it, too.

      Thanks.

    • Misterioso
      March 21, 2015, 11:34 pm

      Well said Eva. I concur.

      I also believe that for some time Obama’s strategy has been to give Israel enough rope to hang itself. Of course, it became relatively easy with arrogant, megalomaniacal, racist, deceitful, thuggish Netanyahu at Israel’s helm. Needless to say, in order to win a second term in office, Obama had to bite his tongue and appear to be under Israel’s boot during his first term.

      The bottom line is that Israel is America’s number one geopolitical liability, a millstone around its neck. We gain nothing other than well-deserved international enmity by supporting Israel. Sooner or later it will have to comply with international law or be cast adrift by America, and the rest of the world. The thrust of 21st century geopolitics, international economics, international law, morality and demographics are with the Palestinians.

  8. just
    March 20, 2015, 2:18 pm

    Holy smokes! Fast and furious~ keep it coming and make it stick!

    “EU report: Jerusalem has reached ‘dangerous boiling point’

    Guardian quotes leaked report warning of the escalating situation in the city and calling for more sanctions against settlement products and ‘known violent settlers.’

    A leaked report prepared by heads of European missions in Jerusalem warns that the city has reached a dangerous boiling point, and that the rising violence and polarization are threatening the “viability of the two-state solution.”

    The report, obtained by the Guardian, also calls for further sanctions against products made in the settlements and steps against “known violent settlers.”

    “2014 has been distinguished by a number of specific, disturbing and often violent developments,” the report says, cautioning that “these incidents have occurred against the background of the systematic increase in settlement activity, tensions over the Haram al-Sharif and rising levels of tensions and acts of violence on both sides.”

    The report is a document prepared annually by the European countries’ missions in Jerusalem, who advise EU foreign policymakers.

    The Guardian quotes “well-informed European sources” who say that the document “is now being discussed in Brussels” and “reflects a strong desire from European governments for additional measures against Israel over its continued settlement-building.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.648042

    • just
      March 20, 2015, 2:29 pm

      From the original in The Guardian:

      “Jerusalem at boiling point of polarisation and violence – EU report

      “Exclusive: Leaked report says city more divided than at any time since 1967 and calls for consideration of tougher sanctions over settlement building

      ………These incidents have occurred against the background of the systematic increase in settlement activity, tensions over the Haram al-Sharif and rising levels of tensions and acts of violence on both sides.” Placing part of the blame on Israel’s “unabated” policy of continued settlement construction, it adds: “The expansion of settlements has continued, including in highly sensitive areas … and [has] been followed in force by waves of demolitions and evictions.”

      A second key factor identified by the report for the deteriorating security situation in Jerusalem is the continuing tensions over the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount complex, which it blames on “serious radicalisation” on both sides.

      The report notes: “Almost on a daily basis settlers and national religious activists have ascended on to the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount under the protection of Israeli forces.”
      ……
      A third factor the report identifies as fuelling polarisation is the heavy-handed policing of Palestinian areas of east Jerusalem, where additional Israeli forces sent to quell disturbances “have been engaged in recurrent violent confrontations with Palestinian youth that led to more than 1,300 arrests (with 40% of the detainees being minors)”.

      An Israeli government spokesman said on Friday: “This is so extremely one sided a report that it distorts reality beyond comprehension.”

      The disclosure of the report follows hard on the heels of a letter sent by chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat to Federica Mogherini, the EU’s top representative on foreign policy, calling on the European Union to take a tougher stance against Israel.

      In the letter, Erekat demanded: “We believe it is time to focus all our efforts in saving the two-state solution from its total disappearance through holding Israel accountable of its violations of international law.”

      http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/20/jerusalem-at-boiling-point-of-polarisation-and-violence-eu-report

      Don’t you just love:
      “An Israeli government spokesman said on Friday: “This is so extremely one sided a report that it distorts reality beyond comprehension.””?

  9. just
    March 20, 2015, 4:52 pm

    Compare and contrast, please. Netanyahu’s lies vs:

    “1:30 P.M. UN: Iran still honoring interim nuclear deal

    Iran has continued to meet its commitments under an interim nuclear agreement with six world powers, a confidential United Nations nuclear agency report seen by Reuters showed on Friday.

    The monthly update by the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran was not enriching uranium above a fissile concentration of 5 percent. It also said Iran had not made “any further advances” in its activities at two enrichment facilities and a heavy water reactor under construction. (Reuters)”

    and

    “8:00 P.M. Kerry to discuss Iran talks with European officials

    U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry will travel to London on Saturday to meet with his European counterparts to discuss the Iran nuclear negotiations, the State Department said on Friday.

    Department spokesman Jeff Rathke said Kerry had already spoken to officials from China and Russia about the ongoing talks. (Reuters)”

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/middle-east-updates/1.647970

  10. just
    March 20, 2015, 5:21 pm

    “Netanyahu Tactics Anger Many U.S. Jews, Deepening a Divide

    Long before the latest election in Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu was a polarizing figure among American Jews. But even many of his supporters said this week that they were appalled at his last-minute bid to mobilize Jewish voters by warning that Arabs were going to the polls in droves, and his renunciation of a two-state solution to the Palestinian crisis.

    Mr. Netanyahu’s party won the election and cheers from hawkish American Jews. But in interviews this week, rabbis, scholars and Jews from across the country and a range of denominations said that with his campaign tactics, he had further divided American Jews and alienated even some conservatives, who had already suspected that he was more committed to building settlements than building peace with the Palestinians.

    Even with Mr. Netanyahu’s postelection interview walking back his statements against a two-state plan for peace with Palestinians, many Jews say they are worried that the most lasting outcome of the elections will be the increasing isolation of Israel — not only around the world but also from the younger generation of American Jews. Unlike their parents and grandparents, these Jews have grown up in an era when Israel is portrayed not as a heroic underdog but as an oppressive occupier, and many of them tend to see Mr. Netanyahu as out of step with their views on Israel and the world.”

    more @ http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/21/us/netanyahu-tactics-anger-many-us-jews-deepening-a-divide.html?referrer=&_r=0

    Comments are not overly kkkind to Netanyahu.

  11. just
    March 20, 2015, 6:15 pm

    From Alan Elsner of J Street (via Max B and Alex Kane)

    “…..Now, as he constructs a coalition of ultranationalists and ultra-Orthodox, those shields have been stripped away. Netanyahu must now face the world having bared his true face and exposed his true beliefs — and the international community, led by the United States, must respond accordingly.

    What should this involve?

    To begin with, Washington should not wait for others to draft a U.N. resolution condemning the settlements. It should take the initiative, in consultation with its international partners, in drafting a resolution that lays out the detailed parameters for an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    The resolution should of course state unequivocally that the solution rests in an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines, with equivalent land swaps to incorporate some of the major settlement blocs within Israel. It should also reiterate Israel’s right to security. And it should state clearly and unambiguously that the settlements are illegal under international law and must stop.

    Words are important — but more important are deeds. Whatever he says about the two-state solution, the next Netanyahu government is virtually certain to blast ahead with settlement-building. It is on that basis that he and his administration should be diplomatically isolated and condemned.

    In his campaign statement, Netanyahu took pride in approving the construction of a huge suburb on the southern fringes of Jerusalem in order to block Palestinian construction from neighboring Bethlehem. He boasted that the building was not simply to provide housing for Jews rather than Palestinians, but that it was to make it harder for the Palestinians to establish a coherent, territorially contiguous state.

    Netanyahu’s statement was a moment of truth for him, for Israel and for the world. He was admirably blunt and concise. He left no doubt what he intended. Now, the world must hold him to account.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/opinions/elsner-netanyahu-promises/

  12. Ramzi Jaber
    March 20, 2015, 8:31 pm

    All the good sentiments and comments discussed here are really very sincerely appreciated. But as the saying goes, we Palestinians have been around the block a couple of times.

    I have reached such a deep level of cynicism and skepticism that I must touch to believe (as St. Thomas once said).

    I gave President Obama the benefit of the doubt for so long, always saying to myself that he’ll be free to do what’s in his heart in the last two years of his second term. Now I’m hearing rumblings from around him and from US zionists that “we need to give nutnyahoo a chance to proof that he really didn’t mean it” or “Obama cannot do anything until the Iran situation clears” or “Democratic candidates for 2016 including the presidential kind will pressure Obama not to upset the zinoist state so as not to impact their chances to win”.

    So my dear friends, this brings me back to St. Thomas and Missouri……. show me and let me touch!

    • just
      March 20, 2015, 8:47 pm

      Good to see you, Ramzi.

      “show me and let me touch!”

      I think we can~ together. I think this is the time~ we’ve been handed a golden opportunity.

      “If not us, who? If not now, when?”

      JFK

      and

      “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?”

      Hillel

      • Ramzi Jaber
        March 21, 2015, 9:47 am

        Same here just. Your support, and those of others in MW and elsewhere, is greatly appreciated and needed, even essential and critical for achieving justice to the Palestinians and establishing the State of Palestine.

        My comment was in no means discarding that great and sustained support. Apologies if it came across that way.

        As I see it, the collective WE that believes in peace and a just resolution of the tragic Palestine., already have done more than enough to keep the topic and interest alive. It’s now the USA and EU turn to show ACTION not words. This action must start in very short order, days not weeks. Otherwise, it’s just the same old b*%#@^&t.

        In parallel to what USA/EU might want to act on, we Palestinians must read this last zionist election as it really is: this is no longer just about bad nutnyahoo and what racism and hatred he spews out. This is a deeply fundamental and hugely consequential shift in the zionist entity’s societal structure and direction:

        – This is about the entire zionist majority voting for apartheid and occupation.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority accepting and supporting racism and hatred.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority being drunk on power, suppression, murder, and colonization of another people.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority rejecting peace and justice.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority putting its collective head in the sand and saying we want, can, and will take the cake and eat it too, we’ll “manage” whatever comes since we’re powerful. Damn everybody else.

        So yes, we Palestinians must take this new reality into our immediate calculus and intensify our resolve, quadruple our efforts, and recommit our total dedication to

        1S1P1V. Yes, 1S1P1V.

        That is the ONLY way forward. And yet again, it as not us as a people or our courageous leadership (they are cowards and zionist agents in reality!) who have made this fateful decision. It was forced upon us yet again, just like all of our existential decisions that have always been forced upon us, by nutnyahoo, leaving us no other path but to work towards 1S1P1V.

        So while USA and EU play catchup with realities on the ground and JUST NOW (maybe) start pushing for true action to pressure the zionist entity towards a 2SS, the fact of the matter is there is no more a 2SS possible after this zionist election.

        So let USA and EU do their 2SS thing. And we – Palestinians, MW supporters, pro-justice and pro-peace people across the world – we must all start pushing in one direction together, as you said just, towards 1S1P1V including our current efforts at the ICC/ICJ/UNSC/UNGA.

        It will be a waste of Palestinian effort and a waste of our grassroots supporters efforts to spend even one second or one penny on anything dealing with 2SS.

        We must pour it all in the 1S1P1V path. We must demand full citizenship, equality, liberty, freedom, human rights, and justice under the current laws of the zionist regime for all those who live in historic Palestine. The United List is courageously showing the way forward.

        1S1P1V. Please all, focus your efforts and lobbying and discourse on that path and only that path.

        Thank you just and all!

      • just
        March 21, 2015, 10:04 am

        Ramzi~ GREAT post! What you wrote bears repeating:

        “this is no longer just about bad nutnyahoo and what racism and hatred he spews out. This is a deeply fundamental and hugely consequential shift in the zionist entity’s societal structure and direction:

        – This is about the entire zionist majority voting for apartheid and occupation.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority accepting and supporting racism and hatred.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority being drunk on power, suppression, murder, and colonization of another people.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority rejecting peace and justice.

        – This is about the entire zionist majority putting its collective head in the sand and saying we want, can, and will take the cake and eat it too, we’ll “manage” whatever comes since we’re powerful. Damn everybody else.”

        I have been hollering this in essence since before the election~ when 95% of Israelis supported the massacre/destruction of Gaza last summer, and no relief in sight! It is the majority of Israelis who are as sick/cruel wrt Palestinians as their chosen leader.

        “So yes, we Palestinians must take this new reality into our immediate calculus and intensify our resolve, quadruple our efforts, and recommit our total dedication to

        1S1P1V. Yes, 1S1P1V.”

        No more farcical “peace process”! External pressure, starting with the US, must be exerted and the citizens of every complicit government must demand an end to the impunity that Israel has enjoyed til now for the vast & sustained array of Israeli criminal actions.

        No more billions, no more wmds, no more veto/abstention at the UN.

        Nothing. Rather, give Gazans the billions to rebuild their homes and improve their lives. Tell Israel that if they ‘touch’ Gaza again, they will face the world’s wrath.

        1S1P1V!

        (And Ramzi, you owe no apology! Both of your posts were spot-on!)

      • Bornajoo
        March 21, 2015, 10:06 am

        +1 Ramzi!!

      • Ramzi Jaber
        March 21, 2015, 12:56 pm

        Thanks just and Bornajoo.

  13. ritzl
    March 21, 2015, 2:29 am

    Good article.

    Two things:

    • When people ask about “cost” I never know what that means? David Axelrod asked the question, “…But at what cost?” in Kershner’s latest NYT article (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/world/middleeast/netanyahu-israel-elections-arabs.html?_r=0). Someone should define “cost” as all this analysis revolves around it. Mostly it seems to me, the discussion assumes that it’s “cost” to Israel’s standing in the world and the fracturing (permanent or inconveniencing/repairable) of the US-Israel relationship. Both of those “cost” senses are completely self-serving, imo.

    David Axelrod, President Obama’s former senior adviser, said Tuesday evening on Twitter that Mr. Netanyahu’s last-minute stand against a Palestinian state might have helped ensure him another victory. “Tightness of exits in Israel suggests Bibi’s shameful 11th-hour demagoguery may have swayed enough votes to save him. But at what cost?” he wrote.

    • In that vein, and to further clarify into the specifically relevant to the discussion, any definition of “cost” should be accompanied by an explicit statement of “cost” to whom.

    Well, maybe that’s only one thing, and maybe it’s a little thing, but it seems (to me) like the assumptions going into the use of “cost” make it such an amorphous term, with definitions filled in by the reader, that it almost makes understanding/PoV/analysis fracture at the outset.

    FWIW.

    • bintbiba
      March 21, 2015, 12:20 pm

      Ramzi….. our hearts are with you…
      If only our leaders were of your mettle…. how much more hope and vigorous mindset we would have, instead of the sad cynicism that you mention. We all suffer from it …. have done so for years.

      Thank you for an invigorating post, Ramzi.

  14. Boomer
    March 21, 2015, 10:10 am

    Since the election in Israel, I’ve read and heard numerous discussions about it in U.S. MSM, including both news and “talk shows” in which the pundits and reporters pontificate. I am amazed at the extent to which Palestinians are invisible, amazed at the way their actual predicament–and Israel’s actions against them–are ignored. The discussion is mostly about personalities–whether Obama is irritated with Nutanyahoo–or politics.

    In some cases this may be because the reporters and pundits sense that it would be bad for their careers to do otherwise. In other cases it may be a result of their own interests, concerns and preferences. In any event, it seems that Palestinians are only visible in the U.S. when Israel is bombing, strafing, and otherwise attacking them on a larger-than-normal scale. Of course, there are places like this site that are exceptions, but they are not frequented by most Americans.

  15. unverified__5ilf90kd
    March 21, 2015, 11:05 am

    Exactly right. Even the Jews in the media who speak out about Israel are restrained and irrational in certain ways. Peter Beinart insists that he cannot support BDS because BDS supporters want a one-state solution. This analysis of BDS supporters in simply not true.

    Similarly, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote yesterday “Sad but true,” he noted, “some Israelis voted for Netanyahu because they’re frightened of Obama.” This is a distortion that tries to blame Obama for Netanyahu’s crimes.

    Ari Shavit wrote yesterday “Israel is not Alabama of the 1950s, as some American media outlets have described it.” I personally was in Alabama at that time – the real truth is that Israel is worse than Alabama ever was. At least in Alabama they did it at night in the dark. In Israel they abuse and murder the Palestinians in daylight and on CNN.

    • W.Jones
      March 21, 2015, 11:14 am

      UNVERIFIED,

      In some ways it’s better than Alabama, in other ways worse. It’s better because slaves were directly owned by the whites. But it is worse than the slave days because Alabama wanted a black population to do work, and thus it had to avoid ethnic cleansing.

      So in some ways it’s better, in others worse.

  16. Misterioso
    March 21, 2015, 11:36 am

    A good sign.

    I just received the following article by esteemed CBC journalist, Neil Macdonald, from a Canadian friend:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/white-house-rethinking-israel-ties-peace-process-rules-1.3002385

    CBC News Mar 20, 2015

    White House ‘rethinking’ Israel ties, peace process rules

    Military alliance still intact, peace-process backing at UN another matter

    By Neil Macdonald

    Almost certainly, what happened yesterday in the White House briefing room is provoking joy among Palestinians, concern if not fear in Israel, and urgent “taking of views,” as the British put it, in foreign ministries worldwide.

    For the first time in decades, Washington is not reflexively and unconditionally standing with Israel.

    As a matter of fact, the Obama administration is explicitly doing the opposite.

    Repeatedly, President Obama’s aptly-named spokesman, Josh Earnest, told reporters Thursday the U.S. is “rethinking” and “re-evaluating,” and “reconsidering” its decades-long, unwavering support of a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    The days of Washington automatically supporting Israel at the UN, striving to protect it from international isolation may be over:

    “That foundation has been eroded,” said Earnest. “It means that our policy decisions need to be reconsidered.”

    And the president’s spokesman was happy to provide everyone with the reason for America’s change of heart: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pre-election declaration earlier this week that shattered, finally, the idea of “the peace process.”

    I use those quotation marks deliberately. The peace process has been a fiction for many years, if it was ever real at all.

    But it was a fiction nearly everyone had an interest in perpetuating: negotiations leading to “two states, living side by side in peace and security.”

    ‘Our ally’
    For the record, Earnest repeated America’s abiding support for that ultimate objective Thursday.

    But, he added, “now our ally in these talks has said that they are no longer committed to that solution.”

    Notice the “our ally” reference. An open admission that America supported one side in those talks, and that that has changed.

    White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Thursday that the Obama administration is reassessing how it wants to proceed on the Middle East peace process. (The Associated Press)

    For nearly a quarter of a century, the states-living-side-by-side-in-peace-and-security trope has been sacred diplomatic script.

    It’s enshrined in the foreign policies of the most important nations. It soothed liberals, and held out promise to Palestinians.

    But it was most fiercely cherished and defended by Israel itself, and its supporters worldwide.

    There is a simple reason for that: the alternative to a two-state solution is a one-state solution, and everybody knows what that means: Israel inherits, in perpetuity, millions of disenfranchised Arab subjects, people who procreate at a faster rate than Israelis, creating an ever-uglier and more asymmetrical version of democracy.

    As former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak has said, if the status quo continues, the nation between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River will either be Jewish, or a democracy, but not both.

    Shattered the fiction
    On Monday, campaigning hard for re-election, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu finally shattered the fiction of compromise and negotiation.

    He would never allow the establishment of a Palestinian state, he promised.

    He also invoked the shibboleth of an Arab fifth column inside Israel, warning that Arab-Israeli citizens, who are permitted a vote, would come out “in droves” to influence the outcome of the election.

    It was a remarkable statement. And, politically at least, it worked; Netanyahu won a decisive re-election.

    But in dispensing with the fiction, Netanyahu handed the Palestinian leadership a remarkable gift.

    In the past, when Palestinian leaders claimed Israel was negotiating in bad faith, and lobbied world leaders to support a unilateral declaration of independence, the Palestinians were patted on the head and pointed back to the non-existent negotiating table.

    The U.S. worked hard to block full Palestinian membership at the UN.

    And the Obama administration has warned the Palestinians against any effort to take Israel to the International Criminal Court for its vigorous settlement-building, which violates the laws of war.

    Everything, the Palestinians have been instructed, must be negotiated. Unilateral action is intolerable. Statehood is only possible with Israeli consent.

    Now, of course, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas can (and almost certainly will) rightly claim that negotiation is no longer possible; that by the Israeli prime minister’s own admission, the Palestinians have no one with whom to negotiate.

    Walk it back
    Netanyahu, realizing that, is now trying to “walk back” his unequivocal declaration.

    No, no, no, he told MSNBC Thursday. Everyone misunderstood his meaning.

    “I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that, circumstances have to change,” he said. “To make it achievable, then you have to have real negotiations with people who are committed to peace.”

    In other words, the Palestinians are the barrier, not him.

    In the past, the White House has almost always fallen into line on such occasions, supporting Israel. Not this time.

    Earnest was careful to tell reporters right off the bat that he’d read the transcript of Netanyahu’s hasty climb down on MSNBC, and then carefully made it clear the White House doesn’t believe a word of it.

    Will Israel be more internationally isolated as a result of Netanyahu’s remarks? Hard to predict, said Earnest.

    Can Israel still count on American support at the UN? We’re rethinking that.

    In reference to Netanyahu’s remarks about Arab-Israeli voters, Earnest called it a “cynical election day tactic [that] was a pretty transparent effort to marginalize Arab-Israeli citizens and their right to participate in their democracy.”

    It was a remarkable, abrupt reversal of attitude by Israel’s powerful friend and patron. (Canada, no doubt, is sticking with Netanyahu, but Canada has no Security Council veto.)

    Actually, there is lots of blame to go around for the failed peace process. Both the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships have shown blatant bad faith over the years.

    But the Israelis, of course, have been the ones in charge, and their stalling has moved in step with the simultaneous expansion of settlements on occupied land.

    In 2003, the renowned Jewish thinker and historian Tony Judt published an article declaring that the two-state solution would not happen; that Israel had created too many “facts on the ground,” meaning settlers in the occupied territories, and that Israel’s citizens must prepare for the “unthinkable” one-state solution with all its implications.

    “The Middle East peace process is finished. It did not die: it was killed,” he wrote.

    Judt was instantly pilloried as a self-hating Jew who advocated the annihilation of Israel.

    Unfortunately, he did not live to hear Benjamin Netanyahu validate his thesis.

    • MHughes976
      March 21, 2015, 2:36 pm

      That’s very interesting stuff, Misterioso – thanks. However, I think that there is one version of ‘one state’ of which we shall hear steadily more, though for a while rather discreetly – that is an overwhelmingly Jewish state achieved by massive population transfer, which is the only outcome truly compatible with Zionist principles. The idea of ‘Palestine in Sinai’, a variant on this theme, was floated or re-floated the other day and from time to time we hear about ‘being paid to leave’. The only reason why any Palestinians, or more than a museum-piece remnant, are still there is that any transfer programme, all the way from the most consensual to the most brutal, would cost an awful lot of money, so far not to hand. Receiving countries would have to be paid for the effort they would have to make and armies of propagandists would have to be paid to explain and justify. I think consensual would be preferred to brutal, even if the costs were about equal, because I’m sure that almost every Zionist, from the time Altneuland was published, has intended the final scene of the drama – though this is in truth impossible, an illusion – to ring down the ages as a mighty moment of generosity, so unlike what was visited on Jewish people by anti-Semites.

      • Misterioso
        March 21, 2015, 11:47 pm

        Yes, I am familiar with the Zionists’ grand strategy of one great mass transfer of Palestinians from their homeland.

        However, as you appear to agree, it’s too late. Israel’s star is fading. The entire world is enraged at and disgusted with Israel. Netanyahu’s electoral victory will only increase Jewish emigration from Israel and further decrease Jewish immigration, which is already less than a trickle. Zionism is moribund. No surprise. It was not only racist, but also a ludicrous concept from its inception. Some day, not so distant, the region, the world and Jews everywhere will be free of its tentacles.

      • MHughes976
        March 23, 2015, 7:47 am

        I quite agree with your remark that there is something ludicrous, as well as much else, about Zionism and its population transfers and crazy nuclear threats. However I don’t think that ‘the night is far spent and the day is at hand’. Rather I think that the idea of transfer will be taken more and more seriously during the next phase which will begin with the next United States election where protestations of Zionist commitment will exceed all bounds yet known.

  17. just
    March 21, 2015, 11:42 am

    Way back on March 16th, I linked to a column that announced the end to Tony Blair’s interference/obstruction in the farce that is the “peace process.”

    http://mondoweiss.net/2015/03/soldiers-jerusalem-netanyahu

    It included this quote: ‘ Wolfensohn shared the opinion of business people such as Lord (Clive) Hollick and informed journalists such as Le Monde’s Laurent Zecchini and Israeli affairs specialist Max Blumenthal: that progress in peace talks comes first, and only when they have delivered some sort of stability will private investment follow.’

    Well, it still has some folks knickers in a twist, namely and lamely, Petra Marquardt-Bigman:

    “A recent Guardian article celebrating reports that Tony Blair was about to “step back from his role as a peace envoy for the Middle East” referred to notorious anti-Israel activist Max Blumenthal as an “Israeli affairs specialist” and – as if this was not preposterous enough – went on to claim that Blumenthal shared with Blair’s predecessor and former World Bank president James Wolfensohn the belief “that progress in peace talks comes first, and only when they have delivered some sort of stability will private investment follow.” ”

    http://ukmediawatch.org/2015/03/19/guardian-promotes-hater-max-blumenthal-to-the-position-of-israeli-affairs-specialist/

    Kudos to Max, and thanks for the heads- up on twitter!!!

    (the comments are a ‘trip’ into zioland for the most part..)

  18. Kathleen
    March 21, 2015, 12:59 pm

    Netanyahu finally said out loud what many have known for a very long time. Israel does not support a two state solution. His actions have always been much louder than the words.

    During his interview with Andrea Mitchell she allowed him to repeat the unsubstantiated claims that Iranian leaders have said they want to “wipe Israel off the map” Andrea did not challenge at all. She did not ask the Israeli leader why Israel has not signed the NPT and yet screams about Iran’s legal right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes while Israel sits on massive stockpiles of nuclear biological and chemical weapons. Not a peep of real challenges out of Andrea.

    Last night on Hardball Howard Fineman went lower than I have ever heard he repeated the false claim that Iran ‘wants to destroy Israel” Pathetic on Fineman’s part. Was shocked.

    Hillary Mann Leverett has an incredible debate up about Iran on the Levertt’s website Going To Tehran. A must listen

    • just
      March 21, 2015, 1:12 pm

      Watch this trash from Jack Kingston and Mercedes Schlapp on Bill Maher from last night…..

      http://www.ringoffireradio.com/2015/03/republican-strategist-says-we-should-bomb-the-hell-out-of-the-middle-east/

      (via Max B.)

      • Kathleen
        March 24, 2015, 10:43 am

        Maher seems to be pushing the classist, racist attitude promoted by the Iraq invasion. Take down the containment boundaries propped up for years by the U.S. in the region and foment the hatred by disbanding Iraq army creating more chaos, allowing rebel groups to take hold and spread. Back off a bit, let them kill each other. A Sabra and Shatilla military method. Extremely creepy. As if the U.S. has nothing to do with the death and destruction going on.

    • MHughes976
      March 21, 2015, 2:57 pm

      The 2ss is incompatible with Zionism if Zionism is taken, as I think it normally is, as a claim to rights for Jewish people a) not shared with others who lack the same ‘birthright’ b) over all of the Holy Land, not just some of it.

      • Kathleen
        March 23, 2015, 1:37 pm

        One of the reasons that I have always had a problem with the term “liberal Zionist’ No way you can be both. Incompatible because of the core definitions of what Zionism is and has been acted upon. Racist at the core of the belief

      • MHughes976
        March 23, 2015, 1:44 pm

        Quite so, Kathleen – ‘equal rights for all’/’special rights for some’ are contradictory.

  19. just
    March 21, 2015, 7:42 pm

    Ilan Pappe:

    “The messages from Israel’s election

    Those of us who know the nature of the beast could not have been surprised by the results of the Israeli election.

    Like many of my friends, I was also relieved that a liberal Zionist government was not elected. It would have allowed the charade of the “peace process” and the illusion of the two-state solution to linger on while the suffering of the Palestinians continues.

    As always, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself provided the inevitable conclusion when he declared the end of the two-state solution — inviting us all to the long overdue funeral of an ill-conceived idea that provided Israel with international immunity for its colonialist project in Palestine.

    The power of the charade was on show when the world and local pundits unrealistically predicted a victory for liberal Zionism, an Israeli ideological trend that is near extinction — embodied by the Zionist Union list headed by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni.

    ……….Ever since Likud took power for the first time after its historic 1977 victory, Jewish voters have preferred the real thing, so to speak, steadily turning away from the paler, liberal version of Zionism.

    Labor was in power long enough for us to know that it could not offer even the most moderate Palestinian leaders any deal that would have granted them genuine sovereignty — not even in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which form only a fifth of historic Palestine.

    The reason is very simple: the raison d’etre of a settler-colonialist society is displacement of the natives and their replacement by settlers. At best natives can be confined in gated enclaves, at worst they are doomed to be expelled or destroyed.

    ……….Vision

    What it means is that the main impulse among Palestinians is not for retribution but for restitution. Their wish is to live normal lives — something Zionism denied all the Palestinians ever since the ideology’s arrival in Palestine in the late nineteenth century.

    Normal life means an end to the discriminatory apartheid policies against the Palestinians in Israel, the end of the military occupation and siege of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and recognition of the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland.

    The quid pro quo is accepting the Jewish ethnic group that emerged in Palestine as part of a new, decolonized and fully democratic political dispensation based on principles that would be agreed on by all concerned.

    The international community can play a positive role in bringing this vision about if it adopts three basic assumptions. The first is that Zionism is still colonialism and hence anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism but anti-colonialism.

    The second is that if it leaves behind the exceptionalism it granted Israel over the years, mainly in the realm of human rights, it has a better chance of playing a constructive role towards safeguarding these rights in the Middle East as a whole.

    And finally, we should all be aware that the window of opportunity for saving innocent lives in historic Palestine is rapidly closing — if Israel’s power remains unchecked a repeat of the massacres of recent years is all but certain. It is urgent to forsake old formulas for “peace” that did not work and start looking for just and viable alternatives.”

    http://electronicintifada.net/content/messages-israels-election/14359

    there’s a lot more to read @ the link.

    • bintbiba
      March 21, 2015, 8:30 pm

      Thank you, ‘Just’ ,for bringing Ilan Pappé’s article to our attention. The man is as outstanding as ever. I read the whole article in the Electronic Intifada …and I am shaking with excitement and anticipation at the mere thought of his VISION (s) eventually coming to fruition.
      The road would be very hard … yet the end result very much worth the effort.
      Hope is eternal !

      • bintbiba
        March 21, 2015, 8:42 pm

        correction : ‘” Hope springs eternal ……. ……”

      • just
        March 21, 2015, 8:45 pm

        You’re welcome, bintbiba.

        He’s another of the “good guys/gals” who dares to have a vision and a way forward that is not bleak and dark.

      • Bornajoo
        March 22, 2015, 4:50 am

        “All it takes is the Will to change and adapt to new situations and mindsets. Hard work and re-education , de-zionification , a focus on Human Rights and Equality for all , with a view of a better life and Future for everyone in the region.
        If only saner minds would prevail ; wit the help through the right pressure from the internationals.

        Too idealistic and improbable?”

        Just, many thanks for posting these 2 great articles from these two fantastic Israelis, Ilan Pappe and Gideon Levy. The whole conversation is now moving towards one state and this is much more positive

        Bintbiba, I love your sentiments. I wish so much it could all come true

        Unfortunately I for one do not believe that the “will” or “saner minds” actually exists in any meaningful numbers in israel. The majority of Israelis will never make these kinds of changes on their own. It has to be forced upon them.

        The master key to unlock the entire occupation is held by the USA. It would end tomorrow if they wanted it to. If the USA withdrew it’s support then all other countries would immediately follow. It could literally happen overnight. But it won’t unfortunately happen overnight.

        However with bds, with further isolation and international pressure, the USA could eventually realise that their continued unequivocal support for such a rogue state is simply damaging their empire rather than strengthening it. And at that point they may cut them loose. This just might happen under the last two years of Obama but my fear here is that Obama may be gone before this happens. I doubt Hillary Clinton would let it happen. (that’s another conversation)

        The period of time between now and then could be very dangerous. The right wing zionists could attempt to achieve their goals by trying everything to remove the Palestinian population in order to prevent the inevitable apartheid state. I know this may sound far fetched to some, but not to me. Desperate people do desperate things especially when there are psychos involved. It was always going to get worse before it got better.

        But if the USA took decisive action sooner rather than later then a huge amount of suffering will be avoided. We’ve all known for some time that Israel will never give justice to the Palestinian people. It can only be forced to do so by the international community and that has to start with the USA. Israel has helped this process by finally showing the world it’s true face. The fate of the Palestinian people lies with the USA, not the occupiers who are too far gone to ever do the right thing

      • Walid
        March 22, 2015, 6:27 am

        Bornajoo, if you’re fascinated by what Pappé is saying today, look up the story of the 1948 Israeli massacre at Tantura and how it affected him. That story and Pappé’s endorsement of the academic boycott of Israeli institutions cost him his job at the University of Haifa and his exile to the UK. A truly fascinating man.

      • Bornajoo
        March 22, 2015, 6:55 am

        Thank you Walid. I’ve read his book “the ethnic cleansing of Palestine” and seen a number of his lectures and interviews on YouTube. I was aware the affair cost him his job. I agree that he is a fascinating man.

  20. just
    March 21, 2015, 8:55 pm

    Gideon Levy’s latest, and he’s brilliant as usual:

    “Netanyahu will be remembered for speaking Israel’s truth

    For at least 25 years most Israeli statesmen have been lying, misleading the world, the Israelis and themselves, until Netanyahu arose. Better late than never.

    ……….After all, one had to deceive the Americans, bluff the Europeans and cheat the Palestinians, fudge things for the Mideast Quartet and lie to some Israelis. One also had to play for time, to build settlements and get rid of every possible Palestinian partner – Yasser Arafat, who was too strong; President Mahmoud Abbas, who is too weak; and Hamas, which is too extreme. One has to play for time, so the Palestinians become more extreme and everyone understands that there’s no one to talk to.
    …….
    It had no chance from the very beginning. In Israel, there was not one single prime minister – including the two Nobel Peace Prize laureates – who intended for one second to let a Palestinian state be established. But the bluff of the century was convenient for everyone. Now Netanyahu has put an end to it.

    If Israel had played its cards openly from the outset, as Netanyahu has done now, perhaps we would be in a different place, a better place.

    If only Israel had told the truth: that it covets the occupied territory for itself and will never give it up; that hundreds of thousands of Jews are living there and it has no intention of evacuating them; that it does not care about international law, and cares nothing for what the whole world thinks; that the Palestinians have no rights there; that Abraham our patriarch is buried there; that Rachel our matriarch weeps there; that Israel’s security depends on it, and that the Holocaust is at the door. The reasons are many and varied, and they all say one thing – now and forever, from Hebron to Jenin. Yes to autonomy, to self-administration, to village leagues or a Palestinian Authority. But no to a state. Never.

    If an honest leader like Netanyahu had arisen years ago, we Israelis would have known, the Palestinians would have known, and so would the whole world: it will not be. Then it would have been possible to deal with other solutions, instead of wasting time cheating, time in which hatred only grew and blood spilled for nothing. We could have begun long ago to think of alternatives to the two-state solution – and there’s only one: one state. And we could have begun debating what regime it would have – and there are only two: democracy or apartheid. Instead, we were misled.

    Now Benjamin Netanyahu has come and put an end to all this. We must be grateful to him for this. History will remember that he was the first Israeli prime minister to speak the truth.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.648122?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

    • bintbiba
      March 22, 2015, 6:54 am

      Walid,
      The story of Tantura is where Ilan Pappé writes in his “Out of the Frame , The Struggle for Academic Freedom in Israel ” .

    • bintbiba
      March 22, 2015, 7:05 am

      Bornajoo !

      I get what you’re saying…. I know that it is near -impossible to dare to envision the Vision .
      I can’t live without the thought that there is NO glimmer of hope , ever! Something, someone , somewhere, somehow may emerge , as by miracle , to set the way towards a better ending of that Nightmare. Otherwise …..no more faith in Humanity ever.
      I don’t expect to see any of that taking place in my lifetime, anyway.

      • Bornajoo
        March 22, 2015, 7:52 am

        Bintbiba

        I’m not saying we should remove all hope, just any hope that change will come from the occupier. Our hopes are unfortunately to be decided by the USA. If and when there is a change of usa policy then there will be change. There are many factors that can bring about that change in USA policy so hope us still alive and kicking

      • seafoid
        March 22, 2015, 10:16 am

        Bintbiba
        Israel is not stable. Injustice always bears that risk of disequilibrium. Zionist hegemony is not a rule of nature,, So I would not rule anything out. It will come down to how many goys are sickened. The news of the world is the template.

  21. Rusty Pipes
    March 21, 2015, 9:31 pm

    Netanyahu made a commitment to Israeli right-wing voters when he told them that a vote for him was a vote against two states. If he really were to walk back on that, under Israel’s system, his coalition would fall apart and he’d be calling for new elections shortly.

    Rather, Netanyahu’s post-election statements to American politicians and media reflect his long-standing policy that Americans are easily managed. So, as soon as pigs can fly, he can support a Palestinian state — but the conditions don’t look very promising in the near future. Because freiers would let him stall out the occupation for another 50 years — and give him funding and applause for his efforts.

    • Citizen
      March 24, 2015, 9:00 am

      I dunno; Netanyahu’s vision of a defenseless barely rump bantustan dotty purely administrative & self-policing “state” would be one in name only–his coalition might wink and learn to live with that.

Leave a Reply