A bi-delusional state
This land will either be home to two nation-states for two peoples, or one nation-state - a Palestinian Arab state. The concept of a nation-state is not going to disappear from here; it would behoove us to make sure that Israel doesn't disappear.
By Alexander YakobsonWhile decades overdue, the realization is starting to sink in for some on the right that in the modern world - mostly democratic, but non-democratic too - it is not possible to exert permanent control over a territory without granting its residents citizenship.
It has been clear since 1967 that Israel does not have the option of annexing the territories and naturalizing its inhabitants. Such a scenario would spell the end of Israel. Recently, figures like Reuven Rivlin and Moshe Arens have embraced the option of annexation and citizenship. Arens is proposing a Greater Land of Israel Lite, without Gaza. In his view, a Jewish majority will remain even after annexation. This is a delusion. Any arrangement whereby Israel annexes the West Bank and leaves out Gaza is inconceivable.
Moreover, it is not just Gazans who will have to be given Israeli citizenship, but the descendants of Palestinian refugees.Since it is obvious that any final arrangement would need to include a Palestinian right of return.
 |
A Palestinian woman hangs laundry outside her house in front of a section of the separation barrier in the Shuafat refugee camp in the West Bank on May 4, 2010. |
| Photo by: Reuters |
Any two-state deal would have to stipulate that a right of return applies solely to the future Palestinian state. However, if there is just one state between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, there will be no alternative but to grant a right of return to this country. Such a situation would create an Arab-Muslim majority, which would only grow bigger.
Contrary to the fantasies of the right, it is obvious to all that such a state will not be Israel. On the other hand, the state will not be binational either, to the dismay of those on the left. It will be an Arab-Muslim state through and through, even if it officially calls itself binational upon its founding.
Is it conceivable to assume that the Palestinian people will, over time, agree to be the only Arab people whose state does not have a clear-cut Arab character and is not considered a part of the Arab world? Is it logical to presume that this concession, which no Arab people has agreed to undertake for the benefit of a non-Arab minority population that is indigenous to the land, will be granted to the Zionist "alien presence"?
The champions of the "one-state solution" pledge that all the legal arrangements that will safeguard the binational character of the state and protect the rights of all ethnic groups in the country will be spelled out in advance. The problem is that written guarantees cannot determine what will happen in practice. Does the world - especially the Middle East - not have enough examples of the discrepancy between the content of state constitutions and the true nature of those states' governments?
In an op-ed piece that appeared on these pages last month, Carlo Strenger argues that Arens' proposal is tantamount to supporting a binational state, and that the idea is worthy of consideration. According to Strenger, the state that emerges from such an arrangement must be completely secular. After the founding of such a state, Strenger wrote, "Arab rejection of a fully liberal Israel-Palestine would no longer have a case." Well, that makes perfect sense, since the root of the conflict, of course, is that none of the multitude of secular and liberal players in the region can stomach agreeing to a non-secular, illiberal state in their midst.
How does one realize this idea of creating a secular and liberal binational state? It's simple, really. We just bring together the secular liberals of Israeli Jewish society, the secular liberals of Israeli Arab society, the secular liberals of the West Bank, the secular liberals of Gaza, and the secular and liberal masses of the refugee camps in the neighboring countries. Then we establish a "fully liberal" secular state.
When faced with this coalition of the delusional, one must say clearly: This land is home to two nations, both of which have the right to national independence. A binational state is an extreme rarity that is nonexistent in our region. This land will either be home to two nation-states for two peoples, or one nation-state - a Palestinian Arab state. The concept of a nation-state is not going to disappear from here; it would behoove us to make sure that Israel doesn't disappear.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Oh I forgot,Jews have no right to be a majority anywhere,they must always be easy prey for scapegoating.......
Dubious.
The author's arguments are valid, but I think he gallops a tad cavalierly over the possibilities for multi-confessional states in the region. Although their history has been chequered, all of the following are multi-confessional or multi-ethnic to a greater or lesser degree: Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt. In fact, virtually all of them. If Israel did succeed (if that's the right word) in establishing a religiously and ethnically uniform state, it would not be fitting in, but attempting a novelty for the region. Indeed, it would be a novelty when viewed in the context of ancient Israel. It would be an unprecedented resurrection of something that was never there. That said, I fail to see wherein is found the justification for the enormous inhumanity and injustice involved.
The problem is, the Nonmuslim groups have second-class citizenship (Dhimmi status) in these Mideast Muslim states. When Israel denies Nonisraeli Palestinians full citizenship, Israel is, in fact, being a 'normal' Mideast country. What we need is, a modern egalitarian Islam, with modern individual-liberty oriented Mideast states. Any solution in Israel requires its Mideast neighbors to adapt to the 21st century.
illegal settlements and what you just wrote will happen. so for that reason I support the illegal settlement building. I must say I was upset about the freeze.
Israel's leaders accompanied by the religious and settler zealots will destroy Israel. Unabashed greed may work for corporations but not for diverse nations. There is a social responsibility highly espoused in the Jewish faith and concurred in by most western nations. Israel cannot continue to swim against the tide and expect to be successful.
Basques may want their independence, but they never had the nerve to "solve" Spain's existance. Puerto Ricans may vote whether they want to be autonomous or not. But nobody would dare to speak about a "one-state" solution or a "two state" solution. If the problem is that Palestinians want a state, then the solution is for them to have a state. The other semantics is messing with a real state, a UN member state since its establishment, a real, viable, existing Jewish state of Israel, which Arabs have fought instead of building their own since 1947.
The basques are welcome to be -- are -- fully enfranchised, first-class citizens of Spain. Puerto Rico can have its independence if its ever foolish enough to wish for it. A
I think Colin is being extremely ethnocentric to assume, however Europeans did things MUST be the way everybody else on the planet does things. European assumptions fail .. especially in the Mideast. The Mideast is NOT Europe. Using Europe as an analogy for Mideast conflicts usually doesnt work well.
"a UN member state since its establishment" What twaddle... Established 14th May 1948 Became a UN Member 11th May 1949. The Arab States fought a legal battle against the establishment of a separate Jewish State, without consulting the local Jewish and non-Jewish population as required by and in accordance with the League of Nations Charter and the UN Charter. --- The Palestinians cannot have or even declare Sovereign Independence UNTIL Israel withdraws from ALL non-Israeli territory it controls. INDEPENDENCE means not under the control of another entity.
If Quebec had chosen to become independent Canada would have had a two-state solution.
Basques may want their independence, but they never had the nerve to "solve" Spain's existance. Puerto Ricans may vote whether they want to be autonomous or not. But nobody would dare to speak about a "one-state" solution or a "two state" solution. If the problem is that Palestinians want a state, then the solution is for them to have a state. The other semantics is messing with a real state, a UN member state since its establishment, a real, viable, existing Jewish state of Israel, which Arabs have fought instead of building their own since 1947.
The two communities of Northern Ireland hate each more than ever before. There is neat total segregation in every aspect of life in Northern Ireland (eg. 95% of schools are either Protestant or Catholic only 5% mixed). There is a bizarre coalition Government between Sinn Fein and the DUP which would be equivalent to a coaltion of Likud and Hamas in Israel/Palestine. But it somehow seems to work!
Within the borders controlled by Israel (that is, all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River) there exists today one state. It has one electrical grid, one road system, one monetary authority, one postal authority, one water system, etc. etc. The problem is that over half the people within this existing state, those that are non-Jews, have lesser rights or none at all. Zionists refuse to recognize this simple fact, because they continue to dream of and work for a state where Jews are in a majority and have superior rights to non-Jews.
Zionism has never been abel to solve that dilemma; how is the State of Israel both Jewish and democratic, where all citizens share the same vision and rights. It is similar to a balkan state in this regard. There were early Zionist thinkers, ie. Buber and Magnes who had a different vision but their voices were drowned out by those with a more strident nationalist vision.
A Two-State solution will fail. Violently. Explosively. Catastrophically. A Two-State solution will drag the planet into a bloodbath. The only solution is a Bi-National State. There is no choice except to start from there. This is a perpetual spiritual conflict, and requires a spiritual solution. Wishful thinking by the seculars insensitive to the traditional religious worldviews, resulted in disaster - already again and again - and if they dont change their strategy, their incompetence will culminate in spectacular disaster. Jews and Samaritans are the aborigines of Judea and Samaria and have a human right to remain in their sacred ancestral lands. This claim as perservered for thousands of years, and will never go away. Oppositely, Muslims consider these same areas their sacred Islamic territory and wont ever relinquish their expansionist heritage. Moreover, since modern times, Arab speaking Muslims from around the Mideast immigrated into these aboriginal areas of Judea and Samaria and are defacto inhabitants. Each rival claims the same sacred land for different sacred reasons. The only solution is to somehow share the same land. Islam must become egalitarian to empower the diversity of Nonmuslim aboriginal populations everywhere in Muslim lands, especially here in Judea and Samaria. Arab inhabitants must see themselves as Judeans and Samaritans, as part of the unique aboriginal heritage of these areas - and celebrate as part of their own identity. The Jewish and Samaritan aborigines must find ways to embrace these inhabitants as a Nonjewish and Nonsamaritan part of their greater community of Israelites. Both the multinational religion of Islam and the ancestral spiritual traditions of Jews and Samaritans, have mechanisms to accomplish this mutual coexistance. There can only be one bi-national state. It must realistically acknowledge the sacred worldviews in play, and wisely and pragmatically adapt these ancient spiritualities to address the 21st-century scenarios.
Not all Palestinians are religious. Not all Jewish folk are religious. Not all Bedouins are religious. Furthermore, in regards to a unitary state, where is this from // in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, [and whereby] minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries, and [whereby] the holy places will be preserved and the right of access thereto guaranteed.//
Most Palestinians think that the One State Solution is the one that is more viable than the Two States One. A Two States Solution is a Half or No Solution at all, while the One State gives more guarantees for the future to both peoples if and only if both peoples have the good intensions of living in peace and harmony and on equal terms.
Of course most Pals think that, because Pals know that they will be the majority and, like the article correctly states, the country will become an Arab-Palestinian state. The two-state solution is the only way to preserve Israel the JEWISH state.
It works quite well in Malaysia, and could work in Palestine so long as there is a fair distribution of resources. People need to stop thinking on an ethnic basis. What is needed is good government - not Jewish Government or Palestinian Government
Do you mean Malaysia or Singapore? A viable one state solution would be difficult because a significant portion of both populations is religious fanatics who believe in divine right to territory and holds the other in contempt and derision. This would make it very difficult. But then, you have a closer example of Northern Ireland that seemed as intractable as the conflict between Israel and Palestine. They seemed to have arrived at some kind of compromise even with both sides still holding to their ideological positions of untied with Ireland or remaining part of Britain.
If I would a Palie, do I have to want a one state solution. Let me remind to new coming Palie these questions? 1) How are you going intergrate to Israel. You don't even know Hebrew. 2)On Israeli side while the GDP is $30i00 per capita on the Arab side is below $1000 per capita. 3) How are you going to merge the social lifes. 4)Habitaion problems. How many new housing projects you have to create. 5) Economis. How are you going to create new jobs for new coming 4 million hungry mouths to feed. 6) Education System. How many schools must have to open in order to educate them. 7) Health System. How are you going to manage the Health system. 8) How are you going to accomodate your legal system. The question to be ask is 1) If these poor Palies would come Israel would their situation be better than today. 2) The same question must be asked to Israeli side. If they would come these Palies what would be my situation. Better or worse.
...a large influx of Haredim. There's no difference really.
to make the sacrifices necessary to bring about a two-state solution. Making demands on the other party, which could accept either solution, to make great sacrifices so that the outcome that you, and not they, feel is the only acceptable one is self-defeating. The Arabs offered 78% of the land, with the condition that the rights of the Geneva conventions be respected, and the rights of sovereignty also be respected. For Israel to demand more land, and that neither of those rights apply, when they are the ones who need to see the deal concluded was foolish, not 'generous'.
5 Arab countries, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq sent their armies the very day after Israel declared its independence, to invade it. Israel managed to defend herself heroically, and won the war. And you call that "the Arabs offered"...
using terror to dispossess Palestinians of their homes and property. But, seeing as their armies had a chain of command who's last experience of war had involved calvalry charges, and they were up against those who had learned what a war involving tanks and fighter aircraft was while fighting their way across Europe, they lost. You might want to think what a sacrifice it represents to give up on the idea of taking the land back using the same methods those who created Israel used.
at what point is 2 states REALLY accepted by the arabs and palestinians??
A single state is a fantasy no easier to achieve than 2 states. This op-ed presumes it comes about because Israel loses. Assume that doesn't happen. Then a state would need to be negotiated so all the various interests are respected, from property rights to guns. That would be more difficult than 2 states. So keep in mind that 1state means 2 things: an Arab fantasy of Israeli defeat or something even more complicated than 2 states.
Besides the security risks of giving away strategic positions within Israel to an enemy who does not want land except to use to destroy Israel, it does nothing to alleviate the demographic problem - they get 1 and a half states, and Israel is left with the half state - not really viable either.
Yacobson is right. The one state solution will ultimately result in an arab state...for the reasons he cites. the irony is that it is our "leaders" who will have created that situation. the time for two states is past. Who among our false "leaders" is really prepared to take the necessary steps to create a viable Palestinian state? Not one. And so, the one state solution is coming. The history books will show the "Fathers" of this state to be Sharon, Olmert, Barak, Natanyahu, Peres, etc.
Yakobson ignores that Israel would dictate the terms of any such state, and those terms surely would protect Jews from discrimination. Further, he ignores the secular Palestinians who have no wish to live in an Islamic state or be governed by clerics. Such a state would be neither Jewish nor Arab.
If Arabs are a majority, they would be dictating. Jews would not have rights, nor would Palestinians. Just look at any Arab or Muslim country.
What would you suggest?? That If Israel has a majority of Jews, they shouldn't rule? A majority Muslim country should have Christians or Jews rule? What is it exactly you're trying say?
but there's the little matter of Israel's ongoing creation of facts on the ground. And those facts say no. No to a fair solution. No to reason. No to virtually the whole international community.
Whole villages have been removed. Caterpillars are famous for their ill-deeds. Israel's "facts on the ground" are no more viable than the Palestinian will to survive. Salaam/Shalom
In American we have all kind of religions and a mosaic of nationalities that end up in a melting pot and in a generation or two becomes all American. In Israel the same could happen with a twist, that is one constitution and a separate legal system that takes into consideration the difference between religous beliefs, A penal code that is tailor made for Jews, Christians and Muslims. Why not, Your neighbor Lebanon has it and it works reasonably well. One vote per person is a must and it makes all citizen equal under the law.Tehn you will have one country with Israelis and Palestinians living under one roof. Ths is the only solution and everyone wants a piece of Israel so why not have it all for everyone.
If you think Lebanon works fairly well, you're delusional. How many civil wars do you need, plus a strong-arm Syria sitting on top of you? Christians massacred by Muslims and fanatic militias ruling their own turf in defiance of a dysfunctional central government. You think that works? If Israel were a bi-national state, it would quickly devolve into fiefdoms and violent internecine battles. Why not avoid that before it happens?
If Israel fails to a cheive a workable solution for two states then one would be the second best. Todays situation is not sustainable.
ultimate soultion would have to look like .
don't be so naive. Sionism stems from history and experience. There used to be a State of Israel which was destroyed and which Jews have always wanted to restore. similarly, Jews have understood that being a minority in adoptive countries has involved tragedies, sufferings, humiliations. Now Israel exists and it can work only if Jews are a majority. A "one state solution would make Jews a minority and this state would become an arabic state . Jews have already experienced what it means to be a minority in an arab state....No thanks, definitely !
oh, I'm sorry, transfer is a BAD word. so let's "evacuate the Arabs" from Western Eretz Yisrael - bring them back to their 'mother countries' in Arabia, Egypt, Iraq.
have you no respect for those who perished in the shoah? And yet Israel uses the shoah to deflect criticism... Treat people with dignity, and you will find solace
Those days are gone. On the ground, what evidence is there that Israel has any intention of cooperating toward the formation of a contiguous, viable Palestinian state? It adamantly refuses to discuss final borders, its is enhancing its settlement policy and has commited to further expanisonism in East Jerusalem and the displacement of Arab residents from the surviving Arab neighbourhoods. Over the decades, it has built up an infrastructure that would make seperation from the occupied territories very difficult. So, where will this second state be? How contiguous can it be? There is no evidence that this "behooves" Israel at all. Power, might and a swaggering self confidence that it leads the US government's policies in the ME, have all contributed to creating the grand delusion from which Israel suffers and there is no sign that that is changing. Positions are only hardening and the delusion deepening. But you are correct that the delusion is no longer sustainable and Israel's future can be in doubt only because of Israel's blindness and arrogance that makes it think it is invincible.
why is leaving gaza out "inconceivable"? they have taken themselves out - as for right of return? forget it - this is the deal - take it or leave it - u become citizens of a successful modern/western/jewish state - or rot in your own manure - ur average ahmed will jump at the opportunity - no demographic issue - as they become more western and materialistic - the less they will procreate - they will instead become like the rest of the west - party/get married late/become openly gay etc.
Afrikaaners voiced similar concerns to resist the end of Apartheid. They also claimed that the beautiful country they created with so much effort and sweat (black's sweat, that is) would end up becoming another African "cesspool" like the surrounding countries, or some kind of socialist regime. In the end, South Africa didn't disappear, just like Israel won't disappear, it just transformed into a democratic version of its former colonialist self. Israel will have no choice but tho follow the same path, scaremongers notwithstanding.
I must agree with Alexander Yakobson that a two-state 'solution' would be best at this time for Israel (most of all!), her neighbors, and the world at large. We Jews will not, IMHO, be able to know the unlimited joy a one-state solution would bring until the coming of Moshiach, may that day come soon.
In his last paragraph, AY claims that there are no binational states in the region. Lebanon though, was intended as such, with specific political positions guaranteed to the Maronite, a ethnic and cultural group distinct from Arabs. It's true the Maronites have lost their political influence. But this is largely because of emigration. The experience of bi- and multi-national states is mixed. South Africa today has it's problems, but it's a paradise compared to the worst case scenario predictions of yesterday. Belgium is successful, but at odds with itself. Switzerland is an unqualifed success, but then they were unicultural to begin with. Finally, we should want to keep in mind the example of the US, which has followed a tortuous path toward integration despite historical injustice to its black minority. An uphill battle for Israeltine (?) but one which needn't be forordained to fail. More questionable is whether there are enough Israelis and Palestinians who really want it, and who would be ready to take the steps to make it work.
South Africa is a nightmare. Rape and baby rape are epidemic. The crime rate is much higher than anywhere in the western world. Aids is out of control. If South Africa is your example of a successful State, you need to try again
But they won't say it now, just as they didn't tell us that the likes of Aish HaTorah was going to spearhead action on the ground to ensure that Jerusalem was Arabierfrei. The purpose is transfer. Don't fool yourselves.
"This land will either be home to two nation-states for two peoples, or one nation-state - a Palestinian Arab state". Well said Mr. Yakobson! God Bless!
Granted the comparison on a little odd, what with Arab Palestinians, supported by the joint effort of the Arab speaking states coming in to remove the Jewish poplulation, and failed, not once, but three times. Like the "Turkish Cypriots" who arrived with the Ottoman conquest, the Palestinian Arabs reached the Land of Israel/ . . . fifteen hundred years ago. On that island the Greeks were forced to coexist with foreign rulers until they achieved independence. Nonetheless, missing out on the treaty that separated Greeks from Turks in the Aegean in 1921, the new republic was bi-national until the Turks decided the Moslems needed a "state of their own". In the process the Greeks who lived on the territory the Turkish Army carved out of the island were chased out of their homes. They were, let us say "transferred". It is said that B-G considered the possiblility, but backed off. Funny, too, now that the island is divided between a prosperous EU nation and a third world dependency of the Turkish republic, maybe a two-state solution "like that" would be preferable.
Saying something over and over again will not make it true :-) you said: "the Palestinian Arabs reached the Land of Israel/ . . . fifteen hundred years ago" .... wow, and can you tell me who was in the "land" when they reached it? Oh I know may be it was “a land without a people for a people without a land” LOL you are hilarious ….
Native Israeli Christians are ancient. The Christian communities in Israel, including Nazareth, Jerusalem, and Bethlehem, descend mostly from Nabataeans who settled in Israel during the Byzantine Period. These were Aramaic-speaking Beduin who dominated the outlands of the Negev, Jordan and Syria. They mass-converted to Christianity around the 4th-century. Some of these nomads formed permanent settlements, and are truly part of Israels antiquity.
and easy to read for the politically dyslectic. Two people, two states or nothing which even remotely ressembles the Zionist visision of a democratic Jewish State in this land.
... the age of oil ends. Which should be in about 20 years. Just hold on until then.
It is just natural that if you add salt to water, it dissolves. Why didn't the Zionism founders oversaw this natural phenomen? Could it had been a lack of sight? I came to this conclusion 20 years ago and left Jerusalem to NYC for good! Here, I can freely feel Jewish without taking other people's place.
An arab living for 2 generations in another arab country becomes citizen of the country he lives in unless you do not allow him. This is the case in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria, What, you want to uproot these poor so-called Pals that have been living in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. They will come back to a place they did not belong to. Stop this bull shit ! Get real, they must integrate to their beloved brethen and get naturalization.
!st read http://wp.me/pDB7k-sa Then http://wp.me/pDB7k-jS
A Jew lives in another country for some 2000 years becomes a citizen of the country he lives in unless you do not allow him. What you want to uproot these poor so called Jews that have been living in Poland, Russia, Yemen, and Iraq? They will come back to a place they did not belong to. Stop this bullshit! Get real, they must integrate and get naturalization.
The Westbank is teeming with Israeli settlements. Many of them complete cities and towns, a lot more then just a few sheds on a hiltop. Arab Jerusalem is already surrounded by Isreali / jewish quarters. Add to this the weakness of the PA, and it is clear enough that keeping the two people apart is simply not workable anymore. Thanks to the settlers. However, de level of development and knowledege in Israel is a very much highter then in the Palestianian territories. Their level of wealth too. They do have a democracy with still some corrective capabilities, so they don't need the dictators Arab countries need to keep things running. Even in a one-state-solution, the Jews will have a very important say anytime. Israelis have a lot in them which
I agree with the writer, when SA became a democracy, the constitution it drew was said to be the most progressive yet. Today black people belittle it by saying its a white mans constitution and are starting to ignore its statutes.
S.A.'s constitution was indeed a white man's thing. Black leaders were so happy with their newly-acquired political rights that they neglected their economic ones, leaving the Central Bank, all the mines and the main companies in the Afrikaaners' hands, leaving the State just with a lot of white-acquired debt to pay back.
S.A.'s constitution was indeed a white man's thing. Black leaders were so happy with their newly-acquired political rights that they neglected their economic ones, leaving the Central Bank, all the mines and the main companies in the Afrikaaners' hands, leaving the State just with a lot of white-acquired debt to pay back.
Black people have more economic rights then white people in SA today. But in doing this they are undermining the whole reason apartheid was abolished. and thats what would happen to Israel with a one state solution.
That's just ludicrous. While white South Africans keep enjoying First World standards of living and own most of the wealth of the country, the vast majority of the blacks still live in poverty and actually their standards of leaving have worsened since the end of Apartheid. You can blame black mismanagement, but there was a lot of white outmaneuvering and co-opting in it as well.
- The Two-State Solution won't work! = So what will? - The Twenty-Four State solution! = You mean? - The Twenty-Three Arab states just recognize the one Jewish state! - It's simple.
Why is this even discussed ? What does the Torah/Tanach say ?
well as the Holy Koran says that the promised land belongs to the seed of Jacob. The POINT is that the Pals in 85-90 % ALSO are of Israelite origin, i.e. ALSO the offspring of Jacob. Once the hardliners and bigots on both sides can accept this, the problem might be possible to solve in a one-state-solution.
What a one state solution would do is that many of the smaller political parties would dissapear and a Jewish block would form. We would see a massive refocusing and return to Judaism. This is a good thing. With aliyah from US and other places, Jews will have a massive majority. The only group that would have a real problem with this is the current Left in Israel. When it comes to “tachlas”, it’s the Left that is racist.
world are more than welcom to join their new conpatriots in building an economic giant not only in the ME but in the whole world.
Oh, yeah, all those secular, liberal Gazans. The ones that voted Hamas into power. What color is the sky on the planet you live in?
like 1. that declares israel the Jewish homeland and that the state itself willalways reflect itself in alliance with Jewish tradition the second that outlaws groups and organization who oppose #1 and gives equal rights to all citizens
Do the Palestinians get to nominate an equal number of non amendable clauses? Or is the the Israeli definition of democracy one which includes dictatorial powers by only one side?
i bet you never think about the fact that israel and the west bank sit on only 10% of the British Mandate of Palestine... the other 90%of the British Mandate of Palestine is called Jordan,,,and it IS a palestinian state.... So why not a Jewish state that treats all its people with dignity and respect.... but still remains a Jewish state.
Another slight problem. the British Mandate over Palestine ENDED May 1948, BEFORE the Declaration of a Jewish State came into effect.
If it treats ALL its people with dignity & respect - no problem - but that hasn't happened in the past - ALL its people treated the same hasn't happened under Israel's apartheid system.
And what happens when the majority of this nice state of yours becomes Arab? Will they have to accept the rule of the colonial minority? That has an ugly name, you know.
This is the problem with people like Yakobson. They state the obvious, but can't make the leap to actually doing anything about it. Why not just end the occupation Yakobson, now? It's not Pal guns that surround Israelis. It's Israeli guns that surround Pals. Just get the IDF out of the West Bank. Get out now. The settlers can stay in Palestine or go home to Israel. Their choice. They chose to settle in land that wasn't their, against international law, now they can take the consequences. Otherwise stay, and take the connsequences of a single state. Your choice.
A bi-national state would mean the end of a Jewish State. A 2-state solution won't work because the result would be a Judenrein Arab State in Yehuda/Shomron, and then the 20% Arab population west of the green-line will become more vocal about power-sharing, equal opportunities, transfer of wealth from the affluent Jewish communities to poor Arab communities. Israeli Arabs aren't going to pick themselves up and move over the green-line to help build a viable Arab state. They will be energized and supplied by the entire Islamic world, who will not rest until all the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean becomes an Islamic republic. Most people choose to ignore the fact that making peace with a few Palestinians does not mean that Hamas, Hizbullah, Iran and her proxy states Syria/Lebanon, Taliban controlled Afghanistan and nuclear-armed Pakistan, and about half-a-billion other Moslems are going to suddenly halt their efforts to eradicate the Jews. I honestly don't see a workable solution. The ones presented here are all flawed and don't lead to peace for the Jews, only their continued persecution. Why would anyone want that?
And tragically, a too often held position of paranoia. It is almost as if the entire world must be your enemy in order to survive because peace is simply too risky. In other words, what will Israel do if it does not have enemies? It must create them. And Eric here certainly gives us a long list of those far and wide that are eager to set up an Islamic Republic in Palestine. Eric simply cannot believe that if there is a viable and contiguous Palestine, the oppostion from the Arab world to Israel will be greatly eliminated and a situation that now exists between Israel and Jordan and Egypt would be repeated with the other Arab countries. But Eric will never buy that.
So what do you propose? No citizenship to Palestinians in the Territories, no right of self determination and independence from Israel, then what? Keep the status-quo and keep over 4 million people deprived of rights confined in reservations? You know how people will start calling it? And treat it as such, of course.
I'm not certain that Eric is right, but Yaakov, how can you be so sure of your position, either? When partition was proposed in the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, it was the Arabs in "Palestine" and throughout the world who vehemently opposed it. When partition was voted on, it was the Arabs who attacked in an effort to decimate the truncated Jewish state. What makes you so sure that partition in 2010 will suddenly "eliminate", in your words, Arab hostility to Jewish sovereignty? I hope you're right, I just don't understand the basis of the surety.
Alexander Yakobson is wrong! The Arabs/Islam will never accept a Two-State-Solution. They will never accept any non-Islamic control anywhere in the Middle East. The British gave 90% of the Palestine Mandate to the Arabs and created the Kingdom of Jordan. The 1948 cease-fire agreement split the rest into two parts an Arab and one Jewish part. This was never accepted by the Arab nation. There is only one solution - A One-State-Solution. A Jewish state in the whole of the Land of Israel. Those who accept to live under Jewish Sovereignty and Law may stay and those who don't may leave. Very simple with no reason to worry about any demographic treats to the Jewish character and living.
are you suggesting that the muslims that decide to stay should convert to judaism? quote : "A Jewish state in the whole of the Land of Israel. Those who accept to live under Jewish Sovereignty and Law may stay and those who don't may leave." end of quote.
The will have to Pledge of Allegiance to the state and its laws.
"The Arabs/Islam will never accept a Two-State-Solution." Really? Every year there is a UN vote on this subject. All the "Arabs/Islam" vote in favor. Guess who votes against? You guessed it. The US, Israel and some Pacific islands.
They can pledge all you want, but once they become the majority they will vote laws that will reflect the Arab nature of the state. It's called democracy, you know.
Works for me! Probably works for YHWH, too.
This makes the case for immigration reform in the U.S. It should be the 'guiding light' for Israel also.
This is the problem, all sides are attached to their delusions to the bitter end. The only solution might be is to hasten the end game. I think Israel should be allowed to do what Israel wants to do. Why condemn Israel for attacking ships on international waters or ships who come from friendly countries? Why pressure Israel not to expand settlements - in particular East Jerusalem? Why pressure Israel to join the NPT? Why plead with Israel not to attack Iran? The solution might be to let Israel be Israel and let nature take it's course. I don't know why Jews feel so lucky with their long tragedy ridden history - but hey, let us all support Israel as it stumbles it's way into oblivion. I was taught humans change behavior only when they hit bottom - maybe it s applies to wretched states too?
Bi-National state sounds like a great idea, where every body wins. But I agree with the author that it will probably mean the end of Israel, a scenario that most Jews will not accept, thus going this route will only lead to a major civil war that will end up in dividing the country between two nations, but not before a lot of people suffer again. If one cares about the survival of Israel, then they must do all they can to stop the extreme right from forcing Israel into this road which leads to its demise.
Israel is already a binational State. 24% of Israeli citizens today are non-Jews. So Israel is viable now but unviable if that goes up to 40%? Why? What is the magic number - 30%? 35%? Also the Arab birth rate advantage is a thing of the past when Palestinian women didnt join the workforce and Israel was not 20% Haredi. It doesnt exist any more.
If they're Israeli, that's their nationality, be they Arab, Jew, Arab Jew. Arab Christian, Arab Muslim, Jewish Muslim, Arab atheist, Jewish atheist.. etc. It's multicultural if anything.
So the fear is that, under a One Stae solution an Palestinian majority would take all existing Isreali legislation, cross out every occurance of "Jewish" and replace it with "Palestinian"? & that would be immoral? Israel seems to have spent most of its existence deliberately making a 2 state solution unworkable - "as you sow, so shall you reap"
i think that much is obvious. the current non-solution causes thousands of deaths and daily suffering in the palestinian territories. a palestinian state would most likely fall down the path to extremism if not backed up by huge sums of foreign aid (which, due to the west's islamophobia, will never be given to the palestinians). in the two-state solution the "jewish" state would inevitably become even more paranoid and racist than it already is. a binational state simply would not work, as you point out, for two reasons: A) the entire point of israel is to give jews the illusion of power, and they can't be "powerful" (over kids with bottle rockets?) while they are the minority and B) since eventually israel's jewish population will be mostly orthodox (and largely haredi) religious conflicts will ALWAYS, yes ALWAYS, be present. there is no solution. it's depressing but true. israel's founding was poorly planned and they will forever pay the price for it until the country is either swallowed up by demographic changes or forced into "remission" by actual attacks. sorry to be the grim reaper here but it's the truth.
It's not one state or two. There are alot of arrangements inbetween. Power sharing and federations are common in Europe, it is only really Israel and New Zealand that are "pure" centralised states. Personally I think a Belgian confederation is the most appropriate, with defined boundaries for the two national groups, but open borders and a higher joint body to manage things like Jerusalem and water that cannot be divided. Whether you call that body a federal government or you call it the EU doesnt really matter. As for no Arab countries tolerating a non-Arab character? Well actually there are two - Iraq and Lebanon. Kurds and Maronites are not Arabs. Hopefully Israel's road there is a bit easier.
isn't that statement an oxymoron ?
So you try to say that Iraq and Lebanon are well functioning multiculti states?! Even Belgium is on the verge to collapse, without violence that is. I believe the division of Checkoslovakia into a Check and a Slovak republoc is a good example for the middle east. Also some parts of the division of former Yuguslavia went quite well
Considering the way Belgian politics is going, I'm not sure your example supports your point...
It seems the Israeli's need the two state solution more than the Palestinians. In a few years Israel may be running after the Palestinians, desperately begging them to agree to a peace agreement. By that time they may even be offered a bit more than just 22% of historical Palestine.
Were is the extra 2% coming from Jordan????
There never was a state named Palestine. And if you refer to the previous British Mandate, the British gave 90% of the mandate to the establishment of the Jordan Kingdom already . Thus, the agreement in 1948 was to divide the remaining 10% int Jewish and one Arab part. So what are you talking about when referring to "22% of historical Palestine".
read what Abbas has said in today's Haaretz about the Palestinians missing the opportunity to accept the terms of the 1947 partition plan...What and where exactly is historic Palestine ??
Crusaders gave also gave the name Palestine to this part of the ME. Ther was no state of Palestine but there was a province which's name was and is still Palestine. Israel's state is settled in a part of it. That's fine! Now what next?
Israel is not, nor has it ever been, a part of the non-state entity of Palestine.
it was known as Palestine at least since the Romans exercised direct rule
Because in order for it to work, Israelis would have to give up their prejudices, stereotypes, suspicions, and ego/ethnocentric views. They'd have to accept Palestinians as equals, a completely secular society, a system of justice that's holds no favorites, a system of laws that accomodates no one over anyone else, and a government that represents everyone equally. Not to say that they're incapable of doing this...only that their doing so would likely take at least one or two generations. And the same would hold true for the Palestinians to let go of their anger, distrust, resentment, and grudges. There are of course those of both who would embrace it and quickly adapt to the change, and to dealing freely and openly with each other; but overall, it would take a few generations to overcome 60-plus years of the indoctrination that each have undergone.
Because in order for it to work, Arabs would have to give up their prejudices, stereotypes, suspicions, and ego/ethnocentric views. They'd have to accept Jews as equals, a completely secular society, a system of justice that's holds no favorites, a system of laws that accomodates no one over anyone else, and a government that represents everyone equally. Not to say that they're incapable of doing this...only that their doing so would likely take at least one or two generations. And the same would hold true for the Jews to let go of their anger, distrust, resentment, and grudges. There are of course very few of both who would embrace it and quickly adapt to the change, and to dealing freely and openly with each other; but overall, it would take a few generations to overcome 60-plus years of the indoctrination that each have undergone so that they can both blend into a neutral blend of utopian non-ethnicity. That said, I would never want my own children to marry out, God forbid.
when to me - during my many trips to Israel and the OT it's absolutely the other way around. However - I agree wholeheartedly with the fundamental tenor of your comment. It's time for both 'sides' to shake hands and live together.
when to me - during my many trips to Israel and the OT it's absolutely the other way around. However - I agree wholeheartedly with the fundamental tenor of your comment. It's time for both 'sides' to shake hands and live together.
when to me - during my many trips to Israel and the OT it's absolutely the other way around. However - I agree wholeheartedly with the fundamental tenor of your comment. It's time for both 'sides' to shake hands and live together.
However within a decade a lot can change, just need a lot of patience
...in the Sunday funnies called "Snuffy Smith." Snuffy was a Ozark mountain rustic who live in a shack, had a dog named "Bullet," a wife named "Loweezy" (who was three times bigger than him)--but what really stood out about Snuffy was his preternatural sense of urgency--and whenever the crap was truly about to hit the fan, he'd jump to his feet and yell: "TIME'S A 'WASTIN' !!"