Ari Shavit / Israel needs legitimacy to wage war and peace

I have read your posts attentively, and I feel really sorry for what history has inflicted on you, your family and your people. I can easily believe your grandfather always dreamed of returning to that piece of land of his, and to his orange grove. It's only naturel. With this, I must tell you, I know well the road that connects Jaffa to Tel Aviv. One sees there orange groves no more, and all the pieces of land of old have since long all disappeared. (see www.planetware.com/picture/tel-aviv-jaffa-yafo-isr-jer146.htm) So please, tell us, what are you expecting from us Israelis? If it is to be compensated, why is it not clearly said? If it is to be allowed to return to your family's domicile, is this not tantamount to chasing a mirage? I wish you a successful career in law, and may God grant you a good and loving (Palestinian) husband.

I mentioned I do not detect much sympathy for the plight of the Jews in your post, in any case said plight was incidental to the right of return. Distress of any form is not a requirement in order to assert the right of return. It is to the Jews' credit that the right of return was only exercised at the time of direst need. Btw, I am neither a Texan nor have I or my family been here 400 years, all of which is neither here nor there. The right of return is not abrogated by any geographic location. It can be exercised anywhere outside one's country, as long as one has "standing" to assert it. Of course, we Jews have standing vis a vis the right of return, no more and no less than Palestinians do.

What does the vague phrase mean "a substantial majority of Israel's actions or arguments or justifications"? We were talking about the right of return. I said Jews have the same right as Palestinians, and that the right of return only means return to one's country, NOT to a domicile. Therefore I say, the Palestinian demand that refugees return to their domicile is devoid of legal basis and also moral basis, since it makes it a central demand which cannot be fulfilled unless the Jews surrender their own right to self-determination. In fact there is no historic precendent within other refugee populations that such a demand can be legally raised or should be met in the context of international law. You as a lawyer know that, for sure. I do not detect much sympathy for the persecutioon of Jews. All the populations you mentioned have a national territory, and therefore you are comparing apples with oranges. On what basis should Palestinians have the right of return and not the Jews ?

I'm not claiming a moral highground, nor do I believe that Arabs are better than Jews, nor do I classify the two groups as Arab and Jew. If anything I am anti all religions, and believe in the individual humanity of the person. From a legal standpoint (being a lawyer) I can confidently say there is no legal justification for a substantial majority of Israel's actions or arguments or justifications where the Palestinians are concerned, I'm not gonna recite the specific laws that back up my argument, but you can no doubt google it or youtube it and the information is available. I'm sorry that the 'Jews' were persecuted, but frankly, if Hitler got his way, we would have been next. And the Jews are not the only people to have been persecuted in modern world history. The Russians were murdered en masse, the Armenians, the Circassians, numerous African tribes were wiped out, and the list goes on... And the Palestinians were persecuted. Unfortunately human nature has an evil streak...

Indeed, you did not attach yourself to Judaism, your historical trajectory is different from ours, but not morally better nor does it confer you an advantage simply because you stayed on the land. If you read the requirements to qualify for the "right of return" Jews fulfil the requirements. In other words, we kept the attachement, that your grandfather and you have , we kept it over 2000 years. However, we did not exercise our right to return simply because of an attachment. We did it when we saw, beginning with the Russian pogroms and culminating in the Holocaust, that we would remain unable to defend ourselves and therefore more vulnerable to mass murder/agenocide, unless we achieved territorially based sovereignty. In any case, we are like most indigenous populations, vulnerable to permanent displacement because of lack of sovereignty, except we were able to overcome this vulnerable condition, even against the objections of those who "occupied" all the land (Palestinian Arabs).

reina, the logic of my argument is international law, it's not subjective, it's agreed upon principles, by souvereign states for hundreds of years. If you have deeds, then you are entitled to compensation, a deed does not confer the right of return in international law. Think about it, the right to one's country is not based on private land ownership, what would the landless poor do if that were the case. I understand you grandfather died dreaming of his home. And I understand you want to marry a Palestinian because of your deeply ingrained cultural sense.

It's got nothing to do with land, occupation, war, peace, the price of dates in iran, or the angle of attack of your golf club...it's quite simple, the world hates the jews. Why did the holocaust happen? Because the jews had land, they occupied somthing, they waged war, etc, etc? Nope they were just being Jews.

Perception of pariah status has already been achieved and is picking up momentum. It is like an iceberg melting. First it starts slowly then the momentum increases to the point where it happens faster and faster. The heart felt empathy "legitimacy" that paved the way for Jews to go to the Middle East after World War II has and is deteriorated by the apartheid that is being used on the Palestinians. Quoting or relying on the Balfour agreement or the UN resolution does not provide legitimacy. History is replete with actions, judgments, accords, etc. that were or were made to seem legitimate at the time yet over time were viewed to be quite the opposite. My suggestion is to look at seeking to make peace at all costs and attempting to live in the Middle East on common ground with those whom you have victimized and been victimized by - the Palestinians. I know this will sound Utopian and foolish to many, but it has worked in America, South Africa, and in other nations.

"The Jewish people's right to sovereignty and self-defense is now controversial." (Ari Shavit) Pure undiluted nonsense. First, because Cast Lead WAS NOT a self-defence war of the Jewish People. Then, because not one of all the civilized and democratic countries is questioning "The Jewish people's right to sovereignty and self-defense." What IS controversial is the right of the Jewish STATE to be the only democratic country on earth to force its will and its settlements on a foreign and stateless population. THAT is what is being questioned, and Ari Shavit is deliberately propagating a lie. Not that we haven't been warned, 29 years ago. "Not only will the effort to annex the territories not provide security, it will weaken the capacity to protect ourselves from our neighbors' hostility and THE OPPOSITION OF THE NATIONS." From an Open Letter to then-PM Begin, 1980, by Jacob Talmon (1916-1980), professor of Modern History at the Hebrew U of Jerusalem, and 1957 Israel Prize for Social Sciences. www.fmep.org/analysis/analysis/a-prophetic-message-from-the-past

Legitimacy through force, a deeply respected rule of international law??? Pure nonsense. Javier Loco, you surely seem to have a problem grasping the obvious. International law is very clear on the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. Re: UN Security Council Res. 242, Nov 22, 1967.

"Unlike Gideon Levy, Ari Shavit does not take every opportunity to lambast Israel." (Yonatan) Glenn Beck, on Fox News, "Obama has a deep-seated hatred for white people. This guy is, I believe, a racist." Screaming at the President, "Why don't you just set us on fire and get it over with?" Now, wise guy Yonatan, tell me, was Glenn Beck lambasting his own country - or rather its current leadership? Why is it, I wonder, that so many of your kind have always to be reminded that a country is not its decision makers? "he is putting in words what I have been feeling for a long time." (Yonatan) Now that's a most convincing point. Since you have been feeling for such a long time what Shavit is putting in words, who are we to dare dispute his views?

In the last election, more than 50% of the vote went to parties that don't really support an end of the occupation. Nobody can claim that Likud is really trying to end the settlement, it's obvious that Netanyahu's policies at best result in a prolonging of the status quo, if not tacitly support for expanding the west bank presence. And the rest of the world drew its conclusions from the vote: There isn't a majority in Israel really wanting peace with the palestinians! They only want peace at their terms, and this means that the palestinians should simply vanish. Nothing good can come out of this lunatic stance, and nothing will change until Israelis vote for a government that will really work to implement the two state solution, the only reasonable way towards peace.

.... One Cypriot woman (part of an ultra elite ruling family) once told me the culture is different, they don't understand our attachment to our land, where we planted crops and buried our dead over generations. Stephanie, your family has been in Texas, for, at most 400 years, and your originally something else... We're not originally anything else. We have been on our land for thousands of years, under different occupiers, often inter-marrying with whatever nearby tribe or culture conquered us, but never being expelled from our land, we were of the original Jews more than 2000 years ago, some of them left, we stayed. In Arabic we have an expression for Jews, 'the cousins'. But we mostly didn't cling to Judaism! And now 2000 years later we're being punished for it and told that our attachment to our and is unreasonable.

I understand the logic of your argument, and if I were from A place like Texas, it would probably make sense to me too. But I'm not from Texas, Im from Jaffa. We still have the British mandate and Ottoman Empire deeds to the orange grove my grandfather was born in. A piece of land that belonged to my family for hundreds of years. It located on a cliff, off the main highway that connects 'old' Jaffa to 'new' Tel Aviv, overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. Across the street is an ancient (actually ancient, church - we're christian Palestinian btw). My grandfather died in Jordan dreaming of his home, believing he would one day be allowed to return. I am Western educated, my culture is more N. American than Arab, and yet, I can almost guarantee I will marry another Palestinian, because there is a land and a culture so deeply ingrained in me, I cannot ever give it up. So far the only non-Arabs I have met that truly understand and relate are the Greek Cypriots...

'...On one hand, there is an urgent need for a creative, daring diplomatic initiative that would prove that Israel is truly and genuinely striving to end the occupation.' The problem here is that there's no striving to be done. Israel stops occupying, and there's no occupation. But Israel doesn't want that. Israel wants the occupation to continue. So how to simulate having enormous difficulty getting up and walking out of the room? After all, the central point is that you don't want to leave. And it's an interesting point. Israelis -- even leftist, peace-loving Israelis -- rarely talk about actually getting anywhere with negotiations -- they never say what the end point is they want to reach. They just advocate that talks start. I suspect that's because what might result -- peace, and an end to the occupation -- is intensely frightening. Israel, after all, is built on the proposition that there is no Palestine. How can a Palestine be allowed to appear?

The political system is almost as bad as France's IVth Republic during the Algerian war: too many parties, no leadership, half of the MPs in the government... A new constitution could be a good collective therapy!

It does not take an Einstein to work out that the Illegal settlements and occupation have become far too costly for Israel. Globally they are shunned as is Israels treatment of Palestinians. It has become the single most millstone around Israels neck and unless Israel discards the settlements and occupation Israel will never gain International acceptance or support of the kind it needs to survive.

You cannot convince the world something that is not true. More than a million Haredim and Settlers - constituting well over 20% of the Israeli population - is not interested in ending land grab (for whatever biblical, historic and economic reasons). And this 20% is in power (and just operated two wars). So how can you possibly convince anyone otherwise?! Israelis, when they think of themselves, leave out the 20% who call the shots. What would you say if Abbas went around asking the world to ignore the existence of Hamas & Islameec Jeehad?

the right of return by international law does NOT guarantee the right of return to a domicile, but simply to return to a "coutry", thereforethe Palestinians have a right to return to Palestine, that's all. Those that fled from a village or town which no longer exists cannot claim a right to return to that domicile. Furthermore if a Palestinian refugee find himself within the original "country" of Palestine,say in the West Bank, he cannot claim a right to return. Beyond international law, why should anyone insist on returning to an original domicile when one finds oneself perhaps 10-20 miles away from that domicile but still in the same country ? Isn't it somewhat silly to insist to return to a domicile which was 10-20 miles away from one's current location and cause continued international unrest, as well as killings and murder, because of this ?

If Israel wants to be considered a member of the Western civilisation, it will have to adhere to the same standards as the Western countries. If it wants to be a part of the Middle East, it will have to accept a fully sovereign and viable Palestinian state, with an army, or one state with its Palestininan citizens as equals. Anything less suggests Israel asks for impunity for its policies. Fences and settlements will only serve to diminish Israel's legitimacy abroad. Israel now has what it needs, now give the Palestinians what they need: a state within the 1967 borders and an end to occupation. In the long run, it will be in Israel's best interest.

EVERY UN resolution regarding Israel and the Palestinians requires the Palestinians to recognize Israel. So, the Palestinians violated all such UN resolutions until the Palestinian leadership recognized Israel in 1988. Hamas of course still violates all UN resolutions regarding Israel.

You said it perfectly.

It's amazing to me the number of Israelis that want to place Israel in moral equivalence to the most atrocious human rights tragedies in history. Do you really want to put your side on a par with slavery, China, Darfur, Hamas, Iran etc.? Are you no different? If not why should anyone support you?

UN Resolution 141 used Jewish state and Arab state as descriptive terms, not proper nouns, there was no presumption or suggestion that these should be named 'the Jewish State of West Palestine' or 'the Arab State of East Palestine'! Recognition as a 'Jewish' state is a complete non-starter because of its racist-religious overtones. Might as well ask countries in 1936 to recognise the 'Aryan State of Gross Deutschland'. It is not an obstacle, it is a tricky new precondition dreamt up by Netanyahu who knows perfectly well it will never fly. Right of Return to Israel will never happen, as all involved know well. Olmert was so confident that he boasts about having offered to take in 'a little over 5,000' Pal refugees - out of 4 million! The issue there is about compensation, who gets it and who pays. This is the real Israeli nightmare, having to compensate millions of refugees who AREN'T allowed to return. No doubt the despised UN and Arab League will dig in their pocket books.

delegitimatizing itself. Nobody has done it for it. It has done it for itself. It is almost impossible to have any positive thoughts about Israeli society however much one tries. It has become an ugly society. A racist society. A fascist society. An immoral society. There may still be time to change for the better, but not too many people believe it.

I thought the same, but could not express it as well. And also, it is the first article that calls it by its name, and correctly gives the year 2000 as the beginning of this dacade-old campaign. To read it as part of the ongoing anti-Israel stance since 1948 is missing the point. The word legitimacy is crucial. Thank you onec again Ari Shavit. I await your op-eds every week.

...you are rooted in times long past, progress to reality Yonatan. Israel has been recognized by the Palestinians for many years, even Khalid Meshaal, Zahar and Haniyah recognizes that Israel exists and agrees to abide by any legitimate agreement obtained by Abu Mazen that is then passed by Palestinian national referendum. The claim that the right of return would result in millions of Palestinians into Israel is a baldfaced lie. It is sad to see it continually made by people like you who refuse to see and hear reality. The Arab Peace Initiative has been understood since the first time it was put forth by then Crown Prince Abdullah that the Jewish character of Israel would not be affected by an influx of Palestinians. Israel even refuses to admit it's culpability for the refugees; the world is no longer tolerant of it.

What constitutes legitimacy? Or, rather, what constitutes Israel's definition of legitimacy? Does that include non Jews as second class citizens? Does that include the horrendous continuing occupation of the West Bank? Does that include stesaling the water under the West Bank for illegal Jewish settlers while forcing Palestinians to buy water? Does that include apartheid? Does that include preventing Palestinians from owning land? And tearing down their homes and apartments and stealing their olive groves? Does that include continued flaunting of international laws and the demeaning of an entire people? So what is your definition of legitimacy in a country that proclaims itself a democracy but that is not?

Historically speaking, were it not for the Western powers, Israel would not have been created, nor existed. The arab world however never need the west in order to exist. Were it not for the aquiescence of and collaboration by the West, the settlements would have been gone and you with them.

Now I see she/he didn't mention "Tel Aviv" ... North?

Your best source of legitimacy is our Muslim Holy Book. All that is needed for peace is to start quoting non-stop the Koran in verses 2:47,7:137, 17:104, 20:80, 26:59, 45:16, 44:32, 32:23. See http://arabsforisrael.com Establish a board of Zionist-Muslim clerics to issue a fatwa that fighting Israel is anti-Islamic. It'll be less hard to find them than you think. Israel's only real crime is against itself: failing to quote the Koran in its fight for legitimacy.

Balfour in 1917 and UN in 1947 indeed stated that Jews had the right to settle in the holy land. The bit Ari left out was 'but not at the expense of the indiginous population'. 40+ys of occupation has to end. Pals need there own homeland or equal citizenship within Israel, and then it will gain legitimacy. Oh, and obey international law!

"Lord Balfour sent Baron Rothschild a letter in which he recognized the Jewish people's right to create a national home in the Land of Israel." No. The national home was to be within Palestine. There was no 'Land of Israel' at that time - or since, either.

"There is one single, major impediment to Israel doing either. It is the belief/wish-dream of the religious and political right in a Greater Israel, stretching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan" There are several other impediments to peace: 1. The Palestinians refuse to recognize the Jews' right to a Jewish State in Palestine, mandated by the UN Resolution of 29 November 1947. This, even though PM Netanyahu claims that he recognizes the right of the Arabs to an Arab State in Palestine. 2. The Palestinians demand a "Right of Return", which would inundate Israel with Arabs and upset the demographic balance. No Jewish political party, right or left, religious or secular, is willing to accept that. There are a few more impediments on the part of the Palestinians I could mention, if I had world enough and time.

"Paradoxically, as Israel gets stronger, its legitimacy is melting away. A national movement that began as "legitimacy without an entity" is becoming "an entity without legitimacy" before our very eyes." - Ari Shavit The root of the paradox is the occupation. Israel, in the eyes of the world, has gone from the little guy who stood up to the Cossacks to the Cossacks crushing the little guy. It is Israel which has undermined it's legitimacy by it's actions. Colonialism was once the great fad of Europe, but it is unacceptable conduct in the 21st century. So long as Israel subjugates the Palestinians, it will continue to undermine the moral foundation of the nation, and bathe itself in the opprobrium which once bestowed those who oppressed Jews.

I also read Israel Harel's article on the Temple Mount.

reproach. With Israel's legitimacy hanging by a thread in the wider world, now is the time for it to take a step back to its traditional values and a step forward to a satisfactory solution on Palestine. There is one single, major impediment to Israel doing either. It is the belief/wish-dream of the religious and political right in a Greater Israel, stretching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan (or even to the Litani and Euphrates). In this land of milk and honey, the Jews would rule and Arabs would preferably emigrate, be pushed out or live in the equivalent of reservations. While that expansionist, predatory nationalist agenda remains, is enshrined in the Likud manifesto and dictates Israel's direction, there can never be peace, equality or progress. There can only be an endless round of Cast Lead 2, Infitada 3, Lebanon 4 until one day Israel is not victorious and all comes to a sticky end. Israeli electors have to renounce this Eretz Israel mirage in order to move forward.

Unlike Gideon Levy, Ari Shavit does not take every opportunity to lambast Israel. He was a staunch defender of Operation Cast Lead. \In short, there is no doubt in my mind that he is a sane Zionist, neither messianic Right nor self-righteous left. So when Shavit writes what he wrote today, I read him very carefully. Basically, he is putting in words what I have been feeling for a long time.

to create states by force. That historical route to nation-building ended in 1948 when the UN ruled as impermissible states acquiring land by force. They did so in the light of German, Italian and Japanese wars of conquest and decided never again. New era, new rules and you are 60 years behind the times. Those that break them get punished. China alone got away with it in Tibet in 1952, due to lack of international resolve and the logistical military problems of putting an army there. But the small fry, such as Iraq invading Kuwait, Argentina invading the Falklands, Serbia invading Croatia met international force and gained not one dunam for the aggressors. Ditto Turkey in Northern Cyprus, which was recognised by no one and is now de facto in the EU. Not one dunam gained there either. Israel is the only country that has been able to occupy another, Palestine, without military force and sanctions being applied against it (yet), due to double-dealing by the USA.

Sorry you may not like the right but they are not anti Israel or anti Semitic. The enemies of Israel are and this is part of the war that has been going on for 100 years. You are confusing yourself, if the left had its way and the settlements would be gone, the problems would just be worse. No defensive borders and the West Bank would be just like Gaza a cesspool of different terrorists. Hamas fed Goldstone the lies and the lefty Goldstone walked into an anti-Israeli trap. Just like Ari Shavit is doing!

... even tho' I condone her/his contention... ('Esther' #11, please state where you hail from...)

...from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River. And you are the one who is branding Dr. Jur. Gabriela Shalev as disappointing...!?

Since 1948, it's like we've been watching a street brawl where you know both parties have grievances. To begin with the Pals got all their mates from Egypt, Syria etc. to gang up on Israel. And naturally we all supported Israel. Then gradually, one by one the Pals' friends were knocked out of the brawl by Israel's superior fighting, leaving just Israel and the Pals. The Pals struggled on feebly, using some dirty moves in the form of terrorism, but it became gradually clear that the Pals could not fatally hurt Israel. Today, we're left with the end of the brawl, where Israel is sitting on top of a Palestine that has given up entirely and is just lying there. This is the part in a street brawl where you expect the winner to get off the defeated. Instead Israel's just sittng there, going through the Pals' pockets stealing land. And almost all onlookers have switched support to the Pals.

The Balfour Declaration stated "The Rights of the Indigineous Populuation Shall not be Abridged"

The operations in Lebanon and Gaza must continue till victory for there ever to be peace and recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. As long as the Arabs are saved from Israel by the big Western powers this conflict will keep on going and going.

Ari is right when he says "the left has also contributed its part to the legitimacy crisis. Those on the radical left did not always make certain that opposition to Israeli policies would not turn into reservations about Israel's very existence." but Ari is very wrong by saying the right is the "culprit" when the right has done the most to advance peace and to realize there is no occupation outside the one the PLO and Left Wing invented.

History will prove that Oslo was a huge mistake. Those involved must be held accountable.

The occupation may have been thrust upon Israel in 1967, but that was over 40 years ago. Let's put that in capitals. Israel has been keeping another nation captive for over 40 YEARS. If an innocent person had been in prison for over 40 years, Shalit for instance, ordinary Israeli Jews would regard that as horrifying. Yet they have come to accept that they have the total right to decide when and if the the Palestinians will have freedom. They have no such right. And it is this denial of freedom and self-determination more than anything else that undermines Israel's legitimacy. If the Palestinians have no automatic right to live in freedom in their own state, why should Jews?

yada yada yada. Existential threat? Joking I assume as we all know that not even an Iranian bomb is an existential threat.

Are Shavit's self revelatory statements genuine? To his questions what needs to be done to regain its legitimacy, Israel must abide by resolution 242. Israel's right to self defense by all means will be justified only after the Palestinians have established their free state and taken reponsibility for its actions by adhering to international law. It this simple. Bygones are bygones. It must be a fresh, forward looking start. The relationship between these two independent states will and should depend wholy on what will take place from that point on.

We should continue to do what the majority of the country understands is necessary for our survival and let the UN suck lemons.

Israel will become legitimate when it recognizes that Palestinians, too, have a right to the land--all of it, from the Mediterranean to the Jordan. The solution is to have two states on the same land, with each state governing its own population and the two states coordinating as equals all matters relating to the common territory, common economy, and communal relations. All individuals should have equal access to land, water, and other resources regardless of which state they belong to. See www.parityforpeace.org.

a

Israel is no different from any other state founded on force. It is not the responsibility of the left to keep reciting myths of its just origins.

1.Marhaba to blind committees, lame-duck institutions, hungry university students and obedient troops. 2.In the Bible it has been predicted that the tightest situation will arise where the multitude is stuck in the middle of nowhere, world leaders realize that they did not bring the correct food and the nearest down that sells the life-giving bread is Two Days away by foot. FYI: Two Genesis Days is equivalent to Two Millennia. 3.The same Biblical Story also predicted that sending the crowd home to starve along the way is NOT an option. 4.We also read from this story that the only food that will be blessed by The Father is the Five Loaves and Two Fish from a small boy. 5.It is clear The Father will not bless accords, agreements, initiatives, road maps, resolutions, etc from rich superstar leaders. 6.Hasta la vista and with all due respect.

simplistic and dishonest, Shavit ignores the fact that Israel after the 6 day war DID offer to return the captured lands. The answer was the 3 No's from Khartoum. Things did not change. The 3 No's are still with us in modern form. And Gaza? You forgot? It's not about the occupation, stupid!

The World watched for 40 yrears the barbaric anture of the occupation. The recent savageness spoke for itself. Despite Israels best efforts to kill without witnesses (keeping reporters out) in today's world hasbara wasn't enough to cover the truth.

Legitimacy means that Israel is a Jewish state, for the Jews, by the Jews, and will always be kept Jewish by force if necessary. That you were born of racially Jewish mothers means you have a right to the land from 2000 year old history. This is a strange legitimacy. Normal states derive their legitimacy through force. Take the USA for example. The USA gathered its land through violence and the creation of a government controlling that violence. If you didn't like the government having sovereignty over the land, you got shot. Israel became a state in a similar way. Those who didn't like the government of Israel got shot. Why can't you be satisfied with legitimacy through force like every other nation? Why must Israeli legitimacy comb from the racially Jewish womb instead of the gun? Legitimacy by birthright is deeply racist and exactly what the Nazis tried to do. Legitimacy through sovereign force is an ancient and deeply respected rule of international law.

"With a strong shekel, relative security and temporary calm, life here really is good." Except, of course, if you happen to have your home bulldozed because you couldn't get a building permit based on your race, or you got your olive grove burned down by settlers. Israeli's not feeling the pain of the occupation 20 minutes away is the reason there is no peace.

Retreat to the green line, remove settlements, share Jerusalem and justly compensate the refugees. There! Complex diplomatic problem solved. Of course, that is not going to happen.