It is also worth remembering a little history, which seems to be re-written or at least forgotten: how much better off the Palestinians would have been had they not gone to war immediately after the British left and the UN partition was authorized in 1948 (hint - there would have been much more territory available for Palestinians than just the current outlines of the West Bank and Gaza):
Also, I’m old enough to remember that the PLO was a terrorist organization that did not recognize Israel at all and it’s right to even exist. Arafat was forced to moderate the PLO’s stance some in the late 1980s as Gorbachev abandoned him in order to move to a less bellicose US-Soviet relationship. Arafat consequently started courting the US and the west as a result. The PLO’s representative groups (Fatah, Hamas, etc.) had not forgotten its original mission, though, and the intifadas following Arafat’s move showed that a great number of the Palestinians did not go along.
So your suggestion is that Israel engage in inarguable war crimes, and perpetrate ethnic cleansing again innocent Palestinians? And you think that would be a good strategy for Israel? And you’re okay with them committing that kind of atrocity against innocent people?
It is Israel’s territory (Hamas says so–publicly). The people living on Israel’s territory say the same thing. Israel has the authority to deport people who are not legally resident in Israel (sound familiar? LOL !!). Where do they go? To whoever will take them. Ireland, Spain, and Norway said “good enough”. So, they get sent there. Problem resolved.
Hamas also says that it’s Hamas’ territory - that they are the legitimate governing body in all of the former Mandate, and that the current Israeli government is not. But just because they say it doesn’t make it true.
It’s not Israel’s territory - they’ve never formally annexed it. For the obvious reasons below…
But the Palestinians are legally resident in those areas. They’re allowed to be there. They were given that right both by the 1948 UN Partition resolution and the Egyptian and Jordanian governments when (after 1948 and until 1967) those nations controlled the WB and Gaza. Israel seized control over those territories in 1967, but that doesn’t convert their status into being unlawfully resident.
It’s a war crime to drive out the resident population of an area in order to engage in ethnic cleansing. It’s a violation of internaitonal law, and it’s a horrific violation of basic human rights. Do you really not understand what you’re advocating for here? That this is supporting committing atrocities against innocent people?
Hamas says there is no border–“from the river to the sea”. Thus, it is Israeli territory–“from the river to the sea”. Hamas says so. The only time the partitioning of the land is brought up is when it is convenient to argue when they DO NOT LIKE the consequences of their actions. THEY WANT A DO-OVER so they can try again. No more. Hamas AND its supporters are stuck with the consequences of their choice(s). All the territory now belongs to Israel. Their problem. They can be ignored. Israel has been annexing land bits and pieces at a time. Be interesting to see if they do anything with the territories this time.
No - they’re saying it’s their territory. They’re not claiming that it’s lawfully Israel’s territory, they’re claiming that the entirety of Israel is unlawful. And we don’t usually take the word of radical fundamentalist terrorist groups. Nor do we attribute their position to the population that they have tormented and established a de facto dictatorship over. Nor would that make it legal or moral for Israel to take the step you’re advocating.
Again, this wouldn’t just be illegal under international law (which it would be). It would be an atrocity. A crime against humanity. Which is one of the many reasons why Israel isn’t actually doing it…
Bold move suggesting a Trail of Tears approach. I’m not sure what problem you think will be resolved, probably won’t result in lasting peace for the region.
It can be both. There are plenty of groups that advocate for a one-state solution. Some of them argue that the current situation is unlawful or illegitimate, and there de facto isn’t a border today. Hamas and various right-wing religious Israeli groups both think that, though they have very different ideas about who rightfully is the legitimate representative of that single state.
Talking with several members of my temple who are active in JVP, there’s a non-trivial level of USian support for a one-state solution as well.
He does not have any inkling of the facts. This is just another ignorant idea that will never hapeen. His idea is only to show hatred toward Palestinians who are trapped under the thumb of an authcratic Isreal government that is commiting genocide. The world is rallying around Palestinians not Israeli conservative goverment or Hamas.
That is no surprise with so many rich and influential Jews in US and close family ties in Israel. I would consider many of them to be biased against Palestinians. I am worried that if US gets a conservative President we will see Putin, Netanyahu and other autocrates becoming the friends of US and the destruction of NATO and our economy.
I mean, to some extent they all do? Even the most extreme ones (Hamas or Otzma Yehudit) want the “peace” that would result from vanquishing their enemies and having total dominion “from the river to the sea,” to coin a phrase. But there would be violence on the way there.
The JVP and If Not Now folks that advocate for a one-state solution certainly want peace, and they believe that a single state would result in that scenario. The ones I’ve spoken to believe that if there was a single pluralistic democratic state (whether called Israel or Palestine or something else), that it would bring peace - because they believe the root of the current conflict lies in the Palestinians’ deprivation of rights, rather than things like nationalism or religious fundamentalism or the desire of a “people” for self-determination. Personally, I think that perspective is flawed (and perhaps a little naive), given the history of nationalist and separatist movements across history and the globe…but I do take them as genuinely believing it to be true.
I generally agree with your assessment, but I don’t think extremists can be classified as wanting peace if it requires the annihilation of their enemy. In my rainbows and unicorns world, peace requires living with your neighbors, not vanquishing them. I’m going to hug a tree now…
I too think their are genuinely concerned one-staters who want peace, some of them even acknowledge it would require everyone to have equal rights. Some do not. For that reason, equal rights for all is a tough row to hoe, and as you pointed out, not everyone would be satiated.
I’m smart enough to realize I don’t know what the answer is. I do believe that more fighting is pushing us further away from the goal of lasting peace.
I’m still a little skeptical that lasting peace is a goal everyone truly wants.
I think most of the genuinely concerned one-staters envision a single state where everyone in that state has equal rights. I just think they’re unrealistic in their assessment of what would happen in that state. I think they recognize that (as you put it) not everyone would be satiated. They believe that this new One State could continue forward like that. I think that ignores the long and bloody history of movements for self-determination and nationalism and religious identity. I know my cross-section of folks I’m speaking with is far from representative of all such folks, but none of them are especially nationalist or religious or strongly connected to a sense of identity as a “people.” So I don’t think they have an appreciation of how those desires can rend a nation apart.
You misunderstand. They advocate a one-state solution with full rights for Palestinians (including right of return). They oppose the position of Netanyahu and his allies.
Askenazi Jews. The majority in Israel are Sephardic. More quick condescending points of view out of the Askenazis.
Israel can not have a right of return. The Jews would be outnumbered. The Ashkenazi seem to think democracy would just coast along. We have problems in this country at this point with coasting along. The rest of the world including Israel has bigger problems with forces against democracy.