The one-state illusion

[cali]

Published: January 29, 2009

The one-state illusion

It is always pleasing to hear Muammar Qaddafi coming forward with a new idea. He is the joker in the pack of Middle Eastern leaders, appearing in the most unexpected places. He looks at things with fresh eyes. Unfortunately, his ideas are not always the most practical.

Now he is putting forward the idea that Jews and Arabs in our country should live together in one joint state, to be called Isratine ("The one-state solution," Views, Jan. 23)

<snip>

It takes quite a stretch of the imagination to believe that Israelis and Palestinians will come together tomorrow, serve in the same army, enact the same laws and pay the same taxes. One wonders how such a state would function.

Israelis might misunderstand the intentions of our Libyan friend and think that he is asking them to dismantle their state, take in six million Palestinian refugees and resign themselves to live as a minority in an Arab-majority Isratine. They will be tempted to answer: Thanks, but no thanks. If there is one point on which 99 percent of Israelis are in agreement, it is their desire to live in a Hebrew-speaking state of their own.

Palestinians might react quite similarly. After enduring the Zionist onslaught for so long, they also want to be masters of their fate, in a state of their own, under their own flag. They might not take kindly to Qaddafi's contention that their brutal oppression and exploitation by fanatical Jewish settlers in the West Bank constitutes a "successful assimilation" and that in 1948 "Jews did not forcibly expel Palestinians." (As a soldier in that war, this comes as quite a surprise to me, too.)

<snip>

The Two-State Solution is achievable right now, in 2009, if President Barack Obama is determined to implement it "aggressively," as he says. He will find many allies in Israel.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/29/opinion/edletters.php

[ProgressiveMuslim]

1. Watch the 60 minutes video from last week. Hear that settler. You really think the gov't of Israel

is going to risk civil war? That is exactly what it will be.

We'll continue with the status quo of course, in which Israel effectively controls all the territory and in which Israeli Jews have full rights, Israeli Arabs most rights, West Bank Palestinians few rights and Gazan Palestinians none. We'll continue with the current system of apartheid on the West Bank and ghettoization in Gaza.

There is already one state, and the quality of political life there very much depends on geography and religion.

[cali]

2. Saw it.

but a one state solution is far more impossible than a two state solution. And Avenery articulates that clearly.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

3. Palatable or possible? Of course it's less palatable.

But 2-states is impossible at this point. I predict that TPTB in Israel will continue to talk about it and trumpet it and pretend to pursue it, while they continue stealing land and building settlements, and creatings more Israeli-only roads and checkpoints.

[cali]

5. it's not possible. I'd find it quite palatable if it was.

But it's not. This is not, as Voltaire so succinctly said, the best of all possible worlds. A two state solution is unlikely but still possible, Avenery explains in his piece. It will take real courage on the part of this Administration to pressure and threaten and encourage the Israelis to shut down the settlements and engage, but that could lead to a two state solution. There is nothing short of invading armies that could impose one state, at least not within the next couple of decades.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

6. Invading armies will also be required to remove settlers.

Cali, I dont mean to argue with you per se, but why in the world would Israel risk civil war to bring about 2 states right now. Their economy is fine, the vast majority of their citizens live their lives in peace. What is the motivation to bring about a civil war for the sake of peace with Arabs about whom they don't give a shit? They simply don't need it!

Perhaps they *could* do, but they have no reason to!

If the 2-state solution were even a remote possibility on the distant horizon, settlement expansion would cease now, as TPTB would realize what goes up today will have to be forcibly removed.
The fact that expansion goes on unabated signals Israel's intent.

I would argue that Israel will reject ANY solution that provides Arabs with either equal rights (can't lose the Jewish majority/dominance of the nation) or their own territory (won't risk civil war).

Ultimately it will require world-wide BDS (along with academic and cultural boycotts) in order to help Israel see the error of its ways.

[cali]

7. I'm not convinced that Israel would be risking civil war

And the motivating factor would have to be, at least in part, provided by the U.S. It's at least more likely than a one state solution.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

8. It would be interesting to poll the IDF

to see if what Daniella Weiss predicted about IDF mutiny, could have any basis in reality.

I also think it unlikely for the US to ever grow the balls to exert any real pressure on Israel.

[Vegasaurus]

9. Boycotts aren't going to happen or do what you expect. nt

[cali]

10. I wouldn't be so sure.

But what's really needed is an American administration that puts its foot down re settlements.

[Vegasaurus]

12. I agree

but there isn't an American president that has the political will or means to dismantle settlements that have been there for 40 years, where hundreds of thousands of people have lived for two or three generations.

These are the only homes these people have ever known, and Israel will never allow total abandonment of all of the settlements, no matter what the US says,

The US could be much more forceful about Israel preventing new settlement building though.

[cali]

13. The Israelis stole Palestinian land to build those settlementsI

If they want to stay, the settlers should become part of a Palestinian nation.

[oberliner]

14. What about a land exchange?

Offering land inside of Israel in exchange for land in the West Bank.

Do you think that could go anywhere? And do you think that might be an equitable arrangement?

[cali]

15. That's a possibility too

as long as it helps to form a contiguous WB and not one divided by Jewish settlements and if the land is of equal or greater value.

[Vegasaurus]

16. There is no question that this is what Israeli leadership in the past has offered

they always offered land in exchange for the settlements.

Of course, if Bibi wins, all bets are off.

[Shaktimaan]

19. You're right...

Israel isn't going to risk its own state's stability for the sake of the Palestinians. The only was for this to work would be for the Palestinians to make it worthwhile for the majority of Israelis to back a two state solution.

You can forget about a single state solution as there is just no way that such a "solution" would gain any support amongst Israelis. It doesn't matter what the eventual plan looks like, unless it benefits both parties then it has zero chance of success.

Right now the only solution being offered that has any chance of success is the two state plan. You can offer all of the explanations in support of a single state that you like, the fact of the matter is that it isn't a concept that even a sizable minority of Israelis agree with. I would offer that they reject it to such a degree that pretty much any alternative would be preferable... whether it is an unending occupation, unilateral disengagement and constant low-grade war, it doesn't matter. The single state solution is a non-starter.

As are boycotts, at least for the foreseeable future. For boycotts to really take hold the idea would need massive support across the globe. And as long as people recognize that Israel has legitimate security concerns that just isn't going to happen. There's no way that the Palestinian cause can capture the hearts of enough people to the extent that they'd be willing to impose a vast boycott as long as their primary tool continues to be violence, as long as groups like Hamas reject the very idea of a permanent Israeli state and as long as the boycott's organizers insist on demanding unreasonable terms for ending it, such as total right of return for Palestinian refugees.

I genuinely feel sorry for the Palestinian people if they are pinning their hopes for a state on long shots like a worldwide boycott of Israel. You were on the right track there for a little while too. You realize that Israel isn't interested in putting itself at risk unless it has a compelling reason to do so. Your mistake is in assuming that the reason will come from an international community that takes up the Palestinian cause for justice regardless of the cost to Israel. Rest assured that any solution that results in the dissolution of Israel isn't going to ever receive the backing you need.

I would recommend that you focus your energies on attaining a solution that you could live with, one that benefits both nations, and on figuring out some way of solving the internal strife that Palestine currently faces. Ultimately the job of building a state will fall to the Palestinians alone. And thus far I am sorry to say that they have squandered their limited opportunities. If statehood is ever going to be an attainable goal, the Palestinians will have to learn how to grab every opportunity that comes their way and exploit them all.

Would you rather have a real-life, imperfect state of your own, or an ideal state that only exists in the future?

[Vegasaurus]

20. This is why the Palestinians innocents (not the terrorists) always lose

People pin their political ambitions on craziness that isn't reality.

Israel isn't going away, and it isn't going to accept 4.5 million refugees and it isn't going to become a single state with the Palestinians.

Posters here already have stated that it is better for Palestinians to have NO work than to be "slaves" of Israel.

What would they be in a single state, where Israelis are so much better educated, have lived with democracy all their lives.

Would people be content to have Palestinians be the "underclass" of Israel?

No,they would rather that they live in abject poverty and misery, apparently.

This kind of thinking doesn't do the Palesinians any good, and won't be getting them a state anytime soon.

Plus, the Palestinians have so many internal problems, that their first order of business should be to find unity among their own people.

But the Palestinian supporters would do a lot more good if they would begin to be realistic about the future, and think about how to help these people, not subject them to 60 more years of misery.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

4. Evidence of Israel's actual intent regarding trading land for peace:

Israel settlement building accelerated in 2008

Peace Now just released a report which found that settlement growth has increased 69% in 2008 as compared to 2007.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x255382

As Phil Weiss points out on his blog:

A similar report was issued by the group in August of 2008.

A similar report was issued by the group in March of 2008.

A similar report was issued by the group in October of 2007.

A similar report was issued by the group in April of 2007.

A similar report was issued by the group at the end of 2006.

A similar report was issued by the group in August of 2006.

A similar report was issued by the group in June of 2006.

A similar report was issued by the group in March of 2006.

A similar report was issued by the group at the end of 2005.

http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/

The time has come to call this phony shell game for what it is.

[LeftishBrit]

11. Very good article!

[IndianaGreen]

17. I am sure the IDF will forcibly remove the settlers from their "GAWD given" settlements

The 2-state solution was killed by the settlers a long time ago. It only remains as a fig leave to cover up the continued settlement expansion on Arab lands.

[azurnoir]

18. The one state solution is already in place

it is Israel and Israel has no intention of allowing a Palestinian state now or ever it needs the West Bank as an overflow area for its population and as a water source and Israeli politicians have been lying and stalling for years about this fact.