Discussion thread for the Hamas Attacks Israel thread, October 2023

[Babale]

@Crane

The objection in my post is the propaganda. Israel is not the persecuted under dog defending a precarious existence as they strive for an equitable settlement with the Palestinians. There were no sweet deals.

The deal was not perfect, but you’re telling me we all would not be better off today - the Palestinians most of all - had Arafat accepted Oslo?

Israel certainly did pursue this goal under Rabin, under Ehud Barack, and at other times. Did Israel pursue this goal under Netanyahu? Definitely not; and I argue against Netanyahu whenever the chance arises, I oppose him at almost every level, precisely for this reason.

@Crane

So, what’s real? Is the situation intractable?

Part of the reason why Israeli politicians who would pursue this goal have a hard time getting elected is a strong sense of disillusionment with the peace process caused by repeated failures over the years - such as Arafat’s rejection of Oslo.

Is there a way out? Yes; we must make our way our of this situation because we have no other choice. My hope is that the monumental disaster of Oct 7 has awoken people to the fact that Netanyahu’s path - of ignoring the Palestinian conflict, moving neither towards a two state solution nor towards annexation, is not a real path. The status quo cannot be maintained indefinitely. And from there, only religious zealots support annexation; the vast majority of Israelis understand that this would be suicidal. What does that leave? If we cannot keep the status quo, and we cannot annex the Palestinian territories, there remains only one path - the only path that was actually available all along - a genuine two state solution.

[carnivorousplant]

Surely a great many Palestinians hate Israel. My problem with two states is that states get to have armies. I believe a Palestinian state would attack Israel.

[Crane]

@Babale

We are talking about tiny fractions of the total amount of land.

We are talking about the key allotments and resources that both sides want. You have pointed out previously that there are powerful forces on both sides that benefit from a non-solution. I fear the US also shares that position.

[Larry_Borgia]

They would be crushed in days, maybe hours.

[Babale]

@carnivorousplant

My problem with two states is that states get to have armies. I believe a Palestinian state would attack Israel

Yet the Arab countries surrounding Israel don’t do so anymore, and haven’t in decades. Militant groups within those nations, sure, but we haven’t seen their armies try to invade since the 80s.

I don’t doubt that there would be continued conflict during the process of setting up a Palestinian state. Conflict that moves us closer to a resolution is better than conflict that maintains the status quo, which is why I keep repeating that Israel’s goal in this war must be the destruction of Hamas - replacing them as the group governing Gaza is a positive, constructive step towards a two state solution.

[Dorjan]

@carnivorousplant

Surely a great many Palestinians hate Israel. My problem with two states is that states get to have armies. I believe a Palestinian state would attack Israel.

Let them. If they didn’t learn from Egypt’s, Syria’s, and Jordan’s experience with that, they’ll be in good company.

[Babale]

@Crane

@Babale

We are talking about tiny fractions of the total amount of land.

We are talking about the key allotments and resources that both sides want.

That’s fine, I am saying we are talking about a small percentage of the total land, not that these small areas are unimportant. But again - negotiate onwards. Don’t start an intifada. That is not the action of someone genuinely working towards peace.

@Crane

You have pointed out previously that there are powerful forces on both sides that benefit from a non-solution

And that comes up in Rabin’s story, with his assassination by Yigal Amir. But the powerful force against peace in Israel was the religious right who felt disempowered and assassinated Rabin, while the powerful force against peace on the Palestinian side was Yasser Arafat.

@Crane

I fear the US also shares that position.

I don’t see how the US benefits from conflict in Israel. If anything, the conflict is a major thorn in American middle eastern policy; the US’s biggest allies in the region are Israel and Saudi Arabia, and America’s greatest rival in the region is Iran; without the Palestinian conflict America’s allies could be much more closely aligned against Iran.

[Alessan]

@Dorjan

Let them. If they didn’t learn from Egypt’s, Syria’s, and Jordan’s experience with that, they’ll be in good company.

Has Hamas learned? Israel has crushed Gaza, and will probably crush it more before this is over. Have they learned?

[Crane]

@Babale

the only path that was actually available all along - a genuine two state solution.

Actually annexation has some benefits. It legalizes the resource issues as long as the Palestinians are granted full citizenship. And as citizens many will be patriotic defenders of the state. Those who advocate overthrow of the state are criminals and can be disposed of without international objection. Aggressive Palestinian participation in the economy will solve a lot of problems.

Part of the question is do you want a State or a Jewish State?

[Dorjan]

The main point of Israel’s existence is as a Jewish state. I think you discount the level of anti-Semitism that is being dealt with here.

[Crane]

@Dorjan

The main point of Israel’s existence is as a Jewish state.

Some Israelis I have worked with did not agree. They said they were Israelis first and Jews second.

[carnivorousplant]

As a religious state, Israel provides a home for persecuted Jews. It is, of course for Israelis to decide. American Jews I’ve spoken with believe Israel to be a refuge should there be another Holocaust.

[Alessan]

@Crane

Some Israelis I have worked with did not agree. They said they were Israelis first and Jews second.

Did you ask them to define “Israeli”?

[puzzlegal]

@Babale

@puzzlegal

But if you want to understand why Palestinians who had just recently been driven off their lands didn’t accept a deal that didn’t allow them to return to those lands, or be compensated for them in some way, well, it seems pretty obvious to me. They lost territory in a war, and hoped to regain it in a new war. That’s a pretty common reaction.

Look, I don’t doubt that there are large groups of people on both sides who are opposed to a two state solution, and who want their side to drive out everyone from the other side.

I agree that today, the only possible solution that results in a peaceful solution for Israel is a two state solution, without any additional Palestinians becoming Israeli citizens. But in 1948, it would have been possible for the displaced people to have returned, and become Israeli citizens. Not the people who had previously lived in the West Bank, but those driven off what became Israel? They could have returned, or been compensated monetarily.

That’s not “driving anyone out”, it would have been the opposite of driving people out. And that action, or rather, that lack of action, gave the Palestinian refugees a great deal of moral standing in the broader world.

And at the time, a lot of Israelis wanted all the land west of the Jordan. Or at least, an awful lot of American Jews who supported Israel did. That was the map of Israel in my synagogue. And i remember my uncle arguing in the 60s that Israel would have to accept a two state solution because otherwise it wouldn’t remain Jewish. But he had to argue that position, because it wasn’t accepted, or even common.

So anyway, yes, i totally agree, a two state solution, TODAY, is the only path forward that doesn’t guarantee massive bloodshed. But you were talking about Palestinians not agreeing to “sweet offers” back in 1948. That wasn’t an especially sweet offer from their perspective.

I agree that Palestinian leadership, definitely including Arafat, have done a huge disservice to Palestinians. Sadly, Israel suffers from some of the same problem. Why can’t Israel keep new Jewish settlements from popping up in the West Bank? If they, for instance, withdrew Israeli citizenship from people who emigrated to the West Bank, there’d be a lot fewer flash points. Or something. That’s a monumental failure of leadership.

Anyway, i wish you the best for your nation. And that includes wishing that you (collectively) manage the current crisis without too many more dead Palestinians.

Shalom.

[Babale]

@puzzlegal

But you were talking about Palestinians not agreeing to “sweet offers” back in 1948.

The offer in 1948 would have not involved anyone returning because it would not have involved anyone leaving. If the Partition Plan was agreed to then Arabs in the British Mandate would not have left their homes, neighboring Arab countries would not have invaded, and Israel and Palestine could both have gained their independence at the same time.

After that I’m mostly speaking about Oslo.

[puzzlegal]

Okay. I guess i was off by a few months.

I still see that as “less than they had before”, which isn’t exactly a “sweet offer”, but it would certainly have been an offer that an awful lot of people could have lived with, far more comfortably than what happened after.

[Babale]

@puzzlegal

I still see that as “less than they had before”,

“Before” they were subjects of the British, and before that the Ottomans, and before that the Egyptians, and before that the Ottomans again, and before that the Crusaders and the Caliphates and the Byzantines and…

It’s not like there was some historic Palestinian free state that was being restored. The Palestinian people lived under one foreign ruler and then another since they first emerged as a distinct group through the process of Arabization under the Caliphate, and their local ancestors had been living under foreign rule just as long as the Jews had.

1948 could have been an emancipatory day for both the Palestinians and the Israelis. Instead, the Palestinians were used as pawns by neighboring Arab rulers with imperial or Pan-Arabic ambitions.

[Babale]

@puzzlegal

Sadly, Israel suffers from some of the same problem. Why can’t Israel keep new Jewish settlements from popping up in the West Bank? If they, for instance, withdrew Israeli citizenship from people who emigrated to the West Bank, there’d be a lot fewer flash points. Or something. That’s a monumental failure of leadership

Because there are three options. Annexation, Two States, or Status Quo.

Annexation is impossible. It would either mean Israel ceases to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people, or Israel commits heinous attrocities. Neither option is acceptable, so the only supporters of this plan are religious extremists who pretend that reality won’t matter so long as we have faith.

And a Two State solution is incredibly difficult to bring about. The Israeli Left has been trying for ages, without success.

What’s a political opportunist like Netanyahu to do? Easy: pander to both sides, pretending you support a two state solution when convenient and that you support annexation when that is convenient; but instead simply entranch the status quo with additional settlements and by exploiting the division between Hamas and Fatah.

But after over a decade, reality has caught up with Bibi. You can’t keep up the status quo forever; eventually Hamas will slip through and cause real damage.

So with status quo getting discredited and with annexation being impossible, I hope once Bibi is thrown out of office we can start making real progress towards a two state solution again.

[Babale]

6th round of hostages should be coming out today. Looking pretty iffy for further extensions.

[cmkeller]

@Babale

but we haven’t seen their armies try to invade since the 80s.

Nitpick: Not a ground invasion, but Iraq launched missiles against Israel in 1991.