But you can’t get investment until the shipping blockade is lifted. So, there has to be some structured mechanism to lift the shipping blockade for that to work. The only way around that is to have a structured negotiation with stages, which I guess moves us away from a purely economic proposal that the OP was looking for.
How much would we pay the American Indians to get that blood off our hands?
How much did the Germans pay to Israel in reparations?
I don’t think the “money” part is the problem, I think the “it won’t work” part is the problem.
Well, that would be a problem. If too many wanted to stay, it wouldn’t work. But I don’t think too many Gazans think Gaza is their homeland. It’s more of a refugee camp. Or an open-air prison. They think their homeland is somewhere in Israel. There are Palestinians all over the world who think that.
I’d suggest offering it to families with children first.
Or maybe it could be offered as a Groupon.
Use the $75b to build a massive United States Military base in the West Bank area … maybe IBM will build a factory there and put the people to work.
I tend to side with the Palestinian cause much more than with the State of Israel, so obviously I don’t think they should have to move.
Having said that, I’m also cognizant of the fact that the future prospects for the Palestinians are probably going to get progressively worse, unfortunately. So I’ve toyed with the idea that you could pay Palestinians to move to South America. South America has already assimilated a ton of Arab immigrants, including a large number of Palestinians (most of whom were Christians, but not all- there are actually more Palestinian Christians in Chile than in the WB/Gaza, apparently). And they’re mostly middle to middle-high income countries where the Palestinians would neither be taking a big step down in terms of income, nor be an economic drag on the host countries.
Venezuela in particular has (in the last ten years or so) taken a strongly anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian stance, the late Chavez was apparently rather popular among Palestinians, and they already have a significant and well-assimilated Arab population. Maybe if a million Palestinians got paid to emigrate to Venezuela, it could be a win-win: Maduro would presumably get a reliable voting bloc, and the immigrants would get to live in a middle-income country with (relatively) good social services, and where the government officially endorsed their cause.
Not that I think this would ever seriously happen, or that I seriously endorse it, but it’s a nice thought experiment.
I think the difficulty is that the proposal is, basically, to offer people money to abandon their national identity and national aspirations. Basic self-respect will prevent most people from accepting such an offer, or from committing to it even if they do accept it.
The underlying problem is not an economic problem, and you can’t solve it by throwing money at it, any more than you can solve it by throwing bombs at it. A rich, and militarily powerful society like America would like to believe that all problems can be solved with either money or guns because, if they were true, then America could solve all problems. But that’s just wishful thinking.
(That’s not to say that material resources can have no role to play in arriving at and implementing a viable political solution to what is, at bottom, a political problem.)
From a purely economic point of view, it’s unfeasable. Israel is a rich country, with thousands of millionaires. The amount of money it would take to get them to move would be astronomical.
If it’s a win-win, why not endorse it?
Shipping inspections could, eventually, substitute for the blockade. So long as nobody is bringing in weapons, nobody would really much care if manufactured goods, machine parts, electronics, and so on come and go. Rockets are a problem, but washing machines won’t be.
As you say, structured negotiation with stages. Peace would benefit the Gazans vastly more than war ever conceivably could.
From my understanding, the Palestinian diaspora includes millions of people who now live all over the world: Jordan, Chile, Egypt, and the US, to name a few. (A quarter of a million live in the US alone.)
The money would be there to get them to do something many would like to do: leave Gaza. It would not be in exchange for giving up their identity or aspirations.
What they aspire to, as I understand it, is to leave Gaza and go to Israel, and what stops them from doing that is not a lack of money.
For the most part, what stops them going to other countries is also not a lack of money. It’s the reluctance of other countries to admit them, and/or the fact that they might have no desire to settle in those other countries (particularly in a context where this is presented as a “solution” to Israel’s problem with Gaza).
If the idea was to spend money to enable Palestinians from Gaza to resettle in other countries, my guess is that the most effective way of spending the money would be to pay it to third countries (that Gazan Palestinians might be willing to go to) in return for admitting Gazan Palestinians as permanent residents. Then at least those Gazans who are open to resettling could do so. If you just give it to Gazan Palestinians, there is no guarantee that they will all try to use it to resettle themselves in third countries, and there is no guarantee that those who do try to use in that way will succeed.
The same result could of course be acheived not by countries subscribing money to pay other countries to accept Gazans as permanent residents, but by countries themselves accepting Gazans as permanent residents. (The countries that are willing to accept immigrants in return for large cash payments from wealthy countries probably overlap to some extent with the countries that most people would not be keen to settle in.)
Respectfully, have you ever met Israelis?
Yeah, Israel does have huge numbers of immigrants to the US and other countries, but the only way what you’re proposing happens is that someone invades them and forces them out at gun point and that is simply not happening.
Similarly, I can’t help but chuckle at all the people proposing to pay off the Palestinians to leave the Gaza Strip.
Please. The Palestinians there shouldn’t even be called Gazans. Something like 70% are refugees or the descendants of refugees who were ethnically cleansed/fled from what is now Israel during the 48 War.
I don’t know how many people have ever been in the houses of Palestinian refugees either in or outside a refugee camp, but it really is something difficult to convey with just words. The walls are often covered with intricate drawings of the houses and villages they used to live in generations ago. Has anyone ever listened to a ten year old child describe in detail the home his great-grandfather lived in and the olive trees he used to own and how he will live to see that home.
They don’t want an independent Gaza or a Palestinian State. They want Palestine. They want Haifa, they want Jaffa. They want their land back and they want the Jews gone.
What we have unfortunately is a conflict between the irresistible force and the immovable object. The Jews aren’t going to leave or give up the idea of a having a sovereign state for the Jewish people which is going to ensure they’re always going to be in conflict with the Arab minority within Israel and the Palestinians are never going to give up their dream of returning to their homes and liberating Palestine from the river to the sea and they will never support a two state solution because they aren’t stupid enough to think that the West Bank and Gaza are viable as anything other than Bantustans.
Now, I’m sure lots of us have “solutions” to this. Quoting from memory, E. K. Hornbeck said, “for every complicated issue there is a solution that is obvious, simple, straightforward, and wrong”. I’ll add to the list self-serving.
I don’t know what the solution is and I guarantee that thirty years from now, just as thirty years ago in late night sessions in college dorms people had “solutions” and people will be saying “this can’t go on forever” but the truth is that sometimes there really is no solution.
Some conflicts just reach a certain point where both sides reach in the words of P.J. O’Rourke “an acceptable level of violence” and neither side is willing to admit they’ve lost and neither is willing to say “ok, we’ve got to give up our dream, sit down and cut the best deal we can.”
Someone on another thread made some terrible comparisons to postwar Japan. What they failed to realize is that Japan not only surrendered to the US but offered unconditional surrender.
That is how such conflicts end. One side clearly is the winner and the other recognizes it and surrenders.
Perhaps I’m wrong. If you’d asked me in 1987 if there’d be a resolution to the conflict in Northern Ireland I’d have laughed in your face and made a similar post, but the IRA surprised me and while they never publicly admitted it and tried to shroud it in sheep’s clothing, they basically realized they’d lost, sat down with the British and negotiated a surrender with the British in such a way as to save face but still meant the British didn’t have to give up one inch of territory and the IRA didn’t gain an inch of territory.
Perhaps something like this will happen, but not while Hamas is around. People who believe that Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs and that the Jews have through their agents, the Rotary Clubs, the Lions and the Free Masons have come to dominate the West aren’t the kind of people to negotiate a surrender with the Jews.
Until then we’ll have what many romantics refer to as “the cycle of violence” but the realists refer to as “the cycle of cease-fires”.
If there’s ever a saying that better encapsulates the situation that Ron Moore’s saying “All of this has happened before, all of this will happen again” I don’t know what it is.
Sigh. I really shouldn’t post when suffering from insomnia, having had a little too much to drink adjust having heard of the daughter of a good friend of mine, whom I’m also friends with, getting paralyzed in a car accident.
I apologize to all.
What I am saying is never discount the attraction of ruining things for everyone. For extremists, that can become a powerful tool for multiplying their impact.
First of all, my sympathies. Second of all, you have nothing to apologize for - it was a good post.
I’m very sorry about your friend’s daughter. And yes, it was a good post. It mostly dovetailes with what I’ve been told about the region by people who know and/or have connextions to the area.
No, but they think Palestine is. And leaving Gaza means, effectively, leaving Palestine. That was my point.
No, no, pay them $50,000 each to move to the West Bank! Who’s gonna stop 'em?!
No practical results aside from 35 years of actual, lasting peace between Egypt and Israel. Everyone seems to forget when and why the US started giving Israel direct military aid: to offset the direct military aid it started giving Egypt as a result of Camp David because Egypt had abandoned being a Soviet client state when it broke ranks and negotiated peace with Israel in 1979.
Thank you very much.