Israel has never PROMISED to not Build or fortify within its borders (It has given up Land for peace in Gaza) and received attacks from there many times afterwards .
given up land for peace in Gaza, that is very funny.
Unilaterally withdrew the military occuption of a not interesting territory with the very limited fringe settlements, withdrawing to the edges but retained 100percent control over all the entry and exit of any and all of the goods, the services, indeed the people.
The Gaza is indeed one very large prison camp
There was no “land for peace” only a military decision on the cheaper form of the occuption.
A true withdrawal like the Sinai does not pretend to control all the access by the air, by the land by the sea…
I wish the people in favor of the settlements would explain what they think the future will be.
Is it, Israel should annex the West Bank, and have it become an integral part of Israel? OK, that’s a plan. But what about the people who aren’t Israelis who live there? What happens to them? Do they get expelled from the country? You can’t do that unless you have another country willing to take them in, and that’s not happening. Do you make them citizens of Israel? That won’t happen, because it would mean Israel would no longer be a Jewish state, it would be a binational state, even if the Jews would still have a slim majority. And how do you cope with a very large minority population that is hostile to the very existence of the country they are supposedly citizens of? Or do the Palestinians remain a subject population–that is, they might live in Israel but are treated as foreigners? How does that work?
None of these options is possible, given the realities of the situation. The Palestinians can’t be gotten rid of, they cannot be made full citizens of Israel. And so the only option is the current Apartheid-like arrangement, where Israel controls the West Bank, but the Palestinians have no rights. Obviously plenty of countries in the world exist where the people have no rights, we could list such countries all day and plenty of those countries are Arab countries. Authoritarian countries are a dime a dozen, and oppression of ethnic minorities happen all day every day. But are we in favor of this or against it?
Israel can’t pretend to be a free country when a very large minority population in their country is not free. Just because Jordan or Syria or Lebanon or Egypt or Saudi Arabia don’t qualify as fully free countries either doesn’t mean Israel should be an unfree country as well.
So, in this case the so-called “one state solution” is unworkable. That means that some other solution has to happen for the Palestinians who live there. They need to be citizens of some other country. It would be easier if Egypt could annex Gaza and Jordan annex the parts of the West Bank that Israel doesn’t want. But they won’t do that, because what’s in it for them?
And so Israel needs to allow the creation of a functioning state in the West Bank. That’s what the Palestinian Authority was supposed to be. But this entity was never allowed to become a functioning state.
And so we have the current mess, where Israel can never make peace with the Palestinians, yet can never disengage either. So I guess it’s perpetual war for generations to come. Israel remains an Apartheid state that nether allows independent self-determination for Palestinians, nor political rights within Israel.
There is a saying that things that can’t go on forever, won’t. So eventually this situation will be restructured along more permanent lines. However I can’t see how current Israeli policy leads to a permanent solution that will work in their favor. They’re never going to be able to give back the settlements, yes? And this means the West Bank will never be a functional country, yes? Which means the Palestinians must remain an unfree subject population, yes?
Israel can be a free country, it can continue slow-motion annexation of the west bank, and it can be a Jewish state. It can’t do all three simultaneously.
Not to mention that “land for peace” would imply some measure of negotiation and organization that would actually allow for the possibility of something resembling peace. Unfortunately, that was not to be.
Gonna take issue with the word. South Africa was apartheid, because it separated out people inside its borders. The West Bank is not inside Israel’s borders. (Your post very eloquently and accurately explained why.) Israel does permit political rights within Israel to all citizens, no matter their ethnicity.
The West Bank is under military occupation (and not very much of that, given that the Palestinian Authority has a lot of the governing power there.)
A two-state solution would be the best, but both sides have made pre-conditions which the other side cannot agree to. So…stalemate.
That would be me. We are still here in the Shomron, at least until the end of next month, when we’re moving. It may excite some of you to know that we’re moving down south, well within the Green Line. On the other hand, it will not excite some of you to know that the yishuv is growing, and there are several building projects going on around the area.
As far as Israeli settlements being “a bad idea for a peaceful settlement,” perhaps you need to be reminded that there were no Israeli settlements in Yehuda, the Shomron, and Gaza pre-1967, and there was no peace then either.
Well, yes. Technically, it can. It just has to be willing to kill or starve every last Palestinian to do so. Which is not an unheard of sentiment amongst Israeli nationalists, sadly enough.
If Israel has Troops defending an area or securing it it is within their borders , Posters in this thread want an even playing field (Arabs to have armor/air power/ heavy artillery and large standing Military) Within Israel’s & Frontiers
By this logic, taking a crap on my boss’ desk can’t possibly harm the relationship between us, since he didn’t like me previously when I did no such thing.
So when the US sent 400 troops to Turkey a few years back, that part of Turkey was “within US borders” for the duration? I did not know that.
I want an even playing field in the sense of the Palestinians having a nation state, just like the Israelis do.
That was offered long ago. The Arab states, including the Palestinian Authority (under both Arafat and Abbas), accepted it. Israel rejected it.
The irreconcilable issue seems to be, not recognition of Israel’s right to exist, but the right of return. See, Israel thinks it is absolutely unacceptable to force people to leave their homes. Oh wait…
This really is the best outcome that can be hoped for… But how do we draw the borders?
The Green Line?
Would either side agree to a divided Jerusalem?
One would hope. It’s been divided before, after all, and the world didn’t end.
You should say “irreconcilable issue seems to be, not recognition of Israel’s right to exist, but Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state”.
Because Arab “right of return” to Israel would destroy it as a Jewish state.
Well (flippant answer) the U.S. was divided once…but that probably wouldn’t work today.
Serious answer/question: could either side be persuaded to accept half a loaf? I suspect that the Palestinians, while complaining bitterly, would accept East Jerusalem, or an international city. But what could anyone possibly offer Israel to make them accept such a deal?
To what are you referring?
Without being party to the negotiations, it’s hard to say. The lack of incentives for Israel to change the status quo is a real problem, for which the US shares a lot of the blame.
American Civil War. (I did say it was only flippant…)
The one thing in all of this that bothers me the most is how the U.S. right wing has taken over the pro-Israel stance, and the U.S. left wing has taken on a much harsher position wrt Israel. I’m old enough to remember when support for Israel was very much a left-wing thing, and I’m extremely disappointed to see the current way of things.
(I find myself agreeing – in part – with posts made by people I very, very strongly disagree with on nearly every other issue!)
I’m not old enough to remember a time when the Left was more pro-Israel than the Right. What do you think has caused this shift?