I can’t help feeling that when Palestine eventually gets control of itself it won’t be possible for the settlers to maintain their current isolated and opulent lifestyles. Otherwise Zimbabwe springs to mind.
As I see it, even if very religious Zionists believe they need to live in that land, they are going to eventually have to do it under Palestinian terms. I would hope that the future Palestinian government makes provision for pilgrims and religious settlers of all faiths and creeds. Palestine and Israel are both rich in holy sites - sacred to many religions - Judaism, Islam, Christianity, and doubtless others.
And if it means living more humbly in future, and with less power, then that’s what the immirant Israeli settlers in Palestine will have to do (or go back to Israel). After all, if you are doing something in God’s (=God = Jehovah = Allah etc) name, then that is the motive and reward, not an opulent lifestyle.
Ok, I’m probably getting myself into a discussion that I’ll regret, and I can’t promise that I’ll be able to keep up with every discussion point, but as the resident settler on the board, I’ll try.
I live in Efrat, a town in the Judean hills, between Bethlehem and Hebron. It’s a nice place to live, I have friends here, and it’s not far from my work in Jerusalem.
I see nothing immoral about my living here.
a) My ancestors lived in these hills for centuries. We’re talking biblical times, Greek times, Roman times, Arab times, Ottoman times and Mandate times. Why shouldn’t I be able to live here?
Simply because so much time has passed? Why in the world should centuries of state sponsored antisemitism be the justification for not allowing me to live here?
b) A lot of the land was purchased by Jews in pre-State times. Then, in the War of Independence, the Jordanians invaded, slaughtered dozens of people, and evacuated all the Jews from Jordan. Not one was left. (This is in strong contrast to the Arabs who stayed in Israel after the war and were not only allowed to stay but allowed to vote and be elected to the government). Jordan never came to peace with Israel during that time - on the contrary, they attacked again in 1967. So the Israelis happened to win that war, and came back. Why shouldn’t we?
c) I strongly believe that I, as a Jew, have as much right to live outside of Bethlehem, Israel as I do outside of Bethlehem, PA. Shouldn’t I?
d) I don’t know how many of you have actually been here, but visitors are always amazed at how much empty space is here. The settlements didn’t kick the Arabs out of cities - they are primarily built on empty hilltops. There’s room for both of us.
e) I certainly don’t feel that because of the violence, I shouldn’t live here. That’s called giving in to terrorism, and throughout history it’s shown not to work. And a large percentage of the Palestinians view Tel Aviv as a settlement - should that be next?
f) On a political level, the settlements had a lot to do with the Palestinians realizing they needed to come to a political settlement. If anything it has been a helpful ingredient in the admittedly volaitle political mix here, despite the use of it by politicians on all sides.
g) Having seen the Arabs line up to work here, I personally don’t think the average Arab minds the Jews being here as much as their leaders. It’s helpful for the economy, and I know cases of Arabs begging to be let back in to work here after their economy has been badly hit by the intifada. If they really thought it was so bad, why wouldn’t the Arabs boycott working in, and certainly building up the settlements? It doesn’t seem to be in their interest to do so.
h) I think to a large extent the settlements are used as a political fig leaf by the West for their need to appear evenhanded. In this conflict, the Arabs are behaving less morally than the Israelis. We’re not intentionally killing old people on busses or having snipers take out infants. Arabs have been killed, but that hasn’t been the intent. But to appear evenhanded to the oil powers, the US and others need to demand a “halt to terrorism and a halt to settlement activity”. Obviously building a house on a hilltop isn’t the same as shooting a five year old in her bed, but there are political concerns here.
i) And lastly (for now), I don’t really see the difference between Jewish settlement here and American settlement in California, Russian settlement in the Baltics, French settlement in Corsica, etc. If you really feel that it is so bad for us to be here, wouldn’t intellectual honesty demand that “everyone” go back to where they came from? Or would that mean that the Arabs need to go back where they came from as well?
“If we abandon the settlements, the terrorists win.”
That’s the mindset as of right now.
Look, I wish the settlements had never been started. It was a mistake, albeit an understandable, and I think the majority of Israelis agree with me (of course, I could be wrong). However, it’s a moot point - there are over 200,000 Isaelis in the Terriories; for nearly half of them, it’s the only home they’ve ever known Their our people, and we have to look after them, even if many of us don’t like them that much (sorry, Curwin, but you know that’s how it is), especially when we’re being confronted by an enemy which looks more and more like he’s unwilling to make any permanant compromise.
The OP called the settlements “impediments to peace”. Tha’s true - if you’re only willing to accept peace on Arab terms, those including %100 withdrawal. What they are, in fact, are impediments to territorial concesion, not peace, even thugh most people have the two confused. As Istara surely knows, there was never a state called Palestine, and the borders for ay future state of that name have not yet been drawn. One major purpose of he settlements, especially the “border” ones, is to force the mapmakers to draw their lines according to the line of settlements. After all, no Israeli government, Left or Right, will ever leave Israeli citizens under Palestinian jurisdiction. ZAny territory not annexed will be abandoned.
Settlements (some of them, at least) are impediments to peace and dangerous to the Israelis. It’s hard to miss the irony, though, that so many people whose countries have benefited from imperialist expansion (paying attention, Henry?) profess indignance about Israel’s policies. Particularly as they follow decades of attack from Arabs determined to wipe them out, the U.N.'s mandate not withstanding.
I wouldn’t want any part of the “opulent” lifestyle in the settlements, ermine-lined trigger guards on the automatic weapons notwithstanding.
One more point. This might not be a justification to the rest of the world, but it certainly should hold true to Israelis living inside the Green Line. By having settlements, it draws Palestinian fire away from pre 67 Israel. The more deep the settlement is in “Palestinian territory” - the more this holds true. The settlements in the Gaza strip, while they might have less historical value Jewishwise, are the focus of Palestinian violence more than nearby pre-67 cities like Ashkelon.
Now for those that believe that the Palestinians are not intrested in a conflict over pre-67 Israel, then my arguement doesn’t seem as strong. But I think the events of the past two years have made it clear, both from Arafat’s rejection of the Camp David offer (which included settlement withdrawal) and the violence that has been just as vicious inside the Green Line as over it, that they want the whole thing. So I think most Israelis should have the same respect for the settlers in the territories as they do for those that live on the northern border and are being attacked by Katusha rockets.
Sorry, pronoun leak. I meant to say that the Palestinians are not interested in only gaining the territory that Israel conquered in 1967, but also the rest of Israel as well. See their textbooks, maps, etc.
After albeit a brief hunt on the internet, I couldn’t find a copy of “Arafat’s rejection of the Camp David offer (which included settlement withdrawal)”. Do you have an online source readily available?
This really shows the value of racism. You see, those little animals over there will never be content to live in peace in their own state. We have to keep the boot on the neck to keep them from getting out of hand. Several decades of anti-Arab racism permeating the intellectual culture allows people to think of them as being less than human. The thoughts and desires of the less than human can be summed up in simple catchphrases, and then dismissed, like the animals that they are.
Of course, there is nothing new here. It is a common tactic that was also used by the American settlers when they were devastating the continent “felling trees and Indians” in the words of John Adams; it was used to justify slavery; it was used by the Nazis to justify stealing the property of jews; it was used by the South African apartheid regime to justify apartheid, and on and on.
In general, if you want to oppress and enslave an entire people, you first have to justify this to yourself. It is very difficult to consciously do something that you know is wrong. A very effective way to justify things like this is to demonize whatever group you want to kick in the neck, to think of them as less than human.
Lying doesn’t hurt either. For one thing, it is a lie that the Palestinian leadership has the intention (much less the ability) to “push Israel into the sea.” This position was abandoned decades ago, when the 78% of traditional Palestine was conceded to Israel. Since the early 80’s, the conflict has been over the occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Of course, using whatever racist assumptions you like, you can claim that those little animals the Palestinians will not be content with a state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. But then, with racist asssumptions you can justify pretty much anything.
It is true that my forefathers was helping the Swedish king to expand in Europe some 400 years ago.
Finland, my country, has lost some 20 % of its area since it became independent 1917.
What Stalin stole some 60 years ago, is a well known history. I just want to remaind, that when the Finns, my father fighting then, had nothing against the Russian tanks, they invented the “Molotov-coctail”, a very simple fire-bomb, a bottle filled with gasoline and a rag soaked with gasoline, that was easy to lit.
Then they throuw the Molotov-coctail against the tank, at the part where the machine-gun had its opening.
At the last visit in Finland, President Putin said, that a solution to the Karelian question will be an integration: the border has to be lowered, the officials has to work more together (against criminals, narcotics etc.) where we have an common enemy.
He also pointed out that we Finns can now buy land and build where-ever we like in Russia.
That is exactly what I am doing here, among other things. Even if I am far eastward from Karelia.
Now let us take a paralell with my situation and what is happening in Palestine:
From my fathers side there is a farm in Karelia, about 60 ha, that belongs to this branch of our family.
I and my brother are the only heirs to this farm.
The farm is now unhibited. Think that I would go there, put up a house, where the old house stood. Then if I had some problems I would call for the Finnish army. They would begin to make checkpoints on the roads etc., checking me as well as the Russians. And when they revolt we would put them under curfew.
Only the 100% Finns would be allowed to move around, the pure Finnish race.
Then I would begin to cut down the apple-trees in the Russian gardens, just trying to drive them away. I would have weapons, but my army would forbid the Russians to have any.
Then I would take the best water-wells. Then I would begin to kick and shoot Russians that comes too near, calling them terrorists. And the army would protect me.
If nothing helps, I will begin a war, or elect someone, very democratically, who probably would begin a pre-emptive war.
We would pre-emptive always now and then.
Time would pass.
The Russians would ask Finns that thinks I am doing wrong, (the commies, the rabble that are always against something, the pacifists and other elements that should…), to come and help them, ask reporters from all over the world and even American civilians, to watch that they can collect in peace the apples in their own gardens.
The army would take care of the reporters, that is the first thing to do.
I would go there and shoot at the Russians and the Finnish rubble, and hit the Americans so that they would be hospitalised.
And if they would have any sort of Molotov-coctails or any kind of bombs, I would say: “See they are terrorists!” If they would have weapons, they would be militant terrorists.
Those my army would shoot from the air with pin-pointing bombs that also would pin-point some dozen of stand-byers.
But that is not my case, their not my race!
Well I have papers about this farm and I do not doubt that many Jews has papers on what land they have bought.
They should live there, as I do on my property, in peace.
If there are revolts in Palestinia, the Jews can ask for help from UN. Is it not curious that Israel never do that, if it is so treathened?
But if the only thing on paper is a book, some thousend years old, I would like to point out that we Finns also have a book, “Kalevala”, a saga about our ancient history, and because the Finns did originally come from behind Ural…, well I have to look at the map, what should really belong to us.
E.g. before Peter the Great found St Petersburg it was Finnish, and that is only some 400 years ago.
And from my mothers side we emmigrated from Sweden, I have to check out that too, what we could have there.
I know it is quite near Sollentuna, but maybe I have to be precise before I take our army there.
The original Bernadotte, the Swedish king came from France, some twohundred years ago and the king that is now on the throne has a German wife.
My roots goes further than those guys together!
Maybe I could ask for the throne?
Only under extreme racist assumptions can this possibly be the case. Fortunately for those who favor a highly militarized Israel, there is plenty of racism to go around.
In reality, Israel is much less safe due to the occupation. The illegal, immoral and brutal occupation only creates and fans hatred. If Israel/U.S. (at this point Israel is little more than a U.S. military base) were to seek a just peace, Israel would become much more safe.
Drain the swamp and there will be no more mosquitos.
Chumpsky, curwin is correct. Please read this article which was originally in the Boston Globe. There may be Palestinians who have a different opinion but they are not in the majority and they don’t make maps for the government.
At this point I think that the territories are considered a bargaining chip in the “peace” process- if the Israelis were to force all the settlers out, Al-Fatah/Hamas/et. al. would see this as a sign that the intifada/suicide bombings are an effective tool for getting what they want.
Oh, I see. So anyone who thinks the Palestinians want to recapture pre-67 Israel is therefore a racist? This is extraordinarily stupid. But fortunately for those who always like to cast Israel and Israelis in the worst possible light, there is plenty of stupidity to go around.
Justification: In the early 70’s, Israel was attacked by suprise. They won. They kept the land they won in the battles. To the victor goes the spoils. The Arabs should have thought of that before they invaded. Strategically, these areas are some of the ones from which the attacks were launched. They provide high ground from which they could have launched attacks in the future. Since they were attacked, and won the territory in battle, they are entitled to keep it. What I don’t understand is why they allow the Palestinians (no such thing, really) to stay. When they were ruled by Syria, Jordan, or some other entity you didn’t hear any moaning for a palestinian homeland.
Chumpsky, please point to a single racist statement made by curwin. If you can’t, I believe you owe him an apology. Your recent posts have been highly slanderous.
This is a severe misunderstanding of history. The West Bank and Gaza Strip, over which most of the conflict exists today, were captured in 1967, when Israel launched a “pre-emptive strike” (aggressive war, the most serious war crime according to the Nuremburg tribunal). The attack in 1973 was on Egyptian territory that was being occupied illegally by Israel, and over which Egypt had made numerous offers of peaceful settlements.
International law explicitely forbids the annexation of territory captured in war. The Geneva Convention forbids the building of settlements in territories occupied by military conquest. Thus, Israel is continuing to violate international law. (Not to mention its violation of every point in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.)
And, as for why they allow the Palestinians to stay… well, it is their homeland, and has been for several centuries. Ethnic cleansing has sort of gone out of fashion in the last few decades. Don’t think that there aren’t many Israelis who want to expel the Palestinians. This has been a dream of many extreme rightists like Ariel Sharon for a long time. It is euphemistically called “transfer,” and is becoming more respectable. Some analysts believe that the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq will give Israel the opportunity to expel the Palestinians for good. …all courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer.
Anyone who believes that Palestinians are only attacking Israelis because they hate jews is a racist. In fact, this is a rather obscene piece of racism, for it implies that Palestinians have not been brutally oppressed, and that they act only like animals. It washes the hands of the Israelis for the decades of oppression they have visited on the Palestinians.
If somebody made a similar statement about blacks in South Africa, we would immediately recognize it as racist. For example, if somebody said that the ANC was a terrorist organization whose only goal was to kill all white people, we would recognize that as racist. (Actually, many people did say that.)
In the case of Palestinians, though, we do not recognize it as racist. Anti-Arab racism is so deeply imbedded in our culture that we don’t even recognize it. We have been bombarded with images of Arab terrorists and fanatics for so long, in movies, on TV, in print, etc., that it just becomes normal.
Thomas Friedman, the State Department spokesman at the New York Times, once remarked that Israel should offer some hope to the Palestinians, because only if “Ahmed has a seat on the bus” will he remain civil. This sort of racism is so common that it passes without notice. Indeed, Friedman, the vulgar racist idiot that he is, is considered an elightened source of Middle East political views. We can imagine, though, what the response would be if he had said, in the 1980’s, that the South African regime should offer Sambo a seat on the bus, to keep him civil.
This is one of the areas where the Palestinian leadership has missed many opportunities. I think that a real Palestinian liberation movement will have to begin with a movement to see Palestinians as human beings. While they are seen by Americans as dogs they will never achieve justice.
Henry, before you come up with any more comically bad analogies, I suggest some reading of 20th century history, in particular the events surrounding the founding of Israel and the attacks on it by its neighbors. Then you can move on to the sorry history of renewed self-destructive assaults on Israel over the decades, which have led to its current hard-line attitudes. Then you and the chumpskies of the world can give some real thought to the question of whether promoting historical distortions, untruths and name-calling will lead to compromise on the settlements and related issues - and ultimately peace.
But I suppose the temptation to engage in Godwinesque rantings is too much for some.
Firstly I don’t see where anyone has actually said in this thread that “Palestinians are only attacking Israelis because they hate jews” - certainly not in the statements you quoted. Secondly, even if someone had, this would not necessarily imply that Palestinians inherently act like animals - someone might make a case that the “brutal oppression” of the Palestinians has caused them to hate Jews.
If you have any sense of honesty and decency, you will retract and apologize for your statements. Let’s see.