A one-state solution

A unitary Arab-Jewish homeland could bring lasting peace to the Middle East

Ahmad Samih Khalidi
Monday September 29, 2003
The Guardian

Something is stirring in Israel these days. After a long hiatus, the country's left is gearing up for a new ideological offensive. Major figures, including the writer David Grossman and former Knesset speaker Avraham Burg, have recently spoken out against the right-wing policies of Ariel Sharon. Their impassioned pleas for a radical alternative cannot but impress all those who genuinely seek a way out of the deadly cycle of Palestinian-Israeli violence.
But there is something poignant about the Zionist left's continuous attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable. Its criticisms of Sharon hark back to an idealised notion of a Jewish state in which democracy, decency and tolerance are the guiding principles. In moving forwards towards peace with the Palestinians, the left seeks to take a few steps back; consolidating the Jewish state, preserving its Jewish character, withdrawing from the quagmire of occupation and reinstating the values of a democratic and humane society. But to Palestinian ears there is something inherently wrong here: for us, there is a basic and inescapable contradiction between Zionism and democracy. If Zionism means anything, it means a Jewish state with a clear Jewish majority - and in Palestine this has necessarily been at the expense of Palestinian Arab rights.

The question of whether Zionism can be reconciled with democracy has always been at the heart of the debate on the Palestinian problem. But it has dropped off the broader political agenda partly because a majority of Israeli Jews have been resistant to anything that smacks of a challenge to the very premise on which the Zionist enterprise was built, and partly due to the belief (on both sides) that the Palestinian problem is ultimately resolvable via a territorial partition that would separate the mass of Arabs from Jews.

However, a number of recent developments have challenged these assumptions. With an unbridled settlement policy now matched by a "separation wall" that merely consecrates the divide between Palestinians and Israeli settlers within the occupied West Bank, Sharon and his predecessors have all but destroyed the possibility of a viable and sustainable territorial settlement along national lines.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1051542,00.html

Wall plus unilateral withdrawel behind the wall will happen - not a one state solution.

Israel will cease to exist and the Jews that survive will flee.

One would think that an expert on "ethnic cleansing" like yourself would know that.

over 78% of the Palestinian's land. Hmm...but that's just a distraction.

Anyway, so Jews have historically been ran off, had a genocide committed against them....ok..yes...so...again, why would this happen in a day and age where international law is supposed to apply well apply with the exception of Israel that is.

You historic distraction is nothing more than that. The Palestinians deserve to live in peace as well as Israelis. In fact, they deserve to live together in one state where every one is guaranteed peace, liberty, and equality.

Sorry to burst your bubble. You can't use those excuses with me.

that Israel has no right to exist and Jews have no right to self rule there doesn't seem like much of a chance of our meeting half way. So we should probably just ignore each other. What did a Jew ever do to you that would make you think they have no right to determine their own destiny?

BTW, Arafat has made it very clear that he wants no Jews in a Palestinian state so your one state solution has no audience.

You also may want to check out how Jews are treated in the seven nations that surround Israel today. That would give an inkling on why Jews aren't looking forward to being a minotiry in an Arab country.

soley for Jews. It should exist as a state for all of it's inhabitants including those that are second rate Arab citizens and those that don't rank as anything but occupied. For give me for being a bit egalitarian about the issue.

BTW, Arafat has made it very clear that he wants no Jews in a Palestinian state so your one state solution has no audience.

Bullshit! Evidence please? Arafat has called many times for peace between both peoples. It is your beloved Likud that calls for all Arabs to have a state in Jordan. Don't fucking give me shit about driving Jews into the sea because you know it isn't true. It's just a trumped up excuse to continue the horrific occupation and the ethnic cleansing policy that goes with it. Is a Palestinian life equal to a Jew's life to you, Yang? If it is, then you would be screaming for One State. If it is not, then you would be taking the stand that you do now. Hypocracy is about the only thing genuine in your post.

You also may want to check out how Jews are treated in the seven nations that surround Israel today. That would give an inkling on why Jews aren't looking forward to being a minotiry in an Arab country.

I would be willing to bet that they are treated no different than any other country with the same amount of anti-semitism as in, say, Europe. Your crowd continuosly wants to drudge up the Arab world as some monolithic Jew killer. Sorry, it just isn't so. If it disrupts your world view...well then I'm fucking happy because you need to wake up!

I'll give you Saudia Arabia and a couple of others which are equally horrendous with regard to civil rights issues. Other than that quit throwing red herrings. Your way busted.

soley for Jews. It should exist as a state for all of it's inhabitants including those that are second rate Arab citizens and those that don't rank as anything but occupied. For give me for being a bit egalitarian about the issue.

Israel is the most diverse nation in the region and one of the most diverse in the world. More Arabs serve in the ISraeli Parliment than serve in any elective office in any Arab state other than Egypt. In the second half of that sentence you seem to be giving Israel dominion over the territories which Im sure will get you slammed when you are at the next meeting getting your talking points.


Bullshit! Evidence please? Arafat has called many times for peace between both peoples. It is your beloved Likud that calls for all Arabs to have a state in Jordan. Don't fucking give me shit about driving Jews into the sea because you know it isn't true. It's just a trumped up excuse to continue the horrific occupation and the ethnic cleansing policy that goes with it. Is a Palestinian life equal to a Jew's life to you, Yang? If it is, then you would be screaming for One State. If it is not, then you would be taking the stand that you do now. Hypocracy is about the only thing genuine in your post.


Somehow you find it difficult to rebut what I acually said so you have to invent the notion that I am a Likud supoporter. That shouldn't surprise me I guess.
The evidence would be Arafat's own speeches available from the PLO website where he often dreams of a Palestinian State where a Palestinain flag flies over all the mosques and churches in the area "accidently" leaving out another type of building where people worship, over and over again. As far as "pushing Jews into the sea" you know that Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah absolutely agree with that but it is immaterial because I never brought that up. Arguing against something that the other person didn't say is known as a strawman.

I would be willing to bet that they are treated no different than any other country with the same amount of anti-semitism as in, say, Europe. Your crowd continuosly wants to drudge up the Arab world as some monolithic Jew killer. Sorry, it just isn't so. If it disrupts your world view...well then I'm fucking happy because you need to wake up!


I will take that bet. Jordainians are forbidden by law from selling land to Jews. Syria, Jordan and Iraq forced most of their Jews out while Saudi Arabia never allowed Jews to live their anyway. I can't figure out whether you are dissembling here or just woefully ignorant.


So while you accuse me of throwign red herrings it seems that it is just a case of you being unwilling to listen.

Immigration is restricted for Arabs in Israel, in order to mantain an jewish majority in the state.

Arab immigration is restricted in the United States in order to maintain a white majority.

Prove it.

then pull your head out. Immigration to the US is restricted based on nation of origin.

Hmm, I thought that Jews were immediately granted citizenship in Israel if they wished to immigrate, while the right of return is denied. Seems awfully racist to me...

if you ignore the other places in the world that do the same thing...

For example, you consider Arafat a Palestinain but he wasn't born or raised there. Is he not allowed to got to his incestral home?


It only has to do with Israel because you are taking Israeli policy out of context while ignoring it in other parts of the world. This shows you are more interested in proving a point than finding the truth.

This happens to be I/P, you know, not International Immigration Affairs.

You want me to criticize US immigration policy? In another forum, fine. But you're clearly dodging the subject here.

What other democracy in the world has immigration polciies that discriminate based on religion?

Judaism is a mixture of culture and religion. The rare Jewish immigrant to Israel who is a convert typically arrives with someone who is Jewish and NOT a convert.

Operationally, Ireland's wildly open immigration policies that give lots of people the ability to declare Irish citizenship encourage Catholic immigration, since so many who would qualify are Catholics.

Jews are given preferential treatment in immigration to Israel. Do you deny this? They are allowed to freely immigrate.

The right of return of the palestinians, however, is denied.

Do you deny this?

Nations -- all nations actually -- choose who they wish to have immigrate to their country and become citizens. All nations set some requirements.

In particular, some nations encourage those with a similar heritage. Israel is one of those.

Brother Daniel, ethnically and halachically Jewish, converted to Christianity and wasn't treated like a Jew by the law.

They don't ask you if you are actively (religiously) Jewish. Many Jews I know in America don't have anything to do with the religious part of their traditions. They'd all still be welcome.

that they don't discriminate.

not based on amount of faith towards that religion.

It's also culture.

what reliegeons are not allowed to immigarte to Israel then we can continue your dodge of my original post.

I never said that.

Do you deny that Jews are given preferential treatement in immigration?

It is also cultural.

that Israel discriminates based on religion.


Atheist Jews have the same right of return as Orthodox Jews. Muslim Arabs and Christian Arabs have the same right of immigration as each other.

All nations restrict immigration. All have quotas based on nation of origin.

So I must conclude that you are once again dodging my point.

you are being purposely obtuse.

My point is that they ARE different things so what is your comment exactly?

Strongly favors Jews. Do you agree or disagree?

What other nation in the world has preferences based on religion?

Why don't you understand that?

but Israel treats it as a religion.

That has been responded to. Atheist Jews have the same immigration rights as religeous Jews so your point is moot.

Find a nation that does NOT have preferential immigration policies then we'll compare.

I'm not talking about religious Jews versus non-religious Jews, i'm talking about Jews versus any other religion.

but atheist Jews DONT HAVE A RELIGION!

WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING

they're Jewish, both ethnically and religously - simply not theologically.

If someone is not religious, they can't be religiously Jewish.

They are CULTURALLY Jewish, which is our whole point.

Israel treats Judiasm as a religion.

In other words, those who convert willingly are not Jews in their view. That is true, and has been affirmed by the Israeli Supreme Court.

So, what other nation gives preferential treatment to a religion when it coems to immigration policy?

Elvis is still alive?

Atheists don't have a religion...perhaps you need a dictionary.

And, by the way, that's junk. An atheist does not believe in God.

And therefore an Atheist has NO RElIGION!!!!

There Are NO Atheist Baptists. Because in order to be a Baptist you have to believe in a specific god. Its the rule of joining that carrass.

You are a Jew if your mother was a Jew no matter what God you believe in. Ask any of the ZOG believers here, they'll tell you how to find a Jew.


a·the·ist
(th-st)
n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

re·li·gion
(r-ljn)
n.

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

The Israeli Supreme Court disagrees with you.

By the way, under the definition for religion:

A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Those could both apply to atheists.

ask an ahteist if they are religious. You are being purposely obtuse.

You should know that I am an agnostic who has known many atheists. Some do not consider themselves religious, others do. It depends on the person.

Support me in my dotage. Buy a t-shirt.

http://www.cafeshops.com/tokin

you are confusing religion with ethnicity.

Hitler never asked anyone if they attended shul last Friday night. If your mother was Jewish you got put on the damn train.

I also think there is often confusion with American Jews on how the majority of Israeli Jews conduct their lives. There is no commandment to attend services at a synogogue. Because they are a minority, many American Jews take going to services more seriously as it gives them a social connection to other Jews and an assimilation factor with their Christian neighbors who attend church every week.

"Practice" of Judaism in Israel (outside the Orthodox community) is much more casual.

I am very well aware that a large number of Israeli Jews are almost completely secular. That doesn't stop them from being Jewish, religiously or ethnically, except from the perspective of a few very intolerant Jews.

Hitler treated Judiasm as an ethnicity - that was because he hated the "Jewish race" and not the Jewish religion.

Israel, on the other hand, does consider Judiasm to be a religion, and does restrict those who are ethnically Jewish but convert.

Coversions by Orthodox Rabbis are indeed accepted in Israel. You might want to be a bit more precise and not make generalizations which are incorrect.


"Israel, on the other hand, does consider Judiasm to be a religion, and does restrict those who are ethnically Jewish but convert."

not those who aren't. I'm not talking about those who convert to Judiasm - I'm talking about those who convert from judiasm.

You just admitted that people can be ethnically Jewish!

You are a Jew for Jesus aren't you! J'accuse!

and I am no Jew for Jesus.

However, Israel treats Judiasm as a religion, not an ethnicity.

It all depends, the Orthodox rabbinacal controls marriage and all other things "Whose a Jew" related outside of immigration and they do indeed treat Judaism as an ethnicity. You could be a Catholic Priest with a Jewish mother and as far as they are concerned you are still Jewish. It's either blood or orthodox conversion and they are serious enough about it that you have slain IDF buried in non-Jewish cemetaries because the Rabbi's decided you weren't Jewish enough by heredity.

once again, I bring up the case of Brother Daniel.

That is how I understand it as well.

L-

on Jews, if they wished to.

The necessary support for a one-state solution will require significant international support. The Palestinians will always be dependant on that support, and if they are to betray it, negative consequences, such as sanctions would follow immediatly.

Nelson Mandela, as President of South Africa was frequently asked why the ANC didn't take revenge against those who had done them so wrong, and he always said that they didn't have the luxury of doing so, and that they had to much work to do. Also, the blacks in South Africa have a far greater majority over the whites than the Palestinians may, if and when they do, have over Jews in a single state arrangement.

Don't share the same history as the Jews. They haven't been abused by virtually every nation on earth for 2,000 years.

No, Israel can't count on international support from such wonderful Jew-loving places like the Arab world or Indonesia or even much of Europe that helped kill off most of its Jews.

so your saying the whole of the Arab world is anti-semitic?

Where have I heard that card before.

Actually, I would think that the GOI's policies do more to enhance anti-semitism worldwide. In fact, I've read somewhere, where this was counted upon so that the diasporan Jewry would return "home."

:eyes:

I can't believe the excuses and the justification.

Only a good chunk of the Arab world might count as anti-Semitic. However it's mostly in lock step on the anti-Israel portion of the program.

It makes me anti-Israel as a state solely for the Jewish people. I'd rather it be a state for people

that the majority of these beleaguered people feel, as well. The majority of these people have managed to live side-by-side without incident. It is a small minority that espouse violence. A great many Israelis are vehemently opposed to the ``security fence.'' These people want peace, not yet another hostile measure that will incite more violence.

But nowhere near the majority anymore. Arafat's Intifada I and II have marginalized the dove faction in Israel. For him to win them back over, he actually has to do more than mouth platitudes. He actually has to lead his people away from terror.

than to live with the current constant threat of terror. And I am speaking of people on both sides of this horrific conflict. It has been said before here that they need a man of vision to lead them out of this conflict. I have yet to see anyone remotely like that emerging. The U.S. could be of invaluable assistance here, but there is no one of vision in the current administration. I am sure that you will agree with that.

No discussed treaty with the PA brings peace to Israel. They only bring peace to the Palestinians.

Israel gets stuck still fighting a terror war with newly emboldened psycho scumbags who take joy from killing women and children.

every treaty has been ruined by both parties. Israel with it's provocations and settlement expansion (remember Oslo anyone) has to share in the blame no matter how bad it hurts, Muddleoftheroad.

So why should Israel sign one?

at Camp David under Jimmy Carter. That held up pretty well and earned Carter the Nobel Peace Prize.

Israel has to make compromises, in good faith, the same as everyone else, to insure a lasting peace. You must know that.

But when peace is NOT offered, there is no benefit. THAT is the deal the Palestinians propose.

The way I see it, one group attacks, usually killing many innocents, then there are reprisals, with more deaths. This has escalated ever since the ``road map'' was placed on the table. When will it end? The difference here is that the Israeli government sanctions the missile strikes while the Palestinian prime minister does not sanction the suicide bombings. Abbas tried to stop them, but gave up in the face of more and more deadly attacks by both sides.

The entire PA sanctions EVERY act the terrorist do by allowing them to live, build, plot and hide among the Palestinian civilian populace.

And then there is the overt and covert cooperation that they give them as well.

And how does Israel santion it's war crimes? Oh I know, they bring some cases before court and then in the end no one is indicted for anything. And they re-elect war criminals like Sharon...

don't listen to the people on your campus. Look at reports from inside and outside Ramallah at the time. He did not resign because of increasing violence. If he did then he didn't deserve the job in the fisrt place.

because Israel was refusing to make concessions, Arafat was udnermining him, and the US wasn't doing anything productive. Additionally, I think he was afraid of being targeted by Arafat, Israel or Hamas.

because you are guessing...again. Like the people in the stands of a baseball game that boo a close strike call, because they have a better view from the upper deck than the umpire had behind the plate.

Abbas talked about one thing and one thing only when he resigned.

Coincidentally, the new PM is talking about resigning for the same reason.

DUH!

How can I prove what Abbas thought? He could have said that blueberry pancakes made him resign, for all I care. He's a politician. Like most of them, half-truths and distortions are his trade.

the point is, I am saying it is an uniformed opinion. The informed opinions disagree with you. Unless you corraborate I would have to agree with the informed opinions especially when the same thing is happening again.

it will help you on your journey. Pay particular attention to what Abbas actually says and then compare it to what the new guy says.

Unless of course you think it is some Mossad conspiracy.

Abbas blamed Arafat, Israel, the U.S. and the Arab media

From this thread.

3 out of 4 isn't so bad, is it?

Abbas was being pushed from two sides to do two things. He was stuck in the middle of Sharon and Arafat, and was pushed off.

I read lots of articles around then. I know what I'm talking about here.

the rest of the article talks specifically about why he resigned.

And coincidentally it is happening again.

He was pushed in different directions from all sides, plus didn't have the support he needed to get done what needed doing. I don't know if anyone can accomplish what was expected of him. There have to be some radical changes in policy and sincere wishes for a lasting peace, coming from all factions, and I don't see that happening. Bush* could accomplish a lot, if he put his mind to it, but he has wars to wage and an election to win. And I/P, for him, is just a no-win situation.

But the way Hamas and Islamic Jihas would mean that would be that they don't consider Jews to be "people."

The one-state solution is an idealistic fantasy. The real world tried it your way for 2,000 years and the Jews lost millions to an endless stream of abuse, rape, murder and genocide.

Get back to me in about 1,900 years and we can compare which works better.

Those who have been historically in charge in Israel have long considered the Palestinian people less than human, thus they have no rights. I could provide quotes, but don't want to incite this any further. On the other hand, the Israeli and Palestinian people have often managed to live side by side as neighbors, even friends. It is the leadership that exacerbates the problem. The people want to live in peace without fear.

it's certainly not the worst. And it's a lot more hopeful than the escalation of the violence, the ``targeted killings'' and the segregation that's happening now. One thing that those of us on DU tend to forget, since most of us are far from this area under siege, is that the ordinary people caught up in this conflict, Israeli and Palestinian, all desire a peaceful solution. Imagine what it must be like to be forced to live under such an unrelenting threat of sudden violence, day after day. They have all been given hope so many times, only to see it snatched away, time after time.:-(

I would like to believe that all of us on DU are on the same side, that of peace, no matter what it takes to achieve it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The current situation: 22 Arab states that have already forcably expelled their Jewish populations and one Jewish state with a large population of Arab citizens.

The result of this proposal: 23 Arab states that have forcably expelled their Jewish populations.

n/t

We can no longer afford Israel. We are broke! It is up to Israel to make peace with her enemies, and you will have no peace for as long as you occupy the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

Withdraw now, and build a Korea-style DMZ between yourselves and the Palestinians. Separate the two peoples until there is no living memory of the hatred for each other that nurtured them for so long.

Forget any biblical nonsense about having a Divine right to land. That mythology belongs in Sunday school, not in the political arena.

Sad but true IndianaGreen! :(

It is sad when fellow human beings are reduced to such enmity!;(