Originally Posted by Bleeding Red
Where to begin.
The anti-Semitic question. The post ion question, in my opinion was not anti-Semitic. Using Nazi or Apartheid comparisons with Israel is simply a wrong comparison and the arguer is either a) ignorant or b) has a heavy anti-Israel bias and benefits from shocking people with the 21st century's buzz words for "evil".
As I have posted before, criticizing Israeli government policy is not anti-antisemitism. Settlements, avoiding a ground incursion into Gaza, the security fence, immigration, these are policies. "Israel is an usurper nation of people who do not belong there", "Israel/Israelis have no right to be there/defend themselves/have a Jewish State" those are not criticisms of policy but denials of the Jews right to self determination and a sovereign state in their ancestral homeland. (Yes, you may want to argue that Israel is denying the Palestinians of the same rights, but once both parties entered into the 1992 peace process the mechanisms were there for the Palestinians to realize those rights within that framework. Had both sides approached the process with honesty and integrity, there would likely be a sovereign Palestine now, but that argument is for another time.)
Someone who is anti-Israel in not necessarily an anti-Semite, but Anti-Semites often couch their Jew hatred in anti-Israel platitudes. My experience has been that when having this discussion face-to-face often the person on the "other side" will get frustrated at some point and mutter something along the lines of "you Jews" - that is a telling sign to me that that person is working from an anti-Semitic base.
Also, just because there are Jews and Israelis who criticize Israel, doesn't make them right or legitimize a particular argument. It doesn't make them self-loathing either. Many Jews & Israelis believe in the one-state solution, being optimistic that the side with the majority vote won't bring in legislation against them and that everyone can live together (I am not so optimistic). Conversely I have listened to Muslims who have been hard core jihadists in their youth turn, gone to Israel, met Israelis (Arab & Jew) and promote Israel as the best country in the Middle East. It doesn't make them any less Muslim. Each "side" can produce their own atrocities and advocates. Playing the "my wound is bigger" game leads nowhere.
The Thread Topic.
To get to peace both sides will have to agree on a few things (mutual recognition), and they will have to do so in Hebrew, English, & Arabic. Both sides will have to make painful concessions. Israel will have to remove settlement blocs, Palestinians will have to forgo the right of return. Each side will have to give and take on the border line. Each side will have to take trust building measures.
Israel has proven in the past that they will remove settlements. Israel removed the settlements in the Sinai and in Gaza, along with removing outposts in the West Bank. The Palestinians however have not proven anything. They have not proven that they can reign in their terror groups or militias, they have have not amended their constitution (an Oslo Peace Accord requirement) to remove the section that refers to "Death to the Jews". They have not proven that they can run their territories by rule of law (no trails for suspected collaborators). the only laws they have on their books are about not selling property to Jews. They refuse to recognize the Jewish State of Israel. Israel needs to see some measures of trust building taken by the other side.
Peace can be had - both sides need to come to the table without per-conditions. Bib has said that he accepts the two-state solution and will negotiate (5 years ago he would have rather poked his eye out). They can hammer it out.
|