Peace in Israel/Palestine

[_Q_]

I thought I would start a new thread for this, since the Hamas thread has kind of turned into two discussions at the moment. I think we can discuss our ideas of how to make peace in the Middle East in this thread, and leave the other one open to discussions about the current Gaza conflict.

To get get things started, I posted this in the other thread:

Originally Posted by _Q_

20% is the official number, but some say there is probably more. Closer to 25 or 30%. In fact I would argue that the Israeli Arab population is higher than 50% if you count all the Jews that came from Arab countries. That group numbers around 3 million and until the creation of Israel, most of them would have identified with where they're from rather than their religion. A lot of them still speak Arabic at home as well as Hebrew. But, this opens a can of worms in terms of who is or isn't a Jew and most of them do not associate with Arabs anymore.

The way I see it is this. Create two states, one Jewish and one Arab (Israel and Palestine). Have them both in a confederation, call it something neutral and uniting like United Semitic States. Both people can agree that their Semites, they can start with that. Have neutral symbols like what Cyprus did as to not offend each side. Each state has it's own laws that govern everything other than national defence and other things of national interest. Severely limit further immigration, maybe open a 5 year window for Jews and Palestinians to return to this new nation, then close the doors for good. Make Jerusalem the capital city, but make the district not technically in either state (sort of like Washington DC).

I'm sure it won't be as simple as that, but I think that's a solid framework that can be workable.

Edit: More importantly, do not re-settle either population, but rather have them accept that they will be living under the laws of their chosen state. Obviously human rights will have to be honoured in each state, but say Palestine wants to make public holidays coincide with Muslim and Christian holidays, then too bad, so sad for the Jews. If they don't like it, they can go to Israel. Similarly, if Israel wants to make Saturday and Sunday the weekend, then too bad for the Muslims, they'll just have to work on Friday and not go for Friday prayers.

If you don't think a one state solution would work I would argue that Canada, Belgium, Switzerland and to some extent South Africa have all been successful in creating a single state for 2 or more nations. Obviously it won't be easy to implement this, however, I think it's the best chance at peace in that region.

What do you believe is the best solution? One State? Two States? Please keep it civil.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I thought I would start a new thread for this, since the Hamas thread has kind of turned into two discussions at the moment. I think we can discuss our ideas of how to make peace in the Middle East in this thread, and leave the other one open to discussions about the current Gaza conflict.

To get get things started, I posted this in the other thread:



If you don't think a one state solution would work I would argue that Canada, Belgium, Switzerland and to some extent South Africa have all been successful in creating a single state for 2 or more nations. Obviously it won't be easy to implement this, however, I think it's the best chance at peace in that region.

What do you believe is the best solution? One State? Two States? Please keep it civil.

Red State, Blue States.

[Kipperriffic]

What is going to happen eventually is 1-state which does not include palestinians. Whoever is stronger economically, and therefore militarily, get what they want. That is how the world has worked historically. If palestinians really want a state there, it'll happen maybe after a century or so - that is only if they spread into neighboring countries, get financially strong over generations, and keep their identity. Only if you are an influential group can you get others to listen to you and get anything done for yourself . Just like native americans can say "this is our land" all they want but no one actually cares what they say. Same goes for the palestinians. There is never a "right of return", or a "right to a land" - You have to snatch it away from the weak. It's basically over for them. Over time, entire westbank will be annexed and they'll just watch it happen.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Kipperriffic

What is going to happen eventually is 1-state which does not include palestinians. Whoever is stronger economically, and therefore militarily, get what they want. That is how the world has worked historically. If palestinians really want a state there, it'll happen maybe after a century or so - that is only if they spread into neighboring countries, get financially strong over generations, and keep their identity. Only if you are an influential group can you get others to listen to you and get anything done for yourself . Just like native americans can say "this is our land" all they want but no one actually cares what they say. Same goes for the palestinians. There is never a "right of return", or a "right to a land" - You have to snatch it away from the weak. It's basically over for them. Over time, entire westbank will be annexed and they'll just watch it happen.

Too much of a demographic issue. There are simply too many Palestinians, and their population is growing too fast.

Your argument is also flawed, in that there have been plenty of poorer populations that have claimed states through numbers alone: See Africa (most recently Zimbabwe), India, etc.. The recent collapse of colonialism has provided with more than just a few examples.

Any lasting peace will have to include arab sovereignty over the Gaza Strip an the vast majority of the West Bank. It may be a return of that land to Jordan/Egypt, but there are just too many Arabs living there for Israel to hold onto it.

[Kipperriffic]

Originally Posted by blankall

Too much of a demographic issue. There are simply too many Palestinians, and their population is growing too fast.

Your argument is also flawed, in that there have been plenty of poorer populations that have claimed states through numbers alone: See Africa (most recently Zimbabwe), India, etc.. The recent collapse of colonialism has provided with more than just a few examples.

Maybe I shouldn't have said that it always happens for every nation, because obviously every situation is different, but specifically for the case of Israel/Palestine, I think there is no option but for the Palestinians to give up on their cause, or suffer huge tragedy. Smarter thing for them to do is to spread out to North America and Europe.

The Arabs living in Israel will eventually have to stop being vocal supportive of palestine as well, I think, for their own sake.

the Jewish will is too strong to have their ownstate, only for them. Thats more admirable that it is disappointing.

(Also, India, specifically, was always an established country. Now Pakstan is one example taht you can point to - but unfortunately, while india rooted out the backward systems from their land, Pak did not and they've suffered for it - they're kid of a failed state now.)

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Kipperriffic

Maybe I shouldn't have said that it always happens for every nation, because obviously every situation is different, but specifically for the case of Israel/Palestine, I think there is no option but for the Palestinians to give up on their cause, or suffer huge tragedy. Smarter thing for them to do is to spread out to North America and Europe.

The Arabs living in Israel will eventually have to stop being vocal supportive of palestine as well, I think, for their own sake.

(Also, India, specifically, was always an established country. Now Pakstan is one example taht you can point to - but unfortunately, while india rooted out the backward systems from their land, Pak did not and they've suffered for it - they're kid of a failed state now.)

Man. There is no way in hell the Palestinians will move out of there. End of story. It won't happen.

[Envitro]

I think that a two state solution, but of two contiguous states can be the only answer.

Here is my proposal:

1. Israel would cede a large portion of the Golan Heights to a new Palestinian state, and connect it to the West Bank with a small corridor to the Golan provided by Syria.
2:1 area swap for example. If Gaza is 365 sq. km, then Israel would cede ~730 sq. km to the Palestinians which is over half of the area currently occupied by Israel.

2. In exchange, Gaza would be handed over to Israel and its citizens would be transplanted to the Golan or West Bank, or stay and become Israeli citizens, their choice...

This would solve a few problems, main being that in order to have a sovereign country you cannot have it split in half by another country.

Secondly, Israel would be giving up the disputed Golan that they won in the war and putting it towards a good cause (peace). Thirdly, Syria has a chance to look like the good guy in participating in the solution rather than being a problem. Obviously I thought of this proposal when there was no civil war in Syria... but I guess we can see how this shakes out.

However there can only be one condition to this: Palestinians and Arabs must have a peace treaty with Israel and cannot attack it. They must give up their goal of Israel's destruction.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Envitro

I think that a two state solution, but of two contiguous states can be the only answer.

Here is my proposal:

1. Israel would cede a large portion of the Golan Heights to a new Palestinian state, and connect it to the West Bank with a small corridor to the Golan provided by Syria.
2:1 area swap for example. If Gaza is 365 sq. km, then Israel would cede ~730 sq. km to the Palestinians which is over half of the area currently occupied by Israel.

2. In exchange, Gaza would be handed over to Israel and its citizens would be transplanted to the Golan or West Bank, or stay and become Israeli citizens, their choice...

This would solve a few problems, main being that in order to have a sovereign country you cannot have it split in half by another country.

Secondly, Israel would be giving up the disputed Golan that they won in the war and putting it towards a good cause (peace). Thirdly, Syria has a chance to look like the good guy in participating in the solution rather than being a problem. Obviously I thought of this proposal when there was no civil war in Syria... but I guess we can see how this shakes out.

However there can only be one condition to this: Palestinians and Arabs must have a peace treaty with Israel and cannot attack it. They must give up their goal of Israel's destruction.

Not a bad concept, however, there are 1.4 million Palestinians in Gaza and to allow them to take up Israeli citizenship might be national suicide for Israel. Why not make it a single state from the get go?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Kipperriffic

Maybe I shouldn't have said that it always happens for every nation, because obviously every situation is different, but specifically for the case of Israel/Palestine, I think there is no option but for the Palestinians to give up on their cause, or suffer huge tragedy. Smarter thing for them to do is to spread out to North America and Europe.

The Arabs living in Israel will eventually have to stop being vocal supportive of palestine as well, I think, for their own sake.

the Jewish will is too strong to have their ownstate, only for them. Thats more admirable that it is disappointing.

(Also, India, specifically, was always an established country. Now Pakstan is one example taht you can point to - but unfortunately, while india rooted out the backward systems from their land, Pak did not and they've suffered for it - they're kid of a failed state now.)

India was not an established country. Prior to colonialism it was a patchwork of random kingdoms.

[_Q_]

Yeah, this notion of what was and what wasn't an established country is misleading. Many nations didn't exist before World War 2 and many more didn't exist prior to World War 1. Doesn't mean that the people there don't have a right to self determination. Would you be willing to give up Alberta to a group of foreigners with all it's natural beauty, resources, and everything you've grown accustomed to love because Alberta was never an established country? Technically it never was, but there are definitely Albertans living here that call it home.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Kipperriffic

(Also, India, specifically, was always an established country. Now Pakstan is one example taht you can point to - but unfortunately, while india rooted out the backward systems from their land, Pak did not and they've suffered for it - they're kid of a failed state now.)

Don't make the mistake of believing India is some kind of centralized, modernized state. Anatol Lieven and many others believe the Naxalite-Maoists pose more of a threat to the internal stability of India than the Pakistani Taleban does to the internal stability of Pakistan.

But that's another topic altogether . . .

[Caged Great]

This is a difficult issue as the lead groups on both sides want war with each other. The people by in large don't.

The Palestinians need to give up on Hamas as it's doing nothing but bringing death and destruction to their people, and Israel needs to get rid of the ultra conservative nut jobs that they have in there currently. It's like having Bolton and Senor running the US. Just crazy war mongers. Both sides need to get away from their extremest leaderships if they want to have a shot at figuring out a legitimate and long lasting way to solve their peace efforts.

[comrade]

Originally Posted by Envitro

I think that a two state solution, but of two contiguous states can be the only answer.

Here is my proposal:

1. Israel would cede a large portion of the Golan Heights to a new Palestinian state, and connect it to the West Bank with a small corridor to the Golan provided by Syria.
2:1 area swap for example. If Gaza is 365 sq. km, then Israel would cede ~730 sq. km to the Palestinians which is over half of the area currently occupied by Israel.

2. In exchange, Gaza would be handed over to Israel and its citizens would be transplanted to the Golan or West Bank, or stay and become Israeli citizens, their choice...

This would solve a few problems, main being that in order to have a sovereign country you cannot have it split in half by another country.

Secondly, Israel would be giving up the disputed Golan that they won in the war and putting it towards a good cause (peace). Thirdly, Syria has a chance to look like the good guy in participating in the solution rather than being a problem. Obviously I thought of this proposal when there was no civil war in Syria... but I guess we can see how this shakes out.

However there can only be one condition to this: Palestinians and Arabs must have a peace treaty with Israel and cannot attack it. They must give up their goal of Israel's destruction.

Who specifically are you referring to when you say "Arabs"?

[AltaGuy]

I think the longer this conflict goes on, the more likely a one-state solution becomes the only option. The feasibility of a Palestinian state is virtually nil already - and settlements, East Jerusalem, and water scarcity will simply make the possibility of an independent Palestine less and less likely.

The WB and Gaza will remain Israel's protectorates while over time more and more Israeli citizenship rights will accrue to Palestinians in the WB and Gaza due to outside pressure and internal realities. (WB obviously first.)

The economic benefits to Israelis and Palestinians will eventually outweigh the old territorial and clan claims, and owing to the demographics of the new state some fifty years down the road, Israel will not be a "Jewish" state, but just a secular state with many different groups of people living within it.

Sucks that there will be more deaths before any of that happens. But I honestly think that this is the only possible eventual outcome given the current realities.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

This is a difficult issue as the lead groups on both sides want war with each other. The people by in large don't.

The Palestinians need to give up on Hamas as it's doing nothing but bringing death and destruction to their people, and Israel needs to get rid of the ultra conservative nut jobs that they have in there currently. It's like having Bolton and Senor running the US. Just crazy war mongers. Both sides need to get away from their extremest leaderships if they want to have a shot at figuring out a legitimate and long lasting way to solve their peace efforts.

Unfortunately, those looking for lasting peace are branded as 'extreme left wing Israeli's' or 'radicals', or, in my mind the most contemptuous of labels, the self-loathing Jew.

Of course, this labelling happens on both sides, I just find it more despicable coming from a 'democratic' country and it's citizens as opposed to multi-generations worth of oppressive theocratic/autocratic governments. I guess I'm just like that.

I think the internal security of Israel is threatened more by the radical right wing of the country that alternates between a free-pass and outright support from the government.

[_Q_]

AltaGuy, I think you're bang on.

I would add that the settlements have actually kind of bit Israel in the ass in this case. By building them where they did and insisting on expanding them, they have made it virtually impossible to have a viable two state solution. I get that throughout history, the winner gets to keep the land they won in a war, but usually the people there are either exterminated, forced out or given citizenship as long as they become loyal to their new state. What Israel did was basically let the Palestinians stay, made life hell for them to try to get them out and now have them sitting in limbo. You can't really kick out or exterminate 3 million people in this day and age, so the proverbial time bomb is just ready to explode and Israel as a Jewish State will no longer exist.

Maybe this thing will just all solve itself if we give it enough time.

[Azure]

Well, after what HPLovecraft and Blankall said, I agree that a unified state wouldn't work.

I think if there is a solution, it will happen without Hamas being in power.

[Red Slinger]

When we discuss any possible solutions we have to make a few solid assumptions:

1) Neither Israelis nor Palestinians are willing, by and large, to live in a secular state. I think this option is off the table.

2) Israel will continue to be under threat by their neighbouring countries (Syria, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon- by varying degrees) due to the dictators of those nations that see Israeli democracy as a threat to their way of life. Some or all of those nations will continue to undermine the Israeli/Palestinian peace process.

3) Palestinians in Gaza will not willingly leave to go to the West Bank or elsewhere. Gaza is their home.

Considering these foundational assumptions I believe that a one-state solution is impossible and a two-state solution is difficult.

Perhaps a three-state solution: Israel, Gaza, WB? Obviously there would have to be negotiations regarding land swaps.

[Nage Waza]

This won't work (in my opinion) because the so called Jewish side will have rights, freedom of speech, protection of minorities, freedom of religion, education, democracy, on and on. Once the other side sees how good the Jewish side's citizens have it, their leadership will either villainize the Jews or provide the same rights. We have seen how this has worked out over the years, so I am concerned about the two state solution.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Yeah, this notion of what was and what wasn't an established country is misleading. Many nations didn't exist before World War 2 and many more didn't exist prior to World War 1. Doesn't mean that the people there don't have a right to self determination. Would you be willing to give up Alberta to a group of foreigners with all it's natural beauty, resources, and everything you've grown accustomed to love because Alberta was never an established country? Technically it never was, but there are definitely Albertans living here that call it home.

You keep talking as if Jews came in and took something, I am curious where that comes from? Jews came in and brought something: education, democracy, rights, freedom of speech, etc. Those Arabs that stayed have it better than most others.