Looking for alternatives to failure: An answer to Uri Avnery

[Tom Joad]

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=12682

The following is Ilan Pappe's response to Uri Avnery's essay "Bed of Sodom," published by Hagada Hasmalit on 22 April 2007. (See DU discussion of that here)


Uri Avnery accuses the supporters of the one-state solution of forcefully imposing the facts onto the "Bed of Sodom". He seems to regard these people at best as daydreamers who do not understand the political reality around them and are stuck in a perpetual state of wishful thinking. We are all veteran comrades in the Israeli Left and therefore it is quite possible that in our moments of despair we fall into the trap of hallucinating and even fantasizing while ignoring the unpleasant reality around us.


And therefore the metaphor of the Bed of Sodom may even be fitting for lashing out at those who are inspired by the South African model in their search for a solution in Palestine. But in this case it is a small cot of Sodom compared to the king-size bed onto which Gush Shalom and other similar members of the Zionist Left insist on squeezing their two-state solution. The South African model is young -- in fact hardly a year has passed since it was seriously considered -- while the formula of two states is sixty years old: an abortive and dangerous illusion that enabled Israel to continue its occupation without facing any significant criticism from the international community.


The South African model is good subject matter for a comparative study -- not as an object for a hollow emulation. Certain chapters in the history of the colonization in South Africa and the Zionization of Palestine are indeed nearly identical. The ruling methodology of the white settlers in South Africa resembles very closely that applied by the Zionist movement and later Israel against the indigenous population of Palestine since the end of the 19th century. Ever since 1948, the official Israeli policy against some of the Palestinians is more lenient than that of the Apartheid regime; against other Palestinians it is much worse.

[papau]

1. disagree - jews inside an initial secular Islamic state become dead jews in a shia state- Two state

will work if the Arabs want it to work. Polls show 85% of all Palestinians do not want to live in (right of return) Israel - but the demand by the 15% for a right of return and not compensation is the only thing holding up agreement.

Ilan Pappe just wants the EU to dump on Israel for wanting to be a Jewish state - and the EU folks will do that without his help. Indeed now that he has rejected living in Israel so as to live in Britain as a British intellectual, he will fit in well with that university crowd.

Pappé is famous for supporting the Teddy Katz M.A. paper that smeared Israel for an alleged massacre by Israeli troops in 1948 in the Palestinian village of Tantura that did not happen - and Katz withdrew the paper, only to follow his EU friends advice and retract his retraction.

An "interesting fellow" - very big on arab right of return - not so much on jewish right of return even via private land sale.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. But the binational state wouldn't be an Islamic nor a Jewish state...

..plus Palestinian Muslims are predominately Sunni. I'm kind of curious to know how making out Shia Muslims will kill Jews isn't a smear, while an academic who wrote a thesis about a massacre in 1948 is engaging in a smear. btw, Katz did not withdraw his thesis at all. He was sued for libel by a group of veterans who claimed that there were discrepancies between the taped interviews with the veterans and the quotes that appeared in the thesis. There was an out of court settlement which involved publishing an apology, and the very next day Katz asked for the settlement agreement to be cancelled but the court refused, so Katz refused to publish the apology and the veterans attorney ended up publishing it. If he'd withdrawn his thesis, then Haifa University would not have been able to take it upon themselves to regrade it after the court case...

[Igel]

3. I suspect papau's fingers left out the ...ar... in shari'a. n/t

[The Magistrate]

4. People For Whom Mr. Avery Does Not Go Far Enough, Sir

Are well beyond the edge of practical debate in this matter....

[bemildred]

5. "As good as it gets"

What is one thing that Syria, Iran, and Turkey all agree on? They all agree that the idea of a sovereign Kurdish state in what is now northern Iraq is a bad idea. Why is that? Because they all have substantial Kurdish minorities living in areas adjacent to the prospective Kurdish state. They all fear, with good reason, that their Kurdish minorities will want to join the new Kurdish state to form the new rich nation of "Greater Kurdistan". There appears to be an excellent chance that there will be a regional war in the near future to decide on the question of the existence and extent of Greater Kurdistan, and it is rather unclear who else might be dragged into that conflict, given the alliances of the different parties, and of course there is all that oil.

Now shift your eyes over to the region between the Jordan and the sea, and consider the similar situation arising with the creation of a new sovereign Palestinian state. What do you have? You have large Palestinian minority populations living in both Israel and all of the surrounding states. What is going to happen to those populations? They can repatriate or they can stay where they are. If they repatriate you have a sudden large increase in the Palestinian population between the Jordan and the sea, leaving the Jewish Israeli population even more outnumbered than it stands to be already, and, because the new Palestinian state is sovereign, persons who remain disgruntled will be much better placed to arm themselves and pursue their own interests. If they stay where they are, they become a permanent headache to the nations they remain in, and a continuing threat to Israel while their grievances are not resolved. What happens if they decide they want to join the new Palestinian state too?

Of course, if the new Palestinian state is not sovereign, then the conflict will continue, too. Installing a stooge government will not buy you much unless it is seen as legitimate, and legitimacy is not something Israel can give to a Palestinian government, and legitimacy will not be maintained unless the new Palestinian government acts in a sovereign fashion.

Now, my point is not that I favor a one-state solution, or a two-state solution, but rather it is that it is wrong to think that any change in political structures is likely to produce some dramatic improvement. Simply because you have a new government does not imply that it has the means, the will, or the public legitimacy to do anything useful. It is equally likely that change, any change, will make the situation worse, that the present situation, to borrow the title of an academy award movie, is "as good as it gets".

[The Magistrate]

6. You May Be Right, My Friend

'Good as it gets' is damned near hard to chew as the Birkenhead drill, but it may well be the case. It is an unfortunate fact that not every problem has a solution, and then there is the great class of problems that began as solutions themselves in their youth.

To my view, the potential benefit of a formally established and genuinely sovereign state of Arab Palestine is in the area of removing immediately felt and presently acute grievance, which it seems to me is necessary if there is to be even a hope of proceeding further. It certainly does not necessarily solve anything by itself, but it may reduce irritation for some, and clear the decks somewhat.

[bemildred]

7. You know me Sir, I love happy talk.

It is true that doing nothing is not an option either. That notwithstanding, a proper appreciation of the difficulties must be the foundation of any sound attempt at progress, and I see damn little of that.

[The Magistrate]

8. Spreading Such Cheer, Sir

As might make others share the same happiness that is mine is a constant endeavor for me as well....

"A pessimist is someone who has known too damn many optimists."