Israel and Palestine: A true one-state solution

[IndianaGreen]

Israel and Palestine: A true one-state solution

By George Bisharat

Friday, September 3, 2010

"Where is the Palestinian Mandela?" pundits occasionally ask. But after these latest Israeli-Palestinian peace talks in Washington fail -- as they inevitably will -- the more pressing question may be: "Where is the Israeli de Klerk?" Will an Israeli leader emerge with the former South African president's moral courage and foresight to dismantle a discriminatory regime and foster democracy based on equal rights?

For decades, the international community has assumed that historic Palestine must be divided between Jews and Palestinians. Yet no satisfactory division of the land has been reached. Israel has aggravated the problem by settling roughly 500,000 Jews in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, eliminating the land base for a viable Palestinian state.

A de facto one-state reality has emerged, with Israel effectively ruling virtually all of the former Palestine. Yet only Jews enjoy full rights in this functionally unitary political system. In contrast, Palestinian citizens of Israel endure more than 35 laws that explicitly privilege Jews as well as policies that deliberately marginalize them. West Bank Palestinians cannot drive on roads built for Israeli settlers, while Palestinians in Gaza watch as their children's intellectual and physical growth are stunted by an Israeli siege that has limited educational opportunities and deepened poverty to acute levels.

Palestinian refugees have lived in exile for 62 years, their right to return to their homes denied, while Jews from anywhere can freely immigrate to Israel.

Israeli leaders Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak have admitted that permanent Israeli rule over disenfranchised Palestinians would be tantamount to apartheid. Other observers, including former U.S. president Jimmy Carter and South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, have said that apartheid has already taken root in the region.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/02/AR2010090204665.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

[shira]

1. The Palestinian side doesn't want 2 states. That doesn't mean 1 state is the only way.

If they wanted 2 states and have been offered something extremely reasonable in the past - even if not perfect - then they would at least compromise and accept 2 states rather than choose war.

Besides, neither the PLO or Hamas has shown they would abide by the rules within any western style, liberal democracy. Like valuing basic civil/human rights of the populace, giving up power freely after elections, checks and balances, a separate court system, etc...

One-state is a warmongerer's position.

Let there be one-state in Israel as soon as the rest of the world successfully models it first.

[IndianaGreen]

3. One state is what we got now, thanks to your precious settlers

so let us proclaim "Israel you won!" Now all we got left is to give the Arabs living in this Greater Israel the same rights and privileges of citizenship as Jews enjoy.

Gaza? Cut them loose! No one needs them! They can form their own Islamic republic, or perhaps join hands with those Shofar fundamentalists in Israel and start a jihad against unbelievers in both faiths.

[shira]

4. Nonsense. Olmert offered even more in 2008 than what Barak offered in 2000. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

7. We heard that drivel before! C'mon shira, embrace the one-state solution!

A united Jerusalem without conflict. Arab and Jew are equal citizens in a fiercely secular state. No more privileges for the religious parasites in both religions. Right of Return for all, even for Russians having the most incredibly fantastic claims of Jewishness.

Better yet, Gaza is no longer a burden for either side.

[shira]

8. It's fact. The same land offered in 2000 can be offered now, settlers or not.

Why pretend otherwise?

One-state is fantasy for now. Great idea if it could happen worldwide, no borders, end to ethnic and racial strife, Utopia... But until then, you should admit one-state would be a disaster. When the PLO and Hamas demonstrate by deed they would abide by western liberal and democratic standards WRT basic civil/human rights, only then can one-state be seriously discussed.

[oberliner]

9. Try to wrap your mind around the fact that the vast majority of Palestinians oppose this

It seems more than a little arrogant to suggest that Palestinians and Israelis ought to accept a solution that the majority of both populations do not want.

[aranthus]

2. 60 years and the rejectionists are still at it.

Enjoy the war.

[shira]

5. Rejectionist one-state warmongers masquerading as pro-peace activists. Funny that. n/t

[aranthus]

6. But not surprising. n/t

[proteus_lives]

10. One state is no solution.

It just means eternal conflict.

[Recursion]

11. Just like in South Africa? NT

[oberliner]

12. What are the steps that would need to occur for a one-state solution to be implemented?

Can you take me through how you think that might play out?

If most Palestinians and most Israelis would prefer to have two states living side by side at peace with one another, why not work to try to make that a reality?

[Recursion]

13. Easy: grant citizenship to the Palestinians

Can you take me through how you think that might play out?

Probably with a lot of bruised egos and recriminations and political polarization, but ultimately much better for everybody.

why not work to try to make that a reality?

Because Israel is stealing the Palestinians' land in the West Bank. It really, really, really is that.

[oberliner]

14. Interesting

So you think a solution that neither Israelis nor Palestinians want would actually be much better for everybody. That seems a bit arrogant.

How does Israel stealing the Palestinians' land in the West Bank make the one-state solution better than the two state solution? That makes no sense to me.

If you are saying it would be easy to have Israel grant citizenship to the Palestinians, wouldn't it be just as easy to have Israel leave the West Bank and stop stealing land there?

Most Palestinians don't want Israeli citizenship. Most would prefer to have their own independent country.

If most Palestinians want a two-state solution and oppose a one-state solution, why not do everything possible to support that goal?

[Recursion]

15. Well

So you think a solution that neither Israelis nor Palestinians want would actually be much better for everybody. That seems a bit arrogant.

You keep saying that, but I disagree that neither want it. The Palestinians I know would love that.

How does Israel stealing the Palestinians' land in the West Bank make the one-state solution better than the two state solution?

Because there is not land left for a viable Palestinian state. Do you actually not get that, that that was the purpose of the settlements?

wouldn't it be just as easy to have Israel leave the West Bank and stop stealing land there?

Apparently not, since a lot of us have been trying to get them to do that for decades.

Most Palestinians don't want Israeli citizenship. Most would prefer to have their own independent country.

I've seen no poll indicating that. Have you?

If most Palestinians want a two-state solution and oppose a one-state solution, why not do everything possible to support that goal?

A) I don't agree with that "if", B) because a two-state solution that keeps the settlements in Israel is not a solution.

[oberliner]

16. Poll Data

Q. Some people think that the best solution to the conflict is one in which Israel is unified with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to establish one state whereby Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews would be equal. Do you support or oppose this solution?

Support/Definitely Support: 28.8%
Oppose/Definitely Oppose: 69.1%

That's from March of this year. The full poll can be found on a PDF at this site: http://www.pcpsr.org/

And obviously, some of the settlements would have to be removed as part of a two-state solution. Not sure why you seem to ignore that. Israel would also have to give land within Israel to the new Palestinian state in exchange for whatever settlements are going to be annexed to Israel though any agreement.

[Recursion]

17. Thanks, I hadn't seen that poll

And obviously, some of the settlements would have to be removed as part of a two-state solution. Not sure why you seem to ignore that.

Because at this point, to me, I mean this literally, Israel has absolutely 0 credibility on this. I do not believe they will ever remove any of them unless somehow forced to.

[oberliner]

18. I agree with you

The current Israeli government seems incredibly unlikely to make the sort of concessions necessary to lead to a two-state solution that would be acceptable to the Palestinians.

My hope is that the Obama administration can twist some arms behind the scenes, but I will confess that it is a faint hope.

Miracles do happen, though, and it is possible that even someone as thick-headed as Netanyahu will see the writing on the wall.