Worth a try? A new model for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from an unlikely source
32 replies, posted
This isn't actually new, but I just heard about it for the first time and thought it was pretty interesting.
Here are some sources:
[URL="http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21655008-new-model-unlikely-source-worth-try"]
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21655008-new-model-unlikely-source-worth-try[/URL]
[QUOTE]The simple two-state solution still favoured by the international community these days looks more elusive than ever. There are close to 600,000 Israelis now living across the pre-1967 “green line” in West Bank territory much of which would be part of a Palestinian state; and there are persisting demands for full recognition of the rights of Palestinians in the sovereign territory of Israel within the green line, including a right of return for their relatives who were driven from their homes. At the same time, the one-state future being advocated by some radical Israelis and Palestinians is a recipe for even deeper strife. At present, the two communities show very little sign of being able to agree on how such a state would be run.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
The new initiative is designed to offer both members of both populations freedom of movement throughout their homeland, from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, while maintaining two parallel jurisdictions and citizenships, one for Israelis and one for Palestinians. It is a gradual trust-building approach that aims at allowing both nations self-determination, which has attracted an unlikely collection of supporters.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.599198"]
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.599198[/URL]
[QUOTE]Further, since neither the often discussed "two state solution" nor the "one state solution" appears to be viable - the former cannot be implemented because of the settlement problem and the latter would be the end of the Jewish state of Israel (see, for example, Dov Waxman’s Haaretz opinion piece earlier this year, (“Time to choose: Liberalism or Zionism?”) I proposed that, instead, Kelman's concept of "One Land and Two States" should be considered. In essence, the present Israel and Palestinian Territories together ("One Land") historically are the homeland of both Jews and Arabs and should be recognized as such. Within the historical homeland there would be two sovereign entities ("Two States") that correspond approximately to the present-day Israel and Palestinian Territories, though the exact borders are one of the many problems that would have to be resolved.
[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/BDS-threats-thwart-Israeli-Palestinian-normalization-meeting-in-Bethlehem-405501"]
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/BDS-threats-thwart-Israeli-Palestinian-normalization-meeting-in-Bethlehem-405501[/URL]
[QUOTE]A meeting between Israelis and Palestinians that was supposed to take place in Beit Jala, near Bethlehem, on Thursday has been relocated, after the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement threatened to thwart the gathering.
The meeting was meant to be the founding congress of the Two States One Homeland Initiative, which advocates the establishment of two sovereign states on one open homeland.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Palestinian sources said that BDS activists in Bethlehem threatened to wage protests against the meeting if it were held in Beit Jala.
The activists said that the meeting was a form of “normalization” with Israel and called on Palestinians to foil the planned meeting.[/QUOTE]
There's a few glaring problems with this. The west bank is a huge pain in the ass for Israel but we want to keep it to prevent weapons and explosives from being smuggled in from Jordan. Giving the West Bank to Palestine is suicide even if magically the vast majority of Palestinians get positive views of Israel.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;50402521]There's a few glaring problems with this. The west bank is a huge pain in the ass for Israel but we want to keep it to prevent weapons and explosives from being smuggled in from Jordan. Giving the West Bank to Palestine is suicide even if magically the vast majority of Palestinians get positive views of Israel.[/QUOTE]
There are no simple or bulletproof solutions. But I think we already proved whatever it is we're doing now isn't working, so it's definitely time to try something new.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;50402521]There's a few glaring problems with this. The west bank is a huge pain in the ass for Israel but we want to keep it to prevent weapons and explosives from being smuggled in from Jordan. Giving the West Bank to Palestine is suicide even if magically the vast majority of Palestinians get positive views of Israel.[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree that it would be a security issue, but actually appeasing the legitimate resentment from Palestinians that fuels and supports Hamas would go a long way towards fixing the problem. Hamas might never stop wanting to destroy Israel, but they get a lot of support among more rational Palestinians who just want their homeland. Gut Hamas's ideological base and a judicious, but careful police approach can do the rest.
[QUOTE=ScumBunny;50402550]There are no simple or bulletproof solutions. But I think we already proved whatever it is we're doing now isn't working, so it's definitely time to try something new.[/QUOTE]
We've given the west bank free trade before, back in 2005 iirc. Didn't really do much for helping out Israel.
I'm still mostly dead-set on the idea that the only way to resolve this war is to finish it. Palestinians are simply too much of fanatics for any sort of peace treaty to work.
[QUOTE=Monkah;50403421]We've given the west bank free trade before, back in 2005 iirc. Didn't really do much for helping out Israel.
I'm still mostly dead-set on the idea that the only way to resolve this war is to finish it. Palestinians are simply too much of fanatics for any sort of peace treaty to work.[/QUOTE]
That's a harsh generalization coupled with a terrible idea. Sure there are fanatics, but for every fanatic there will be a bunch of innocents that will be caught in the crossfire.
[editline]28th May 2016[/editline]
Not to mention that a full scale war with the Palestinians will probably bring on even worse consequences than upholding the current status quo. Sadly it seems like both sides aren't truly willing to find a nonviolent solution.
What about a four-state solution?
Hard-liners of both camps at opposite ends of the country with moderates in the middle.
Seriously though, I truly don't think there is much of a solution, unfortunately, due to the nature of the individuals that are in charge on both sides, and what they fundamentally are each trying to work towards.
This sound ridiculous to be honest.
The conflict will be solved when Donald Trump becomes president.
He's the only one who could negotiate a proper peace deal.
[QUOTE=ScreamingGerbil;50403618]That's a harsh generalization coupled with a terrible idea. Sure there are fanatics, but for every fanatic there will be a bunch of innocents that will be caught in the crossfire.
[editline]28th May 2016[/editline]
Not to mention that a full scale war with the Palestinians will probably bring on even worse consequences than upholding the current status quo. Sadly it seems like both sides aren't truly willing to find a nonviolent solution.[/QUOTE]
We can either let a bunch of people die now, or have a war that may very well continue for centuries.
I say we just spill the blood that needs to be spilled and get it over with. There's no peace deal possible here.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Advocating genocide + shitposting." - Bradyns))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Monkah;50404128]We can either let a bunch of people die now, or have a war that may very well continue for centuries.
I say we just spill the blood that needs to be spilled and get it over with. There's no peace deal possible here.[/QUOTE]
You sure have a War Boner don't you?
[QUOTE=orgornot;50403755]This sound ridiculous to be honest.
The conflict will be solved when Donald Trump becomes president.
He's the only one who could negotiate a proper peace deal.[/QUOTE]
I think the sentence you started this post with should have been at the end
[QUOTE=Monkah;50403421]We've given the west bank free trade before, back in 2005 iirc. Didn't really do much for helping out Israel.
I'm still mostly dead-set on the idea that the only way to resolve this war is to finish it. Palestinians are simply too much of fanatics for any sort of peace treaty to work.[/QUOTE]
Unless you're suggesting an ethnic cleansing there is no "finishing it."
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50404369]Unless you're suggesting an ethnic cleansing there is no "finishing it."[/QUOTE]
By finishing it I assume he means pushing the rest of the Palestinians out of their homes and into the neighboring countries.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;50404353]I think the sentence you started this post with should have been at the end[/QUOTE]
this was sarcasm.
I think
[QUOTE=Monkah;50404128]I say we just spill the blood that needs to be spilled and get it over with. There's no peace deal possible here.[/QUOTE]
yeah guys peace has failed. time to kill everyone just for where they were born and not because of their individual actions
[QUOTE=da space core;50404796]this was sarcasm.
I think
[/QUOTE]
Most likely not, orgornot is a staunch Trump supporter.
Well, the genocide is just pouring out of your posts, Monkah. "Palestinians hate how we treat them, so we should just kill them all off and be done with it!"
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;50404789]By finishing it I assume he means pushing the rest of the Palestinians out of their homes and into the neighboring countries.[/QUOTE]
That is one of the definitions of ethnic cleansing.
well regardless of what plan someone comes up with, one things for sure; Netanyahu must resign/be removed from power. The guys insane.
[QUOTE=Saber15;50405708]That is one of the definitions of ethnic cleansing.[/QUOTE]
Why don't they just kick the Israelis and Palestinians out and neither of them gets the land problem solved.
[QUOTE=coldroll5;50406763]Why don't they just kick the Israelis and Palestinians out and neither of them gets the land problem solved.[/QUOTE]
Turn the entire holy land into a massive parking lot
[QUOTE=Monkah;50403421]We've given the west bank free trade before, back in 2005 iirc. Didn't really do much for helping out Israel.
I'm still mostly dead-set on the idea that the only way to resolve this war is to finish it. Palestinians are simply too much of fanatics for any sort of peace treaty to work.[/QUOTE]
wow dude I always knew you were insane but that comment paints you as just as much of a fanatic as those you so clearly have a hate boner for.
disgusting.
[QUOTE=Monkah;50404128]We can either let a bunch of people die now, or have a war that may very well continue for centuries.
I say we just spill the blood that needs to be spilled and get it over with. There's no peace deal possible here.[/QUOTE]
hard men making hard decisions
[QUOTE=Monkah;50403421]We've given the west bank free trade before, back in 2005 iirc. Didn't really do much for helping out Israel.
I'm still mostly dead-set on the idea that the only way to resolve this war is to finish it. Palestinians are simply too much of fanatics for any sort of peace treaty to work.[/QUOTE]
Yep, the entire country of Palestine should just be destroyed and every single man woman and child should be shot because they're all so fanatical
[QUOTE=phygon;50407291]Yep, the entire country of Palestine should just be destroyed and every single man woman and child should be shot because they're all so fanatical[/QUOTE]
Certainly, OP is referring to genocide and not to things along the lines of, say, an actual effort to put an end to Palestine's shit. Right? Jews love genocide! Them damn Jews!
If you think Palestinian leadership will ever allow for an actual peace treaty, you're insane. The only way that one will ever occur is with someone sane taking the reigns-- even if that requires Palestine to actually be occupied by Israeli government and Israeli police. Even if that takes dystopian levels of surveillance and costs an ungodly amount of money.
You're also insane if you think that the above has any chance of working without probably setting off every religious nut in Palestine. People will die along the way of making this happen, that's no question-- but thousands have already died over mediocre half-measures by the IDF, and thousands will continue to die for every half-measure Israel takes to keep Palestine at bay, rather than finally end the war.
But what's your proposed solution? We go knocking on the doors of terrorist group leaders and ask them if they'd like to be friends? That we invite Hamas and ISIS to the White House and talk terms over nice wine and filet mignon? Do you really think there's any peace agreement, short of the destruction of Israel, that they'll ever agree to?
Any effective solution is going to require the radicals to be killed. That isn't some obscene statement, that's the obvious truth-- there can clearly be no peace between Israel and Palestine when one side is entirely uninterested in maintaining it. The United States' solution to an unendable war was to drop two nuclear bombs on Japan, in case you guys don't remember your own histories. Saying that any effective solution will require death should be the least controversial thing you Americans have heard all year.
I kind of feel like this whole situation could have been avoided, and possibly a LOT of unrest in the middle east as well, if we had just found a different/better place to put all the displaced Jews following WWII.
I still don't understand the logic of the time when Israel was founded. Like who seriously thought displacing another ethnic group from their long standing home to introduce a different ethnic group, especially when historically both of those ethnic groups have never really gotten along too well in the first place.
Why didn't the British Empire give them land literally anywhere else?
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50412246]I kind of feel like this whole situation could have been avoided, and possibly a LOT of unrest in the middle east as well, if we had just found a different/better place to put all the displaced Jews following WWII.
I still don't understand the logic of the time when Israel was founded. Like who seriously thought displacing another ethnic group from their long standing home to introduce a different ethnic group, especially when historically both of those ethnic groups have never really gotten along too well in the first place.
Why didn't the British Empire give them land literally anywhere else?[/QUOTE]
a) Nobody "put all the displaced Jews" in Israel. In fact, the Brits put quite a lot of effort into stopping Jewish refugees from entering Palestine during and immediately following the war, to the point of imprisoning them in concentration camps in Cyprus and actually turning them around and sending them back to die in Europe.
b) The reason Jewish refugees kept coming to Israel was that there was literally no where else they could go to. Most nations on Earth had very strict immigration quotas for refugees, and again- a lot of refugees ended up being sent back to die in Nazi occupied Europe.
c) In the past, especially during the late 19th and early 20th century, Jews have made multiple attempts to work out Jewish autonomies literally anywhere that would have them, from Russia to Argentina. They all failed because in the end there's no place on the planet that's just sitting around uninhabited, waiting for Jews to settle it. In the end it's always a hated minority suddenly in the middle of the local population.
d) Which is why we came to Israel. Other than being only sparsely settled at the time, and mostly desert and malaria infested swampland anyway, it was literally the only place on Earth Jews could lay claim to, being both our ancestral homeland (I'm talking historically, not by force of some religious prophecy) and the only place that had a constant Jewish presence since the dawn of history.
e) And of course fleeing the Nazis or getting our shit together after the war Jews didn't really give a flying fuck what other nations felt about a Jewish state. We saw what happens when we don't have one. We were going to reclaim our home and fend for ourselves or die trying.
But none of that matters, really. What's done is done. Israel is here, the Palestinians are here and so is the rest of the Arab world. We are what we are and where we are, and no matter how hard anyone wishes, none of us are about to fuck off or disappear of even wipe each other out in a nuclear blaze of glory. This is reality, and any solution to this conflict is going to be a boring, imperfect one that will probably keep a lot of people unhappy and would keep giving assholes reason to murder each other for the next few decades to come. But hopefully less than now.
But seriously, pretending if Israel just didn't exist would have made the world, or even the Middle East a better place is as dishonest as it is ignorant. Look at the history of the Middle East. Look at the Iran-Iraq war, the Gulf Wars, the Arab Spring. Look at all the conflicts that are going on right now in Syria, Iraq, Yemen.
Most of the wars and conflict in the Middle East and the overwhelming majority of lives lost in them had nothing to do with Israel, and everything to do with the religious and political lines that divide everyone else in the Middle East. Shia vs. Suna, Secular vs. Religious and just various local powers and factions vying for power and influence over the region. Putting Israel in Sweden wouldn't have meant that much for the local death count. Hell, there are already more dead in the Syrian civil war than all the Arabs and Jews killed in all the wars fought with Israel, combined. Since 1920. Including terrorism.
Why don't they just bring in UN Peacekeeping forces to turn the more holy areas of Israel into internationally run religious tourist areas?
Hell, the entire reason people want the area is because of the religious significance. Just open it to anyone who wants to go there.
[QUOTE=ScumBunny;50412626]But seriously, pretending if Israel just didn't exist would have made the world, or even the Middle East a better place is as dishonest as it is ignorant. Look at the history of the Middle East. Look at the Iran-Iraq war, the Gulf Wars, the Arab Spring. Look at all the conflicts that are going on right now in Syria, Iraq, Yemen.
Most of the wars and conflict in the Middle East and the overwhelming majority of lives lost in them had nothing to do with Israel, and everything to do with the religious and political lines that divide everyone else in the Middle East. Shia vs. Suna, Secular vs. Religious and just various local powers and factions vying for power and influence over the region. Putting Israel in Sweden wouldn't have meant that much for the local death count. Hell, there are already more dead in the Syrian civil war than all the Arabs and Jews killed in all the wars fought with Israel, combined. Since 1920. Including terrorism.[/QUOTE]
Three main reasons for middle eastern conflict. Western powers drawing up borders in disregard for the people living there. US fucking around with overthrowing governments. Israel, and continued American support for Israel.
The last two are to blame for the major backlash in Islamic fundamentalism, which in turn is what leading to conflict between Shia and Sunni etc because fundamentalists have no room for compromise even for other members of the same religion.
Without Israel's creation and the US fucking around the middle east would be a lot more secular, conflict might not be eliminated but it would have been greatly reduced.
[QUOTE=AlexConnor;50416821]Three main reasons for middle eastern conflict. Western powers drawing up borders in disregard for the people living there. US fucking around with overthrowing governments. Israel, and continued American support for Israel.
The last two are to blame for the major backlash in Islamic fundamentalism, which in turn is what leading to conflict between Shia and Sunni etc because fundamentalists have no room for compromise even for other members of the same religion.
Without Israel's creation and the US fucking around the middle east would be a lot more secular, conflict might not be eliminated but it would have been greatly reduced.[/QUOTE]
Can you explain the mechanism through which the creation of Israel drove fundamentalism? I can understand the interventionism might fuel fundamentalism but Israel has existed long before the advent of Islamic fundamentalism. You're creating a false relationship of cause and effect there I would suppose. Sectarian conflict is not the driving force behind all (or even most) conflict in the middle east and your first point is not the chief cause of conflict either, so it's doubtful that the prevention of Israel becoming a state would have contributed much to the overall stability of the region. Islamic fundamentalism may be the cause of sectarian conflict but it was by no means spawned by those three reasons - sectarian conflict has occurred for ages.
[QUOTE=Monkah;50403421]
I'm still mostly dead-set on the idea that the only way to resolve this war is to finish it. Palestinians are simply too much of fanatics for any sort of peace treaty to work.[/QUOTE]
what a sheltered fucking opinion. the situation is bleak but surely you would be able to empathize with the innocent people just caught up between the two sides?
i'm glad the decision isnt up to you guys
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.