Skip to main content

View Diary: Carter: Palestinian Leaders "Seriously Considering" One-State Solution (301 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hmm (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karmafish, word is bond, politicalstu

    I think one can safely predict that a one-state solution isn't going to be realised any time soon, which is why a two-state settlement should be the immediate goal, if only as a first step to something better.

    It's exactly this attitude that concerns Israel (both leaders and its people) and hampers the peace process. How can Israelis trust their negotiating partners when they see a two state solution as the final settlement of the conflict, yet they know full well that for "anti-zionists" of all stripes it's just a stepping stone to something "better" - the elimination of the Jewish state.

    •  The idea is not that a two-state settlement (7+ / 0-)

      would be the launching pad for a violent struggle. The point is that after decades of living peacefully together, cooperation between the two-state will likely increase and animosity between the two peoples will very possibly decrease to the point where some sort of federation or binational state will become a realistic possibility.

      Israeli leaders are not in the least bit concerned that a two-state settlement could lead to the destruction of Israel, because they aren't fools. They know full well that a Palestinian state, defenceless and surrounded on both sides by a tactic Jordanian-Israeli military alliance, would pose as much threat to Israel as Luxemburg did to the Soviet Union (as Abba Eban put it).

      •  just because (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Karmafish, Doodad, mattwb, politicalstu

        two states live peacefully side by side and cooperate does not mean they are ever going to merge or form a federation. People harboring this hope will end up sorely disappointed and disappointed people in the Middle East do tend to take to arms. You know perfectly well that there will always be people in the Middle East and in the world hell-bent on eliminating Israel as a jewish state, one way or another. The real question is whether they are going to be fringe or become/remain mainstream in the Palestinian and other arab societies.

        Just out of curiosity, why won't this palestinian state establish ties, cooperate and eventually merge or establish a federation with Jordan. That would make a ton more sense as they share culture, language and religion. But it does not serve the ultimate objective of getting rid of Israel so I am sure the idea will not be entertained by self-proclaimed palestinian supporters.

        •  asdf (7+ / 0-)

          "just because two states live peacefully side by side and cooperate does not mean they are ever going to merge or form a federation"

          I agree, it doesn't necessarily mean that, but if a one-state solution is going to come about I can't see any other realistic way it's going to happen. The future states of Israel and Palestine would be heavily interconnected in numerous ways - economically, territorially, in terms of resources (e.g. water), in terms of Jerusalem, etc., not to mention the situation for Palestinian citizens of Israel. In such circumstances it makes a lot more sense to have some sort of federal or binational arrangement than to have two-separate states, and after decades of living peacefully together the obstacles to that happening (the mutual animosity, distrust, etc.) might well attenuate to the point where it becomes a realistic possibility.

          "People harboring this hope will end up sorely disappointed and disappointed people in the Middle East do tend to take to arms."

          Sorry, there's no basis whatsoever for suggesting that Palestinians would throw away everything they've struggled for in a hopeless battle against one of the world's military superpowers to achieve a goal that is in any event only supported by a minority of the population. You can invent doomsday scenarios all you want, but it just comes across as an attempt to justify the status quo.

          "You know perfectly well that there will always be people in the Middle East and in the world hell-bent on eliminating Israel as a jewish state, one way or another. The real question is whether they are going to be fringe or become/remain mainstream in the Palestinian and other arab societies."

          Just as there will always be people in Israel determined to prevent the existence of a Palestinian state (y'know, like the ones currently in government). We don't need to speculate about whether Palestinians support a two-state settlement or not: they do, and have done for a long time. Moreover once a Palestinian state is established they'll be far less likely to resort to violence against Israel than they are now, since a) that would mean a return to the current status quo of occupation and military repression, and b) they would no longer be living under military occupation, with all the incentives towards violent resistance that brings.

          Of course the real danger is the security of the future state of Palestine from the military superpower that has been occupying, attacking and dispossessing it for decades. That you don't even mention this, focusing instead on the purported Palestinian threat to Israel, which is comparitively miniscule, reveals a lot about your priorities.

          "Just out of curiosity, why won't this palestinian state establish ties, cooperate and eventually merge or establish a federation with Jordan. That would make a ton more sense as they share culture, language and religion."

          Perhaps it will, but I really don't see the use of speculating about that. Palestinians don't want Jordan, they want their own country back, and as inconvenient as that is for you, you're just going to have to accept that.

        •  700 years ago Genoans despised Pisans (0+ / 0-)

          when Pisa and Genoa were two, separate, aggressively competing political and economic entities.

          Today, it is still common for a Genoan to say, "Better a death in the family than a Pisan at the door."  But the two cities are cooperating and contributing cities in one Italy.

          •  so it took them 700 years (0+ / 0-)

            to get along even though they were part of the same country, shared the same religion, language, culture (most of it), had the same ethnicity, had no blood feud going on between them... Do you seriously think it's a relevant example? Get out of town Mac :)

            •  do you seriously know the history of (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Alec82

              the many times the Italian peninsula was conquered, the many ways the disparate populations who lived on the same Italian geography were as different from each other as the the (semitic) Arabs are from the (semitic) Jews? Do you seriously realize that over the course of as much as half a millenia persons who lived on the Italian peninsula lived there as vassals of occupying powers?  
              Get back to me when you've expanded your historic database.

              •  what do your posts have to do with (0+ / 0-)

                this discussion? Pisa and Genoa are now in one country, London and Paris are in different countries, Prague and Bratislava, Moscow and Kiev used to be in the same country, they are now in different countries. What the hell do your irrelevant posts about the history of Italy have to do with the fact that the Jews and Palestinians (arabs) don't share the same culture, religion, language, don't enjoy similar economic status, have been murdering each other for the last 200 hundred years and will certainly be unable to get along within one state for generations to come.

                •  is there an ignore function on this forum? (0+ / 0-)

                  you seem to be spouting off just to vent spleen.  
                  Knock yourself out.

                •  lacking an ignore button (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Alec82

                  your claim that

                  Jews and Palestinians (arabs) don't share the same culture, religion, language, don't enjoy similar economic status,

                  seems to do battle with the notion that the land to which Palestinians are indigenous was also the land to which Jews were indigenous.

                  Palestinians and Jews are both offspring of Abraham; it is not at all unlikely that many Palestinians are descendants of the lost tribes; it is not at all unlikely that indigenous Palestinians are descendants of the ancient Hebrews who were "left behind" when Nebuchadnezzar exiled the Hebrew elite to Babylon, where 75% of them remained.  

                  In short, there are probably more degrees of connectivity between Jews and Palestinians than between Germanic tribes who settled Northern Italy, indigenous Etruscans, Greeks and Nordic tribes who settled Southern Italy, Spain, which ruled large parts of Italy for several centuries, etc.

                  But the larger point is that peoples have had major conflicts of monumental intensity over great spans of years, and have eventually achieved relatively peaceful coexistence.  It can happen again.

                  •  we all came from the same monkey (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Karmafish

                    (according to Darwin at least) and still we have more than two hundred states on the planet. And incidentally the number of states is increasing, not decreasing, making the creation of a Jewish and Palestinian state more logical and more in line with the trend on the planet.

                    And no, peoples did not just go from major conflicts to "relatively peaceful coexistence" the process took hundreds of years of bloodshed, oppression, riots, exploitation, pogroms, murders, persecutions, uprisings etc and  at the end mostly failed. And that's exactly the kind of future that the proponents of a two state solution are trying to avoid for both Jews and Palestinians. And that's exactly the kind of future that people like you (well meaning as you may be) are pushing them into.

                    It's not going to work Mac, the Jews don't give a shit  about Genoa and Pisa, they have their own 2000 years of history and you'll have to pry their state and their majority status out of their cold dead hands. Isn't it obvious?

    •  1994 saw the elimination of the apartheid state (6+ / 0-)

      but to my knowledge the afrikaaners and white south africans continued to exist well enough in the new country, even when the white-run constitutional regime changed into something else.

      ending a state predicated upon the supremacy of one ethnic group over another in a mixed population, and eliminating those privileges in favor of legal equality is not the same as eliminating that ethnic group. the dixiecrats and right wing afrikaaners and ulstermen argued differently, but their claims were not borne out by what happened next.

      surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

      by wu ming on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 05:21:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  White South Africans are... (0+ / 0-)

        leaving South Africa at a very high rate. I think over 1 million have left since 1994.

        The US south is different because white southerners are a majority in every state.

        Israel will never accept a one-state solution. The perfect example is to the north in Lebanon. Lebanon originally had a Christian majority. Over the years the higher Muslim birth rate and Christian emigration eroded that majority. A 15 year civil war broke out in the mid 70s.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site