Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  the (3+ / 0-)

    "facts on the ground," which you are resisting, are that Carter encountered this:

    A majority of the Palestinian leaders with whom we met are seriously considering acceptance of one state, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

    You are also resisting the questions I asked at the close of the diary, and that I would like to hear you answer:

    If the Palestinian people of the occupied territories were really to say, we renounce our dream of our own state, we wish to join you in yours: how, really, could Israel say no? And on what grounds?

    •  okay. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Karmafish, hikerbiker

      i will answer this and nathan's post as i am heading to a bbq - and i guess my links and logic are getting any traction as they contradict this premise you've positioned here.

      to me its simple - the people do not want it. all i am asking is to have a bit of respect for the this much like you do that of the jordanians.

      "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

      by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 01:44:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Have fun at your barbecue (4+ / 0-)

        But hopefully you'll see this some time after you get back.

        I'd like to make several points. First, the statistics that you cited strike me as answers to questions quite different from a straight up "what sort of state do you support" type survey. In JMCC polls, the answer to that question results in approximately 20-25% of respondents saying they prefer a binational state. So, while the establishment of a Palestinian state is important to all Palestinians that doesn't mean that that's their preferred choice.

        Second, blueness quotes Carter as saying that the majority of Palestinian leaders are "seriously considering" the binational state solution. That doesn't mean that the majority has accepted it, which I think is the important thing to keep in mind.

        However, the fact that 1 in 5 non-diaspora Palestinians (a not insignificant number of people) support the binational solution coupled with the fact that most Palestinian leaders are seriously considering it should give pause to those are committed to the two-state solution. Instead of arguing that the binational solution isn't possible, perhaps it would be time better spent for these supporters to wonder why this has become a trend and what can be done to reverse it.

        •  I wonder if the people who would aim for 1-state (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          canadian gal

          would be committed, on behalf of themselves and their descendents, to the eternal preservation of the Jewish people?

          That was and is the purpose of establishing an independent Jewish state.

          Just as Israelis' priorities will always be self-serving, it would be fair to expect that Palestinian's would be, too.

          So, why rely upon the good will of others?  Both Palestinians and Israelis know well what it is to be a victim.

          Two states would provide the opportunity for each people to control their own destiny.

          Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

          by hikerbiker on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 02:55:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't disagree. (4+ / 0-)

            But keep in mind that the questionnaire always posits a two-state solution and a binational (not one-) state solution, which explicitly means that both Jews and Arabs are in the state.

            In any case, I think it's worth thinking about why so many Palestinians actually prefer a binational state.

            •  Yes, and I also think it's important to consider (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Karmafish, canadian gal

              why most Israelis would never consider such an option:  

              A. History

              B. Demographics

              I believe that the Israelis will always consider plans for a binational state to be nothing more than the same old step-by-step plan to destroy Jewish Israel.  

              Whether or not this is anyone's specific intent, there are no guarantees that this will not be the inevitable result.

              Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

              by hikerbiker on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 04:54:38 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  i'm stuffed! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blueness

          i dunno - the poll numbers seem pretty straightforward to me and further i'm pretty sure the numbers i've cited are similar to the JMCC ones you have just posted.

          keeping in mind blueness diary is fine - but again i find it pretty odd that people want to discuss or debate the merits of an option on behalf of these groups that 75% or more of them do not want. which is a clear majority of both groups.

          as to your last point about the palestinian diaspora, this does not surprise me since these numbers pretty much seem to reflect the non-dispora opinion. but i do agree that we need to try and reverse people that have given up hope. to the others that put this option forward with ulterior motives, feh. (btw - not directed at anyone in particular)

          "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

          by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 05:39:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  soysauce, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Aunt Martha, soysauce

        who recently visited Palestine, says the Palestinian people are increasingly moving towards a one-state solution. You ignore her. Carter, who recently visited Palestine, says Palestinian leaders are increasingly moving towards a one-state solution. You ignore him. You, who so far as I know have not recently been to Palestine, say the people are not moving towards a one-state solution . . . presumably because you yourself do not want it. In this way, you can avoid the questions, because you have decided, there in your mind, that the Palestinian people, who live in your mind, "do not want it." Very good.

        And please do not try to fall back again into the embrace of your polls. They are not on point, because as far as I can tell they did not offer as option the sort of single-state solution to which Carter refers. A single-state solution, to repeat, that both soysauce, who has recently been there, and President Carter, who has recently been there, say Palestinians increasingly favor.

        •  I think more accurately, moving (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          soysauce

          BACK to demanding a "one state" solution. a democratic secular state was the original demand.

          greatest purveyor of violence in the world today, my own govt.-MLK

          by Tom J on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 04:57:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  i'm confused. (0+ / 0-)

          yes me.

          you would like me to ignore all polls i have read from a couple of decades and up until about 4 months ago based on the observations of two people?

          and before you criticize the validity of such polls, which perhaps is probably the greatest indicator of public opinion, why not read some? here's one from a few months ago.

          According to the poll published Wednesday morning, 74% of the Palestinians and 78% of the Israelis are willing to accept the basic solution of two states for two people. On the other hand, 66% of the Israelis and 59% of the Palestinians object to one bi-national state.

          as to the rest of the tone and personalization of your comment - no thanks ;(

          "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

          by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 05:50:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  i (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            soysauce

            read your polls. You--again--either didn't read, or chose to ignore, what I wrote:

            And please do not try to fall back again into the embrace of your polls. They are not on point, because as far as I can tell they did not offer as option the sort of single-state solution to which Carter refers.

            These are really pretty simple questions.

            If the Palestinian people of the occupied territories were really to say, we renounce our dream of our own state, we wish to join you in yours: how, really, could Israel say no? And on what grounds?

            I'm frankly flummoxed that you absolutely refuse to answer them.

            •  as to ignoring... (0+ / 0-)

              i have shown polling numbers that demonstrate the majority of palestinians favour their own state and are against a bi-nationalist state, suddenly this means that they are for a single state? as sophia said below - yes, some academics have been pushing this idea for some time now - but that does not mean that it has caught on with the people.

              as to your question:

              If the Palestinian people of the occupied territories were really to say, we renounce our dream of our own state, we wish to join you in yours: how, really, could Israel say no? And on what grounds?

              quite easily. much like the status quo, however dysfunctional as it has for the past 30 odd years has continued... speaking of unanswered questions though:

              and as an academic exercise - even if the palestinians dramatically shifted their position in recent months and the israelis hadn't, how likely do you think its successful implementation would be?

              care to give it a kick?

              "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

              by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 08:39:20 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  of course (0+ / 0-)

                I don't "care to give it a kick." Not after you have, again, refused to answer the questions. You do not get to repeatedly, persistently refuse to answer the questions I have posed to you, but demand I answer a question you have posed as part of your interminable deflection and resistance campaign. I'll be perfectly happy to answer your question once you have answered mine. Here they are again. Highlighted is the one you missed.

                If the Palestinian people of the occupied territories were really to say, we renounce our dream of our own state, we wish to join you in yours: how, really, could Israel say no? And on what grounds?

                •  this is just unbelievable. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  hikerbiker

                  perhaps you missed this answer above:

                  quite easily. much like the status quo, however dysfunctional as it has for the past 30 odd years has continued..

                  an answer to your question.

                  but you know what, never mind - i have answered your question and tried to engage you both respectfully and sincerely - but sadly i have not been returned this courtesy. good luck.

                  "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

                  by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 09:04:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  no, (0+ / 0-)

                    what is unbelievable is you. Here are the questions again:

                    If the Palestinian people of the occupied territories were really to say, we renounce our dream of our own state, we wish to join you in yours: how, really, could Israel say no? And on what grounds?

                    Here is your response:

                    quite easily. much like the status quo, however dysfunctional as it has for the past 30 odd years has continued..

                    You respond that Israel "quite easily" could say no, but you do not at all answer the question "on what grounds?" Unless you intend as your answer the impenetrable word-cluster "much like the status quo, however dysfunctional as it has for the past 30 odd years has continued."

                    Instead of answering the question, you simply claim you have answered it, though you have not, whine about courtesy, and then, presumably, take your leave. Without being at all responsive. After having for hours wasted my time, as I assumed, wrongly apparently, that you were a person of good faith who would, eventually, answer a couple of simple questions.

                    •  whining now? (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Pozzo, hikerbiker

                      even though my answer clearly did not meet your word-count needs, i did in fact answer your question. frankly, i simply do not understand what you are attempting to argue here. a one-state solution is not wanted by the majority of both peoples yet you would like me to engage in a long-winded rhetorical discussion about how israel could turn one down, if in an alternate reality that the palestinians wanted one.

                      so again, if in an alternate reality the palestinians wanted a one-state solution, and the israelis didn't - they simply could say no - period. and they could do so on the grounds that the status-quo has continued for the past 3 decades unfettered (save for bloodshed and heartache), without much change either way. [hint: that's my answer]

                      anyway - as you've taken to mocking me the past few comments,  i think its best that i take my leave since clearly i've wasted your time with my viewpoint and it seems that you have very little interest in what i have to say.

                      "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

                      by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 10:09:07 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  i'm sorry, (0+ / 0-)

                        but "much like the status quo, however dysfunctional as it has for the past 30 odd years has continued.." is not an answer to the question of "on what grounds" Israel could say "no" if the Palestinian people in the occupied territories announced they wished themselves and those territories to become part of Israel. I can't even understand what those words mean. I have made a living writing and editing the English language for the past 37 years, and you've stumped me. I do not desire "a long-winded rhetorical discussion." I'd simply like a coherent answer to a simple question.

                    •  btw.... (0+ / 0-)

                      the whining now was meant to say: 'so i'm whining now.'

                      "Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

                      by canadian gal on Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 10:20:45 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  blueness (0+ / 0-)

                      Since you seem to have had such a hard time understanding canadian gal's answers, maybe you should go back and reread some of my comments to you from last night.  Maybe you can start with the ones you recced.

                      To rehash a bit:  

                      The Israelis are not interested in living as a minority population in a binational state.  You seem to not want to accept this fact.

                      Any proposal for a binational state, which would include the populations of the West Bank and Gaza, would render the Jews a minority in this new state.  This is unacceptable from the Israeli viewpoint, for obvious reasons, given their bloody history of over 2 millenia.  The Jewish People would like to retain sovereignty over a tiny piece of real estate, somewhere on planet Earth.  

                      Yesterday you seemed to understand this fact.  Now I see that you are unsure why such a plan is not acceptable to the Israelis.

                      It will take both Palestinians and Israelis to agree to any plan for peace.  Creating a plan that will be acceptable to both sides is obviously extremely challenging, maybe even impossible, given today's actors/leaders.

                      But it is an exercize in futility to continue discussing the merits of this mythical binational state.  Why not be pragmatic and consider the option that actually has the potential to meet most of the needs of the people in Israel and Palestine?  2-states will not be perfect, but the so-called one-state means the destruction of Israel from the Israeli viewpoint and it ain't happening.

                      I'm not sure why you felt the need to harass canadian gal in this thread.  She's one of the best people here at DK and she did not deserve your disrespect.

                      Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

                      by hikerbiker on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 09:21:50 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  you offered (0+ / 0-)

                        answers to the questions posed, which is why I recced you. Canadian gal for many moons refused to provide any answers, then offered a word-grouping--"much like the status quo, however dysfunctional as it has for the past 30 odd years has continued.."--that was unintelligible. Hence my "harassment." Also, you responded from the Israeli perspective; canadian gal claimed to respond from the Palestinian perspective, but by denying the on-the-scene observations of Carter and soysauce, and clinging to polls that are not on point. I agree that canadian gal is a good person, which is why I was flummoxed by her behavior.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site