Skip to main content

From Haaretz,
Shlomo Avinri who is consider by many as an icon to the Israeli left now admits failure of the Oslo Accords and makes a surprising conclusion. The realization that the Palestinians do not want a two state solution and their unwillingness to accept a Jewish national self determination.

Shlomo Avineri chooses to retain his national identity.  

Below is a partial translation of his article that I saw on Twitter from the website "Israel Matzav".  I thought its perspective was important to share.

The initiators of Oslo and the process' supporters saw the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a conflict between two national movements, and believed - as I believed - that in direct negotiations between Israel and the PLO, a solution could be found to the territorial and strategic issues that are the source of the dispute between the two movements. It was not simple to persuade Israelis - and even the Labor party - that there was a national movement on the other side, and that although it had terrorist aspects, at heart it is entitled to fulfill its independent national self-definition, just like Zionism. The viewpoints of Golda Meir on the subject ("there is no Palestinian nation") have not been forgotten, and the fact that the initiators of Oslo managed to overcome this tradition of denial, to which even the Labor party was a partner, was an accomplishment.

But the basis of this concept had a mistake. All of those who supported the Oslo process believed that we were talking about a dispute between two national movements, and that the other side felt the same way.

We were mistaken.

The Palestinian side does not believe that we are talking about a dispute between two national movements: It believes that we are talking about a dispute between one national movement - the Palestinian - and a colonial imperialistic entity that will eventually die off. Therefore, the parallel that appears in the Palestinian textbooks is Algeria. It isn't the Israeli presence on the West Bank that is Algeria, but rather the entire Israel is Algeria, and the Israelis will disappear one way or the other, just like the French settlers were expelled from Algeria.

This is the reason why the Palestinian title for the two-state solution is different than the Israeli version. The Israeli stance talks about "two states for two peoples" but in the Palestinian version the phrase "for two peoples" does not appear. It only talks about "two states." If someone thinks that this is just poor phrasing, he should ask his Palestinian counterpart to express an opinion about the "two states for two peoples" version and he will sooner or later get the answer that there is no Jewish people. This is also the reason why the Palestinians refused the version suggested by [John] Kerry "an agreement between two nation states."

The truth is - and every Oslo supporter must recognize it - that in the Palestinian narrative, the Jews are not a people or a nation, but only a religious group, and therefore they are not entitled to a state. This is also the reason for the across-the-board and uncompromising opposition of the Palestinian side to recognizing the State of Israel as the State of the Jewish People. Even those who believe that Benjamin Netanyahu raised the topic only to complicate the negotiations, must contend with the fact that the Palestinian refusal to contend with the topic derives from the simple reason that the Palestinians believe that there is no Jewish people.

The source of the dispute is not borders, settlements or even Jerusalem. And of course, this is connected to the Palestinian refusal to waive the principle of the right of return. There are good reasons to criticize the Netanyahu government's behavior during US Secretary of State John Kerry's efforts to revive the negotiations, but to ignore these deep-seeded views constitutes a lack of intellectual honesty.

Where do the Shlomo Avinris go from here?

Both sides of the process seem to be at the end of a very long road...with not much to show. I wonder what comes next?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I've seen no evidence that the Israelis have ever (9+ / 0-)

    supported a "Two State" solution.  As long as the U.S. continues to enable Israel, they will continue to hold out for the whole thing.

    "Because I am a river to my people."

    by lordcopper on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 07:52:41 AM PDT

    •  I respect your opinion (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordcopper, Zornorph, PeterHug
    •  "Facts on the ground" supports your conclusion (11+ / 0-)

      The West Bank has been sliced and diced into hundreds of Israel enclaves and road systems that now make it impossible to have a contiguous Palestinian homeland.

      This process continues to this very day.

      http://www.btselem.org/...

    •  a 2 state solution was a real possibility from (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MikeCA, henryjones000, Kickemout

      1993 to 1995.  Since then, not really.   Maybe to some extent in 2000 but not really.

      •  It was never a possibility. Israel would not (0+ / 0-)

        allow it under any circumstances. They never walked the talk. If it even came close, they would move the goal posts.

        The Iron Wall
        Vladimir Ze'ev Jabotisnky
        (November 4, 1923)

                    We cannot offer any adequate compensation to the Palestinian Arabs in return for Palestine. And therefore, there is no likelihood of any voluntary agreement being reached. So that all those who regard such an agreement as a condition sine qua non for Zionism may as well say "non" and withdraw from Zionism.

                    Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population. Which means that it can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population – behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach.

        •  if by 'moving the goal posts' you mean 'having (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          anna shane, Kickemout

          the prime minister assassinated', well, fine.

          There was indeed a strong chance in 1995.  Just because you and some others here may prefer not to believe that because it allows you to view Israel as a perpetually evil entity doesn't mean it wasn't true.  Israel's acceptance on a global scale was highest at that point, as well, coming on the heels of its restraint in the fact of Gulf War attacks on its territory.

          Your citing 1923 quotes from Jabotinsky does little to nullify that fact that Rabin by the early 90s had come around to the idea that entities like the PLO had to be dealt with as equals and even fringe actiions by terrorist groups had to be, to some extent, absorbed.

          There was a chance then.  There is none now.

          •  The Oslo Accords were smoke and mirrors (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Johnny Q
            The Mirage of Peace (pdf)
            The Nation
            October 16, 1995
            Edward W. Said

            Under pressure from the Palestinian residents of Hebron not to sign an agreement that would give 450 Israeli settlers encamped in the center of town separate rights and an army to guard them, Yasir Arafat theatrically pulled out of his eleventh-hour meeting with Shimon Peres. "We are not slaves!" Arafat shouted. Moments later he was reached on the telephone by Dennis Ross, the State Department's "coordinator" in charge of the Middle East peace process. "If you don't sign now," Ross was reported to have said, "you don't get the $100 million"--a reference to America's yearly pledge toward Palestinian development projects in the West Bank. Arafat signed, and the protests in Hebron continued.

            As a negotiating turn, this was not unusual. Without maps of their own, without the requisite detailed knowledge of the facts or figures possessed by the Israelis, without a firm commitment to principle, the Palestinian negotiators have consistently yielded to Israeli and American pressures. What Palestinians have got in the latest agreement, initialed in Taba, Egypt, is a series of municipal responsibilities in bantustans dominated from the outside by Israel. What Israel has got is official Palestinian consent to continued occupation.
            ...
            These two communities must seen as equal to each other
            in rights and expectations; only from such a beginning can
            justice then proceed. This IS not where Oslo I or Oslo I1 began; nor will they lead to a just settlement. The peace process as now understood is a process with no true peace at all. In I's present form, I am convinced, It will not stand the test of time; it must be completely rethought and put on a fairer course. I urge fellow Palestinians, Arabs, Israelis, Europeans and Americans not to flinch from the unpalatable truth and to demand a reckoning from the unscrupulous leaders who have lied about the facts and tampered with the lives of far too many decent people.

          •  yes (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Portlaw, bananapouch1

            and the man who killed him is in prison and receives 1000's of letters and marriage offers.  

            It's very sad, if Rabin had not been killed and with him the peace process, so much would be different today.  

            And we'd think, wow, there was so much that could have gone wrong and didn't, rather than wow, it wasn't just a missed opportunity, there was no leader who would take up that cause, and so the loss of Rabin was the forever loss of peace.  

            And they are all paying for it, the Palestinians in poverty and danger, and the Israelis in the loss of personal freedom and the loss of any possibility of living in prosperity with their neighbors.  

            there are no winners, the are just bigger losers.

            plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

            by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 02:17:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  There's a distinction between Israeli government (0+ / 0-)

      and the Israeli left. This diary seems to be about the latter.

      The right wing has always been expansionist and militaristic, but the Israeli left has not.  The notion that the left is surrendering to the right on this point would be very bad news for everyone indeed.

  •  Reads like a desperate attempt to remain relevant. (10+ / 0-)

    The Israeli Left is dead. Rather than admit it, Shlomo Avinri does the old standby of blaming the victim.

    "On no... it's not our fault the Peace Process failed, it was those Palestinians! The Settlements, land seizures, indefinite arrests, etc. that the Israeli Left was completely helpless to stop had nothing to do with Palestinian Terrorism!

    We are still capable! We are still a Force! It's simply the Palestinians who failed! As proof, I offer a semantic reading of this document nobody takes seriously!"

    LOL

  •  I've seen some discussion recently about (7+ / 0-)

    Israel accepting 'half a loaf' in 1948, and about Palestine just declaring a state now and working out the borders later.

    So what's the problem with accepting the half a loaf of "two states" instead of "two states for two peoples" and then working out the "people" part later?

    The world is bad enough as it is, you have no right to make it any worse.
    Lamb chop, we can quibble what to call it, but I think we can both agree it's creepy.

    by InAntalya on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 08:17:19 AM PDT

    •  i don't think the 'working out the people part (6+ / 0-)

      later' works....

      honestly I don't think anything works.

      I think the whole thing is going to turn into a 3rd intifada, caught up in the broader context of the Arab Spring, and that all bets are off as to what the hell the M.E. looks like in 10 years.

      I lived in Jerusalem in 1995--before Rabin was killed.  There was hope then--a  LOT of resistance of course but some hope.

      I don't see a damn thing now.

      •  (i use the Arab Spring term a bit ironically (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MikeCA, InAntalya

        I'm not using it to connote the 2011 optimism--but the general upheaval)

        •  the kidnapping (0+ / 0-)

          gave Bibi an excuse to foray into bombing again, he thinks he has to do that every few years, to degrade the opposition, as if they had any real ability to harm Israel.  

          what happens always is after a while the population has tasted enough blood and they settle down, and then it's back to keeping the occupied 'living' in abject poverty and making daily life hell for them. You have to go to Africa to find lower standards of living.  

          plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

          by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 02:22:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  further: nothing works because neither group in (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      InAntalya, happymisanthropy

      power have anything to gain from a peace settlement.

    •  Well (5+ / 0-)

      Well, the Palestinians already had a quarter of a loaf. Let's imagine, if you will, that the government in Gaza were to decide that they were not going to spend another dime on weapons - that they weren't going to use their concrete to build attack tunnels under the boarder. That they were simply going to focus on improving the lives of their people and building up the economy. And after five years of no attacks from Gaza, the Israeli opinion would start to shift and think that perhaps it was worth trying for a similar situation on the West Bank. As it is now, all the can imagine is rockets being launched from the Judean highlands down onto their coastal cities and international airport.

      Good girls shop. Bad girls shop. Shoppin', shoppin' from A to Z!

      by Zornorph on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 08:55:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This idea that attacks from Gaza (5+ / 0-)

        are the sole problem and it is up to the Palestinians alone to ignore the continuous provocations and expansions of Israel is absurd. Where is the Israeli Mandela, that is the question.

        No War but Class War

        by AoT on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 10:18:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Where is Israel 'expanding' into Gaza? (0+ / 0-)
          •  right after the kidnappings (0+ / 0-)

            the army broke the peace agreement and people were killed while they arrested Hamas leaders.  Then the bodies were found, and the Palestinian teen was burned alive, and then the Army started bombing, but the start was the kidnapping, as if that had been a Hamas act, and not just some lone creeps who may or may not have belonged to Hamas. Israel doesn't claim they were behind burning the 14-year old, but they claim Hamas was behind the kidnapping, and that's when it started, as if the kidnapping were breaking the peace agreement.

            Forty-four people were killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in 2013. The vast majority of them (38) were Palestinian, six were Israeli. Five of the Palestinians were minors and one was a woman. The youngest was two years old, the oldest was 61. Some were actively involved in hostilities or were members of armed groups and armies, others were civilians who were uninvolved in hostilities.

            http://972mag.com/...

            The ostensible kidnapping of three Israeli settlers in the southern West Bank this week, presumably at the hands of Palestinian militants, seems to have driven the Israeli political-security establishment over the edge.
            Perplexed, even hysterical, reactions by Israeli political leaders and army commanders were noted in the past few days.

            Tens of thousands of Israeli soldiers were deployed in several parts of the West Bank in a seemingly futile effort to locate the kidnapped young soldiers.

            The crème de la crème of the Israeli intelligence community as well as the best technology money could buy are being employed in a race against time to find the kidnapped settlers, but so far to no avail.

            The Israeli army has also rounded up as many as 80 Palestinian community leaders associated with the “Islamic current,” especially Hamas. The detainees include university professors, lawmakers and religious leaders.

            More arrests are expected in the next few days.

            http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/...

            plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

            by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 02:45:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wait, what? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bananapouch1, DeeDee001

              After Hamas kidnapped and killed three children, Israel was the one who "broke the peace"?

              You conveniently 'forgot' to mention the hundreds of missiles fired at Israeli civilians from Gaza, btw, each one an individual war crime by any standard, in your timeline.

              You're welcome, for reminding you of that.

              Wow, your links are totally not completely laughably biased in any way...

              Also, btw, I'll ask again - where is Israel 'expanding' into Gaza?

              •  you conveniently forget that they re-invaded (0+ / 0-)

                right after the kidnappings and arrested hundreds of Hamas leaders. When leaders are gone, who's to stop the missiles?  

                plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 03:26:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  "Invaded" what? (0+ / 0-)

                  You do realize that Gaza is not the same territory as Judea and Samaria, right?

                  Would you like to see a map?

                  Thank you for adding one more piece of blatant ignorance to your resume, though.

                  If you don't know what you're talking about, sometimes it's okay to just bow out of any given discussion, for the record.

                  •  a personal attack on me? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT

                    watch it buster, I didn't call you names.

                    The legal right to invade, that's what you're saying?  As far as I know neither Judea nor Samaria are on the map?

                    Settlers were kidnapped, and obviously not in Gaza. But Gaza was invaded because the settlers were kidnapped. Hamas leaders were arrested in Gaza. The missiles are coming from Gaza. They're being shot down with our weapons systems.  

                    If some of this isn't factual correct me, don't insult me.

                    plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                    by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 03:44:40 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Nope. (0+ / 0-)

                      No personal attack at all. I am simply pointing out the obvious fact that you clearly know nothing about which you speak.

                      And you continue to demonstrate your ignorance in this comment.

                      You're adding hate and bigotry to your resume, as well.

                      For the record, two of the boys kidnapped and murdered lived in Israel, proper, and were not 'evil settlers.'  But even if all three Jewish boys were living where you don't think they should have, would that have been okay then?

                      Watch it yourself, buster.

                      You may be okay on Daily Kos, but you're treading in some really disgusting territory yourself.

                      •  obvious personal facts (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        AoT

                        they were kidnapped from settlements, so what if two of them didn't live permanently on settlements. Hamas was blamed and Gaza was invaded.  

                        correct my facts.  

                        plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                        by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 04:03:30 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I've already corrected your so-called 'facts.' (0+ / 0-)

                          And you haven't answered my question.  Is it alright to murder Jews who do not live in places you approve of?

                          •  it's not okay to murder anyone (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            it's not okay to turn a crime into an excuse to bomb and invade.  Neither is okay.

                            So, what do you disagree with? hamas wasn't blamed? a few thousand soldiers didn't go to Gaza to search for them without any idea of where they really were, and in the process to arrest hundreds of Hamas leaders. That that wasn't a violation of the peace accord, the violation was only after that, when some rockets were lobbed at Israel and shot down by our missile defense system?

                            It was a crime, and it ought to have been treated as a crime, like any other awful crime.  It was not a state sanctioned excuse to call for revenge against an entire people, any more than the burning alive of a 14-year old was a reason to take revenge on all Israelis.  

                            plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                            by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 04:11:33 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I disagree with... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...your cartoonish portrayal of perpetual Israeli villainy.

                            A few thousand soldiers went into Gaza?  Seriously?  Do you have links to back up this fantastic claim which runs against every partial-ounce of reality?

                            Yeah, I know.  To people like you, 'peace' is only violated when Jews finally shoot back against the hundreds of individual Hamas war crimes in the form of rockets fired at Israeli civilians.

                            When you use phrases like "our missile defense system," you're not doing yourself any favors.  You are obviously not an Israeli, so I'm going to assume you are engaging in borderline rhetoric of a very unhelpful nature.

                            Btw, would you prefer that terrorist missiles fired at Israeli civilians not be shot down?

                            That doesn't sound very peaceful to me, anna shane.

                            And once again, I'll note that you haven't answered as to whether you feel it is alright to murder Jews who do not live in places you approve of?

                          •  you've got me mixed up with someone else (0+ / 0-)

                            the USA and Israel cooperate on defense systems, which is why Israel has the state of the art.  And they test them for us. I don't have a problem with that.

                            I gave you that link, you didn't look at it.  It's not disputed.

                            Why would you think that I think it's okay to murder anyone, where do you get those notions?  And I did answer it, I said no, it isn't right.

                            plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                            by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 04:26:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, I don't. (0+ / 0-)

                            And thanks for backing down on all of your previous outrageous claims, and proving me right.  Have a nice night.

                          •  I didn't make any outrageous claims (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            what are you talking about.

                            I used to live in Israel, my ex-husband still lives there, and both of us dislike Bibi's policies and the racism that has taken hold.  I support the state of Israel.  I don't like at all what they are doing. I think there should be one state, everyone equal under the law with the exception of immigration policy - no right of return and no Jew turned away.

                            plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                            by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 04:42:28 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  here is the problem (0+ / 0-)

                you think the kidnappings were from Hamas, and not by kidnappers/murderers.  That is not only pure supposition, it's nuts, that's the last thing they'd do. It's an invitation for disproportionate retaliation.  And a shameful act of cowardice that flies in the face of their self-perception of 'manly' resistance.  

                no one accused the Israeli government of being behind the burning of the teenager.

                That is your problem, it's that assumption.  Challenge it.

                plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 04:48:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Gaza and the West Bank are not separate (0+ / 0-)

            political entities. Israel makes this clear by invading or bombing one for the actions of the other. And vice versa, except the invasion part, obviously.

            No War but Class War

            by AoT on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 06:50:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  From your lips ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JayinPortland
      •  Yeah and Israel will stop expanding Settlements... (0+ / 0-)

        which it has NEVER done even when Palestinians stopped attacking for over 2 years.

    •  We could leave that for later. (0+ / 0-)

      If the borders were close to the pre-1967 lines, then of course Israel would remain majority Jewish, and the new Palestine would be almost only Arab. The entire debate over whether to recognize Israel as a Jewish states seems pointless to me.

  •  It's also rank historical revisionism, (13+ / 0-)

    By the point of Oslo, some 44% of Palestinians, ( up from 7% a decade earlier) had given up on The Two State Solution, on the basis of the belief that Israel, would never allow the existence of a Palestinian State.

    Oslo was the last kick at the can, and Israel brought nothing to the table, and shortly after, Sharon pickled the Two State Solution in formaldehyde.

    Aviniri wrote about this many times in the 80's and  90's.

    What we are probably witnessing, is the start of a Propaganda influence campaign, for the Israeli left, that will follow the following pattern

    " Well we tried, sure we made some mistakes, but we are only human, ........but the Palistinians have never wanted the Two State Solution",....

    "So the One State Solution is the only remaining Possibility",....

    "But look at what they have done, we can't live with the Palestinians,",.....

    "So it's not our fault, we tried everything, (except land for peace), to the best of out abilities, (said some words that one time ), there are no other options,".......

    "Transfer".

    •  Wow... That is really dark. I hope that the pre... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      anna shane, MikeCA

      Wow... That is really dark. I hope that the prediction that you (JayF) laid out doesn't come to pass. I don't know how we in the USA can reset this view to something more optimistic that we as Americans would consider just, but it would help if we could take the mic from the Adelson/AIPACs and hand it to the Tikkuns, so the Israelis hear a progressive msg from the USA.

      •  I have been watching and reading for a long time, (4+ / 0-)

        And have seen how The Left moves from the left, rightward, and studied how this mechanism happens , in Europe, the America's and the ROW.

        The pattern is always the same.

        Defeat and disempowerment, often caused by compromise on basic principals, is turned into disparity and eventually acceptance by the Intellectual Left, and then a shift rightward is sold as pragmatism.

        " Globalisation is a fact, so we must accept this and move on",... Yada, yada, yada and after a decade of that Left Parties are signing FTA's with out even blinking.

        It's the same way the Left was sold the Wall, Collective Punishment, pre-emptive wars, the Beduin, the list goes on and on.

        Nary a call for revolution, never a note that some principals and ideals cannot be compromised,

        Other than by a tiny, tiny minority, who as the Left moves right, become harder and harder to hear.

  •  Two states for two peoples (0+ / 0-)

    would lead directly to the ethnic cleansing of both territories. In the case of the Israeli settlers in the OPTs, that would likely be grudging tho complied with.

    In the case of the non-Jewish citizens of Israel, it would mean forcible removal to a manufactured "homeland". In other words, Grand Apartheid in action.

    "Come to Sochi, visit the gay clubs and play with the bears" - NOT a Russian advertising slogan.

    by Lib Dem FoP on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 08:35:50 AM PDT

    •  You might be correct (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jersey Jon

      ...minorities exist in Israel for the past seventy or so years. On the flip side, Israelis had to vacate Gaza and there is an expectation that this would happen again in a future Palestinian state.

      •  Sharon chose to evacuate Gaza's, (4+ / 0-)

        He did not "have" to evacuate Gaza.

        Sharon did some very practical math in regards to Gaza.

        9,000 Settlers in 21 small settlements in Gaza, required the deployment of 25,000 IDF and Police, and $2.8 billion dollars in subsidies, annually, to exist.

        In order to support the scattered Settlements, large amounts of infrastructure had been created and maintained, and like poor oppressed people everywhere, Palestinians had learned to take advantage of that fact.

        Keeping the settlements open meant that the border could not be sealed, there could be no blockaide and seige of Gaza, as the settlers still needed food, water, gas, electricity, and to commute to work in Israel,

        And the settlements, their supply lines and security requirements left strategic, tactical and political vulnerabilities for the State of Israel in any conflict with the Gazan's.

        For a one time cost of $360 million, most of which has not been paid out in compensation,

        Gaza could be turned back into what it was always supposed to be, the worlds largest concentration camp.

        •  Don't forget that Egypt controls Rafah. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jersey Jon

          Also, what's the problem with the Palestinians allowing Jews to live within their future borders?

          Hamas and similar organizations just can't seem to build their national institutions. They should give it a try rather than continuing a seventy year conflict.  

          •  Maybe because the IDF keeps bombing said... (0+ / 0-)

            institutions?

            Also... hard to build anything when Israel controls your tax receipts.

          •  So, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Johnny Q

            Has Egypt any interest in a viable Gazan economy or a viable Palistinian state?

            Are there treaties and trade agreements between Israel and Egypt that constrain and restrict Egypt 's control of Gazan border crossings into Egypt?

            Are US Egyptian Arms deals contingent on Egypt's cooperation with Israel, 'cause it's pretty clear they have nothing to do with Democracy.

            One of the most charming features of radicalized, hysterial, Religo/nationalist States, is they always require an enemy, internal, to explain why the policies are failing, and external.

            Other than North Korea, which has managed barely to survive it's self imposed isolation,

            The other historic examples have always gone down in an orgy of blood, either by picking wars they cannot win, (and there really is nobody that Israel can go to war with),

            But more often, collapse as purge after purge of the internal enemy , people not "-------" reduced the State and Society to a Year Zero.

            Rabin was not the first, nor will he be the last.

            Just a casual reading of Israeli news an Op Eds shows that that there are no shortage of Israeli' and Jews that are not Israeli and Jewish enough.

            It has been very interesting to watch Israel go from a theoretical exemplar, to a cautionary example.

            •  It's not so complicated. (0+ / 0-)
              •  your comment explains a lot (0+ / 0-)
                •  Simplicity (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Jersey Jon

                  1. Do you really think el-Sisi gives a shit about Hamas? Pleaseee.
                  2.  Oh and the Salafists after their Sinai games with the Egyptians. Another Hamas ally that is not going to bring smiles to the Egyptian leadership.
                  3.  Israel? We'll, I don't think they went into this to kill innocents. Hamas is a trouble maker and the last thing Israelis wanted is to be dragged into a pissing match. But, once it started, Israel needed to protect its deference capability.  

                  I think Israelis would rather be doing something else than  bomb Gaza.

                  My question to you is; why are people willing to march against Israel's actions in Gaza but are unwilling to march for Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians?

                  •  Hamas was courted by the Brotherhood (0+ / 0-)

                    Who promised an easing of the Blockaide, but they were betrayed by the Brotherhood and now that the Generals are back in charge, are as hosed as Egyptian Democracy or Al Jazeera reporters.

                    The Sinai radicals and the remnants of the Brotherhood are their only lifeline,

                    I remember millions marching for the Iraqi's and against the war, some of them must have been there just for the Iraqi's because I remember the marches against the Sanctions,

                    But now, which Iraqi's? Most of the secular, moderate democratic Iraqi idealists were slaughtered between 2003 and 2008, the rest are keeping their heads down either in Iraq or in exile in the Gulf and Iran, some made the serious mistake of fleeing to the one country with open doors, Syria.

                    Which Syrians? Al Nusra, ISIS?

                    The Assad Regime, or the nonexistent FSA and SNC?

                    There was a lot of demonstrations for the Persian Spring, but a combo of demographics, Regime repression and ham handed geopolitical moves by our ImperialLeaders made it pretty clear that the best thing we could do for them, was not get them needlessly killed.

                    •  Pretty depressing. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Jersey Jon

                      Did you ck out this week's Economist. Your comments reminded me of it.

                      The Arab world needs to figure out how to put its shit in order. Whether it be the Gulf nations with their wealth or the depots in Syria, Egypt and the rest. Iran is not Arab but is totally screwed up.  Tunisia is the only fledgling democracy.

                      Nothing will change until they all find away to move away from their past. Good luck to them.

                      •  Since the end of WWII, (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        MikeCA

                        There has been far too much outside interest and interference in who is ruling where, in the Arab World, for "the Arabs" to get their house in order.

                        Look at the Syrian Spring. the Assad Regime, basically frozen in time by the Cold War and our support for Israel,

                        (Sent troops to fight and die in the Gulf War on "our" behalf, didn't even get an attaboy, stabilized Lebanon at our request, got condemned for it for a decade, tortured guys for us during GWOT),

                        Starts liberalizing, easing travel, press restrictions but mostly the economy and corruption.

                        Window seen, big probono confrence in Lebanon, 450 Syrian anti-Assad activists show up, 2 full weeks of training by the IRI on protests, communications security, incitements,

                        Three months later, the public protests start, don't even last a month before the cops kill 20 some protestors and the protestors kill some 7 cops,

                        Or the protestors kill seven cops and the cops kill some 20 some protestors,

                        Downtown gets trashed and burned by the rioters,

                        The Assad Government makes further concessions, protests ramp up and become more and more violent to the point where it is an arbitrary call when the protests stopped and the Civil War began.

                        Of course, hard questions are never asked, like how does a supposedly secular, moderate, democratic activist become a devout, fundi, heart eating Jihadist, in less time than it takes to read the first 10 sura's of the Quran?

                        Speed reading? books on tape?

                        "The Arab's" will get their house in order, about 50 years after the oil and gas is gone, the trade routes are irrelevant and "The Rods From God" have made ground based military bases obsolete.

        •  Wait a second... (0+ / 0-)

          Gaza was not meant to be blockaded in 2005. That happened after Hamas seized power in 2007.

          •  Israel first closed the Gaza border (0+ / 0-)

            And cut off the flow of goods into Gaza during the unrest of 1976.

            From 1975 to 1994, Israel closed the border, 217 times for periods ranging from 2 days to four and a half months.

            The Gaza Wall was built in 1994 and the crossings reduced to 5.

            None of these actions were accidental.

            •  Ok, it may have started earlier (0+ / 0-)

              But Israel does not need to have open borders with Gaza anymore than the US needs to open its border with Mexico.

              •  There is of course a difference between (0+ / 0-)

                Open borders, regulated borders and blockaides.

                According to the UN Commission, since 2009, Israel has allowed into Gaza only 2/3rds of the required imported food for a minimal survival diet, less than 1/3 of the material required to rebuild Gaza let alone house, school, employ and provide services to it's growing population, malnutrition is endemic, medical services at the best of times are inadequate and social services are strained.

                The Sanctions against Iraq is one of the cruelest, most inhumane, cynical actions in the postwar history, and will go down as one of the crimes of the century.

                It is also one of the most unproductive and counterproductive.  

                Of course, Israel must then copy it.

      •  they've existed for multiple generations (0+ / 0-)

        not just the past 70 or so years.  

        plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

        by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 02:47:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Isn't that precisely what started this mess (3+ / 0-)

      was the cleasning of Israel  proper in the 1940s?  A few Palestinians were left, but they are dwarfed by the number who were expelled.   We started off with Grand Apartheid, and now nearly seventy years later we are all still trying to clean up that mess.

    •  Care to back this accusation up with any facts? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DeeDee001, Jersey Jon

      Israel's current population is roughly 25% non-Jewish, and has always had a significant non-Jewish minority since its establishment in 1948.

      If Israel intended to engage in "ethnic cleansing," it is clearly the most incompetent ethnic cleanser of all time.

      Not to mention that half of Israel's Jewish population descends from the Arab nations from which the Mizrahim were actually ethnically cleansed.

      Israel did, however, forcibly remove those of one certain ethnicity from an area in the recent past.  When the IDF removed all remaining Jews from Gaza upon disengagement under Ariel Sharon in 2005.

      You can have your own opinions, but you can not have your own facts.

      •  it's a worry for them (0+ / 0-)

        it's a emigration worry and a not enough new babies worry.  and Arabs do lose their Israeli citizenship and are exported for various 'legal' reasons.  

        but that is the real debate, can there be any modern state that is based on ethnicity or religion.  It's by definition racist. And the only reason is that the Jews needed a safe place, which is why I back the state of Israel, and don't mind that it's by law a Jewish state.  

        As a Jewish state, I believe there is still a requirement to treat everyone the same under the law.  That's where I have the differences.  

        I don't mind one state, and all Palestinians being full citizens with full rights and yet the state being Jewish, and as such always a refuge for any Jew who needs protection. Only legal immigration for Jews is fine with me, but in that way only may there be differences. That removes right of return, and makes sure that the state remains the Jewish homeland.  

        plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

        by anna shane on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 03:57:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's not supposed to be that. (0+ / 0-)

      No Israeli Arabs will ever get forced out of their homes or stripped of  their citizenship.

      In theory the settlers could remain under Palestinian rule, but this is a little hard to imagine given their tensions.

  •  Did I misinterpret something? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MikeCA, Toyotabob7

    It seemed like sometime during the Clinton presidency the Holy Land was finally making real progress toward a lasting solution just as Northern Ireland was.  What happened?  Even though I absolutely support their right to exist and defend themselves I also feel like Israel is the side not taking this seriously.  Do they like living under constant threat?

    •  Clinton blamed much on Arafat. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      anna shane
      •  Isreal was unwilling to give land for peace, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Claudius Bombarnac, anna shane

        While at the time, the MSM was selling hope, alternate media was pointing out that what was offered on the table, would never be accepted,

        And that the whole process was more a cynical "legacy stunt" for the President, than an actual, hard attempt at making peace.

        Afterwards, somebody had to be blamed for the failure, and it sure wasn't going to be the US or Israel.

        Immediately after, the Third Demonization of Arafat began,

    •  The Oslo Agreement was a conservative solution (0+ / 0-)

      i.e. merely partitioned the land and left the identity of each side intact and protected.  The conservative nature of this bargain was its defect; it left the ultrarightists on both sides a veto and they destroyed it.

      It's my belief that I/P will stay in this holding pattern state of on-again off-again warfare and atrocity until the larger Middle East regional problem resolves.  First the regime in Iran needs to fall and its dependencies in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon follow.  At which point the Sunni monarchies are out of political rationale and also start to crumble away rapidly.

      By then I/P will be quite thoroughly cantonized.  As "impossible" as both sides declare it now, there will need to be a liberal solution- a modus vivendi created (some X State solution, which all sides will regard as transient and fraudulent) and inevitable to it a process of assimilation and intermarriage.  One of the things ultrarightists on both sides in I/P hated obsessively in that brief period of detente after the Oslo Accords was how quickly and some ways easily Israeli and Palestinian young people were to mingle.

      Actual integration is, of course, going to be difficult and messy and weird.  It's not quite socially or politically imaginable today.  There are lot of confounders in the form of class, wealth, education, traumas, ideological commitments, justice for crimes committed, compensations, etc.  But when these wear down, the central issue is going to be the status of Judaism.

      And that's why I stay out of 99% of I/P diary threads.  The day to day battles and atrocity are exciting and engrossing but imho until things change in Teheran it'll remain a dreadful stalemate.

      •  You sound like a neocon... (0+ / 0-)

        ...blaming Iran for everything.  I wish when Khatami was President and extended the olive branch we had reached back, but we couldn't kick the demonization habit.  I'm not sure I would call Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon dependencies as they have often counted Iran as an enemy.  I also not sure why you want the monarchies to fall as those seem to be the countries I worry about the least these days.

        •  I'm not blaming anyone (0+ / 0-)

          It's just how I see the order in which the dominos fall of necessity.

          Does everyone on I/P threads try to pick gratuitous fights about extraneous details?  I haven't been in one in probably five years and you're reminding me why that is.

    •  The Likudnik Israelis killed Rabin. (0+ / 0-)

      Things haven't been the same since.

      You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

      by Johnny Q on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 03:41:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Slomo Avineri is and always has been (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MikeCA

    a very smart and reasonable person.

    Thanks to the diarist for sharing this.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site