In the wake of the recent upsurge of violence in Palestine-Israel, the US-based Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) is pitching an open letter under the heading "End the bombing. End the occupation." The pitch links to JVP's "July 9 statement on the roots of the recent escalation". Advocates of justice and peace would do well to steer clear of JVP.
As the Rev. William Sloane Coffin said: "Every prophet has realized that nobody loves you for being the enemy of their illusions. Every prophet has realized that most of us want peace at any price as long as the peace is ours and somebody else pays the price." As reflected in their rhetoric and actions, JVP wants peace at the expense of Palestinians.
The July 9th statement was authored by JVP Executive Director Rebecca Vilkomerson. In it she claims: "To end violence - and truly mourn its victims - we must acknowledge, and challenge the root causes beneath it. The occupation, with US military and financial support, is the root cause." JVP's position is that "the occupation" refers only to territory captured by Israeli forces in the 1967 war.
For nineteen years, from 1948 until 1967, Israel did not control East Jerusalem, Gaza, or the West Bank. So, what then was the "root cause" of the assassination of UN envoy Folke Bernadotte by Jewish terrorists, Israel's "border wars" in the 1940s and 1950s, the Lavon affair, the Suez crisis, and the 1967 war? Hint: it wasn't "the occupation" as JVP defines it.
The root cause of the conflict in Palestine-Israel is the creation and maintenance by force of a Jewish state in a territory with a non-Jewish majority. This resulted in the displacement of what is now more than five million Palestinian refugees from 1948 alone. The only real solution for the conflict will be the dismantling of the Jewish apartheid state and its replacement by one state in all of Palestine with equal rights for all of its citizens and the return of those refugees who chose to return.
Responding to criticism of JVP and the assertion that "You're just whistling past the freshly dug graves if you think the 'two-state' delusion will solve anything" by a member of Veterans For Peace (VFP), a member of that organization's national board of directors weighed-in. Gordon's (not his real name) comments illuminate the problems within the American peace movement on the subject of Israel.
Concerning "two-state vs. one-state solutions," Gordon asserts, that is "something that has not yet been resolved among Palestinians. That is why VFP calls for Palestinian self-determination." In light of my twelve years of experience as a member, VFP hides behind the fig leaf of Palestinian "self-determination" to avoid supporting a one-state solution because, collectively, its leaders and members—not all of them, of course—are too afraid, ignorant, unprincipled, or defeated to confront the Left Zionists* in our midst and the larger peace movement.
After a brief delay, Western supporters of the South African anti-apartheid movement quickly rejected the White apartheid regime's own version of a two-state solution. There was nothing like the dithering we see now in the peace movement concerning Palestine. Justice and peace advocates rapidly coalesced around the idea of one democratic state in South Africa with equality for all of its citizens despite the fact that a significant minority of Black South Africans, led by Buthelezi, accepted a pseudo-statelet offered to them by the apartheid regime.
The idea that "two-state vs. one-state solutions" is "something that has not yet been resolved among Palestinians" is dubious, at best. There are millions of Palestinians and you will seldom if ever get unanimity in any large population. Nevertheless, all the recent scientific polls of Palestinian public opinion I am aware of demonstrate that a solid majority of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza (WBG) support a one-state solution.
A 2008 scientific poll conducted by the Palestine-based Arab World for Research and Development (AWRAD), under the supervision of Colin Irwin, and commissioned by the astroturf OneVoice Movement, which supports a two-state solution, found that the "final status" option that WBG Palestinians most strongly support (82%) is "Historic Palestine – From the Jordanian river to the sea". A 2010 scientific poll conducted by AWRAD found that 91% of Palestinians in the WBG say that "historic Palestine—from the Jordan River to the sea—as the national homeland of the Palestinians is essential or desirable" as the "final status" outcome of any peace agreement.† A 2011 scientific poll conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for the US-based Israel Project found that only 30% of Palestinians in the WBG accept "permanently a two-state solution with one homeland for the Palestinian people living side-by-side with Israel, a homeland for the Jewish people" while 66% agreed that the "real goal ... should be ... one Palestinian state" in all of Palestine.
More recently, a June 2014 scientific poll of WBG Palestinians conducted by "a leading Palestinian pollster" for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that "a clear majority (60% overall, including 55% in the West Bank and 68% in Gaza) say that the five-year goal 'should be to work toward reclaiming all of historic Palestine, from the river to the sea' " and "Nearly two-thirds said 'resistance should continue until all of historic Palestine is liberated.' " Only "one-third said that a two-state solution 'should be the end of the conflict.' "
These polling results are remarkable considering the tremendous pressure placed on Palestinians to accept Israel's existence as a Jewish state and the fact that the Palestinian Authority has publicly committed itself to a two-state solution. However, the breadth and depth of Palestinian resistance to accepting Israel's existence is reflected elsewhere. Specifically, the Palestinian National Charter of 1964 clearly says: "Palestine is an Arab homeland" and "Palestine, with its boundaries at the time of the British Mandate, is a indivisible territorial unit". It also says:
The partitioning of Palestine, which took place in 1947, and the establishment of Israel are illegal and null and void, regardless of the loss of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right to its homeland, and were in violation of the basic principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, foremost among which is the right to self-determination. [emphasis added]
To the dismay of many a two-stater
the Charter has never been amended to remove its claim on all of Palestine as the Palestinian homeland. Zionists clearly understand that
the Charter is an "accurate reflection of what Palestinians want"—one state in all of historic Palestine. Generally, the US peace movement is negligently or willfully blind to this or simply too cowardly to reflect the will of Palestinians in its positions and work.
Despite what the Israeli-US puppet regime in Ramallah may say, if Palestinians actually living in Palestine were free to exercise their right of self-determination then there would already be one state in all of Palestine. Undoubtedly, if many peace organizations such as VFP would grow a backbone, get some principles, and get off the fence then open Palestinian support for a one-state solution would be even stronger. Instead, we waffle out of ignorance, cowardice, and to placate supporters of Israel within the peace movement, such as JVP.
However, to give credit where credit is due, JVP is correct when they say: "the crisis in Israel and Palestine is rooted in the idea that Jewish lives matter more than Palestinian lives." The problem is that they do not extend that logic to the pre-1967 occupation of Palestine thus consigning themselves to a role as shills for Jewish supremacy in the 78% of Palestine forcibly seized in 1948.
Notes
* "Zionist" is sometimes taken to be an epithet. It is used here as a descriptive term. Zionism is simply an ideology that supports the creation and maintenance of a Jewish state in Palestine. One distinction between Left and Right Zionists is that you will seldom find a Right Zionist criticizing or calling for an end to the Israeli occupation of the territories captured in 1967. For an article on Zionism in The Encyclopedia of Race and Racism click here.
† AWRAD apparently stopped asking this question after 2010 perhaps because its result were problematic for the Palestinian Authority, which like AWRAD, is based in Ramallah.
See also: "JVP's Peace Malpractice"