Yossi Beilin, who needs no introduction, says A one-state solution is deranged. But no where in his article does he say why other than to say :No joint Israeli-Palestinian state will come to be as long as the Israeli government is headed by a Zionist leader. Any such leader will prevent a situation in which a Jewish minority rules over a Palestinian majority.”
But what I found interesting is this comment:
-
During my visit to Washington, D.C. last week, I was asked, seriously for the first time, for my opinion on the one-state solution as opposed to the two-state solution. When I respond that it is an inane idea, I am told that it is being raised by increasingly serious actors and figures in the arena, particularly from the Palestinian side, but also from the Israeli side. The interesting thing, say the people I spoke with, is that it is being raised by speakers from the Israeli Right as well as the Left, and by people from the mainstream of the Palestinian leadership. These people claim that Netanyahu is unwilling to pay the price of peace, and that Abbas cannot speak for Gaza. Neither of them is keen on interim arrangements, and therefore bestowing full rights and citizenship upon the Palestinians is the most practical solution.
This is good news. So not only are Israelis talking about it, Washington is listening.
Beilin doesn’t mention at all that annexing Judea and Samaria would result in a 2:1 Jewish majority and if Gaza were included it would result in a 1.5:1 Jewish majority. But many of us on the Right are not so quick as to give the Palestinians citizenship.
Ron Breiman writes that to call for negotiations for a two state solution is wrong headed as it pre-determines the outcome. Better to have all possibilities on the table. Furthermore he writes:
-
There are some who are scared of a demographic threat, claiming that if we don’t withdraw from our land there will soon be an Arab majority west of the Jordan River. However, it is precisely for this reason that supporters of a Palestinian state should ensure that such a state won’t absorb Arab refugees, who would cause there to be an Arab majority west of the Jordan River.
I share this position. Even if we were to agree to create a Palestinian state, it should conditioned on no refugees being allowed to return to Palestine. Imagine if one million refugees came back to Palestine and they all crashed the security fence in order to return to Israel, how could we get rid of them?
A one-state solution should be very appealing to the Americans. There would be no need to divide Jerusalem, set ’67 lines as borders or uproot 150,000 Jews.
@ yamit82:
Thank you. Yamit, for the beautiful video about birds in Israel. I knew it was a migratory route, but I never suspected that more than 500 million flew over the country each year. ~~~ I have the “Winged Migration” DVD. It is extremely moving. Even those people who are indifferent to birds must feel much more respect for them after watching their relentless efforts during their migratory flight. There is a scene where some of them stop for a rest at some toxic pond in an industrial part of Eastern Europe, with pipes pouring thick sludge into the water. It is heart breaking.~~~ Our own Tar Sands tailing ponds kill tens of thousands of migratory birds.
CuriousAmerican Said:
We are not here because of the San Remo document.
We are here because of the first Rashi commentary on the Torah.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Civil rights for you Americans are those rights contained in the Bill of rights to the constitution of the USA.
Most countries have either none, few or some similar rights but none on a one for one basis that defines civil rights and political rights exactly as does America.
No country ever came into existence peacefully without those entities indigenous or foreign asserting superior power over the other. Most countries that came into existence since the end of WWl and WW2 were artificial creations of the dominant powers of their time. One as a result of the defeat of the Ottomans and the other with the breakdown and breakup of colonial powers.
America came into power through rebellion and revolution, extended her geography through conquest using manifest destiny as their ideological excuse. Along the way they decimated the indigenous populations to the extent that by today’s morality it would be considered genocide.
The french murdered millions in North Africa and Indo-China and the British Millions from south Africa to China in the Opium wars. They ravished India and Afghanistan and stole everything they could from their African colonies while enslaving millions of Black Africans.
All of Asia and Europe are the consequence of hundreds if not thousands of years of internecine tribal wars.
To the strongest and most powerful go the victory and the spoils and that’s how every nation came into being.
Israel is the only country to be ratified by the whole of the international community first through the League of nations and secondly by the UN.
If Israel had lost it’s war for independence then the the decisions by the League of Nations and the UN would have been meaningless.
Israel exists today not because of political support and the goodwill of a few supporters but because we won 5 wars for survival.
Israel owes more to Stalin and Russia than we do to your USA who expected the Jews to be wiped out by the Arabs especially when Truman placed an embargo on the almost still born Jewish State.
For over a thousand years they Jews lived under theocratic and monarchical rule and it was no worse than the current so called democracy we endure today.
I find it reprehensible even repugnant that those such as you would dare in-light of your own history to have the chutzpa to tell us what we must and should do especially with those who seek to replace us as i type and would murder us all today if they could.
As an American are you suggesting we treat this non people, this invented people with no unique features or history that differentiates them from any other Arab in the region? Should we not trat them as your ancestors treated real unique indigenous peoples in north America?
It’s safe to say America exists today as the wealthiest and most powerful nation in history built on the bones and graves of native Americans and the theft of Southern and Western States from Spain and Mexico.
There is not a nation or people on this planet with the moral right to tell Jews how to behave either to each other or to that artificial nation self-created fiction called Palestinians.
There is only a single reason the Western countries (nominally christian), support the Palis and the creation of an ad-hoc nation. Their hatred of the Jews and what we represent. “Esau hates Jacob” is an immutable Law. Pity most Jews don’t understand what that means.
CuriousAmerican Said:
from wikipedia
I dont see anyone upset about all those other countries without rights and freedoms to citizens, who exclude other religions, transfer and expel populations. Only the Jews feel they have to meet standards that do not apply to to others. As long as the jewish sucker buys into this con the con artist will continue to repeat the con. An intelligent person, or nation, would figure out the conditions they desire and afterwards cite an example in the world today, which is accepted by the community of nations,as a demonstration of the acceptability of the position. A good place to find examples is on the UNHRC 🙂
@ CuriousAmerican:
By all means! They can vote in Jordan or Gaza, two states they already have carved out of our land, so what’s the problem?
“Jewish state has theocratic overtones, and was not in the San Remo document…”
You are such an idiot, like all self-aggrandized anti-Semites.
The Jews can do what they like with what is theirs already, was theirs long before your jihadist friends occupied the land. Who are you to dictate what Israel can and cannot do with their sovereign state, you unctuous ass?
A political right is a civil right, you stupid bastard.
“Jewish state has theocratic overtones, and was not in the San Remo document…”
You are such an idiot, like all self-aggrandized anti-Semites. The Jews can do what they like with what is theirs already, was theirs long before your jihadist friends occupied the land. Who are you to dictate what Israel can and cannot do with their sovereign state, you unctuous ass? A political right is a civil right, you stupid bastard.
@ Canadian Otter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXDeqHSou7s
Canadian Otter Said:
Only for the parasites that would feed off them and the soul snatchers.
CuriousAmerican Said:
All or none. Otherwise it won’t solve our problem.
I COULD MAKE THEM LEAVE WITHOUT MONEY. When I got through with them they would pay me to leave. 😀
CuriousAmerican Said:
does not.
@ CuriousAmerican:
The way I see it is that given all of Israel’s circumstances (size, demographics, place in the world’s esteem, past genocides, present threats of genocide, recurrent terror) the idea of giving blanket citizenship to such a hateful bunch of people is grotesque. And given the trap the world has set for Israel – which includes ridiculous and unrealistic high standards of conduct – Israelis will have to use their wits to maneuver themselves out of it.
Rubin’s plan is such a maneuver. I’m not saying he intends it that way, but that’s how it works. Rubin’s plan has taken the trap into which the world has placed Israel, and turned it upside down. ~~~ He has taken our very own standards for citizenship and applied them to the Palis. Do you want to be an Israeli? Of course, you can, but first you have to prove you want to be a good citizen and accept all the responsibilities that come with it. Simple and fair. Arabs, even the most psychotic and degenerate among them, have their pride and won’t demean themselves to swearing an oath of loyalty to people they hate and despise (pigs and monkeys, they call us). That’s the plan’s beauty.
Regarding paying Arabs to leave, it may be a good investment. It should be done through the private sector. It would save money and Jewish lives in the long term. The package does not have to be generous, as you call it. But Israel has to stop subsidizing Arabs who do not contribute to the community, those with multiple wives, and those who break the law. And stop all that insane affirmative action as well. In any case, as soon as there is a war and Arabs show their true loyalties, they and their families should be repatriated to Jordan, whether they have Israeli citizenship or not. At this time Jordan is Palestine.
Almost perfect. But I would phrase it, a commitment to Israel has the homeland of the Jews, which is what the Balfour Declaration says. Jewish state has theocratic overtones, and was not in the San Remo document, Use Homeland of the Jews.
National Service should be required.
That being said: Otherwise excellent.
But first, try and pay some to leave. No need for an unnecessary demographic bulge.
While the Arabs will not be a majority, an Arab-Suicidal Jewish Left Coalition would be.
So offer much of the young generous relocation packages, including residencies elsewhere.
Pay them to leave.
Civil rights includes the right to vote. Political rights means the right to set up a state.
A person has civil rights in America. She can vote. She cannot set up a competing state, like the Confederacy.
There would be no way to prevent a sovereign palestinian state from allowing whomever they choose to live their country, so hoping refugees wouldn’t come is a non-starter. Even if they agreed beforehand, the palestinians have never honoured any agreement they’ve ever signed with anyone.
If you annex an area the arabs there become residents which means they can move anywhere in Israel. East Jerusalem Arabs who mostly have not taken citizenship but are permanent residents. Some of these people have moved into other mostly Jewish areas of Jerusalem.
This is why you must be careful where you annex. Talk about moving a mass amount of Arabs to elsewhere is not going to happen first because Israelis will not do it!
This is why I say annex Area C which is primarily Israeli Jews.
Areas A&B needs creative solutions for this exclusive Arab population: (1) in which Israel will have security; (2) Part of this above and beyond the IDF remaining is establishing peaceful coexistence with these Arab peoples. For the most part Israelis are not going away and neither are the Palestinians. So we need real workable solutions.
@ Laura:
Yah, me too but lets be realistic!
The world is not going to countenance transfer of Arabs (Jews – no problem, but Arabs – forgetaboutit!).
So let them stay as legal “residents” proclaiming that Israel does not recognize Jordan’s unilateral and illegal termination of the Jordanian citizenship of these Arabs and considers them Jordanian nationals. As alien residents they will be expected to be on their best behavior. Any seditious or anti-Semitic acts, criminality, etc., will have them summarily expelled across the river.
This I submit is doable.
A path to citizenship for PA Arabs by David Rubin – It would include an extensive two-year course in Zionist, Jewish history and good citizenship, culminating in a required oath of loyalty to the Jewish State of Israel, and a 2-3 year commitment of national service to Israel, as performed by other citizens. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/13469
This is one of the best options among second-to-best options. Ideally those Arabs should have been repatriated in 1967. The problem has grown along with the population there. There is no good solution now (unless there is another war). But Rubin’s path to citizenship has many advantages, the main one is that the Arabs themselves will refuse it. Israel will show it is not denying them citizenship but, as in all countries, citizenship comes with obligations and requirements. To Rubin’s plan I would also require a clean police record. If someone is in the business of making bombs or detonating them, or attacking Jews in any way, he would be automatically disqualified.
@ NormanF:
It is also in keeping with binding international law as the Mandate for Palestine only gave the Arabs civil rights while all political rights were given to the Jews.
I do not want a one state solution if it means absorbing the Arab population. I am also against a two-state solution. I am in favor of the only logical solution: Annexation and expelling the arabs from the land.
There is no need to grant the Arabs political rights in the Jewish homeland! Meir Kahane proposed the Arabs be given the status of ger toshav – righteous strangers who have basic human rights and dignity Jews would have to protect. But they would have no say in electing the leadership of the Jewish State or in determining its policies. And it goes without saying any Arab who incited jihad, murdered a Jew or sought the destruction of Israel would be deported from the country.
This is all in keeping with classical Jewish jurisprudence. The Arabs should be treated humanely but that is on the condition of their respecting the fact of Jewish sovereignty in the Land Of Israel. If they don’t feel comfortable with this kind of arrangement, they can move to countries where they will be able to enjoy full citizenship and political rights. Israel is the only homeland of the Jewish people and only the Jewish people can exercise sovereign rights in it.
Israel could spin off of the Swiss process in applying citizenship for Arabs in any annexed territories (Start with Area C ONLY as we could learn from mistakes made here before considering taking all the Arabs in Area A/B).
12 Years needed in country before being allowed to apply for citizenship. The person must be well integrated, familiar with customs and traditions, law abiding, and pose no threat to internal or external security. E.g. learn Hebrew and sign loyalty oath (agreeing to perform national service if drafted for this).
In Areas A/B I suggest an experient of offering a city by city referendum if the city wants to govern their own affairs under a local council/ Mayor. They would be citizens of the city if they agree. The city/emirate would have not military powers. They would have the right to trade with the state of Israel in an economic union.