A "One-State" Solution

[P F Tinmore]

RE: A "One-State" Solution
⁜→ JoeB131, Shusha, et al,

The phrase "National Liberation Movements" (NLMs) is a polite and politically correct way of addressing various grassroots anti-government activities that are normally (but not always) associated with low-intensity asymmetric conflicts over non-self-governing territories and the attempts to implement self-determination. What the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip like to think of as the State of Palestine (SoP), the once fledgling and nascent entity is displaying fewer and fewer signs of future potential.

The SoP is what some might consider as a "front company" for an organized criminal enterprise fleecing the donor nations of the world under the threat of lawlessness. Even within the last 60 days, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has been politicking with the Arab League to acquire pledges amounting to ≈ $1.2B/year (≈ $100 million per month). It will be interesting to see who contributes what, and for how long.

Including the right to a national liberation movement resulting in a sovereign state?

Um, sure, if you can get a majority to agree through democratic process... you know, not bombing and terrorizing them into fleeing.

Um. Sure. Let's go with that. And while I appreciate the desire for peaceful resolution to conflict, I have questions.

Who has a right to vote? Thinking of places like Quebec and Canada; Spain and Catalonia; US and Haudenosaunee Nations: who has the right to vote for self-determination for peoples? What about when, as in the case of the Arab Palestinians, they have ALREADY been displaced? Do those in the diaspora have a right to vote as well? Their descendants? Or only those currently living in the territory?

See, where I think you are going with this is that everyone gets a vote -- both those who belong to the peoples seeking self-determination and those who do not. The problem with this is peoples seeking self-determination are often minorities. Therefore, you've made the rights of a peoples to self-determination subject to the whim of the majority. You are making peoples' rights subject to popular vote.

I believe this is both morally wrong and dangerous. Peoples' rights are inherent and are not subject to control by a majority.

(COMMENT)

While we all hear this quite frequently, "rights of peoples to self-determination," there is no one, authoritative way to interpret this right. The meaning behind and the definition of self-determination (explicitly) makes it almost impossible for the International Community to respond to the ever-increasing number claims under this "right."

Most Respectfully,
R

Does a settler colonial project have superior rights to those who they displace?

 

[Hollie]

RE: A "One-State" Solution
⁜→ JoeB131, Shusha, et al,

The phrase "National Liberation Movements" (NLMs) is a polite and politically correct way of addressing various grassroots anti-government activities that are normally (but not always) associated with low-intensity asymmetric conflicts over non-self-governing territories and the attempts to implement self-determination. What the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip like to think of as the State of Palestine (SoP), the once fledgling and nascent entity is displaying fewer and fewer signs of future potential.

The SoP is what some might consider as a "front company" for an organized criminal enterprise fleecing the donor nations of the world under the threat of lawlessness. Even within the last 60 days, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has been politicking with the Arab League to acquire pledges amounting to ≈ $1.2B/year (≈ $100 million per month). It will be interesting to see who contributes what, and for how long.

Including the right to a national liberation movement resulting in a sovereign state?

Um, sure, if you can get a majority to agree through democratic process... you know, not bombing and terrorizing them into fleeing.

Um. Sure. Let's go with that. And while I appreciate the desire for peaceful resolution to conflict, I have questions.

Who has a right to vote? Thinking of places like Quebec and Canada; Spain and Catalonia; US and Haudenosaunee Nations: who has the right to vote for self-determination for peoples? What about when, as in the case of the Arab Palestinians, they have ALREADY been displaced? Do those in the diaspora have a right to vote as well? Their descendants? Or only those currently living in the territory?

See, where I think you are going with this is that everyone gets a vote -- both those who belong to the peoples seeking self-determination and those who do not. The problem with this is peoples seeking self-determination are often minorities. Therefore, you've made the rights of a peoples to self-determination subject to the whim of the majority. You are making peoples' rights subject to popular vote.

I believe this is both morally wrong and dangerous. Peoples' rights are inherent and are not subject to control by a majority.

(COMMENT)

While we all hear this quite frequently, "rights of peoples to self-determination," there is no one, authoritative way to interpret this right. The meaning behind and the definition of self-determination (explicitly) makes it almost impossible for the International Community to respond to the ever-increasing number claims under this "right."

Most Respectfully,
R

Does a settler colonial project have superior rights to those who they displace?

No. Hence the failures of the various Islamist caliphates.

You're lamenting the Islamist loss of Al-Andalus and so much of Europe, right?

 

[rylah]

Sure, because we all know that Hamas throwing their opposition off rooftops at the end of elections day is all about democracy.

And what the majority of Your western democracies did with the boats of fleeing Jews?

Right, the imaginary rooftops.... I thought gays were being thrown off of those.

Why can't You answer a single question?
No not imaginary at all, what the Caliphate did to shock the world is what Hamas was literally doing after elections to their own, and I won't go as low as to post the evidence. Rooftops and mass shootouts between party rivals during "demonstrations" was just the one that the media allowed to be published, and it was not reserved for gays but anyone that Hamas and Fatah happened to lay their hands after the elections. The last Hamas Commander publicly executed for gay relations received 3 shots to the chest and was televised on the Islamic Jihad network, others are accused of collaboration tortured to death then dragged on the streets for all to see tied to a motorcycle squad.

Hamas commander accused of gay sex is killed by his own

 

[xyz]

It's an interesting topic and question, but I don't think it would happen.

Plus it would change the definition of "Jewsihness" over time if they do that. Of course, if they don't, then they will be accused of being undemocratic.

There are already Israeli Arabs, but if they grow in number substantially it's a different story.

I see the two state solution as more realistic. But I really don't know what will happen in 50-100 years.

The conclusion is based on lack of real demographic data.
Jewish birthrates surpass those of the Arabs, not only in Israel but also the rest of the middle east.
Even if Israeli sovereignty was applied in Judea Samaria today, providing Israeli citizenship to all the Arabs in the area, Jews remain around 65% majority.

I didn't say Arabs would become a majority, however it would still be a substantial number of people, and many Israelis would not want them to become citizens and I don't see this as happening in the near future.

I actually voted for a party that proposes exactly that, they are in the govt now, specifically for this solution.

So then it's like a choice thing, or everyone gets citizenship?

Read the OP, I wholly agree with it.

Ah, o.k.

It is a bit confusing, it's not "everyone", but everyone who agrees to pledge allegiance to Israel as a Jewish state. I don't think many will. Would it even guarantee they get to keep their land?

 

[rylah]

It's no secret that for many Arabs, given the monetary incentive, choose to leave for the wealthy and stable Arab states like the Emirates and Europe.

Given that Israel does consider giving citizenship for those who're willing to pledge allegiance and do national service, given that agreements with leading local tribe Sheikhs already have been established, given that there will be local joined policing forces under the Israeli sovereignty, special police undercover units and unified surveillance network - as Yishay Fleisher said to Sheikh Tamimi, and I paraphrase -

"Under those conditions it would be much easier for us to do Jihad on Jihad"

 

[rylah]

What Arabs in Hebron Really Think About Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria

Ashraf Jabari, an Arab Muslim resident of Hebron talks about relations with the Jewish community, spokesperson Noam Arnon, Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, and what local Arabs think about the Palestinian Authority. This speech was part of a panel discussion at the 4th annual Sovereignty Conference held in Jerusalem. Also on the panel were Noam Arnon of Hebron, Sheikh Abu Halil El-Tamimi, Abu Naim al Tarifi of Ramallah, Anett Haskia of Akko, journalist Shalom Yerushalmi of Ma'ariv news, and Jonathan Elkhoury of Lebanon. Speeches were held in Arabic and Hebrew with translation into English

 

[Shusha]

What about the rights of the Palestinians? Oh, that's right, they don't have any rights...

Of course the Arab Palestinians have rights. I've always supported the rights of Arab Palestinians. They are the same rights I believe the Jewish people have. This includes the right to self-determination for both people. Its a simple concept, but one Team Palestine has difficulty grasping.

The solution to the problem, if one believes in self-determination for all peoples, is the same solution which is near universally applied in ethnic conflict. It worked with Czechoslovakia, with Yugoslavia, with the USSR, with the Ottoman Empire, with literally dozens of former states or territories.

So why isn't it working in "Palestine"?

 

[Shusha]

Does a settler colonial project have superior rights to those who they displace?

All peoples have the same rights. The problem with this conflict is that BOTH peoples were displaced. And each side views the other as the "settler colonialists".

 

[rylah]

Shusha I remember You saying, if I'm not mistaken, that providing citizenship to all the Arabs in Judea Samaria is a bad idea. RoccoR as well said that merely suggesting that in the open might constitute as dangerous act.

Let's put aside all the naive scenarios where citizenship is instantly given unconditionally to all, and without confrontation during separation of civilians and militants.

I read about what the retired officers who are against such a move write, the use of terms like "Point of No Return", but somehow they mostly rely on horror predictions regarding economy and demographics without taking in account any development plans of the area, or suggest separation pointing to the security danger without weighing out the dangers of such separation, as if no lessons were learned since Oslo and the disengagement.

Given everything we've discussed prior to that, demographics, alternative options to citizenship within the plan,
obligations and measures - help me understand what is so bad about suggesting we give another 1.2-1.5mil people citizenship and apply sovereignty in all of Judea? What is missing in the plan?

 

[Alan Stallion]

Andrew Klaven had the right idea seven years ago...

Klavan's One-State Solution: Give the Middle East to the Jews

 

[Shusha]

Shusha I remember You saying, if I'm not mistaken, that providing citizenship to all the Arabs in Judea Samaria is a bad idea. RoccoR as well said that merely suggesting that in the open might constitute as dangerous act.

Let's put aside all the naive scenarios where citizenship is instantly given unconditionally to all, and without confrontation during separation of civilians and militants.

I read about what the retired officers who are against such a move write, the use of terms like "Point of No Return", but somehow they mostly rely on horror predictions regarding economy and demographics without taking in account any development plans of the area, or suggest separation pointing to the security danger without weighing out the dangers of such separation, as if no lessons were learned since Oslo and the disengagement.

Given everything we've discussed prior to that, demographics, alternative options to citizenship within the plan,
obligations and measures - help me understand what is so bad about suggesting we give another 1.2-1.5mil people citizenship and apply sovereignty in all of Judea? What is missing in the plan?

Ultimately? The two ethnic/religious groups are at odds with one another. Its not resolvable in the next generation, or the next or the next. And it takes place in the context of an Arab/Muslim Renaissance or Disaster, depending on the outcome.

There will be a war. The question for Israel is whether that war will be fought as an international war or as a civil war. I can't see any advantage with Israel fighting both a civil war and an international war at the same time. Especially when Arab Palestinians seem content to make themselves the point of the spear in their rush to martyrdom.

 

[rylah]

Shusha I remember You saying, if I'm not mistaken, that providing citizenship to all the Arabs in Judea Samaria is a bad idea. RoccoR as well said that merely suggesting that in the open might constitute as dangerous act.

Let's put aside all the naive scenarios where citizenship is instantly given unconditionally to all, and without confrontation during separation of civilians and militants.

I read about what the retired officers who are against such a move write, the use of terms like "Point of No Return", but somehow they mostly rely on horror predictions regarding economy and demographics without taking in account any development plans of the area, or suggest separation pointing to the security danger without weighing out the dangers of such separation, as if no lessons were learned since Oslo and the disengagement.

Given everything we've discussed prior to that, demographics, alternative options to citizenship within the plan,
obligations and measures - help me understand what is so bad about suggesting we give another 1.2-1.5mil people citizenship and apply sovereignty in all of Judea? What is missing in the plan?

Ultimately? The two ethnic/religious groups are at odds with one another. Its not resolvable in the next generation, or the next or the next. And it takes place in the context of an Arab/Muslim Renaissance or Disaster, depending on the outcome.

There will be a war. The question for Israel is whether that war will be fought as an international war or as a civil war. I can't see any advantage with Israel fighting both a civil war and an international war at the same time. Especially when Arab Palestinians seem content to make themselves the point of the spear in their rush to martyrdom.

First of all the Arabs in Judea are not the real spear, but a deflecting maneuver of little military potential.
The territory is of great military potential.

Don't they teach striving for contact in Krav Maga?

In any case of war, or fall of the rule in Jordan, that area will inevitably be taken under full control.
And as You said it's always a potential for international and civil, even if they're given an autonomy, and that's probably the maximum anyone can suggest for Israel to sit on the table, it's still a conflict of the same scale, minus the limited ground control and surveillance like in areas A and B.

Even if none of them are loyal, doesn't this actually minimize the sum potential danger if our starting position on that front is at dealing with mostly disarmed population?

 

[JoeB131]

Why can't You answer a single question?
No not imaginary at all, what the Caliphate did to shock the world is what Hamas was literally doing after elections to their own, and I won't go as low as to post the evidence.

because their isn't any.... Little bored with the Zionist propaganda, anyway.

Not my problem, really. We need to not be involved.

Hey, here's a crazy idea. If they are SOOOOOO awful, GO BACK TO EUROPE.

Problem solved.

 

[Hollie]

Why can't You answer a single question?
No not imaginary at all, what the Caliphate did to shock the world is what Hamas was literally doing after elections to their own, and I won't go as low as to post the evidence.

because their isn't any.... Little bored with the Zionist propaganda, anyway.

Not my problem, really. We need to not be involved.

Hey, here's a crazy idea. If they are SOOOOOO awful, GO BACK TO EUROPE.

Problem solved.

I’m afraid your Islamic fascist heroes are having a greater presence in Europe.

Why don’t you give up the land you stole and you move back to where ever it is you came from.

 

[JoeB131]

I’m afraid your Islamic fascist heroes are having a greater presence in Europe.

Why don’t you give up the land you stole and you move back to where ever it is you came from.

I didn't steal it, I bought it...

So how about a trade... we can send all the zionists back to Europe and all the Islamists can go back to the Middle East.

That will work until the Zionists start reminding the Europeans, "Oh, yeah, that's why we hate you guys!"

 

[Hollie]

I’m afraid your Islamic fascist heroes are having a greater presence in Europe.

Why don’t you give up the land you stole and you move back to where ever it is you came from.

I didn't steal it, I bought it...

So how about a trade... we can send all the zionists back to Europe and all the Islamists can go back to the Middle East.

That will work until the Zionists start reminding the Europeans, "Oh, yeah, that's why we hate you guys!"

As I thought, your phony tirades about “stolen land” are just an excuse to vent your OCD-like rage aimed at Joooooos.

I think ISIS is a bit short-handed. You may have a job opportunity.

 

[JoeB131]

As I thought, your phony tirades about “stolen land” are just an excuse to vent your OCD-like rage aimed at Joooooos.

I think ISIS is a bit short-handed. You may have a job opportunity.

I've got a job, thanks.

Yes, if I object to your awful behavior, it's because I have a problem, not you.

This works for you, I guess.

 

[fncceo]

I've got a job, thanks.

I'm betting you work for Jews.

 

[Mindful]

As I thought, your phony tirades about “stolen land” are just an excuse to vent your OCD-like rage aimed at Joooooos.

I think ISIS is a bit short-handed. You may have a job opportunity.

I've got a job, thanks.

Yes, if I object to your awful behavior, it's because I have a problem, not you.

This works for you, I guess.

So you can be funny if you try?

 

[Hollie]

As I thought, your phony tirades about “stolen land” are just an excuse to vent your OCD-like rage aimed at Joooooos.

I think ISIS is a bit short-handed. You may have a job opportunity.

I've got a job, thanks.

Yes, if I object to your awful behavior, it's because I have a problem, not you.

This works for you, I guess.

You're rambling incoherently.