Is it Possible for Israel and Palestine to Peacefully Coexist?

[Deadstick]

Only if they could.

Gaza must be plowed under and salted each for a decade.

The Gazans should be resettled in Madagascar.

Do they have gas chambers ready for the Palestinians in Madagascar?

 

[Deadstick]

That is patently untrue.

Israel doesn’t object to a peaceful Palestinian state.

What they object to is a terrorist state dedicated to killing Jews.

Better tell Likud because they don't believe in a Palestinian state.

 

[Coyote]

Show me a theocracy that hasn't imparted death and destruction thru this rock's history Coyote

~S~

I am no fan of religious government. They have never been good for religious minorities or nonbelievers. Keep religion out of governance.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Do they have gas chambers ready for the Palestinians in Madagascar?

Hopefully, not. However, they can no longer inhabitant Palestine.

 

[Deadstick]

Hopefully, not. However, they can no longer inhabitant Palestine.

Why not they were born there unlike the Polish Colonialists?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

They won, Deadstick. They will never lose to the Arabs.

 

[Shusha]

Which appears to be a very minority opinion and policy.

Hence the "from the River to the Sea" ~ Israel and the Jews will no longer be.

1993 was a more, let's say... 'hopeful' time. Peace finally achieved with Jordan, the Oslo Accords providing a path forward. I think it was a time when more Arab Palestinians were open to sharing the territory.

I'm thinking of Corey Gil-Shuster's "The Ask Project", which didn't start until 2010? but demonstrates from then until now a clear change in attitude. Now it's all "its our land and the Jews have to go".

 

[Shusha]

I don’t think it is as simplistic as that.

Heard and agreed. You know I am always begging people to understand that full story.

I think issues stem from cultural attributes

Yes, I think we (Western "we") do not correctly understand ME culture which is relevant. Things like family and tribal affiliations, religious undercurrents, honor codes and values. We are missing an entire subtext. (Just yesterday, I was pointing out to another poster the arrogance of requiring ME nations to have an "American"-style democracy.)

that prefer violent resistance and have prevented forming a cohesive national identity

I see you. Its a shifting train of thought, I think. In 1948, "We are all the same - Syrians, Jordanians, Arab Palestinians - same." Somewhere in the mid-1960s that became, "We are separate and distinctive and demand the right to determine our own future". Now it has shifted to an uglier thing, "The Jews are (insert all the nasty labels here) and they must (leave or be defeated or be destroyed)".

These shifts are reflected in international response to the conflict and, honestly, it is hard to determine chicken and egg between international pressures and Arab Palestinian drive.

I think a negative national identity (we are not, we are opposed to, we are separate from) is a much more difficult to build something on than a positive national identity (we are, our values are, our culture is). A negative national identity, then, much more easily slides into violence against the "other".

Where I do agree is the Palestinians need to move towards governance over violence

I mean, yeah.

but how and to what end?

Any possible ending could work. It depends on what they really want if it was in the context of peace. What do you think they want?

 

[Shusha]

It is also against international law.

It is against international law to attack another sovereign state without just cause. Syria was the belligerent and must be treated as such. Israel's response is permissible under the laws of armed conflict and the inviolable right to self-defense. The resolution will be in the form of a peace treaty, which will resolve the border dispute(s).

 

[Coyote]

It is against international law to attack another sovereign state without just cause. Syria was the belligerent and must be treated as such. Israel's response is permissible under the laws of armed conflict and the inviolable right to self-defense. The resolution will be in the form of a peace treaty, which will resolve the border dispute(s).

I get the need for security. However Israel has been bombing sites in Syria since the Syrian civil war began.

As far as I know it is not permissible to keep territory that is the sovereign territory of another state or transfer civilian populations, such as ocurred in the Golan Heights. Israel is taking advantage of the break down in Syria to take territory that doesn’t belong to it and is not disputed territory.

What happens to the people living there now? With the Golan heights, farmers who fled war were barred from returning to their farms which were quickly taken over by settlers. (Supposed to be the best farmland in the area and has water).

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Israel has a right to exist, and all Middle Easterners have a duty to support that right.

 

[ESay]

The Muslims have a long history of destroying and or appropriating other religion’s holy places. The Hagia Sophia is a prime example. It was built as the most impressive cathedral in Christendom, then the Muslims defaces all the Christian religious components and converted it to a mosque.

And before that the Christians destroyed the temples of Greek, Roman, Celtic and other people's temples and 'holy places' and built their churches and cathedrals.

 

[Coyote]

Heard and agreed. You know I am always begging people to understand that full story.

Excellent post!

Yes, I think we (Western "we") do not correctly understand ME culture which is relevant. Things like family and tribal affiliations, religious undercurrents, honor codes and values. We are missing an entire subtext. (Just yesterday, I was pointing out to another poster the arrogance of requiring ME nations to have an "American"-style democracy.)

This is a bit off topic but what the heck. There are several things that come to mind:

We are both on the same page here and I especially agree with importing democracy (or imposing democracy) on nations that lack the basic institutions needed in terms of or culture and governance. The hubris of “nation building” in Iraq comes to mind, and subsequent horrific civil war.

In terms of culture we are steeped in western Euro-centric mindset and culture and in the idea it is superior and you just have to show them the way. The Middle East was carved up by people who either didn’t understand the cultures (and the many ethnic/religious divisions) or didn’t care because the mindset at the time and even now is both paternalistic and generally anti-Arab, viewing them as savages that just need to be taught how wonderful Democracy is and all will be good. I think that arrogance is an impediment to finding workable solutions such as different ways of governance.

The other thing that comes to mind is do we really understand Israeli culture? In some ways Israel is like Russia in that spans both east and west and is both and neither. It is both Western European and Arab. The Jews who were there before European Jews began immigrating in greater numbers and actively working to form a state were considered Arab Jews and were considered culturally Arab. Israel has an Arab population. In addition Israel from its beginning has had tensions between religious Jews and secular Jews each of whom envisioned different paths for the state. On top of all that, Israel has enough generations to develop their own unique culture based on it’s unique history and perspectives, that is different than that of Jews in America for example (like America is different from England even though we share a lot of attributes). So do we really understand Israeli culture either?

Religon is kind of a good example. It is an important component of Arab cultures particularly in governance. It is also an important component in Israeli culture and governance which seems to straddle both sacred and secular with considerable tension. However we, in the west, have become largely secular and adamant about separation of church and state. It is something we struggle with in cultures where church and state combine. For me personally, I am very opposed to religion and government mixing yet, in some of the countries where it does that is what the actually want so who are we to negate that?

So do we also make assumptions about Israeli culture that create misunderstanding?

Yes, this is a huge topic shift, but culture interests me and if I ever retire or have fewer dogs to train, then I would like to spend more time reading about it.

Once again the quote function messed up, these are your words:
…..
I see you. It’s a shifting train of thought, I think. In 1948, "We are all the same - Syrians, Jordanians, Arab Palestinians - same." Somewhere in the mid-1960s that became, "We are separate and distinctive and demand the right to determine our own future". Now it has shifted to an uglier thing, "The Jews are (insert all the nasty labels here) and they must (leave or be defeated or be destroyed)".
……..

That is a thought provoking post. In terms of “all the same” was that in the context of “pan-Arabism” and the Arab nationalist movement that was occurring along with Jewish nationalist movement at the end of the mandate?

These shifts are reflected in international response to the conflict and, honestly, it is hard to determine chicken and egg between international pressures and Arab Palestinian drive.

I agree, I think it is hard to determine what came first and probably doesn’t matter now.

I think a negative national identity (we are not, we are opposed to, we are separate from) is a much more difficult to build something on than a positive national identity (we are, our values are, our culture is). A negative national identity, then, much more easily slides into violence against the "other".

That is interesting thought. I’ve thought of identity in terms of a negative identity or of how it can become “other ism”.

I read an interesting article in relation to the conflicts in CAR. The gist of it was when a state cannot or will not protect or represent all of its citizens and national identity is weak or absent, people turn towards ethnic, religious or tribal identity for protection. Many states that fall into this category are states with artificial boundaries incorporating groups who are normally antagonistic to each other or separating groups that belong together. I think one of the many problems in the ME is there are many ethnic identities forced to assume a national identity they don’t yet feel a part of. This is going to be a huge problem for Syria.

I mean, yeah.

Any possible ending could work. It depends on what they really want if it was in the context of peace. What do you think they want?

I think ultimately they want a future that doesn’t involve the daily degradations and lack of dignity and rights that they currently live with under with Israel and that would be some form of autonomy or representation. I think people ultimately want to be treated with dignity and respect.

Whether that manifests as a state or something else, I don’t know. While I don’t know if their national identity is strong enough to build a state on, I do think it is too strong to simply subsume under “just Arabs”.

I really don’t know at this point because the world there has changed. I’ll need to think about this.

 

[Coyote]

Israel has a right to exist, and all Middle Easterners have a duty to support that right.

Indeed they do have the right to exist. That should not be in question.

So do the Palestinians.

 

[Coyote]

And before that the Christians destroyed the temples of Greek, Roman, Celtic and other people's temples and 'holy places' and built their churches and cathedrals.

Yup, it is a common tactic.

 

[Coyote]

Which appears to be a very minority opinion and policy.

Hence the "from the River to the Sea" ~ Israel and the Jews will no longer be.

From river to sea from one side.

Ersatz Israel from the other.

 

[Shusha]

I get the need for security. However Israel has been bombing sites in Syria since the Syrian civil war began.

As far as I know it is not permissible to keep territory that is the sovereign territory of another state or transfer civilian populations, such as ocurred in the Golan Heights. Israel is taking advantage of the break down in Syria to take territory that doesn’t belong to it and is not disputed territory.

What happens to the people living there now? With the Golan heights, farmers who fled war were barred from returning to their farms which were quickly taken over by settlers. (Supposed to be the best farmland in the area and has water).

Syria and Israel are at war. Syria is the belligerent (the one in the wrong, the one breaking international law). Until the war ends (with a peace treaty resolving all issues), Israel is within her rights to protect territory and her citizens. This includes occupying territory and creating buffer zones. This is not "taking advantage" it is responding to the conditions of and acts of illegal armed aggression towards her.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Indeed they do have the right to exist. That should not be in question.

So do the Palestinians.

Then they need to earn it, all of them.

 

[Shusha]

Phew! A LOT to respond to here. I'm going to take it in pieces according to my own interests. Feel free to circle me back if I haven't addressed something that is important to you. (And THANK YOU! for your thoughtful, intelligent response.)

In terms of culture we are steeped in western Euro-centric mindset and culture and in the idea it is superior and you just have to show them the way. The Middle East was carved up by people who either didn’t understand the cultures (and the many ethnic/religious divisions) or didn’t care because the mindset at the time and even now is both paternalistic and generally anti-Arab, viewing them as savages that just need to be taught how wonderful Democracy is and all will be good.

Yes. This. I think we all need to get over this idea that there is only one "right" way to (insert anything here).

The other thing that comes to mind is do we really understand Israeli culture?

I'd argue most here do not and don't even try. I have some understanding, based on many friendships with Israelis and travel to Israel, but its still pretty limited. One big thing I think many people miss is how easily Israelis accept each other's culture, religion, and traditions. This speaks not only across ethnicities, but also the level of observance within religious faith. On an individual level, they are all pretty, "Oh, you do this? Shrug, I do this." They are neither overly concerned nor overly accommodating.

This is a stark contrast (imo) to the inherent conflict(?) struggle(?) friction(?) between faiths in the US where any acknowledgement of one is taken as a detraction from another.

On top of all that, Israel has enough generations to develop their own unique culture based on it’s unique history and perspectives, that is different than that of Jews in America for example (like America is different from England even though we share a lot of attributes).

Yes! This rings true from my understanding. There is an Israeli culture that is distinct.

Religon is kind of a good example. It is an important component of Arab cultures particularly in governance. It is also an important component in Israeli culture and governance which seems to straddle both sacred and secular with considerable tension.

I'm not certain the tension is as considerable as western media would lead you to believe. But that is a surface level understanding primarily from dealing with individuals as individuals. And you know I tend toward optimism in that regard.

However we, in the west, have become largely secular and adamant about separation of church and state. It is something we struggle with in cultures where church and state combine. For me personally, I am very opposed to religion and government mixing yet, in some of the countries where it does that is what the actually want so who are we to negate that?

Being religious, I am comfortable with religion, as part of the fabric of life, being entwined with certain areas of government. For example, another thing I was discussing yesterday, I have no issue with marriage being under the purview of religious authorities rather than governmental ones, with work-arounds for those who fall outside the religious sphere.

Yes, this is a huge topic shift, but culture interests me and if I ever retire or have fewer dogs to train, then I would like to spend more time reading about it.

I am retired as of two weeks ago (from formal employment, still have my creative career)! And have only the two dogs (one is still a young puppy though).

 

[toomuchtime_]

It is also against international law.

Bullshit. Immediately after the Six Day War, Israel offered to return all the land it had captured in exchange for peace and every Israeli PM since, including Netanyahu, has made that offer to Syria until Syria fell into civil war and Syria has refused, so there is no violation of international law for Israel to keep it.