What must Israel do to "end the occupation"? (solutions thread)

[P F Tinmore]

It's April 30th 1948 borders.

To be clear, you are advocating the erasure of Israel as a State.

How can you "erase" something that is not there?

Oh come on. How are we to have a reasonable discussion about solutions when you toss around one-liners like this? Of course Israel exists as a State.

Where? Show me a map of Israel that does not have fake, armistice lines borders. Why fake borders if Israel is a real state?

You are seriously trying to argue that Israel is not a State.

History agrees with me even if you don't.

 

[Challenger]

Since there is no likely Pali Leadership to emerge here.

True. The west tried to hold free and fair elections to let the Palestinian people decide who they wanted to lead them under international supervision. These elections were internationally recognised to have been both free and fair but the only problem was that the Zionists didn't get the result they wanted; Fatah lost, Hamas won. Fatah was then told to engineer a coup (which would have failed had the Zionists not stepped in). Now we have Hamas and Fatah at each other's throats; a result the Zionists can live with as there's no-one they need "negotiate" with, but then the Zionists have never wanted to negotiate anything, peace means they won't be able to expand any more and might actually be forced to give up some land.

Not interested in how Fatah goes to Civil War on the instructions of their "Zionist masters"..

Fact is -- the ONLY HOPE for a sovereign Palestine is if it's done FOR THEM and held in trust until they get their act together and decide that the FUTURE is more important to their kids than the past...

Who is going to do "the doing for them" and the "holding in trust"? Do the Palestinians get a say in deciding that? Once upon a time, what you are suggesting was called a "Mandate". The opinions of the Palestinians were ignored then as well and my, didn't that work out well for everyone?

The Protectorate would be administered by "the neighborhood" with cooperation from the entire Arab League. So the answer is the governments of Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, (Syria) and Israel. No need for any law and order under the SOLE jurisdiction of Israel. I'm sure that Western countries would be falling over themselves to help with support and infrastructure development in a project designed to BUILD a Levant trade hub with Palestine as the center of it.

When and if the Palestinians step up -- they can supply municipal, regional leadership for the first 10 years. Palestinians NEED to endorse a plan that gives them economic life and security and stop fighting over who is the baddest ass when it comes to claims on Israeli land.

It's one of those "home makeover" TV reality shows. But on a slightly larger scale. If they DON'T respond to a genuine display of world-wide aid and assistance in creating a homeland -- then they are permanently fucked.

Seriously?
Jordan at the moment has enough internal and external problems without adding a "mandatory" role for Palestine. Jordan's tribal core which keeps the Hashemite monarchy in power is restive because of economic austerity and government correuption; Jordan's "ex-palestinian" population is an underclass often at odds with the tribal core; then there's widespread unease at Jordan allowing foreign militaries, especially Zionist Israelis, to either enter or overfly Jordanian territory, factors that have seen a growth in Salafist radicalisation in the country, and then of course there's the ever present risk of Jordanian involvement in Syria. Egypt is far more concerned repressing any political opposition to the new dictatorship and has similar problems to Jordan, the regime is financed by Saudi Arabia to keep the country afloat, so the last thing al-Sissi wants is a potential quagmire involvement with Zionist israel and Palestine. Lebanon has enough problem governing itself, never mind looking after anyone else, Syria? enough said. Zionist Israel has absolutely no interest in creating a Palestinian state on it's borders, none. It has sabotaged every attempt to create one since 1948; Zionists want it all with the Palestinians "removed". Your "home makeover" scenario will have all the "tradesmen" either fighting each other or not turning up; you will create a bigger, more intractable mess than that which exists now.

 

[Challenger]

It's April 30th 1948 borders.

To be clear, you are advocating the erasure of Israel as a State.

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

 

[Challenger]

End the occupation of '67 land.

That didn't work in Gaza. Why didn't it?

Because the control over Gaza never ended.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It's April 30th 1948 borders.

To be clear, you are advocating the erasure of Israel as a State.

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

Of course, Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented so Israel does not even have that. Nobody, including Israel, recognizes those proposed borders.

 

[Shusha]

Bottom line is Shusha -- I don't think the solutions lie in what Israel must do alone -- like the OP suggests. I think many more parties are REQUIRED to come to viable solutions. Because many more parties are already INVOLVED in the problem. And they are handling it WORSE than Israel is.. Time to call them into plans that get THEM out of the "occupation" and "discrimination" business wrt Palestinians.

Well, it was never my intent to suggest that Israel shoulders the responsibility, let alone the sole responsibility. In fact, my point was to illuminate that the oft-repeated cry that Israel must "end the occupation" is a meaningless phrase. No one on Team Palestine is able to reasonably articulate what the phrase actually means, let alone speak intelligently on how to implement such an action.

End the occupation! has become the be-all-and-end-all of "solutions" to the conflict to the exclusion of all other possibilities and yet no one seems to know what it means or how we would measure if its been completed.

This thread has amply demonstrated how weak their argument is. We have one poster who insists that the "zionists must go" while claiming this is not ethnic cleansing. We have one poster who insists that Israel doesn't even exist since it has no borders (thus making it impossible for there to BE an occupation, let alone end it). And a third poster who claims asking members to define and defend their stance on an issue is a wicked Jew trick for deceiving people.

The reality is Israel can not possibly end the occupation because that term is so loosely defined as to create endlessly moving goal posts. This is intentional, imo. It creates a no-win set of conditions for Israel. A Kobayashi Maru.

 

[Shusha]

End the occupation of '67 land.

That didn't work in Gaza. Why didn't it?

Because the control over Gaza never ended.

Well then, kindly explain, in detail, what Israel needs to do to end the control over Gaza. That is the entire point of this thread.

 

[Lipush]

That UNSC Resolution spells it out. 1967 borders.

how are 1967 boarders supposed to solve the issue, exactly?

 

[Lipush]

BDS has the only just solution.

Do tell. The solutions threads are not the place for one-liners. If BDS has a "solution", please summarize it or link to it.

End the occupation of '67 land.

Equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and properties.

Propaganda.

There is no such thing as "Palestinians citizens of Israel". There are Arabs with blue IDs, Israeli citizens, who already have the same citizen rights as all Israelis.

right of return means the destruction of Israel as the Jewish state. There is nothing 'Just' about this.

 

[Lipush]

"End the occupation of '67 land" means what, exactly? That the 1949 Armistice lines become international borders (contrary to international treaties (ie law) and UN resolutions)?

That is true. There are no '67 borders. The armistice lines were specifically not to be political or territorial borders. Israel should withdraw to its 1948 borders.

In what Alternate Universe you believe is that going to happen?

 

[Lipush]

Palestinians (Muslims and Christians) are only native to Palestine. It is understandable that other countries control refugees with walls, fences etc. What is no longer acceptable is colonists expelling native people and preventing their living (or returning to) on their native land, as Israel does.

My family has been in this land since 1883. My grandmother ID said "Born in Palestine". So, by your thinking she was not a legitimate native citizen of the land because, she was Jewish?

 

[Lipush]

Only thing I get from this thread is that you're all a bunch of crazy people with no clue about anything. Behind this conflict there are actual people. What a horror it would have been if your actual suggestions came reality.

 

[Shusha]

...just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. ...

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land. If you want to go back that far you have to go back to the Jewish National Homeland's borders - which is all of Palestine except Jordan.

But, in the spirit of this thread, end the occupation means the forced implementation of 181, then?

 

[Challenger]

End the occupation of '67 land.

That didn't work in Gaza. Why didn't it?

Because that is the largest concentration camp on earth and the Israelis bomb it regularly!

Okay. So how would you suggest Israel end the "concentration camp"?

International law has always held that States hold the absolute right to permit or deny entry into their sovereign territory. Are you suggesting this law be changed?

Are you suggesting Gaza must have open borders? If so with which States? All of them? Or just Israel?

Are you suggesting Gaza not become independent? Or that Israel should be erased and become Palestine?

Should Israel be permitted to use military action to defend itself? What sort of action? In response to what? How often?

End the occupation of '67 land.

That didn't work in Gaza. Why didn't it?

Because the control over Gaza never ended.

Well then, kindly explain, in detail, what Israel needs to do to end the control over Gaza. That is the entire point of this thread.

The clue is in your sentance, "...end the control..." Allow Gazans free access to their fishing grounds and their airspace, that's a start. Remove the fencing and gun towers from Gazan territory and build them in your own if you want to feel "secure".

 

[Challenger]

...just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. ...

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land. If you want to go back that far you have to go back to the Jewish National Homeland's borders - which is all of Palestine except Jordan.

But, in the spirit of this thread, end the occupation means the forced implementation of 181, then?

Typical hasbara troll tactic. This is what I actually wrote:

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

Look at your own declaration of statehood; you declared sovereignty based on Resolution 181, regardless of UNGA "powers" or lack thereof.

 

[P F Tinmore]

...just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. ...

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land. If you want to go back that far you have to go back to the Jewish National Homeland's borders - which is all of Palestine except Jordan.

But, in the spirit of this thread, end the occupation means the forced implementation of 181, then?

Typical hasbara troll tactic. This is what I actually wrote:

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

Look at your own declaration of statehood; you declared sovereignty based on Resolution 181, regardless of UNGA "powers" or lack thereof.

Indeed, Israel did mention resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Resolution 181 states that all Palestinians who normally live in the territory that becomes Israel will be Israeli citizens. This is also the rule of state succession under international law. This applies to all Palestinians who became refugees.

This means that the right to return is not about immigration, it is about citizenship.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land.

That is true and neither did its predecessor, the League of Nations. No land was ever given to a Jewish state.

 

[Hollie]

...just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. ...

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land. If you want to go back that far you have to go back to the Jewish National Homeland's borders - which is all of Palestine except Jordan.

But, in the spirit of this thread, end the occupation means the forced implementation of 181, then?

Typical hasbara troll tactic. This is what I actually wrote:

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

Look at your own declaration of statehood; you declared sovereignty based on Resolution 181, regardless of UNGA "powers" or lack thereof.

Indeed, Israel did mention resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Resolution 181 states that all Palestinians who normally live in the territory that becomes Israel will be Israeli citizens. This is also the rule of state succession under international law. This applies to all Palestinians who became refugees.

This means that the right to return is not about immigration, it is about citizenship.

Indeed, 181 was never implemented. Did you forget?

 

[P F Tinmore]

...just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. ...

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land. If you want to go back that far you have to go back to the Jewish National Homeland's borders - which is all of Palestine except Jordan.

But, in the spirit of this thread, end the occupation means the forced implementation of 181, then?

Typical hasbara troll tactic. This is what I actually wrote:

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

Look at your own declaration of statehood; you declared sovereignty based on Resolution 181, regardless of UNGA "powers" or lack thereof.

Indeed, Israel did mention resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Resolution 181 states that all Palestinians who normally live in the territory that becomes Israel will be Israeli citizens. This is also the rule of state succession under international law. This applies to all Palestinians who became refugees.

This means that the right to return is not about immigration, it is about citizenship.

Indeed, 181 was never implemented. Did you forget?

True, but it is still the rule of state succession in international law.

 

[Hollie]

...just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. ...

The UNGA does not have the powers to "allocate" land. If you want to go back that far you have to go back to the Jewish National Homeland's borders - which is all of Palestine except Jordan.

But, in the spirit of this thread, end the occupation means the forced implementation of 181, then?

Typical hasbara troll tactic. This is what I actually wrote:

To be clear, that's a Hasbara troll response, and no, just a return to the lands it was allocated by the U.N. and which it declared sovereignty over when it declared statehood.

Look at your own declaration of statehood; you declared sovereignty based on Resolution 181, regardless of UNGA "powers" or lack thereof.

Indeed, Israel did mention resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Resolution 181 states that all Palestinians who normally live in the territory that becomes Israel will be Israeli citizens. This is also the rule of state succession under international law. This applies to all Palestinians who became refugees.

This means that the right to return is not about immigration, it is about citizenship.

Indeed, 181 was never implemented. Did you forget?

True, but it is still the rule of state succession in international law.

There's a reason why no one comes to you for interpretation of international law.