When President Bush convened the Annapolis summit last November, pledging to have a final solution based on a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in place by the end of 2008, nobody believed him. Except possibly the Western media. As the deadline approaches, both Palestinian and Israeli negotiators have been saying that there is no chance for a solution any time soon. I’ve noticed an uptake in the number of voices warning that the two-state solution will be abandoned or become ‘unviable’ by the end of this year. Here Jonathan Freedman discusses the issue in the Guardian.
I don’t agree by any means with much of what he says (Israel’s leaders aren’t being held back from reaching a meaningful peace deal with the Palestinians by extremist parties in their coalitions, but by the very ideology on which their government is built).
Here’s our own Diana’s take on the topic-she saved me the bother of trying to coherently write out my own thoughts:
To be honest, I actually do not buy the “two-state solution is nearly dead” argument. The argument is premised on the fact that, with the growing number of settlements, separation between Israel and the WB becomes impossible. The problem with that argument is that it focuses on the infrastructure of the West Bank and assumes that either (a) Israel will not evacuate from the settlements and (b) that all that is needed is for a “viable” Palestinian state (an awful term coined by a friend of mine who shall remain anonymous). Under this theory, a “viable” state is the goal and can be achieved provided that the settlement construction doesn’t go out of whack. Tons of pontificators have come to the West Bank and declared the two-state solution “dead” and yet none have been able to answer a simple question: when did it die? In other words, at what point did Israeli cross the threshold of destroying the two-state solution and making a “viable” Palestinian state an impossibility? And for those who advocate that the two-state solution is “nearly dead” the question becomes many settlements have to go up before the state is considered “not viable”? And, isn’t it possible to dismantle settlements just as they were erected?
Don’t misunderstand me: I am not an advocate of the two-state solution (indeed, I think any talk of “solution” is escapism). That said, to me, the “death” of the two-state solution came on the very day that Israel chose to allow settlers to take hold of the West Bank (incl East Jerusalem) (ie. within 2 weeks of the start of the occupation). For me, it has little to do with the physical presence of settlements (for indeed they can be dismantled) but has everything to do with: (a) a mindset that allows settlements to be erected without repercussion (in fact now there is a case before the Supreme Court in which settlers argue that it would be inhumane not to extend water and electricity to the outposts) with the concomitant unwillingness on the part of the government to tear them down (b) a political mindset that is obsessed with controlling the Palestinians and (c) a government system that necessitates that deals be struck with fascist parties in order to pass the budget (over the past 20+ years, governments have fallen only due to corruption scandals or to failure to pass the budget; hence they make sure to court the fascists so they have enough votes to pass the budget). Being unwilling (or unable) to challenge that mindset means that Israel will perpetually seek to maintain control over the Palestinians (whether in the form of two states or one).
As for the article, the only fool who would call Livni a “master negotiator” is our favourite sell-out: Saeb. I have seen virtually all of the meeting notes from the negotiation sessions and the only thing that she is skilled at is erecting obstacles to ensure that the negotiators don’t make it to Jerusalem on time. (Abu Ala was once held for 3 hours at a checkpoint on the day that they were to meet for a “negotiation session”). I think he was peeved (poor thing).
Shoutout to Lowfields: I caught you schooling the Zionuts on Cif as well as you do here.
Related posts:
- Break Me Off a PEACE of that Kit Kat Bar!
- The Just and Lasting Solution for Israel-Palestine
- Just another war crime
- The Apartheid Solution
- One-State Solution Gathering in London
Tons of pontificators have come to the West Bank and declared the two-state solution “dead” and yet none have been able to answer a simple question: when did it die?
I personally believe that there has never been a realistic “two state” solution… and I think that option died in 1948, when Arabs lost the Arab Israeli war but decided to, instead of negotiating a peace they could live with, continue the fight in perpetuity by any and all means. The level of barbarity (all around) over the last 60 years, can’t be undone. Arabs can’t coexist with Israelis. There can’t be two states there, for that reason alone.
But I would think for “pundits”, the two-state solution died when HAMAS took over Gaza and attacks on Israel intensified, AFTER Israel dismantled settlements and unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. That’s a precedent that can’t be ignored.
Posted by programmer craig | September 17, 2008, 3:09 pmThe Two State Solution already exists – Gaza and Jordan.
As for those so eager to violently cleanse Jews from their homes in Israel – Mohammad, as an anti-semitic extremist who openly advocates the murder of Jews anywhere and everywhere, is fully committed to this notion – let’s flip that coin…
There is paltry little preventing the dismantling of the Palestinian settlements in Judea and Samaria, and indeed, the resettlement of their current, temporary tenants in that great, unsettled Arabian expanse which lies to the East of the Jordan River.
The Palestinians can’t properly rule and administer an area of 5 miles by 15 miles. For all the world’s intelligentsia, this depressing fact has not been missed.
Posted by Anonymous | September 17, 2008, 3:28 pmSaree Makdisi makes a rather compelling argument why a two-state solution is no longer feasible towards the end of his book “Palestine Inside Out” An Everyday Occupation”.
Posted by rebecca | September 17, 2008, 4:01 pmI saw Programmer Craig write:
“I personally believe that…
and I couldn’t help but to move on to the next comment.
Posted by Bonty | September 17, 2008, 4:19 pm“”
There is paltry little preventing the dismantling of the Palestinian settlements in Judea and Samaria, and indeed, the resettlement of their current, temporary tenants in that great, unsettled Arabian expanse which lies to the East of the Jordan River.”"
Uh, what? They’re not ‘settlements’, they’re full-on cities, composed for the most part with people who are trying to live their lives peacefully. By contrast, living on an illegal settlement is a choice; I’m a Jew, and generally pro-Israel, but if those who’ve chosen to live on illegal settlements were all driven off by lethal force, I’d say (with the exception of those too young to choose) they made their beds, good riddance.
The ultra-religious types in Israel, like the ultra-religious types most anywhere, are like cockroaches; they breed out of proportion to everyone and everything else, all they understand is force, and they stand in the way of any meaningful progress.
Posted by Joe | September 17, 2008, 6:29 pmWhich Jewish cities in the West Bank have you been to, Joe?
Posted by Anonymous | September 17, 2008, 6:44 pmJoe, you are an asshole.
Posted by Bonty | September 17, 2008, 7:25 pmLet me continue my thought…
Joe thinks he’s cool and has credibility because he finally visited the West Bank this past summer. For a few hours. Probably into Bethlehem or longer over to his uncle from Brooklyn’s house in a West Bank settlement — it’s a settlement, asshole — and then ventured on over to his other settler uncle from Long Island’s house in Hebron for a couple of days, where he and his cousins threw bricks at the Palestinians in the souq so they can all finally get so sick of life so much they’ll just finally decide to leave to Jordan — the real Palestine, right? where they belong?
I imagine Joe to be a white privileged male who probably attends a public policy or political science program — in Washington D.C. (so he can get a job fucking things up even more after graduation) but who plays the Jew card whenever he needs speak for the oppressed.
And this summer, he made sure he stepped one toe into a place he can never understand and refuses to understand, but it doesn’t matter — just that little toe says he can speak ABOUT the oppressed, too! I’m sure our resident expert commenter will write his thesis about this experience so you can read all about it in a couple of years.
Asshole.
Posted by Bonty | September 17, 2008, 7:45 pmAll I want to say is that no one ever proposed a two state solution to South Africa.
And to Programmer Craig, asides from the racial colonies and concentration camps scattered throughout the land, the Palestinians do co-exist with Israelies and recognize de facto that they are being occupied by a foreign entity with no genetic inheritance to the land whatsoever.
Posted by dopesexyfuck | September 17, 2008, 9:54 pmExcellent post ya Mohammad.
And Diana is right on the money (as usual).
Now this “master negotiator” is likely to take the helm and push Kadima’s ‘peace’ initiative. The last thing we need is for a protege of that mf Sharon to ‘take control’ of the situation. In addition to being skilled at erecting barriers, she’s one of the most arrogant condescending pieces of shit I’ve seen squeezed out of the Zionist political establishment lately… Things just keep getting worse I’m afraid.
Posted by Kalash | September 17, 2008, 11:01 pmDo you know why all Peace proceses fail, because thay are all based on a 2 state solution. I believe in a one state solution, why? well when you go the west bank, Israel, you will know that there is no chance to seperate those towns, villages and settelments into 2 states and 2 nations, it just wont work. the solution is a one state for all. After all the Holy Land is smaller than Long Island in NY
Posted by Ali | September 18, 2008, 1:25 am“Do you know why all Peace proceses fail…”
I’m sure hundreds of homicide bombers, thousands of Qassams, tens of thousands of bombings, sniping, knifing, rock throwing attacks have NOTHING to do with it.
If I were living in the shitholes of WB/Gaza, I would be desperately trying to get Israeli citizenship too. Keep trying.
Posted by Anonymous | September 18, 2008, 1:43 pmTo the anonymous above me: The West Bank isn’t a shithole, at least plenty of it isn’t? And lumping together the living situations in Gaza and the West Bank makes little sense?
“”Which Jewish cities in the West Bank have you been to, Joe?”"
Ramallah.
“”Joe thinks he’s cool and has credibility because he finally visited the West Bank this past summer. For a few hours. Probably into Bethlehem or longer over to his uncle from Brooklyn’s house in a West Bank settlement — it’s a settlement, asshole — and then ventured on over to his other settler uncle from Long Island’s house in Hebron for a couple of days,”"
Uh, why do you assume I have family in either Israel or New York? I have neither. That’s… kind of anti-semitic?
And you kind of missed my point entirely, with the “It’s a settlement, asshole”? Because my whole point is that the illegal Israeli settlements are just that — settlements — whereas the Palestinian ‘settlements’ are actual fucking cities, and using the term ‘settlement’ to describe them is a misnomer?
“”where he and his cousins threw bricks at the Palestinians in the souq so they can all finally get so sick of life so much they’ll just finally decide to leave to Jordan — the real Palestine, right? where they belong?”"
Uh… How would this jive with my politics, at all?
“”
I imagine Joe to be a white privileged male who probably attends a public policy or political science program — in Washington D.C. (so he can get a job fucking things up even more after graduation) but who plays the Jew card whenever he needs speak for the oppressed.”"
Not terribly privileged, but not un-privileged — middle-class kid who went to public school. Nailed me on the poli-sci public-policy in DC thing, just finished a join B.A.-M.A. in DC. My focus is East Asia, though, and I’m going into this work rather than doing something that’ll actually pay because I’m planning to help with that whole ‘un-fucking-up-the-world’ thing. Oh, and I don’t “play the Jew card”.
“”
And this summer, he made sure he stepped one toe into a place he can never understand and refuses to understand, but it doesn’t matter — just that little toe says he can speak ABOUT the oppressed, too! I’m sure our resident expert commenter will write his thesis about this experience so you can read all about it in a couple of years.”"
Understanding is relative, but judging from what you’ve got on display here, I understand it better than you.
“”All I want to say is that no one ever proposed a two state solution to South Africa.”"
Apples to oranges, and another problem with declaring the situation in Israel to be ‘apartheid’; it clouds your view of how any sort of legitimate, lasting peace that safeguarded liberal democracy and individual liberty might be achieved.
Posted by Joe | September 19, 2008, 2:12 amguys, try to dial down the knee jerk.
joe was on your side on this one — dismissing the idea that palestinian cities could be called “settlements” that could be easily dismantled.
try reading first!!!!
Posted by Anonymous | September 19, 2008, 4:44 am“Which Jewish cities in the West Bank have you been to, Joe?”
Ramallah.
That’s not a Jewish city.
I meant, have you been to any of the Jewish settlement cities you’re discussing. Ariel? Beitar Illit? Modi’in Illit?
These population centers, among others, number between 30-50k residents, each. This makes them considerably larger than 95% or more of Palestinian towns and villages.
To call a Palestinian village of 200 people a permanent city, and claim that a Jewish city of 40,000 people is a temporary settlement that can be torn down tomorrow is dishonest. I don’t think you’re lying. I think you’re misinformed.
If you went to Ariel or Beitar Illit, you would understand these are not hilltop caravan settlements full or crazy religious people. They are thriving metropolitan areas.
But why go to extremes. Elkana is a small Jewish village of about 1000 families (or 5000 people total). It is maybe a twenty minute drive from Tel Aviv, making it an attractive place to live for middle class professionals who want to raise families in a quiet, suburban environment.
It was walking the streets of Elkana that I realized no Jewish leader will ever give up a village of this size. I also thought, before vising there, that the settlements were temporary, because this is how they are portrayed in popular discourse. No. These are expanding towns and cities no different from any other, anywhere in the civilized world!
Elkana looks exactly like an American subdivision in Pennsylvania or New Jersey (because of the similar hilly terrain) – in fact, not very different from my own subdivision. The home designs were practically identical to what you would see here in the US.
So, the next time you dream of ethnically cleansing half a million Jews from their homes to the east of the “Green Line”, drive yourself to an any American subdivision and do a test run.
Walk up to a home owner and tell them that this is really not their house and not their property; it actually belongs to some Native American tribe that European colonizers fought a war with and conquered the land from. You are in DC, so there are many Native American tribes to choose from. Let’s say the Saponi, who inhabited parts of Virginia and North Carolina.
Tell them that if they don’t evacuate their homes, the Saponi Liberation Organization will begin a terrorist campaign of strapping on bomb belts and butchering American colonist children in kindergardens, or firing makeshift rockets at random into American urban areas, until this land is returned back to the Saponi people.
In fact, the population of Washington DC (500,000) is roughly equivalent to the number of Jews currently residing to the east of the Green Line. So, just ethnically cleanse that city, for comparison purposes. Fuck them, right? They should have known better than to colonize land that belonged to someone else.
This is what you’re proposing.
The next time you are in Israel, I strongly recommend you visit Elkana. I have some friends there you can stay with; a good family. Take your time. They’re not going anywhere.
Posted by Anonymous | September 19, 2008, 9:14 amso…if you put enough israelis on stolen land, giving that land back to the people it was stolen from over the last 40 years would be immoral?
Posted by Mohammad | September 19, 2008, 9:49 amMohammad, I can’t believe you took a break from supporting the indiscriminate mass murder of Jews to write that. We’re honored!
Posted by Anonymous | September 19, 2008, 11:32 amso… if you put enough Arabs on stolen land, giving that land back to the people it was stolen from over the last 2000 years would be immoral?
Posted by Anonymous | September 19, 2008, 11:34 amThen by your own examples America should indeed be given back to Native Americans.
Idiot.
Posted by Mohammad | September 19, 2008, 3:02 pmActually, that’s your example.
Islamofascist.
Posted by Anonymous | September 19, 2008, 3:11 pm“”
These population centers, among others, number between 30-50k residents, each. This makes them considerably larger than 95% or more of Palestinian towns and villages.”"
The particular numbers aren’t important, since, as noted earlier, the religious types in Israel breed like cockroaches. It’s little wonder they’re able to run up the numbers.
“”
To call a Palestinian village of 200 people a permanent city, and claim that a Jewish city of 40,000 people is a temporary settlement that can be torn down tomorrow is dishonest. I don’t think you’re lying. I think you’re misinformed.”"
I was referring to cities on the scale of Ramallah and Bethlehem. And I wasn’t denigrating the size of the Israeli establishments; it’s not the size that’s the issue, it’s their character, their location, and the means by which they were constructed.
“”Elkana”"
Elkana was founded by Gush Emunim, a group that barely deserves to be called human. Anyone who’s willing to live alongside them isn’t simply “rais[ing a] famil[y] in a quiet, suburban environment”, they’re willing to lay down with the devil and fuck over the rest of Israel in the process. ‘Collaborators’, let’s call them. Anyone with even a basic set of humanist principles would never agree to live in such a place.
Oh, and according to Wikipedia, “virtually all of the town’s residents are religious of a primarily national religious orientation.”
“”Walk up to a home owner and tell them that this is really not their house and not their property; it actually belongs to some Native American tribe that European colonizers fought a war with and conquered the land from. You are in DC, so there are many Native American tribes to choose from. Let’s say the Saponi, who inhabited parts of Virginia and North Carolina.”"
We get somewhat grandfathered in based on the “we did it way back when, when nobody gave a shit about fairness and justice” rule, with a side helping of “we’ve sure fixed up the place since then, and built one hell of a society that the native Americans are able to negotiate freely, as individuals if they so desire.”
Those same two principles also explain why I’m generally pro-Israel, FWIW.
Elkana was built only 20-or-so years ago, by people who were both crazy and evil. Its continued existence is an impediment to lasting peace and progress for everyone in the region — can’t really say the same for DC (unless you buy into the A.N.S.W.E.R. bullshit about how America’s the source of all the world’s ills).
Posted by Joe | September 20, 2008, 12:06 amWow, I didn’t know there were still fools who believed in “land for peace”.
Posted by Anonymous | September 20, 2008, 7:47 pmYou throw around words like “evil” with the carelessness of a teenage girl. Quizzical, for someone who does not believe in G-d, and thus negates the foundation of understanding the concepts of “good” and “evil”.
Posted by Anonymous | September 20, 2008, 7:54 pmLand for peace is real. Give us our land back, all of it, and go back to where you came from, and we will give you peace.
Posted by Samir | September 21, 2008, 8:21 am“”You throw around words like “evil” with the carelessness of a teenage girl. Quizzical, for someone who does not believe in G-d, and thus negates the foundation of understanding the concepts of “good” and “evil”.”"
I’m sorry, but if you really think that religion is the foundation for understanding concepts of good and evil, you’re practically too stupid to live.
Religion is the *ultimate* in relativism — whatever your god says, goes! If he hops down to Earth tomorrow and changes all the rules, adds an 11th commandment that says “eating babies is awesome”… what the fuck are you going to do about it? He’s god! And don’t say “God would never do that” — how the fuck do you know? You’re really so arrogant to think you can understand some all-powerful entity?
*My* principles, on the other hand, are rationally and empirically derived. They trace back to a fundamental understanding of our biology, and are grounded in a scientific approach to existence.
No, anon, *you’re* the relativist, and there’s no amount of theistic bullshit you can swallow and regurgitate to escape that point.
Posted by Joe | September 21, 2008, 3:20 pm“”Wow, I didn’t know there were still fools who believed in “land for peace”.”"
This implies that if it didn’t bring peace, abandoning the illegal settlements would be wrong — abandoning the settlements is right entirely regardless of what the Palestinians try to do. The settlers are a cancer upon the Israeli state.
Posted by Joe | September 21, 2008, 3:22 pm*My* principles, on the other hand, are rationally and empirically derived.
That’s what I’m worried about. It’s people like you, operating on “pure, empirical reason” who create concepts like “Lebensunwertes Leben”, as demonstrated by:
if you think that religion is the foundation for understanding concepts of good and evil, you’re practically too stupid to live.
But you’ll make sure to fix that, right?
Of all the Marxists and Islamofascist on this blog, I must say I have NEVER read something so truly frightening, so genuinely intolerant at a very basic, core, human level, as what you have written above.
What you’ve written is beyond the pale, beyond humanity. You’re not evil, you’re misguided, and that’s what makes your absolute confidence, your belief in your own reason so dangerous.
It is a faith no different from that of any other, except that history shows us what your faith leads to, G-d forbid.
Posted by Anonymous | September 21, 2008, 6:43 pm“”But you’ll make sure to fix that, right?”"
Uh, no? That’s the joy of America, for example — you build a system that subsumes base impulses like religiosity and converts them into something practical, or at the very least, harmful.
In ages past, you and I probably *would* have to be killing one another, as part of some existential fight for control of the body politic — I should note that that’s the true story of Hanukkah, in a nutshell, since you’re big on holiday stories. The Maccabees, the Jewish Taliban of their day, massacring secular Jews who’d seen the joys of Greek epicureanism, and were more interested in little things like Democritus and Leucippus first proposing that the world was made of frickin’ atoms nearly two millenia before Boyle.
Instead, we’ve got a system where you can believe some *pretty wacky shit* and still be a productive, functioning member of society. Given that you guys tend to breed more often and outnumber us to begin with (for reasons that may be genetic in origin — belief in god and the supernatural has been shown to be fairly heritable), that’s probably for the best for all involved.
“Too stupid to live” is meant more in the sense of “It’s a wonder you manage to dress yourself in the morning” rather than “Final battle, seculars versus black hats”.
Posted by Joe | September 21, 2008, 9:28 pmJoe,
You are so confused it is hard to know where to start. I’ll just go in order…
1) What you term “religiosity” is not a base impulse. Gasping for breath after being submerged in water is base impulse. Eating when you’re hungry is a base impulse. Protecting your children from attack is a base impulse. Maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain are base impulses. Having sex whenever your hormones demand is a base impulse.
Saying a blessing before eating is about delaying your base impulse (to eat when hungry) in order to thank G-d for the food and acknowledge that this is His creation. Wrapping tefillin every day, an inconvenience for which there is no “rational” explanation, goes against the base impulses of a human being.
Your “wherever my heart sees fit I will go” humanism is much more base than “religiosity”. I don’t know about other religions. We Jews have 613 commandments to follow. They haven’t changed in 3000 years. Only an ignoramus would say that complying with them – a challenge every Jew struggles with daily – is a “base instinct”.
Eating food without acknowledging G-d is a “base instinct”. Animals, for example, don’t say a blessing before eating, and they are not instructed to do so. It takes much dedication and personal refinement to achieve a state of sensitivity where you realize that eating without a blessing to G-d is a crass state of being.
Judaism is about elevating an individual above nature, above the animalistic “base instincts”, to connect with G-d, and to transform nature in service of G-d.
2) In ages past, you and I probably *would* have to be killing one another
G-d forbid, why would you say such a thing?! Where is this anger coming from? Why do you wish to kill me? The only one mentioning violence, over and over, is you!
3) You are not well read on the story of Hannukah. I’ll have to break down your points into several portions:
a) The Greek Hellenists were not atheists, they were polytheists. The Jewish revolt came not because of “atoms”, but because the Hellenists started erecting shrines to idols throughout the land, even in the Holy Temple!
The Hellenists were religious. They accepted the Jewish G-d. Their point was, you Jews are right, there is a G-d of gods. But there is also a god of the earth, and a god of the sun and a god of the trees. They were willing to accept the Jewish G-d, as long as the Jews accept all their gods in return. Moreover, they enforced their polytheism with military force!
It’s true, some Jews were lured to hedonism and polytheism at this time. Yet the Jewish nation did rebel, starting with the Maccabees. They weren’t the Taliban of their time! They were fighting a war to preserve the spiritual integrity of the Land of Israel and the Jewish people.
b) You chose the wrong person to BS with the “atoms” argument. The philosophers of antiquity had no modern understanding of atoms. Atomism deals with abstract, philosophical notions of a building block of reality. Epicurus, for example, believed that the difference between gods and humans was that the souls of gods adhere to their bodies without escaping while the forces holding human atoms together cannot hold the soul forever.
This was not the Bohr model or Molecular Orbital Theory! These people had no idea what they were talking about.
Furthermore, reading traditional Greek philosophy, after being acquainted with Jewish mysticism is like getting a Ph.D and going back to kindergarten. The questions Greek philosophers raise are not only answered by our tradition, the very premises on which those questions are made are invalidated by even a Jewish child’s understanding.
It is only your ignorance and arrogance that holds you back from learning the basic tenets of your own, incredible heritage, which has withstood 3000 years without a single successful challenge to its foundation, and which grows, from “strength to strength”, year after year, as the sun rises and falls on all others.
It is an injustice that you, as a Jew, spend time with this nonsense of people playing guessing games about the nature of existence when your own identity is interwoven with the fabric of creation!
600,000 Jewish heads of household, along with families numbering in the millions, stood Mt. Sinai and mutually witnessed an event unparalleled in the history of humanity. Nature itself bent on one knee. Not for one man did this occur, not in a dream; the entire world knew, in life, that the Jewish people were born! Fear descended upon the world of the Jewish people, for the knew that we carried the name of G-d.
Through our own mistakes, expulsions, dispersions, pogroms, assimilation and genocide we have survived, not just as a people, but as a nation united with our heritage and our inheritance. What other people have this history? What other people can claim such miracles? Wake up!
Your ignorance of your own people, your own inheritance needs to end. It’s time to grown up and take responsibility for your own learning, for your own yiddishkeit.
Posted by Firouz | September 22, 2008, 1:40 pm