NYT Op-Ed: One-State Compromise Needed..."Irastine"

Status
Not open for further replies.

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
It's a solid argument against a two-state solution. It blames both sides for making mistakes and having valid grievances, but also speaks to how the two cultures (Arab Muslim and Arab Jew) are interconnected in enough ways that a compromise can be reached and respected. I still think a strong third-party coalition will need to force the issue and make the two sides look beyond their own taste for revenge that has fueled this conflict for decades.

Text

By MUAMMAR QADDAFI

THE shocking level of the last wave of Israeli-Palestinian violence, which ended with this weekend?s cease-fire, reminds us why a final resolution to the so-called Middle East crisis is so important. It is vital not just to break this cycle of destruction and injustice, but also to deny the religious extremists in the region who feed on the conflict an excuse to advance their own causes.

But everywhere one looks, among the speeches and the desperate diplomacy, there is no real way forward. A just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians is possible, but it lies in the history of the people of this conflicted land, and not in the tired rhetoric of partition and two-state solutions.

Although it?s hard to realize after the horrors we?ve just witnessed, the state of war between the Jews and Palestinians has not always existed. In fact, many of the divisions between Jews and Palestinians are recent ones. The very name ?Palestine? was commonly used to describe the whole area, even by the Jews who lived there, until 1948, when the name ?Israel? came into use.

Jews and Muslims are cousins descended from Abraham. Throughout the centuries both faced cruel persecution and often found refuge with one another. Arabs sheltered Jews and protected them after maltreatment at the hands of the Romans and their expulsion from Spain in the Middle Ages.

The history of Israel/Palestine is not remarkable by regional standards ? a country inhabited by different peoples, with rule passing among many tribes, nations and ethnic groups; a country that has withstood many wars and waves of peoples from all directions. This is why it gets so complicated when members of either party claims the right to assert that it is their land.

The basis for the modern State of Israel is the persecution of the Jewish people, which is undeniable. The Jews have been held captive, massacred, disadvantaged in every possible fashion by the Egyptians, the Romans, the English, the Russians, the Babylonians, the Canaanites and, most recently, the Germans under Hitler. The Jewish people want and deserve their homeland.

But the Palestinians too have a history of persecution, and they view the coastal towns of Haifa, Acre, Jaffa and others as the land of their forefathers, passed from generation to generation, until only a short time ago.

Thus the Palestinians believe that what is now called Israel forms part of their nation, even were they to secure the West Bank and Gaza. And the Jews believe that the West Bank is Samaria and Judea, part of their homeland, even if a Palestinian state were established there. Now, as Gaza still smolders, calls for a two-state solution or partition persist. But neither will work.

A two-state solution will create an unacceptable security threat to Israel. An armed Arab state, presumably in the West Bank, would give Israel less than 10 miles of strategic depth at its narrowest point. Further, a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip would do little to resolve the problem of refugees. Any situation that keeps the majority of Palestinians in refugee camps and does not offer a solution within the historical borders of Israel/Palestine is not a solution at all.

For the same reasons, the older idea of partition of the West Bank into Jewish and Arab areas, with buffer zones between them, won?t work. The Palestinian-held areas could not accommodate all of the refugees, and buffer zones symbolize exclusion and breed tension. Israelis and Palestinians have also become increasingly intertwined, economically and politically.

In absolute terms, the two movements must remain in perpetual war or a compromise must be reached. The compromise is one state for all, an ?Isratine? that would allow the people in each party to feel that they live in all of the disputed land and they are not deprived of any one part of it.

A key prerequisite for peace is the right of return for Palestinian refugees to the homes their families left behind in 1948. It is an injustice that Jews who were not originally inhabitants of Palestine, nor were their ancestors, can move in from abroad while Palestinians who were displaced only a relatively short time ago should not be so permitted.

It is a fact that Palestinians inhabited the land and owned farms and homes there until recently, fleeing in fear of violence at the hands of Jews after 1948 ? violence that did not occur, but rumors of which led to a mass exodus. It is important to note that the Jews did not forcibly expel Palestinians. They were never ?un-welcomed.? Yet only the full territories of Isratine can accommodate all the refugees and bring about the justice that is key to peace.

Assimilation is already a fact of life in Israel. There are more than one million Muslim Arabs in Israel; they possess Israeli nationality and take part in political life with the Jews, forming political parties. On the other side, there are Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Israeli factories depend on Palestinian labor, and goods and services are exchanged. This successful assimilation can be a model for Isratine.

If the present interdependence and the historical fact of Jewish-Palestinian coexistence guide their leaders, and if they can see beyond the horizon of the recent violence and thirst for revenge toward a long-term solution, then these two peoples will come to realize, I hope sooner rather than later, that living under one roof is the only option for a lasting peace.

Muammar Qaddafi is the leader of Libya.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: Farang
This seems really odd coming from Qaddafi. I wonder if he has lost his marbles
He's not a Holocaust denier like Ahmadinejad. He's always been a shrewd politician, but I think the aging process has also made him a better statesman.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,395
8,558
126
i don't think either side is mature enough to accept a 1 state solution of any sort.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Not workable. A mandatory Right of Return kills the deal straight off. If exercised it would likely result in a 40% non-jewish Israeli population. At that point small demographic shifts over even a small amount of time could easily lead to a Jewish minority, thus destroying the purpose of the state of Israel as a home for the Jews. Either you agree with the idea of a Jewish homeland or you do not. If you do, a one state solution is not tenable, at least as proposed above.
 

Turin39789

Lifer
Nov 21, 2000
12,218
8
81
Originally posted by: jonks
Not workable. A mandatory Right of Return kills the deal straight off. If exercised it would likely result in a 40% non-jewish Israeli population. At that point small demographic shifts over even a small amount of time could easily lead to a Jewish minority, thus destroying the purpose of the state of Israel as a home for the Jews. Either you agree with the idea of a Jewish homeland or you do not. If you do, a one state solution is not tenable, at least as proposed above.

I don't believe in mandating a homeland for any religion.
 

mxyzptlk

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,888
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
i don't think either side is mature enough to accept a 1 state solution of any sort.

I agree, but I see this as a reason for both sides to grow up a bit in an effort to make it work, not a reason to dismiss the entire idea all together.

It's most unfortunate that it wont work without full commitment from both sides. There's a lot of room for failure, but ultimately it's the only solution that its fair and equitable.

It's the best solution, but it's also the hardest to implement.

also, I think the name should be Palisrael.

sounds cooler :p
 

0marTheZealot

Golden Member
Apr 5, 2004
1,692
0
0
Originally posted by: jonks
Not workable. A mandatory Right of Return kills the deal straight off. If exercised it would likely result in a 40% non-jewish Israeli population. At that point small demographic shifts over even a small amount of time could easily lead to a Jewish minority, thus destroying the purpose of the state of Israel as a home for the Jews. Either you agree with the idea of a Jewish homeland or you do not. If you do, a one state solution is not tenable, at least as proposed above.

The way the demographics are, Israel won't have a Jewish majority in 40 or 50 years. It's inevitable. There are simply not enough Jews having kids compared to Arabs having kids. So the question is, how soon will the Jewish majority become the Jewish minority. Not if.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
So all the Islamic factions dont want to push the jews back into the sea now?



This is breaking news!
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
He may be right in advocating a 1-state solution over the long term, but in the short term it isn't going to happen. Until the standard of living for those in the West Bank and Gaza rises, there will always be hatred and suspicion on both sides. Poverty on such a scale breeds discontent and hatred. This is why a two-state solution is good in the short term, if and only if Israel enacts policies allowing these areas to have some semblance of prosperity. After that, probably a generation or so of "cooling off" would a 1-state solution be possible. You cannot have a 1-state solution with such high animosity between major segments of your population.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
A one state solution might seem impossible until the other alternatives are examined and found even more wanting.

I think we are past the Oslo days where we believed we could find some common ground agreement between the two sides and get peace that way.

It may well take rather strong and final third party binding arbitration to ever get a fair and lasting settlement, here is the best fair settlement, now like it or lump it. And a one State solution becomes doable if both sides have common goals. Israeli apartheid separation and segregation in their educational system, is also needed. Just as forced school integration has ended up proving beneficial to the USA despite earlier. protests.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I have a One-State solution: Israel.

So do a lot of people: Not Israel. Look where that kind of thinking gets ya...

/reloads sarcasm meter batteries....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.