Roadmaps in the Middle East
Roadmaps in the Middle East
There has been a lot of discussion recently about a ?roadmap to peace in the Middle East?. Some see progress on this front as a source of good news. I am going to suggest, however, that the current roadmap is pointing us very much in the wrong direction.
First, I want to clarify that I am not going to blame G.W. Bush for the current roadmap (much rejoicing, perhaps, given some of my posts in other AO threads). The current roadmap is a product of the work of many countries and has been widely endorsed across the international and political spectrum. In the past days, it has even won the apparent - qualified - endorsement of the two parties whose opinion may seem to count the most: the Palestinian and Israeli leaders (who, exactly, is the current Palestinian leader I leave for you to decide, but I believe that, for the present, both Arafat and Abbas seem to be offering support for the ?roadmap?).
Despite its apparent ? qualified - acceptance, I do not see the current roadmap as leading us anywhere. Further I don?t see it serving the interests of either the Israelis or the Palestinians. Simply put, an independent Palestine in the current West Bank and Gaza strip will not be a viable country. It will be a divided, squeezed and impoverished rump of a nation. Further, it will not fulfill the dreams and desires of Palestinians, which are for a right to live in what they consider to be ALL of Palestine (including what is now Israel). The population will be seething and ripe for future violent action against their neighbour.
And for Israel - as a result - the creation of an independent Palestine will not provide security. An end to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza will prevent Israel from taking forward action ? however awful this action continues to be ? against terrorist cells within these areas. Further, giving up the settlements in these areas is politically impossible: we are not talking about the equivalent of the scattered symbolic settlements in the Sinai which were given up for peace with Egypt: in the West Bank, especially in the areas near Jerusalem, we would be talking about effectively dismantling what has effectively become ? right or wrong ? part of Israel. And then there is the issue of Jerusalem itself?.
In the end, I believe, both the Israelis and the Palestinians realize that the current plan is not viable. The endorsement of their leadership for the plan is just buying time. In Sharon?s case, he can afford to say that he supports it, but then wait for the inevitable terrorist attacks to make any progress impossible. In the end, he hopes the international community (or at least the Americans ? who, for Sharon, effectively constitutes the ?international community?) will come to accept the de facto permanent control of Israel over this territory. Although terrorism will continue, cordoning off the Palestinians behind security fences will help control it at manageable levels. For the Palestinians, it is more difficult to know what the upsides of the current roadmap are. Let?s just say that they don?t have many options at the present other than to play along.
If I am so pessimistic about the current ?roadmap?, do I have an alternative? I do.
My alternative roadmap is based on three principles. First, Israel is, and must remain, a Jewish homeland. Second, the creation of a Palestinian state separate from Israel, and within the current boundaries of the West Bank and Gaza, is not a viable option. Third, the Palestinians have a right to return to all of Palestine as their homeland.
There is a clear way to achieve a solution consistent with these principles: Palestine and Israel must be a single state. To achieve this, we must reconsider the underlying concept of modern Israel (and reconsider the current proposals for a separate Palestine). Above all, we must reconsider the principle of a ?Jewish state? (and a ?Palestinian state?). In my view, it is fundamentally wrong to consider a state in the context of the historical reality of what is modern-day Israel to have a single religious or cultural identity. Israel was not a Jewish state when it was founded and it is not a Jewish state now. Rather, it is a state containing many Jews, many Arabs (Jewish and non-Jewish ? the category of ?Arab? being non-exclusive), and many Muslims. This is true even aside from the population of the West Bank and Gaza.
Therefore, to say that Israel is a Jewish state is simply untrue and unjust. However, we must fully acknowledge that in the hearts of Jews worldwide, Israel is their homeland. This is also reality. Further, the present Jewish population in what is now Israel (and the West Bank) is not going anywhere: it is there to stay.
The solution, therefore, is to abolish the unrealistic concept of a ?Jewish state? and to replace it with a concept of a ?Jewish homeland?. Commensurately, we must abolish any idea of creating a separate Palestinian state, and this for many of the same reasons that a Jewish state is incorrect. Instead, the West Bank, Gaza AND what is now Israel must also be considered a Palestinian homeland and a Jewish homeland.
But can Jews and Palestinians live together in peace in a single territory?: Yes. In fact, they lived together in peace for centuries and I believe that they can once again live in peace. Further, the relatively good relations between the Jews and Muslims within what is now Israel (not including what is now called the West Bank and Gaza) are a demonstration of the ability of the communities to live together.
But who could live where under my alternative?: Freedom of movement and habitation would exist throughout the single territory. There is no reason that Muslims and Jews should be segregated from each other. Indeed, the concept of segregation is offensive.
But can security be guaranteed?: No, there is no absolute guarantee of security and there will be some who will resist the solution of a single state, probably violently. However, if a mass of Jews and Muslims unite behind the ideal of a single state, this ideal will be much easier to defend. Further, I hope that success of the ideal will convince many of those who initially disagree.
But what about disputes of ownership about individual properties ? disputes that go back to the creation of modern Israel and the exodus of part of the former Palestinian population? This is a very difficult question, but can be worked out, I believe by appropriate compensation plans, granting of alternative properties, buybacks, and cooperative arrangements. [As an aside I would add that if any Jews and Palestinians don?t get the land they want, I say, ?Come here to Canada?: I know Jews and Palestinians in Canada, know how much they have done and can do for our country, and frankly would love to have more immigrate and be citizens here.]
I could say much more, but I am tired. I will acknowledge that my solution is almost hopelessly idealistic and will be difficult or even impossible to achieve. I nevertheless believe that it is the correct solution and, despite its perhaps hopeless idealism, it is the only realistic plan.
There has been a lot of discussion recently about a ?roadmap to peace in the Middle East?. Some see progress on this front as a source of good news. I am going to suggest, however, that the current roadmap is pointing us very much in the wrong direction.
First, I want to clarify that I am not going to blame G.W. Bush for the current roadmap (much rejoicing, perhaps, given some of my posts in other AO threads). The current roadmap is a product of the work of many countries and has been widely endorsed across the international and political spectrum. In the past days, it has even won the apparent - qualified - endorsement of the two parties whose opinion may seem to count the most: the Palestinian and Israeli leaders (who, exactly, is the current Palestinian leader I leave for you to decide, but I believe that, for the present, both Arafat and Abbas seem to be offering support for the ?roadmap?).
Despite its apparent ? qualified - acceptance, I do not see the current roadmap as leading us anywhere. Further I don?t see it serving the interests of either the Israelis or the Palestinians. Simply put, an independent Palestine in the current West Bank and Gaza strip will not be a viable country. It will be a divided, squeezed and impoverished rump of a nation. Further, it will not fulfill the dreams and desires of Palestinians, which are for a right to live in what they consider to be ALL of Palestine (including what is now Israel). The population will be seething and ripe for future violent action against their neighbour.
And for Israel - as a result - the creation of an independent Palestine will not provide security. An end to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza will prevent Israel from taking forward action ? however awful this action continues to be ? against terrorist cells within these areas. Further, giving up the settlements in these areas is politically impossible: we are not talking about the equivalent of the scattered symbolic settlements in the Sinai which were given up for peace with Egypt: in the West Bank, especially in the areas near Jerusalem, we would be talking about effectively dismantling what has effectively become ? right or wrong ? part of Israel. And then there is the issue of Jerusalem itself?.
In the end, I believe, both the Israelis and the Palestinians realize that the current plan is not viable. The endorsement of their leadership for the plan is just buying time. In Sharon?s case, he can afford to say that he supports it, but then wait for the inevitable terrorist attacks to make any progress impossible. In the end, he hopes the international community (or at least the Americans ? who, for Sharon, effectively constitutes the ?international community?) will come to accept the de facto permanent control of Israel over this territory. Although terrorism will continue, cordoning off the Palestinians behind security fences will help control it at manageable levels. For the Palestinians, it is more difficult to know what the upsides of the current roadmap are. Let?s just say that they don?t have many options at the present other than to play along.
If I am so pessimistic about the current ?roadmap?, do I have an alternative? I do.
My alternative roadmap is based on three principles. First, Israel is, and must remain, a Jewish homeland. Second, the creation of a Palestinian state separate from Israel, and within the current boundaries of the West Bank and Gaza, is not a viable option. Third, the Palestinians have a right to return to all of Palestine as their homeland.
There is a clear way to achieve a solution consistent with these principles: Palestine and Israel must be a single state. To achieve this, we must reconsider the underlying concept of modern Israel (and reconsider the current proposals for a separate Palestine). Above all, we must reconsider the principle of a ?Jewish state? (and a ?Palestinian state?). In my view, it is fundamentally wrong to consider a state in the context of the historical reality of what is modern-day Israel to have a single religious or cultural identity. Israel was not a Jewish state when it was founded and it is not a Jewish state now. Rather, it is a state containing many Jews, many Arabs (Jewish and non-Jewish ? the category of ?Arab? being non-exclusive), and many Muslims. This is true even aside from the population of the West Bank and Gaza.
Therefore, to say that Israel is a Jewish state is simply untrue and unjust. However, we must fully acknowledge that in the hearts of Jews worldwide, Israel is their homeland. This is also reality. Further, the present Jewish population in what is now Israel (and the West Bank) is not going anywhere: it is there to stay.
The solution, therefore, is to abolish the unrealistic concept of a ?Jewish state? and to replace it with a concept of a ?Jewish homeland?. Commensurately, we must abolish any idea of creating a separate Palestinian state, and this for many of the same reasons that a Jewish state is incorrect. Instead, the West Bank, Gaza AND what is now Israel must also be considered a Palestinian homeland and a Jewish homeland.
But can Jews and Palestinians live together in peace in a single territory?: Yes. In fact, they lived together in peace for centuries and I believe that they can once again live in peace. Further, the relatively good relations between the Jews and Muslims within what is now Israel (not including what is now called the West Bank and Gaza) are a demonstration of the ability of the communities to live together.
But who could live where under my alternative?: Freedom of movement and habitation would exist throughout the single territory. There is no reason that Muslims and Jews should be segregated from each other. Indeed, the concept of segregation is offensive.
But can security be guaranteed?: No, there is no absolute guarantee of security and there will be some who will resist the solution of a single state, probably violently. However, if a mass of Jews and Muslims unite behind the ideal of a single state, this ideal will be much easier to defend. Further, I hope that success of the ideal will convince many of those who initially disagree.
But what about disputes of ownership about individual properties ? disputes that go back to the creation of modern Israel and the exodus of part of the former Palestinian population? This is a very difficult question, but can be worked out, I believe by appropriate compensation plans, granting of alternative properties, buybacks, and cooperative arrangements. [As an aside I would add that if any Jews and Palestinians don?t get the land they want, I say, ?Come here to Canada?: I know Jews and Palestinians in Canada, know how much they have done and can do for our country, and frankly would love to have more immigrate and be citizens here.]
I could say much more, but I am tired. I will acknowledge that my solution is almost hopelessly idealistic and will be difficult or even impossible to achieve. I nevertheless believe that it is the correct solution and, despite its perhaps hopeless idealism, it is the only realistic plan.
Comments
A palestinian state is the only way to guarantee the status of palestine within future single state or union solution. If the were to form a single country now it would be on very uneven premises.
Personally I think the "union" idea is best. It could include Lebanon, Jordan and Syria, and be sort of like a mini EU. with a free flow of people and goods.
Palestine is not viable with its present borders..
I have made similar points at AI & been shouted down.
But I would like to see some really courageous thinking from both sides in order to settle these on going problems.
Namely,
I think that the Gaza Strip should be handed over to Israel. AND In return, Israel should hand over an equal proportion of its own territory in order to make up for the Palestinian's loss of Gaza. And I don't mean occupied land.
A sort of swap if you will...
It would make security / commerce etc for both parties far easier to control...
But like I said, no one has the courage or vision to put such a radical proposal forward..
No would dare for fear of being killed..
Violence is always the best answer when logic cannot be rebutted..
Originally posted by Scott
See the whole problem here is that it ignore the part of the rest of the Arab Muslim world. Let's say Israel and Palestine make peace next Tuesday. Too bad, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran .... will continue the terror war against the Jews.
So who do we Invade next ?
Originally posted by Scott
Huh?
As in like Iraq.....you know...Saddam made it known to the whole world that he wanted the destruction of Israel..
So if the others rattle their swords in similar fashion, shouldn't we go in and take out their regimes?
My point being that the solution is not just Palestine and Israel. If those were the only two involved in this "war" that would be fine. But a significant part of the arab muslim world still wants Israel to die and be erased from the map. Hence IMO any solution that does not include the total solution will not work.
Aquafire: Land swaps have in fact been suggested as part of the two-state solution. I have not heard of a suggestion under which the Palestinians would give up Gaza, but I have heard Israel floating ideas under which the Palestinians would give up claims to certain key land in the West Bank (near Jerusalem, I believe), in exchange for certain other land in what is now part of Israel proper. My point, however, is that a two state resolution - land swaps or no - is not actually going satisfy the concerns of either party and is not going to result in a viable Palestian state
Scott: It is a given that any peace deal - the current roadmap or any other- will require the active cooperation of Arab nations in order to succeed. I don't disagree with you there. I also don't disagree that this will be difficult to achieve. Things are going to have to change .
That would just about fix it.
Unless they ( Hezbollah ) moderate their stance, re : the anhihilation of Israel, there will be a civil war between Palestinians in the not too distant future.
Something that is already starting to happen in the Palestinian " Camps " of Lebanon.
The Palestinians can't support both their Prime Minister's call for peace as well as supporting Hezbollah.
Either they go down the road of Democracy or they continue the slide into perdition..the road of violence & bloodshed.
One path is for the Ballot the other for the Bullet.
Originally posted by Scott
Too bad, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran .... will continue the terror war against the Jews.
Too bad you're too racist to know that this isn't true.
Originally posted by bunge
Too bad you're too racist to know that this isn't true.
.
Cool down Bunge.
I think Scott is pointing to the relative & ongoing " History " of animosity in those countries against Jewish people.
But then I don't supose you would consider attacks on Jews as Racist or are you being one sided just to start a flame war?
Originally posted by aquafire
There is no way known that Hezbollah etc will accept this road map.
Unless they ( Hezbollah ) moderate their stance, re : the anhihilation of Israel, there will be a civil war between Palestinians in the not too distant future.
Something that is already starting to happen in the Palestinian " Camps " of Lebanon.
The Palestinians can't support both their Prime Minister's call for peace as well as supporting Hezbollah.
Either they go down the road of Democracy or they continue the slide into perdition..the road of violence & bloodshed.
One path is for the Ballot the other for the Bullet.
Well that's part of the problem for the middle east. These contries allow outside groups to operate in there territory and effect foreign policy for them. They need to gain control over what goes on in their own contries. Hamas, IJ, Al Queda a like foreign invading forces.
Originally posted by bunge
Too bad you're too racist to know that this isn't true.
Pointing out the truth makes me racist?
In that his mouth often "races" ahead of his brain.
Originally posted by aquafire
There is no way known that Hezbollah etc will accept this road map.
Unless they ( Hezbollah ) moderate their stance, re : the anhihilation of Israel, there will be a civil war between Palestinians in the not too distant future.
Something that is already starting to happen in the Palestinian " Camps " of Lebanon.
The Palestinians can't support both their Prime Minister's call for peace as well as supporting Hezbollah.
Either they go down the road of Democracy or they continue the slide into perdition..the road of violence & bloodshed.
One path is for the Ballot the other for the Bullet.
I think, however, that one of the reasons that there is support for Hezbollah is that what is now being proposed in the roadmap for peace does not actually give any hope to the Palestinians. They are smart enough to see that what they will get is a non-viable divided nation with no control over its borders, no control over its water supplies (a VERY big issue in the area - but one that is not often discussed in Western media), poor economic prospects, and corrupt leadership.
Actually, I don't think that what is now being proposed in the roadmap to peace offers much hope to Israelis either, as I explained in my opening post in this thread. Israelis realize that giving up the West Bank and Gaza is impossible from a practical perspective and will not guarentee security. In their hearts, most Isrealis have given up on the peace process and, as a result, have also voted for bullets.
What is needed instead is a proposal for a roadmap to peace that satisfies the actual underlying needs of the parties and offers real hope. We may have to take a mental leap to get there. I offer my proposal (detailed in the first post of this thread).
Originally posted by aquafire
Bunge's a real Race-ist in the true sense of the word..
In that his mouth often "races" ahead of his brain.
DOH!
Check out today's headlines. Hezbolla has stated that attacks could end as soon as next week if serious peace plans move forward. It's Israel that's saying this isn't enough.
Sounds to me like the tables are turned scott, and your original comments are not in fact the truth, but racist lies.
Originally posted by Scott
3) World figures out that terrorism is bad even when it happens to Jews and Americans.
Dear Scott:
Before September 11 2001, terrorists were killing people all over the world. In Spain, in Ireland, in Sri Lanka, in Angola, everywhere. Even Jewish nationalists (what we call 'Zionists') have had a bash, blowing up hotels and plotting to kill the Prime Minister of Britain (they taped a bomb to his bench in the House of Commons. It didn't go off.)
It's never been nice, it's never been good. But where I live, in London, people have blowing up office blocks, bandstands and hotels for years. It isn't new just because it's happened to you.
It's not a case of "World figures out that terrorism is bad even when it happens to Jews and Americans." It's a case of "Hi! Join the fun!"
In the words of Corialanus: "There is a world elsewhere." Yes indeed, it's called Everywhere Else Outside the Borders Of the Nation Where Scott Lives, and I BEG you, don't visit it. You won't like it. It's more dangerous than your country, some of it's in France, and the dentists are terrible.
Stay at home.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Dear Scott:
[rantrantrant]
That was good entertainment.