When discussion first surfaced a year or two ago about an Israeli call for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a "Jewish State," criticisms of the Israeli government burst forth. Why was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adding a new requirement? It's unrealistic, it was said, and demonstrated anew that the Israeli premier wasn't really interested in negotiations and peace with the Palestinians.
One of the striking moments of the prime minister's address before Congress on Tuesday was his focus on exactly this point. He called on Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to stand before his people and say six courageous words: "I will accept a Jewish state."
Netanyahu continued: "Those six words will change history. They will make clear to the Palestinians that this conflict must come to an end. That they are building a state not to continue the conflict with Israel, but to end it."
It may not be so obvious to everyone why the Israeli prime minister emphasized the words "Jewish state." Isn't it sufficient for the Palestinians to recognize the state of Israel?
Netanyahu's words reflect an understanding of "old wine in new bottles," of how Arab and Palestinian historic rejection of Israel's existence can appear to change in a post-Oslo world but, in fact, represent the same rejectionism that has plagued this conflict for more than six decades.
The very concept of Israel as expressed in three documents -- the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the U.N. Partition resolution of 1947, and the Israeli Declaration of Independence of 1948 -- was as the home for the Jewish people based on the historic connection of the Jews to the land.
All three documents recognized the rights of Arab residents. Balfour called for no violation of their civil rights, the U.N. required a division of the land so that Arabs would have their own state, and the Declaration of Independence asserted full and equal rights for the Arab citizens of the new state -- in other words, a complete democracy in a Jewish state.
Aside from Hamas, which is blunt about its rejection of Israel, other Palestinians, in light of their commitments under the Oslo accords refrain from using the old Palestine Liberation Organization language about Israel. No more the assertion that Israel needs to be thrown into the sea; instead, it's a two-state solution.
Yet significant parts of Israeli society believe that when the Palestinians say two states, they do not mean an Arab Palestinian state and a Jewish state, but a Palestinian state and a bi-national state. After all, if it was to be the former, then the Palestinians would acknowledge that the refugee problem should be resolved primarily within the new Palestinian state, just as the Jewish refugee problem was resolved by their absorption into Israel.
The fact that Abbas refuses to relinquish the "right of return" indicates that the Israeli state the Palestinians envision recognizing would in no way resemble the kind of state embodied in the Zionist concept of a homeland for the Jewish people.
That is why Israeli leaders across the political spectrum make clear there can be no peace agreement until the Palestinians stop demanding that refugees and their descendants be settled in Israel.
The call for the Palestinians to accept Israel as a Jewish state, however, recognizes that the refugee problem, as serious as it is, is still a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. This fundamental opposition to a Jewish state remains a tool to satisfy the goal of upending the Jewishness behind the state of Israel.
And it is exactly that Jewishness the enemies of Israel see as the true provocation.
It speaks to the long history of relations between Jews and Muslims through the centuries, a relationship that in many ways was better than that of Jews living under Christians in Europe, but was still characterized by a consistent Muslim belief in Jewish inferiority and second-class status.
This kind of thinking suffused that part of the world, even when individuals or political parties were not Islamic in any way. It didn't matter if the ruler was pan-Arabist, Socialist, or otherwise secularist; even those of a non-Islamic bent shared pejorative notions about the Jews.
Israel, if it stands for anything in the Arab mind, is an assertion of Jewish equality. This is difficult for Arabs and Muslims to swallow under any circumstances, but particularly so because that assertion is being made in the heartland of the Arab world.
Netanyahu's statement that recognition of a Jewish state would change everything is truly an effort to get to the core of the problem.
Now is the right time for the Palestinians to say it. It is time they start teaching their children to say it. It is time to start acting in a way that removes any question of the legitimacy of a Jewish state in the Holy Land. It's hard to do, and there will be resistance. But if done, it offers the hope of changing for the better the lives of millions of Palestinians and Israelis.
"On September 3, UNSCOP issued its report to the General Assembly............
"It noted that the population of Palestine at the end of 1946 was estimated to be almost 1,846,000, with 1,203,000 Arabs (65 percent) and 608,000 Jews (33 percent). Growth of the Jewish population had been mainly the result of immigration, while growth of the Arab population had been “almost entirely” due to natural increase.
(United Nations Special Committee on Palestine Report to the General Assembly, September 3, 1947)
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/07175de9fa2de563852568d3006e10f3?OpenDocument
"In-Migration and Demographic Transformation: Palestine in 1882 had a small, native, and migrant religious Jewish community of roughly 24,000 among a Palestinian population of nearly 500,000. There were several waves of politically inspired immigration into the country."
http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/ContentDetails/i/2963
I would suggest that since at no stage prior to 1948 did Jews in Palestine reach a majority of the population. That the state of Israel far from representing Jewish equality, represent an ideology of Jewish superiority
I woulld also suggest that this comment is also relivant to this discussion
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Aussieposter/netanyahu-aipac-speech-1967-borders_n_865990_89665110.html
You are quite wrong. "Why was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adding a new requirement?" It's not called a new requirement, it's a precondition that has been newly added to further prevent any negotiations.
When will Bibi stand before his people and say six courageous words: "I will accept a Palestinian state?"
Palestine does not belong to the Jews and their right to the land is neither antecedent nor superior to that of the Arabs. Jews may have lived in Palestine 2000 years ago but the Arabs have established over one-and-half thousand years of continuous Arab-Muslim presence, and were only dispossessed of it by superior force and colonial machination which continues to this day.
The Palestinians (as represented by the PLO) formally recognized both the reality of the state of Israel and "its right to live in peace and security" as per the September 9, 1993 letter from Chairman Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin and the subsequent double amendment of the PLO's Charter in 1996 and 1999.
What they cannot be expected to do is to renege on their past, deny their identity, and give up on what they believe is their history. They cannot be expected to become Zionists.
Israel, and you, will need to accept a Palestinian state and start respecting the right of the people who occupied the land before you or you will not have peace. The burden is on you.
“former Fatah security commander Muhammad Dahlan ... called on Hamas not to recognize Israel’s right to exist, pointing out that Fatah had never recognized it.” Speaking on Palestinian Authority TV, Dahlan said reports that Fatah demanded Hamas recognize Israel as a precondition for a Palestinian unity government were "misleading."
“They [Hamas] say that Fatah has asked them to recognize Israel’s right to exist and this is a big deception. For the one thousandth time, I want to reaffirm that we are not asking Hamas to recognize Israel’s right to exist. Rather, we are asking Hamas not to do so because Fatah never recognized Israel’s right to exist .... We acknowledge that the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization] did recognize Israel’s right to exist, but we are not bound by it as a resistance [terrorist] faction.”
GO FIND THE AMENDED PORTION AND POST A LINK OR RETRACT IT!
In my view its best to keep Jewish/Muslim/Christian designations out of country identity.
For example, an Israeli passport as opposed to a Jewish passport..... or a Palestinian passport as opposed to an Islamic passport
"When they hear that Sharia law needs to be introduced, which basically means that Christians cannot testify in court as equals, that they are inferior - this is something that is very hard for any minority in the world, does not matter if they are Christians or not - very hard to understand or to accept in the 21st century, which is about tolerance and is about modernity. That's why we've had millions of them get up and flee to other parts of the world, where they don't feel threatened."
http://moderntribalist.blogspot.com/2005/12/christians-leaving-middle-east-due-to.html
http://www.persecution.org/2010/12/11/muslim-genocide-of-christians-throughout-middle-east/
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/raymond-ibrahim-in-the-face-of-muslim-persecution-of-christians-the-humanitarian-west-yawns.html
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34882
Of the 175 Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel.
Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel.
The UN was silent while 58 Jerusalem Synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians.
The UN was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.
The UN was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like a policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIEeiDjdUuU
just goes to show what a rogue apartheid state Israel has become in it continued occupation and dehumanization and victimization of Palestinians.
“Countering official Zionist historiography, Sand questions whether the Jewish People ever existed as a national group with a common origin in the Land of Israel/Palestine. He concludes that the Jews should be seen as a religious community comprising a mishmash of individuals and groups that had converted to the ancient monotheistic religion but do not have any historical right to establish an independent Jewish state in the Holy Land. In short, the Jewish People, according to Sand, are not really a “people” in the sense of having a common ethnic origin and national heritage. They certainly do not have a political claim over the territory that today constitutes Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem.”
"There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
- Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
And with a former PLO terrorist.
Walid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
“Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
“We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
“When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
Bibi's insolence has been tolerated for long enough.
But if the Saudis are worse, why does Israel get disproportionate coverage?
The Arabs continue their attempts to deny the Jewish People its right to national self-determination in even part of its ancestral homelands; while hypocritically demanding that same right for the Arab Palestinian People, whose claim to separate nationhood is shaky at best.
The demand for "right of return", bickering over percentages (95% or 99% of West Bank) etc. argue strongly against the notion of Arab Palestinian nationhood. What real nation would demand its nationals be settled on the territory of ANOTHER state, rather than in THEIR OWN independent nation state? What nation, given the possibility of achieving independence (for the first time in its history!), would not take that opportunity, because of 1-2% of territory? All this demonstrates an absence of true national aspirations. The more I hear demands for the "right of return", the more I become convinced that Palestinian Arabs are NOT a separate nation. They're a part of the Arab nation, indistinguishable from Jordanian, Syrian & Lebanese Arabs -- except insofar as cynical Arab tyrants are using them as cannon fodder & political weapons.
The Palestinian Arabs have rejected the opportunity of achieving independence in 1937, 1947, 1949-1967, 2000, 2001, 2008 and 2010. Maybe it's time to give up the charade: they do NOT want "two states"; they do not even really want "one state". What they really want is simply "no state" -- no Jewish state.
The other side just doesnt want to hear it.
By the way, you are right. What I mean is, it’s a fact, sooner or later they will have to accept it.
The Arabs rejected the Partition Resolution. Had they accepted it, there would have been two states from 1948. They attacked Israel in 1948, refused to make peace in 1949, did NOT establish any sort of Palestinian state despite the fact that they controlled both Gaza Strip and the West Bank between 1948 and 1967. They continued belligerent acts against Israel including but not limited to: bombardments of Galilee and West Jerusalem, terrorist/sabotage raids, boycott and embargo, blockade of the Suez Canal (an international maritime way which can't legally be closed to innocent passage), blockade of the Tiran Straits (another international maritime way), ordering the UN peace-keeping troops out in 1967, amassing Egyptian troops in Sinai, introduction of Iraqi troops into Jordan. The last 4 acts constituted flagrant breeches of the 1949 armistice agreements. Further, the Arab League adopted the "3 No's of Khartoum", which precluded any possibility of a peace with Israel. They refused to conform to UNSC Resolution 242.
In fact, the only 3 Arab countries which ever tried to make peace with Israel are the ones which DID make peace: Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon. The peace treaty with Lebanon was cancelled after the country's President was assassinated and a coup was staged with Syrian support.
Furthermore, if Israel was truly a democracy, incorporating the millions of Palestinian refugees who have an INALIENABLE right to return to their homes, as well as the millions of disenfranchised Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, who are controlled by the Israeli state, but can not vote, it would no longer be a Jewish majority state.
This brings us to the crux of the matter. Israel is not interested in being a democracy, but in being a Jewish state, at all costs, including repression, population transfers, and denying people the right to vote by bogus laws.
If current populatn trends continue, by 2080, Palestinians will comprise the majority in what is now recognized as Israel. So, why in the world would it even come up to recognize Israel as a "Jewish" state?
People who believe in equal rights in the LGBT communities know - if they were to live their life the way they want to in the Middle East - the only country they could do that in is Israel.
Shame on you - take the time to read what Israel is really about - don't make an evil empire where there isn't one. Neither the Palistinians or Israel owns the moral high ground in this war and hopefully there will be a just compromise - that is what I root for.
Please show me where in history the grandchildren and great grand children of 'refugees' have been considered for a return? And might I add that reparations are considered to be another way of reimbursing refugees- this was done by Germany after WW2. During the Camp David Summit of 2000:
In the Israeli proposal, a maximum of 100,000 refugees would be allowed to return to Israel on the basis of humanitarian considerations or family reunification. All other people classified as Palestinian refugees would be settled in their present place of inhabitance, the Palestinian state, or third-party countries. Israel would fund their resettlement and absorption, contributing a total of $30 billion. An international fund would be set up, to which Israel would contribute along with other countries, that would register claims for compensation of property by Palestinian refugees and make payments within the limits of its resources.[12]
This was TURNED DOWN by Arafat. Might I add that pretty much the same amount of Jews were expelled from Arab countries during the same time as the Palestinians were fleeing Israel. No compensation has been offered to them.
In addition, Palestinians have the right to vote in Gaza and the West Bank for their OWN RULERS but those leaders have refused to have a vote in over 5 years.
All the posters can do is attack, attack, attack with weak propaganda statements.
Rather than saying both sides need recognition - with which I agree - they attack because in their heart they do not want peace BUT Isreal gone.