In 2007, I wrote a blog about the ludicrous comments of Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat, who summarily dismissed the prospect of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. "No state in the world connects its national identity to its religious identity," he declared.
Three years later, nothing much has changed. The Palestinian leadership continues to reject acknowledging Israel's distinctive character, though to do so would not only recognize reality, but also give a big boost to the stalled peace talks.
As I wrote then, such a statement by Erekat is utterly preposterous. What, for example, do Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Comoros, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen have in common? You guessed it. Islam is the official religion, though many, such as Malaysia, have significant non-Muslim minorities.
And in Egypt, Shari'a, or Islamic law, is formally given a role as the wellspring of legislation. Moreover, what exactly are we to make of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), an intergovernmental grouping of 57 countries, including the "State of Palestine" whose charter speaks of their "common belief" and whose goals include ensuring "the progress and well-being of their peoples and those of other Muslims the world over?" Is there any similar entity binding countries of other religions together around "common belief?"
And perhaps Mr. Erekat could explain why, if states don't connect national and religious identities, we have countries whose formal names include the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. To be fair, Muslim countries aren't alone in establishing state religions and seeking to associate faith and nationality.
There are countries where Buddhism, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and various Protestant denominations are the established religion. By contrast, in Israel, there is no official state religion, though the majority population and the character of the country are unquestionably Jewish, even as full protection is accorded to minority faith communities.
But Mr. Erekat's statement isn't just wrong; it's also wrong-headed. If he is committed to the search for peace, he has a strange way of showing it. A settlement will only come when several conditions are met, among them recognition by the Palestinians and the larger Arab world that Israel is a Jewish state and was established, with the endorsement of the international community, to be a Jewish homeland.
Otherwise, all bets are off. The Palestinians cannot have it both ways - demand a Palestinian state, to be part of the Arab League and the OIC and to be Judenrein, and, at the same time, reject Israel as a Jewish state, insisting, hypocritically, that it be an "open" state.
That, of course, can only mean one thing: The battle to destroy Israel as we know it will continue to be waged by any means possible. Talk about a nonstarter. The late Yasser Arafat told Bill Clinton, to the president's dismay, that the Jews had no historical link to Israel and, in particular, Jerusalem, claiming that the Temple never even existed.
Erekat's remarks show that this unwillingness to recognize indisputable facts wasn't limited to Arafat. It's part of decades of willful denial.
It's time to face reality. It's time to grasp what Winston Churchill understood when he called the establishment of the Jewish state "an event in world history to be viewed in the perspective not of a generation or a century, but in the perspective of a thousand, two thousand, or even three thousand years." And what Jorge Garcia Granados, Guatemalan representative to the United Nations, knew when he publicly endorsed Israel's founding because of his outrage at the time that "no Jew dare risk entering the most celebrated place of the Hebrew religion, because if he did so he might be killed [by Arabs]."
And what President Harry Truman felt when his favorite psalm, Psalm 137, moved him to identify with Zionism: "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, as we remembered Zion." And what French President Nicolas Sarkozy grasped when he spoke at an AJC breakfast of a "two-nation-state solution," meaning a Jewish and a Palestinian state. The historic connection of the Jewish people to the land - and now the state - of Israel is as legitimate as it is unbreakable.
Israel has made a giant leap in recognizing Palestinian nationhood and the need for a Palestinian state, with all the risks it entails for Israel's security, as a territorial answer to the needs of the Palestinian people. Now the Palestinians need to reciprocate, and the sooner the better, if the current peace process is to have a chance of success.
Will they? Hamas has already made perfectly clear where it stands, if ever there was ever any doubt. In its statement calling on the UN to apologize for the 1947 Partition Plan, Hamas said, "Palestine is Arab Islamic land, from the river to the sea, including Jerusalem. There is no room in it for the Jews."
So it's up to leaders like Erekat to show the world that other Palestinian voices, at long last, recognize what the Balfour Declaration, League of Nations, Peel Commission, United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, and United Nations General Assembly all expressly made clear, and what U.S. President Obama, German Chancellor Merkel, and other world leaders have asserted: There is a compelling and legitimate need for a Jewish - yes, Jewish - state in the region, living alongside other states, each with its own distinctive character. There's no getting around it. You can't make peace with someone whose core identity you refuse to acknowledge.
The Israelis want to ensure that giving up the west bank will give them peace, not more war, as happened with Gaza. The Palestinians want to retain their war options, and still receive title to the west bank. That is what this argument is about.
While the Israelis have spent the last years arguing over the disposition of the west bank and other critical issues, the Palestinians have not even begun to acknowledge that there will be no so call "right of return", they will not be given soveriegnty over the old city of Jerusalem and that the areas surrounding Jerusalem will not be evacuated by the Israelis. If there were an "A Street" (hah!!), to discuss these matters, it would be fire bombed by Hamas.
Your statement: "By contrast, in Israel, there is no official state religion, though the majority population and the character of the country are unquestionably Jewish, even as full protection is accorded to minority faith communities." Full protection to minority faiths? In what sense is full protection accorded?
Statement from another article: " the power of the Orthodox Jewish establishment over Israeli life is out of control."
"The Orthodox rabbinate decides who is Jewish and who isn't, based on bizarre racial criteria. Those deemed not Jewish are burdened with obstacles at every milestone in life: birth, marriage, divorce, death."
"A Jew cannot marry a non-Jew, or anyone deemed a "non-Jew" by the rabbinate in Israel but has to travel abroad (Cyprus is the favored destination). In Jerusalem, the public bus authorities run sexually segregated buses and the Orthodox are demanding that the new light-rail system run cars only for women."
"Sabbath observance is enforced by law as is the ban on selling pork. And each year pressure increases on restaurants and hotels not to host Christmas or New Years parties or lose their licenses to do business. Israel, with no separation of state and synagogue,"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/the-obstacles-that-probab_b_721983.html
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/plo-chief-we-will-recognize-israel-in-return-for-1967-borders-1.318835
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=323786
Abed Rabbo told Ma'an that "Israel is an unknown entity in terms of borders [so] how does it suggest to recognize it as a Jewish state? Israel and the US should first set out Israel's borders."
...Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of...the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict...
Or UNSC Resolution 446, which affirmed in explicit terms the conclusions of UNSC Resolution 242 (three abstentions) as did UNSC Resolution 452 (one abstention) UNSC Resolution 465 (unanimous), and UNSC Resolution 471 (one abstention)?
Or the portion of UNSC Resolution 252, passed with two abstentions, in which the Security Council:
...Considers that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, including expropriation of land and properties thereon, which tend to change the legal status of Jerusalem are invalid and cannot change that status; [and] Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem...
This is a topic that gets brought up often...whether jews would be allowed to live in the new palestinian state. I know how Hamas feels about this, but what is the current official PA line on this? Will jews be allowed to live there and be subject to the same laws as muslims?
"or land sold to them by a few opportunists" So jews can live there, but you have an issue with someone selling them land so that they can live there??
Well, that pins it down, doesn't it?
It would be VERY easy to claim all land sales are 'sold to them by a few opportunists', particularly since there is a still standing law of death for selling land to a Jew.
So a more honest restatement of what you said, is "No Jews will not be allowed and anyone who tries to sell land to a Jew will be killed" which is just another way to say that Palestine will be Jew-ridden.
Are you sure that's what you want to be fighting for?
Senior Palestine Liberation Organization official Yasser Abed Rabbo said on Wednesday that the Palestinians will be willing to recognize the State of Israel in any way that it desires, if the Americans would only present a map of the future Palestinian state that includes all of the territories captured in 1967, including East Jerusalem.
Any formulation the Americans present – even asking us to call Israel the ‘Chinese State’ – we will agree to it, as long as we receive the 1967 borders. We have recognized Israel in the past, but Israel has not recognized the Palestinian state.”
Its like claiming Israel agrees to give the Palestinians the 67 lines once the Palestinians conquer Iran and remove them as a threat.
What will happen if in 5 or 10 years the Palestinians will choose to elect Hamas again?
The settlement will become a worthless piece of paper and Palestinians will start again the campaign to take over the rest of Israel.
The final agreement must also be signed by the US the EU and the UN stating this agreement completes the claims of the Palestinian people and any future attempt by them to bring forward more claims to the state of Israel will be dealt with crippling sanctions.
"What will happen if in 5 to 10 years..." Works both ways. What will happen if Avigdor is elected into power in 5 years and pulls out his Eretz Yisreal plan? Can we change the Israeli constitution to allow for that? (Not that Israel has one, but you get my point)
The way things are going, what will happen within five years is everyone giving up on the mess and withdrawing support for the 2-state solution.
Palestinians have only demands from Israel and nothing to offer besides peace.
If even peace is questionable and seemingly very temporary what incentive is there for Israel to take such risks.
Its in Palestinians best interest to try and convince the Israeli goverment and pubic in their wish for long lasting peace by writing those conditions in their constitution.
This article, Mr. Harris, is very short-sighted and definitely fails to address the real issues behind the failed peace talks - it is the issue of illegal settlements on (stolen) palestinian property. Land that does not belong to israel being taken by immigrant settlers who claim to have a religious right to it. What's even worse is the fact that isreal constantly makes the public claim that their security is threatened, yet their "government" sanctions and allows the settlements to not only continue but expand. What's the truth?
If Abbas were to agree to the precondition of recognizing Israel as "Jewish state" he is likely to be assisinated within days -- which would have serious consequences on the progress of the peace negotiations.
Jan
Their Islamic character is not recognized in any official capacity by any other country?
States recognize other states. They do not recognize them as possessing this or that characteristic. When the US recognized the PRC, they didn't recognize it as being a Communist country either. So actually Mr. Erekat was quite right.
Now, Palestinian leaders also say that the Israeli side's insistence on being recognized as "the Nation-state of the Jewish people", in addition to being unnecessary and unusual, would amount to giving their blessings to the marginalization of the non-Jewish minority in Israel and to the denial of the Palestinian refugees' rights. And just once I would actually see one of the Israeli proponents of the recognition demand answer these concerns. Because if they are baseless, then I don't see what this recognition demand is about, and if their is some basis to them, then of course it's not acceptable.
http://www.zionism-israel.com/hdoc/kissinger_iraq_israel_1975.htm
Not exactly what I'd call a Zionist, would you?
ElishaJob states:
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
"Israel was declared a state as soon as the British Mandate expired and was recognized by the United States as such."
A bald face lie. How could anyone make such a claim and ignore the fact that:
On the 29th November, 1947, THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY PASSED A RESOLUTION calling for the establishment of a Jewish State in Eretz-Israel
Yours is a distinction without a difference
Another excellent piece, exposing the truth, displaying yet again the ongoing problem of the Palestinians, the lack of good sane and strong leadership. Genuinely sad, genuinely unfortunate, because it's not the leaders of the Palestinians that pay the price of not recognizing Israel as Jewish homeland, it's the poor common man that pays.