Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister of Israel from 1992-1995, understood that unless the Palestinians were allowed self-determination and given a viable State, Israel would lose its future as a home solely for Jews. To make matters much worse, Israel's survival would always be threatened by its neighbors.
His untimely death, at the hands of a fundamentalist Israeli assassin, never allowed Rabin to lead the country toward a two state solution with a future devoid of relentless war. In fact, his death marked the beginning of the end of the Israeli ideal of a theocratic state.
Rabin, probably due to his military past, knew that the only way forward was to choose peace over a never-ending cycle of hostilities. Despite his wisdom, scores of people still think that the 50-plus year cycle of violence is the only answer. Yet, an "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" only perpetuates a downward spiral, leading to more bloodshed and death.
The Obama Administration knows this, and has started a process by which Israel can live at peace with its neighbors and Palestinians can be assured that, as the U.S. Secretary of State Clinton said, "a child has the same rights in Gaza as children in the rest of the world." She also stated that the U.S. will vigorously pursue a two-state solution every step of the way and underscored that there is no time to waste. While this reinvigorated U.S. engagement is welcome, unfortunately the declaration is too little, too late.
All parties have wasted precious time and the current situation on the ground does not allow independence for either party. The past eight years of American policy, or lack there of, also contributed to false hopes.
After President Clinton's thwarted effort to achieve peace, the Bush Administration had a very nice ceremony with Jordan's King Abdullah in Israel and then another in Annapolis only to sit by as the prospects for peace dwindled. Any engagement was merely a facade to demand that the Palestinians and other regional players proclaim unwavering support for all policies implemented by Israel no matter the cost, which only made matters worse.
As the regional conflict went on -- war with Lebanon, bombing Syria, borders cordoned off, rockets fired by Hamas, and the devastating destruction and humanitarian disaster in Gaza -- the United States stayed silent, except when it came to removing a democratically elected Hamas. Each incident generating more tension.
While Israel did declare a unilateral ceasefire after the latest violent exchange, without Palestinian agreement I might add, both are still lobbing lethal weapons at each other. The Palestinians are launching crude missiles at Israel (18 in the first two days of Clinton's visit), and Israelis continue to drop bombs on the Palestinian border with Egypt.
And if all this wasn't enough, Israel has ramped up its settlement activity over the past year. The Israeli-based group Peace Now recently reported that settlement construction in the West Bank has accelerated, despite a lack of permits or clearance to build on what's considered Palestinian land. In 2008, settlements increased by 57% from 2007 according to Peace Now.
The sad truth is that the Israelis and Palestinians are locked in an endless war for a land they both call their own. Both parties believe God gave the land to them. (Maybe God did and they both need to share it).
The "Two-State" rhetoric currently being pushed by the U.S. and its international allies neither ensures Israeli security or Palestinian self-determination. Much to everyone's dismay, their destinies are intertwined. Israelis have not, and will not, allow Palestinians to govern their own borders, airspace or -- as history has shown -- democratic process. The only solution is for the two groups to work and live together.
Perhaps there was a chance for two states during the time of Rabin, when settlements were few and the road map was open. Today, those opportunities are gone. Even Netanyahu, who will be the next Israeli Prime Minister, refuses to discuss a Palestinian State, which only moves us closer creating to a single state and making it an undeniable solution.
The idea is a very hard pill to swallow. A warring past is not easy to forget. Israelis and Palestinians will have to work together to resolve a mound of grievances and heal decades' worth of wounds. But continually living in a "he did / she did mode" will help no one. Only pragmatic steps will lay the foundation for positive change.
A new, democratic and inclusive, Israel could be a symbol of a new way. Clinton mentioned that we cannot afford more delays or regrets... and it is time to look ahead. Specifically, the parties must pledge to renounce war, violence, segregation, displacement and the mistreatment of each other.
Finally, the Secretary pointed out that, "we need progress that will improve the lives and the livelihoods of the people of Gaza and the West Bank, the people of Israel, and the neighbors throughout the region." That means Israelis and Palestinians must work side by side as one. Unless, that is, everyone prefers more war or wants to try moving more than 460,000 Israeli settlers from what is supposed to be the future Palestine. I assure you that will not be pretty.
Upon visiting Israel anyone can see that there is no use trying to separate what already exists together. Palestinians and Israelis are clearly intertwined making a two state solution no longer a probably or a possible solution at all.
And we the American people fight two world wars to establish an Empire (at least THIS American, and many others are opposed to empire- especially when our wn government ats like one)
What our goal was in WWII particularly, was to rid the world of tyranny and establish the principle of Human Rights and liberties (see the UN Charter)
It's all happened in fits and starts, and we're hardly a perfect nation.
but if Vickster or anyone here wants to tell me that the Palestinians (or the Israelis) DON"t have the rights enumerated in the Declaration--I'd like to know which ones --and why.
Because it's certainly true that the Palestinians are being deprived of their rights (and i'm not talking about terrorists tried by a jury of their peers and imprisoned through due process--)
Now Vickster argued that I couldn't apply the US Constitution to the Israelis and the Palestinians.
THe thread was getting small, so i'm starting a new one to make this point, because I believe it an important one.
First, as I've quoted above (and in the thread below) I was not quoting the US Constittion--but the US Declaration of Independence--a VERY different document-- one presented to the ENTIRE world.
Jefferson was asserting (as self-evident, by the way) as am I,that these rights ARE universal--they apply to EVERY HUMAN BEING-- (and if you follow Jefferson's argument, by the way, when a government becomes destructive of those rights -- ANYWHERE-- it is the RIGHT and DUTY of the people to ALTER OR ABOLISH IT.
I'll grant that we still have a gap between ideal and reality-- we strive to close that gap
But I'll also argue that much of human history since the Enlightenment has been a struggle (often violent) for the recognition of those rights.
ctd
I've been to the area (it was quite some time ago -- and a lot has changed)-- as an American I am not trying to dictate a one state or two state solution.
The problem that is putting a "time limit" on a two state possiblity is the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East jerusalem--that continiue to grow and expand, and with them, the web of roads and checkpoints that cut off the Palestinian towns and villages from each other, and finally the Wall, which i don't need to tell you (if you've been to the region) isn't being built on the GreenLine, but DEEP inside the west Bank.
The Settlers like to call these things "facts on the ground" and hope to make a Palestinian state impossible by creating so many of these "facts" that it will be a herculean task to untangle them.
If the Palestinians are to have their state, it's got to be somewhere, and it sure can't be limited to Gaza-- it's got to be enough land to be viable and it's got to be contiguous.
As I'v said to Jezreel below, the choie is really up to Israel--and she can't defer it any longer.
Remember, no one FORCED israel to start building all these setlements on the West Bank after the 67 war.
This mess is mostly Israel's own making (not entirely--the Palestinians do share a part of the blame--but they're not in a position of dominance.
Palestinians went from Turkish occupation to British Occupation to Zionist terrorism to Israeli occupation -- if all of you foreigners would just leave those poor people alone to develop their nation and stop killing, invading and ethnically cleansing them, they'll develop their nation as they see fit. And that doesn't mean strip malls and materialism, they have the right to be whatever national identity they want.
One cannot be heard to complain that one is being denied the right to self-governance when one insists that upon obtaining such one will use it to deny that same right to one's neighbors. Yet that is precisely the stance that the Palestinians have taken, as expressed in the PLO's "Phased Plan" and in the Hamas Charter (don't take my word on it, look these things up for yourself).
There can be no two-state solution so long as there is one party that does not agree to settle the conflict on that basis. Yet, no one can or will force a "one state solution" on the Israelis, nor should the be held responsible to impliment such a "solution". They have the right of self-determination, like all other peoples, and those who contemplate denying them that right need to do some thinking as to why they think that Israelis, unlike everyone else, should be denied that right.
Muslim and Jewish they looked like the same ethnic group.
Another case of historical revisionism.
Not at all Ms. DeGennaro, the realities on the ground already have a de facto one state, under a flag that does not represent the majority of the people with a minority ruling over them.
Got that?
Muslim and Jewish they looked like the same ethnic group.
"Both parties believe God gave the land to them"
It's the jewish people that believe God gave them this land. The Palestinians are the indgenious people here, the majority of jews, especially the orthodox jews, that had been living in palestine for hundreds of years were agianst a secular, socialist and colonial zionist movement.
I think one of the biggest obstacles to a one-state solution . . which is the only viable solution at this point are the AIPAC and the US Congress .. specifically feinstein, schumer, lieberman and of course the israeli zionists . . . there is a fledgling peace movement in israel that knows that israel as it is currently constituted cannot long endure.
They claim it because it's been their home for generations.
ironically, the settlements intended to extend Israel's borders have created an intermixed zone, from which the Israeli settlers will never be extracted, except after a civil war won by the "two state" side.
Unlikely, at best.
A growing number of israelis are beginning to openly discuss ethnic cleansing -- moving the Arabs out of Israel. Their new "kingmaker" is very close to this idea. The fact is that the Arab population is increasing so fast, it might take 50-60 years at a rate that wouldn't trigger armed conflict. Not much relief here.
Faster? You have to solve some practical problems. Are these people expected to just show up and get into the trucks? Where do they go? Lebanon? Jordan? Syria? Turkey? How does the IDF manage a huge zone that will inevitably include forces from the "destination" nations, which will certainly mobilize -- initially to keep order among the refugees? talk about a tinderbox!
No, the only real solution is a single, democratic state that embraces all. Failing that, all Israel's neighbors and opponents need to do is wait. Palestinians under israeli occupation and in Lebanon continue to grow their numbers. Conflict will continue, and eventually israel will become uninhabitable by normal people, just fanatics.
A failed state with nukes, just like Pakistan, with only one nation backing its increasingly nutty population.
And then you have lower immigration due to :
1. The Jewish communities around the world being well-integrated in their countries of origin;
2. lager number of jewish people marrying outside the community,
3. Increasing lack of identification with/idealization of Israel, particularly in the face of its policies towards the Palestinians;
So, Jewish demographic dynamics combined with the high birth rate among Arabs makes the one-state solution not a question of if, but rather of when.
I've even seen "warnings" from ethnocentric Jewish organizations in the US that tolerance is bad for Jewish survival, too much risk of intermarriage! Do they prefer persecution? Possibly, the perpetual crisis in Israel certainly builds ethnic solidarity. I suspect there's an AIPAC task force trying to figure out how to stimulate just enough anti-Semitism to unite Jews without going over the top.
If one looks at the fate of the Zoroastrians or the ongoing shriveling of the Japanese nation, one can see the destiny of people who want to remain "pure." Diversity is not a slogan, it's biologically and culturally healthy.
The more we intermix and influence each other, the better and more alive will our culture be, and the healthier we will be as a species. Humans are descendants of about 2,000 people, and our relatively limited biological diversity is a potential problem, just like those zoo-bred animals.
In the long run, as you say, younger ambitious Israelis are going to realize that they can do very well, and face no Inquisitions or other bugaboos from the past, in the advanced nations of the world. The old "virtues" of the shtetl -- isolation, hostility from surrounding people, diseases of inbreeding -- will fade away.
The dream of an independent Palestinian state is over. It went on life support when Arafat walked away from Camp David and died when Hamas showed Israel what Palestinians would do with a state (hint: it wasn't nation building).
Israelis and Palestinians don't want to live together in one state. Efforts to force them down that road will be not only frustrating, they will waste more precious time and lead to continued conflict. The time to support Obama's initiative to renew negotiations is now. www.peacenow.org
What should we Americans who are interested in peace be asking of our Reps and Senators (and of the Obama Adminisstration)?
I realize one voice alone might not make a difference, but I also know they keep track of what their constituents are saying.
I know that as things stand now, it's becoming more and more difficult, because of the increased settler building, to disentangle the two populations (and this article --which DOES lay out the problems very well, doesn't even mention those Palestinians living in refugee camps in Jordan and Lebanon (and other places outside Israel/Palestine)