Eye On Israel/Palestine

Sigh - I am still heartened by Shaon's more flexible actions - probably dumbly, eh?

0 Replies

Not dumb. Hope is always good (unless you bet too heavily on it.).

Arafat may not have long to live. It is conceivable that the withdrawl just might contributr to the subsequent development of a more responsible Palestinian government - not likely, but possible.

0 Replies

Quote:

The struggle is nearing the century point, and I see no possibility of peace until both sides are thoroughly exhausted from the struggle and come to desire resolution and peace more than victory. All the attention on the "Peace Process" is wasted until this occurs.

Interesting.
I believe that "both sides" would be defined as one side being the Israelis and the other side being the Palestinians?
Israel is a highly developed, technologically advanced, industrialized, innovative country with a legal code that has its basis in both Judaic and Western (European, American, ie: Roman) Law. It has a population that is largely secular and modern. Approximately 5 million of these people are Jewish by ancestry and over 1 million are Arab by ancestry. There is a mix of religious beliefs. Those who practice Judaism as a religion are about equal to the numbers who practice either Christianity or Islam as a religion.
Palestinians are an Arabian peoples who are scattered throughout the Middle East. They have no clear country as such; no infrastructure; legal codes; economy; government or other accoutrements that define a nation or civilization. In terms of "being on one side," the Palestinians in conflict with Israel are defined by those who live in the geographic areas known as the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinians that live in these areas have repudiated the right of those who practice the religion of Judaism to live in their areas (no matter what their genetic ancestry) and have largely driven out or driven under Arab Christians who used to live there. Whereas most Palestinians appear to be secular, most if not all Palestinians acknowledge the authority of Islam and its more violent leaders.

This is a highly unbalanced equation. The chances of Israel becoming "thoroughly exhausted from the struggle" is highly unlikely.
Israel's economy is on the upswing, largely due to the fence they have built to keep out terrorists and largely due to the United States' current military occupation of Iraq. Both of these factors have energized the Israeli population.
The Palestinian population may or may not be "exhausted." It is certainly broken, as in non-functioning.
Eventually, the Arab Islamic world will reform itself and at that point, and only at that point, there will be resolution and the Palestinians will indeed get a country, if they still desire it....

0 Replies

Moishe,

Your recitation of facts is largely true, but selective and very far from complete. It leaves a false impression of the situation.

Israel, despite its mixed population, is a state that gives special, privileged status to people who claim to be Jews, religious or not. This is the essence of the Zionist dream and governing principle. It necessarily involves injustice for the unfortunate people who have lived in that place for over a millennium.

The rights of the indigenous people do not depend on the presence or absence of a government organized along the historical modalities recognizable by Westerners. Instead they arise because they are humans, and because they have lived there, and in a civilized manner, for a very long time. The various sophistries Zionists have contrived to rationalize their expropriation of land and wealth, oppression and attempts to drive out the native population - "There is no Palestine: there are no Palestinians", etc. are, at best, semantically tortured distortions.

While in most ways the Israeli State lives up to Western norms for economy and governance, it is an observable fact that the government and the economy work primarily for the benefit of its Jewish population, to the exclusion of others. This is not a modern state: it is a tribal anachronism, not far removed from some of the Moslem states, which it criticizes so assiduously.

I have great sympathy for the European Jews who emigrated in such great numbers to Israel after WWII and the Holocaust. No one could deny them their quest for freedom, security, and independence. However, history makes it fairly clear that freedom cannot be built on the exploitation of others; that security does not exist in the presence of an oppressed people; and that the independence of Israel, in the continuing grip of this continuing struggle, is an illusion.

I am also aware of the perfidy and manipulations of the European victors in WWI who in their greed, dismembered the Ottoman Empire and set the stage for the political turmoil that confronts the world today. Their avarice and deceptions are exceeded only by their contemporary forgetfulness and hypocrisy. This, however, does not excuse continuing injustice on the part of Israel and one-sided support on the part of the United States.

While some incremental improvements may be achieved by application of the two state solutions now being discussed, I believe the only lasting solution will be the creation of a unitary state that is neither Jewish nor Arab/Moslem, and which can embrace both peoples.

0 Replies

George wrote

Quote:

While some incremental improvements may be achieved by application of the two state solutions now being discussed, I believe the only lasting solution will be the creation of a unitary state that is neither Jewish nor Arab/Moslem, and which can embrace both peoples.

That may sound good but I believe it is only an illusion. IMO that would be the precursor of another Holocaust. No Jew based on a thousnd years of history should accept that soliution. If you choose to ignore history you are destined to repeat it.

0 Replies

Then they'll have to learn to like what they've got now. Moreover the population trends are quite unfavorable to them.

0 Replies

George
Remember the saying "Better red than dead." That would be analogous in this situation.

Indeed the population trends are unfavorable. Perhaps by the time the balance shifts the wounds would have healed.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Moishe,

Your recitation of facts is largely true, but selective and very far from complete. It leaves a false impression of the situation.

Israel, despite its mixed population, is a state that gives special, privileged status to people who claim to be Jews, religious or not. This is the essence of the Zionist dream and governing principle. It necessarily involves injustice for the unfortunate people who have lived in that place for over a millennium.

The rights of the indigenous people do not depend on the presence or absence of a government organized along the historical modalities recognizable by Westerners. Instead they arise because they are humans, and because they have lived there, and in a civilized manner, for a very long time.

No, actually, you are incorrect.
The rights of the indigenous people do depend on the presence or absence of a government organized along the historical modalities recognizable by Westerners.
You may find this unpleasant or unfair or unjust or a whole host of other distasteful adjectives, however, I don't know of any instance in history where it is untrue.
In addition, "living in a civilized manner" seems to imply some sort of order and "civilization." The Arab Palestinians living in the part of the Middle East that is now claimed by Syria, Jordan, Israel and Egypt have never had an independent, civilized order of living even dating back to pre-Kingdom of Israel times. Their tribal societies have always been either extremely disparate or have had civilization imposed upon them from without.
Residing in a location for a length of time has never given any tribe or society the "rights" to claim a particular piece of land as their own, including the Jews, as can be easily demonstrated by history.

The various sophistries Zionists have contrived to rationalize their expropriation of land and wealth, oppression and attempts to drive out the native population - "There is no Palestine: there are no Palestinians", etc. are, at best, semantically tortured distortions.

Could you give me some concrete examples of your above statement?
The "expropriation of land and wealth" implies that Israel took something unjustly; unfairly; etcetera.
Again, you would need to show how Israel has behaved unjustly based on some historical context in order for this false statement to be true. Please offer some comparison regarding the standards of other nation states. Please demonstrate how Israel has created "semantically tortured distortions" based on how other nations have dealt with either war and invasions or the populations that existed before a particular nation or peoples displaced it.

While in most ways the Israeli State lives up to Western norms for economy and governance, it is an observable fact that the government and the economy work primarily for the benefit of its Jewish population, to the exclusion of others.

As opposed to what other country? (As in: substitute the word "Jewish" for "white or black or Hutu or French or Russian or Mandarin or non-native North, South or Central American or Hindu or Moslem or Christian....." Whatever) I would suggest that Israel is far more equitable in its treatment of it non-Jewish citizens than the majority of the world is in the treatment of its minority citizens.

This is not a modern state: it is a tribal anachronism, not far removed from some of the Moslem states, which it criticizes so assiduously.

Hmmmm. Data? Anything at all to back up this absurd emotional contention?

I have great sympathy for the European Jews who emigrated in such great numbers to Israel after WWII and the Holocaust. No one could deny them their quest for freedom, security, and independence. However, history makes it fairly clear that freedom cannot be built on the exploitation of others;

No, history makes it quite clear that freedom can be built on the explotation of others. How far back would you like to go?
As all nations eventually crumble and one explanation of their demise is often the rise of the exploited populations, your point is well taken for building a free society that will last forever. However, it hasn't happened yet, so your historical paradigm is inaccurate.

that security does not exist in the presence of an oppressed people;

Now, this is the first point you have made that I believe is absolutely correct, both in the context of history and of present day Israel. The entire conflict with the Middle East; Islamic fascism; Israel; and terrorism rests upon this exact point. However, Israel is a model of what Arabs and Muslims can be and do in terms of not being oppressed. The rest of the Middle East would do well to emulate Israel's model, as imperfect as it is.

and that the independence of Israel, in the continuing grip of this continuing struggle, is an illusion.

Interesting. So they are going to be absorbed or taken over by whom? Unless we get into Biblical prophecy, which basically says that the Arab world; the EU; and the UN will besiege Jerusalem (which, carrying it to its conclusion, also says that Israel is going to win that conflict after being somewhat obliterated), it doesn't seem likely that Israel is going to be going away anytime soon.

I am also aware of the perfidy and manipulations of the European victors in WWI who in their greed, dismembered the Ottoman Empire and set the stage for the political turmoil that confronts the world today. Their avarice and deceptions are exceeded only by their contemporary forgetfulness and hypocrisy.
This, however, does not excuse continuing injustice on the part of Israel and one-sided support on the part of the United States.

I assume that the injustices of the entire rest of the Middle East (including, obviously, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Saudia Arabia, etc.) are also equally reprehensible and that somehow the world should dismember or otherwise nullify these states that were also created after WWI, resulting in the massacre and displacement of millions of peoples who lived in these areas?
I don't think that is practical.

While some incremental improvements may be achieved by application of the two state solutions now being discussed, I believe the only lasting solution will be the creation of a unitary state that is neither Jewish nor Arab/Moslem, and which can embrace both peoples.

This will eventually happen. It is happening now, within Israel.
However, it is only going to include Palestinians or others when the Arab/Muslim world accepts the fact that there are five million plus non-Arab/Muslim people living in Israel and that the rest of the Middle East could accomodate as many non-Arab/Muslim people who chose to live there.
Until then, the inequities that you mention will be with us for a very long time.

0 Replies

Moishe,

Standard responses, all very familiar, and mostly sophistry. You are applying a supposed right of conquest to an event that occurred in the mid 20th century. Historical norms have changed since the sixteenth century. Even the French left Algeria.

You also attempt to unduly shift the burden of proof - and ignore the organized existence of the institutions of the Ottoman Empire, which ruled Palestine for several centuries before the Zionist immigration and revolution. The British and the French certainly betrayed all the interested parties in their disposition of the debris of that empire which together they brought down - Zionists and Arabs particularly. Nevertheless the pieces of that empire soon coalesced into distinct states Iraq, Jordan, Palestine (which never got past the stage of Protectorate when the British gave up, bugged out and left the mess to the then new United Nations.) On what logical basis do you claim that the other Arab states had an obligation, political, moral, or otherwise to accept the population, which the Zionists drove out of Palestine?

How do you rationalize the 36-year occupation of the West Bank by Israel? Instead of claiming the territory and its people, and giving them rights in the expanded country, Israel has systematically attempted to squeeze the Palestinians out of these lands which they have occupied for centuries. The reason was clear - Israel wanted the land, but not the people, whose numbers (and fertility) threatened the Jewish character of the Zionist state. This gives the lie to your protestations that Israel is evolving to a multicultural/religious state.

The "territorial settlement", offered by Barak four years ago, would have created a patchwork of isolated cantonments, each surrounded by Israeli territory, and resembling more the Bantustands of Apartheid South Africa more than a real political entity. This kind of treatment has not brought security to Israel, and there is, even now, no prospect for it in sight.

This process has cost Israel nearly all of the sympathy and support that much of the world once gave it. Even in the United States, disgust for the actions of Israel is a growing phenomenon, which increasingly threatens the political, financial and military support we have traditionally provided. I believe a major reversal of U.S. policy in this area awaits only a precipitating event, which could bring about the sudden manifestation of a shift that has been growing, out of sight, for a long time here.

Israel is a modern state economically and technologically. In every other respect it is a thing of the unlamented past. Moreover the demographics of the region are not promising for its future dominance. The supply of willing Russian emigrants has been exhausted - what next?

0 Replies

Well George, the problem is that you didn't actually respond to any of my " sophistry -applying a supposed right of conquest to an event that occurred in the mid 20th century."
Which means, quite definitively, that you want to apply a standard to Israel exclusive as to the rest of the world.
Why?
You are perfectly willing to denigrate Israel vis a vis the rest of the world, but you insist that is because it must rise to a higher historical standard than any other country on this planet.
Why?
What could possibly motivate a person to so single out Israel as to accuse it of being the most illegitimate nation because it ought to have the most exalted standard of behavior in regards to the rest of humanity.
I can't imagine.

It is wonderful though how you have the rest of the Middle East "coalescing into distinct states Iraq, Jordan, Palestine." Sort of like stars and planetary gases, eh? Natural, foregone occurences? Beautiful.
Laughing

Historically ridiculous, but a beautiful image....

And there goes that little rogue comet, Israel, intruding itself into this gently coalescing middle east.....

History. Read some damn history.
Try beginning with the history of the modern day country called Saudi Arabia.
Then we could discuss how the Middle East coalesced.

0 Replies

Like it or not Israel is judged by the standards that apply to developed, western nations - a grouping comprised of roughly 1.5 billion of the earth's people: (also standards that are rapidly being approached by developing Asian nations comprising easily an additional 500 million people). In many respects this is appropriate in that these are the nations that have provided the dominant majority of Israel's inhabitants, and most of its political traditions. It is simply false to say or suggest that I am applying standards to Israel, higher than are applied to any other country in the world.

Moreover your, far-from-subtle meaning in the following passage is both false and evasive -

Moishe3rd wrote:

Which means, quite definitively, that you want to apply a standard to Israel exclusive as to the rest of the world.
Why?
You are perfectly willing to denigrate Israel vis a vis the rest of the world, but you insist that is because it must rise to a higher historical standard than any other country on this planet.
Why?
What could possibly motivate a person to so single out Israel as to accuse it of being the most illegitimate nation because it ought to have the most exalted standard of behavior in regards to the rest of humanity.
I can't imagine.

Rhetorical devices such as this serve more to both dilute the meaning of anti-Semitism and shield those using them from truths that are becoming increasingly evident to larger and larger numbers of people in the world. It is a device that clouds both the truth in the dialogue and the perception of those who use it.

There is no doubt that one of the chief problems facing the world today is the intolerance, zealotry, and sense of injury that infects much of the Moslem, and nearly all of the Arab world. Complicating this is the frightened passivity of Europe, the source of most of the Moslem outrage, but hiding behind the comfortable edifice of the EU and the notion that somehow history began with the Treaty of Rome that founded it. I acknowledge that Saudi Arabia represents an extreme manifestation of the Moslem problem, in that it is (in some areas) rich and modern, and, at the same time, utterly intolerant and authoritarian. Iran, much more populous, non-Arab and possessing more of the foundations of modern states, is likewise in the not-very-firm grip of backward-looking religious zealots. Egypt, more western and historically tolerant, is being drawn in to the vortex of Islamism

For the zealots of all of these nations, Israel has become the standard excuse for their failure to face or constructively deal with their own internal contradictions. It has paralyzed them, preventing progress and political development. In a perverse but analogous way, accusations of anti-Semitism have done the same for contemporary Zionists. It could leave them maladapted, exhausted, friendless, and alone in a troubled world.

These issues are coupled by history and geography. Both sides must break through their own blindness to move beyond a worsening situation that could consume them all.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Complicating this is the frightened passivity of Europe, the source of most of the Moslem outrage, [...]

Europe, the source of most of the Moslem outrage - did I miss something, George? And why do our media, politicans, citizens, Islamic co-citizens, the Muslim states etc. ignore this?

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Europe, the source of most of the Moslem outrage - did I miss something, George? And why do our media, politicans, citizens, Islamic co-citizens, the Muslim states etc. ignore this?

I don't know Walter, but it is a good question. Perhaps the explanation for your politicians and media lies in the fascination they have with the evolving and inward-looking secular bureaucratic perfection of the European Union. (by the way, it is not evident from here that your "Islamic co-citizens" do ignore it).

For the Moslem states - it well serves their purpose for Europe to stand aside in this struggle.

0 Replies

George,
This is good. You are not anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) per say.
Which then still leaves my questions unanswered.
You claim that Israel is held to the same standard as which modern day nations?? China? Russia? France? Sudan? Cuba? Brazil?
I mention the above off the top of my head because they are all currently occupied, for whatever reasons, with the suppression and death of minority populations that do not control their respective governments.
Many countries of the world are engaged in this sort of activity. Perhaps the majority.
However, due to "Muslim outrage" being the major problem that the world faces today, Israel is a particular problem.
The reasoning follows that if only Israel were not a majority Jewish state, then Muslim outrage would abate.
As I stated before, this will probably happen within my lifetime. By that time, Muslim outrage will either have reformed; been obliterated; or it will still be the problem it is today.
Co-opting Israel will change nothing.
I mention reading the history of Saudi Arabia, because it is instructive as to how the states in the Middle East were created, not because of its present day problems.
To put it mildly, Saudi Arabia was created and maintained with far more destruction; turmoil; chaos; death; displaced persons; and arrogant seizure of lands going back to Mohammad, than Israel could possibly ever come close to emulating.....
Read some history, dammit!
Smile

Vote

0 Replies

I'm not anti-Jewish "per se" or any other way. I am, as you may detect, anti-Zionist, and for some that is the equivalent. (Perhaps it explains your qualification of the phrase.)

I even attended Hebrew Day school (under the pseudonym of Alan Weiss) for about a month at age 11 (the CYO gym where my buddies and I played was closed for repair, but the JCC was open to support the pre Bar Mitzvah studies of young boys. After school, I'd remove the scapular around my neck and replace it with a mezuzah (sp?) on a chain and assume a new identity for a while. The Hebrew sounds were strange and guttural, but for a proficient altar boy learning phrases in an unfamiliar language was not a great challenge. After 40 minutes of that we would play basketball. ).

I did include France, Russia, and Brazil in my enumeration, but not China, Sudan, and Cuba. Intolerance of minorities is a phenomenon that strikes humans in every corner of the world. No one I know is entirely free of it. We can however make useful distinctions between countries based on both the degree of it and the extent to which it is a direct expression of government policy, or alternatively done in defiance of that policy. Evidently, in your comments about Brazil, you are referring to the occasional treatment of indigenous aboriginal people in the Amazon. While much of this is true in the growing encounters between Indians and settlers in the newly opened Amazon basin it is also true that many on both sides are adapting and assimilating, and that much of the criticism is from environmentalists who would like to see the region forever closed to development. The policy of Brazil is both to protect the Indians and to permit development in the Amazon. Compared to the histories of other countries in like situations they are doing rather well.

Perhaps you are attempting to compare the encounter between Zionist settlers and the Palestinians, with those between settlers and aboriginal peoples in the new world, suggesting that what works for one, works for all. I don't thinlk you can get very far with that. The Palestinians are not aborigines. They are largely immune to the same diseases as the Israelis, and their cultural and economic development is quite comparable. Politically they are far behind, but much of that is a result traceable to the Israeli occupation..

You have twice now exhorted me to read more history. I don't think that I have revealed any particular ignorance of it on these threads. Indeed I fancy that I am a bit more knowledgeable than the average here. What, exactly do you have in mind?

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

You have twice now exhorted me to read more history. I don't think that I have revealed any particular ignorance of it on these threads. Indeed I fancy that I am a bit more knowledgeable than the average here. What, exactly do you have in mind?

Reminding George to read history is something like carrying coal to Newcastle or (as we Germans say) owls to Athens.

And he really is much more knowable than being aware of the correct writing (and meaning/origin) of per se or knowing the difference between anti-Zionism, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-momentary-Israelian politics etc. :wink:

0 Replies

I'm glad, George, that I finally succeeded in changing your view about the EU.

(Althought I'm not that sure, if starting with the unofficial EU-anthym is the correct site to start with. Laughing

)

And: 'yes', I've realised that agreement, too.

Surely, you noted that I avoided to refer to that (listening to marches and brass band music played by the 'Louisiana Repertory Jazz Ensemble of New Orleans :wink: )

0 Replies

Walter,

Do you mean that "The Song of Joy" is the anthem of the EU ?? I didn't know that. How kind of you to stick your finger in my eye about it. (I would use a half-smiling emoticon here, but whenever I select one the program freezes up on my computer.)

Actually my choice would be Va Pensero from Nabucco. Verdi, in an allegory for Italy, put that wonderful chorus in the mouths of the Jews in captivity in Babylon. Perhaps there is a message there for all of us.

You know that I admire many aspects of the EU, and many qualities of Europe and Europeans. I do fear only that Europeans have turned inward, and away from their own histories, seeing perhaps in the EU, instead of a means to higher degrees of peace and harmony in Europe, a new beginning which frees them from all they have done (good and bad) and which they imagine provides a panacea for all of the injustices and imperfections of the real world which, despite these illusions, still remains a very competitive, and dangerous place. America is younger, more energetic, hopeful and perhaps foolish. Perhaps the contrast is like that between Grandfather and young Peter in Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf. (I always liked Peter best.)

New Orleans Jazz is great, as are its several other varieties. Interesting to me to note how well Germans (as opposed to the French, English, or others) take to that form of music. Now Germany is reexporting really good jazz performers to the U.S.

0 Replies

Take a look at this: Human Rights Watch says "'Disengagement' Will Not End Gaza Occupation". http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/10/29/isrlpa9577.htm

0 Replies

Eye On Israel/Palestine

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know