quote:

---

I'm one of those lefties who happens to think that some sort of 'two state' solution is still a decent option, if only because its still somewhat more plausible than other proposed solutions, but I also think international sanctions might be the needed spur. Can bypass the inevitable US veto altogether.

---

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

Arguing that human affairs are "inevitable" is as much to say that nothing we do matters, and I think anyone interested in peace for Israel/Palestine needs to seriously consider whether or not they believe that.

Any peace, beyond that of the grave, will require at least the wary assent (if not full-throated support) of the majority of people now living in Israel/Palestine. I find it unlikely in the extreme that these two parties will be able to cobble together a unified state at any point in our lives.

1. Withdraw troops from beyond the Green Line.
2. Withdraw settlers from beyond the Green Line, or allow them to become citizens of the Palestinian state (by individual choice).
3. Dismantle the wall and return lands confiscated beyond the Green Line. Israel of course has the option to build a wall along the Green Line.
4. Release political prisoners, people being held without charge, and people who would simply be considered POWs in any other conflict.
5. Halt rocket attacks into Israel.
6. Halt suicide bombings in Israel.

Hows that for a start, prior to setting normal relations between neighbours? Seems bloody simple when you spell it out, doesn't it?

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: Briguy ]

quote:

---

5. Halt rocket attacks into Israel.
6. Halt suicide bombings in Israel.

---

For this thread, it should be very important to note that the Palestinian people do NOT act as one. This assumption has been made by Israel descision makers in it's dealing with Palestine so far... And it's a very flawed assumption. The Palestine authority (in part due to having it's funding cut off by the West) has absolutely no control to enforce what it decides over the people it's designed to represent.

There can be all the 'solutions' put forward in this thread that we want, but we cannot use this point 5 and 6 as a basis... If 99.9% of Palestine agrees to these terms, but the .001% (being 4 teens in a small apartment building a rocket for all we know) fire rockets into Israel. It's really been Israeli policy (western policy for that matter) to punish the whole of Palestine for the actions of the few rockets.

We can get into the circular arguement from here, saying it's the Palestinian authority's responsibility to prevent such attacks (while we've cut all funding to ensure they have absolutely no ability to).

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Krago:
Would Palestinians who owned property inside the Green Line prior to 1948 get their property returned to them? Would they receive compensation? Would they be allowed to return to their former homes? Would their descendants?

---

Sorry, I forgot to address the right of return.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noise:

For this thread, it should be very important to note that the Palestinian people do NOT act as one. This assumption has been made by Israel descision makers in it's dealing with Palestine so far... And it's a very flawed assumption. The Palestine authority (in part due to having it's funding cut off by the West) has absolutely no control to enforce what it decides over the people it's designed to represent.

There can be all the 'solutions' put forward in this thread that we want, but we cannot use this point 5 and 6 as a basis... If 99.9% of Palestine agrees to these terms, but the .001% (being 4 teens in a small apartment building a rocket for all we know) fire rockets into Israel. It's really been Israeli policy (western policy for that matter) to punish the whole of Palestine for the actions of the few rockets.

We can get into the circular arguement from here, saying it's the Palestinian authority's responsibility to prevent such attacks (while we've cut all funding to ensure they have absolutely no ability to).

Just to keep in mind with any solution here... Realize the Palestinian authority is a crippled entity that will not be able to enforce anything over the people it is to represent. I hate to say it like this... But part of the peace process MUST include a willingness on Israeli's part to endure some rocket attacks, but refrain from retaliating against the majority of Palestine to punish the few for the attack... Atleast until the Palestine gov't can control this themselves.

---

quote:

---

Would Palestinians who owned property inside the Green Line prior to 1948 get their property returned to them? Would they receive compensation? Would they be allowed to return to their former homes? Would their descendants?

---

quote:

---

The term Green Line is used to refer to the 1949 Armistice lines established between Israel and its opponents (Syria, Jordan, and Egypt) at the end of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The Green Line separates Israel not only from these countries but from territories Israel would later capture in the 1967 Six-Day War, including the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Its name is derived from the green pencil used to draw the line on the map during the talks. [1][2]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by oreobw:
How about adding an major international aid package for the resulting Palestine state (monitored of course, so that it is spent on re-construction)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Briguy:

Sorry, I forgot to address the right of return.

7. Palestinians with deeds or claims to property inside the Green Line shall be suitably compensated for the seizure of their properties.

---

Why are Palestinians merely compensated for perfectly legal property claims (at least according to international law) while illegal settlers are allowed to keep their illegally gained property (see the Fourth Geneva Convention for details.)

Doesn't this result in loss of property by Palestinians (and a gain by Israelis) on both sides of the Green Line?

Aren't we also asking the Palestinian state to "tolerate" a potentially disruptive group in their midst while not requiring the same of Israel? Why must the Palestinians be inclusive while Israel is not?

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

quote:

---

Why are Palestinians merely compensated for perfectly legal property claims (at least according to international law) while illegal settlers are allowed to keep their illegally gained property (see the Fourth Geneva Convention for details.)

---

When you talk about illigal settlers, are you talking about the Isrealis who settled in the West Bank after 1967, or the decendents of those Isrealis who gained possesion of Palestinian land during and after The Nahkba?

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by B.L. Zeebub LLD:

Why are Palestinians merely compensated for perfectly legal property claims (at least according to international law) while illegal settlers are allowed to keep their illegally gained property (see the Fourth Geneva Convention for details.)

Doesn't this result in loss of property by Palestinians (and a gain by Israelis) on both sides of the Green Line?

Aren't we also asking the Palestinian state to "tolerate" a potentially disruptive group in their midst while not requiring the same of Israel? Why must the Palestinians be inclusive while Israel is not?

[ 23 January 2007: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

---

I'm not big on land seizures. There should be courts set up to settle land claims, on both sides of the Green line, and probably overseen by neutral judges from third countries. At the same time, forcibly removing 2nd and 3rd generation settlers from homes and lands illegally seized by their parents and grandparents is going to create as many problems as it solves. There may be cases where compensation is preferable to seizure, or at least in the interests of both parties (the squatter and the original landowner).

make the world understand the close similarity between Hitler putting Jews in concentration camps, and the Jews in Israel putting Palestinians in concentration camps.

a total worldwide boycott of all products Israeli. until they stop treating the Palestinians the way Hitler treated the Jews (gypsies, gay people, etc.) in Europe. as expendable.

Peace is ALWAYS one day away. all the US-Israel has to do is peel away 50% of the $Billions that the US gives to Israel, and give it to the Palestinians, for schools, wells, farmland - the ingredients for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

quote:

---

The Angry Arab (Sa'ad AbuKhalil) says that Palestinians should get their land back AND compensation. Nothing less.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
The Angry Arab (Sa'ad AbuKhalil) says that Palestinians should get their land back AND compensation. Nothing less.

---

Jewish Refuges

Time To Settle Accounts

quote:

---

The resettlement of Jews from Arab countries in Israel, which by a conservative estimate has cost $11 billion (US) so far, and the property, communal and private that they left or were forced to leave behind in their countries of birth, would have to be assessed in any settlement of the refugees. To date, Jews have received no compensation for their property and their suffering. The resettlement of these Jews in Israel was financed by the Israeli government, the Jewish Agency and world Jewish organizations. By contrast, the Palestinian refugees have been financed since 1948, by the UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, with an annual budget of $311 million.

By recognizing the claims of the Jews from Arab countries to their rights, the Arab world, and for that matter the Muslim world, would come to recognize another important part of the equation – that Jews have legitimate rights to that part of the Middle East, their ancient homeland, as do Arabs to other parts of the Middle East, even if these were occupied and converted to Islam centuries ago. Paradoxically if the right of Jews to an independent national entity in the Middle East is recognized by the Arab neighbours, territorial boundaries will be as irrelevant as they were during that brief period of history called the Golden Age of Spain, when Muslims, Christians and Jews lived in harmony and made contributions to mankind, the effects of which are felt to this very day.

---

[ 24 January 2007: Message edited by: Peech ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:

When he says that, is he talking about the Palestinians living in refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria or just the Palestinian refugees living in the West Bank?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
My ideas is that Israel withdraw, unconditionally, to the pre-1967 war start line.

---

... soon thereafter to be renamed the pre-2007 war start line.

quote:

---

And the practical Israeli and Palestinian would disagree. "Return" is impractical and and impossibility. Most Palestinian negotiators know this.

---

I agree to a certain extent. The Palestinian diaspora is massive. They can't all come back, anymore then every single Jewish person can move to Isreal, but I think isreal could absorb quite a few Palestinian refugees without to much difficulty. The Return, even if it's limited to a certain number of refugees, must be a part of any settlement with the Palestinians.

Edited because to remove the word "small"

If Isreal wants peace, the number of refugees it will have to accept should be quite large.(at least 500,000 people.)

[ 24 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Return" is impractical and and impossibility.

---

quote:

---

I'm not big on land seizures. There should be courts set up to settle land claims, on both sides of the Green line, and probably overseen by neutral judges from third countries. At the same time, forcibly removing 2nd and 3rd generation settlers from homes and lands illegally seized by their parents and grandparents is going to create as many problems as it solves.

---

quote:

---

Squatters rights for illegal settlers?

---

quote:

---

OK, what if we put the word "attacks against Israel organized by Hamas, Al-Aqsa (and a list of whatever other groups can be controlled by the PA) will be halted". Nitpicker.

---

Wasn't intending on nitpicking Briguy I think this is a point that needs to be included as the number of times that Palestine has been retaliated against as a whole for the actions of a few that the Palestine gov't was unable control (Very much in part due to having funding cut) has really harmed the process. What if a radical element to Hamas refuses to accept any peace deal and continues to launch rockets even in the presence of a peace deal that more than 99% of people involved are willing to accept? Does another family on a beach deserve to get hit by sea-based Israeli artillery fire in retalitation again? Until the Palestine authority is capable of controlling it's own population, we cannot hold it accountable for the actions it cannot control. Keeping in mind that us punishing them by withholding funds is a major reason why they are unable to... I'll stop myself short of accusing the Western world of intentionally keeping the Palestine state crippled so we can continue to play for a morale high-ground (when they stop we stop) and continually punishing the Palestine population for actions they are unable to control.

quote:

---

Peace is ALWAYS one day away. all the US-Israel has to do is peel away 50% of the $Billions that the US gives to Israel, and give it to the Palestinians, for schools, wells, farmland - the ingredients for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:

Any peace, beyond that of the grave, will require at least the wary assent (if not full-throated support) of the majority of people now living in Israel/Palestine. I find it unlikely in the extreme that these two parties will be able to cobble together a unified state at any point in our lives.

A two-state solution is still the only viable option to ending the madness of occupation and reciprocal violence.

---

I agree though firmly believe that Israel will have to be prepared to withdraw from the disputed territories to close to the 67 borders, up for some terriotial negotiations. Jerusalem must be the Capital of both states. Israel must make other consessions, including acknowledgement of the pain and humiliation caused to the Palestinian people.

On the other side, Hamas will have to reject terror and accept the Jewish state full stop. A viable Palestinian state must accept that a "right of return" to Israel should be better tempered as a "possibility" of return offered to those who can prove first generation land loss. Others should be fully compensated by Israel.

Here is the problem. Various peace accords and agreements have been drawn up and agreed to. However, the Palestinians 'violate' the terms each time by making attacks on Israel. Then Israel retaliates, and does not honour their side of agreement and it is back to the drawing board. We have seen this pattern many, many times.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how generous an agreement is made, there will always be people on both sides, that do not want peace. These are people that have had their children killed by an IDF missile, or fathers who have lost children on a school bus hit by a suicide bomber. These people will never want peace, only revenge.

Therefore, any model and any agreement needs to have the possibility of independents carrying out attacks built into it.

I have to disagree with other posters who say that the other Arab/Persian nations must agree to it. They should have no say. For too long, they have used Palestinians as pawns in their desire to take back the holy lands from Israel. If they really cared, they would be giving aid to the Palestinians and opening up their borders to them.

Now then, given that the international community gives a massive amount of aid to both of these nations - it shouldn't be too hard to control them.

While it may seem odd, I think it is necessary for Palestinians to be in charge of Israeli security. A clear understanding of a link between benefits/punishments for the Palestinian people - and actions against Israel is needed.

For example. Currently, when an action is taken against Israel, there are many Palestinians that are happy. If, on the other hand, it was immediately understood that this attack would result in 10% less money for every Palestinian and they would lose rights to work in Israel - then the Palestinians would not be so happy. In fact, they might even attack those that are making the attacks against Israel.

Likewise, if Israelis understand that an assault by the IDF that kills 12 Palestinians is going to result in a substantial reduction in foreign aid - they might not vote in a government that is so quick to pull the trigger.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peech:

And the practical Israeli and Palestinian would disagree. "Return" is impractical and an impossibility.

---

These are two nations which, at the moment, are possessed by deep and legitimate hatred of the rival nationality. How will putting them together in the same polity dissipate this hatred?

It would be great if it did, and I'd like to see it if it could, but at the moment it seems to me likely that a binational state would only produce a great increase in bloodshed and mayhem on both sides.

Does anybody have any real idea of how to start the kind of reconciliation process that would make binationalism a real possibility?

The workers in that region of the world are not seperate...

They work for the same capitalist system that the rest of us work for...

Seperating the workers in two groups and calling one group Israeli and the other group Palistinian is what is causing all this trouble.

There is no such thing as a state... Its just a figment of the human imaginations... either you live in an a certian part of the globe or you do not...

All those people live in that part of the globe and thus, all must work for the means of thier servival.

For example...

If the engine aprts for the minivan are made in Mexico and the body panels in the USa and theya re all shipped to Canda for assemble... Then what is really seperating all these people other then geography...

Trotsky knew a long time ago the the workers of the world are not seperate and that socialism could never work in one country alone and theat is why he called for the permanent revolution... He knew that it could not only happen in Russia. It need to happen everywere....

the problem with all of your thinking is that is all inside the box...

What I mean by that is the box was created for you and then you try to figure out how to work in it.

You all think these people are seperate from one another and that these groups hate each other ... How do you know that.... how do you know what is going on over there.... are you from there? have you lived there??

Do you even know why these people are ate each others throats ??

What are the reasons... because of some figment of the imagination line pre or post 1960 what ever???

Were is the historical refrence points to you arguments ??

How come we don't start from the beginning of Jewish history and the thousands of years of self delussion in all of thier mythogogy...

Or how about finding out the players that use these myths aaginst these people for thier own selfish needes..

You come along then ask a bunch of naive questions based on the idea that no one here really knows anything about the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and Israel to really formulate an opinion, when you have been on the web site for less than a week, on your 8th post, then offer us some kind of fix-all Trotskiest analysis of what is wrong with the analysis here, without the faintest clue about the history and depth of the debate on this issue on this web site.

I notice for instance, amid your tea-cozy solution to the issue you haven't offered one single historical detail of note to indicate that you know anything at all about the situation yourself, except some pie-eyed pseudo-anthropology (?) about "Jewish mythology."

And you ask, why don't we start there? Why because it has absolutely nothing to do with the issue, expecially if you hold to the opinion that the real issue is a devide and conquer strategy devised for the benefit of modern US imperialism.

If the latter is the case, then the national mythologies of either of the parties, so set against each other, is really so much window dressing.

[ 27 January 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Does anybody have any real idea of how to start the kind of reconciliation process that would make binationalism a real possibility?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Burch:
My basic question to those who advocate a binational state has always been this:

---

The issue is not a "binational" state - it is a non-ethnic, non-theocratic, non-discriminatory, non-aggressive state.

Israel's population is 20% Arab. And whaddya know, they've actually allowed one of the wrong-nationality people to hold a meaningless cabinet position, for the first time in 58 years of statehood.

Israel should (as mentioned above) withdraw from the occupied territories, tear down the Wall, and cease any and all incursions beyond its borders.

After that, we can discuss the longer-term absurdities of this anachronism called Israel, such as the fact that I can land in Israel tomorrow and claim immediate citizenship (although I waived publicly any intention of doing so), while expelled Arab former inhabitants may not.

Or the fact that you have to attend at some frigging religious type to get married or divorced (oh, and of course forget getting married in Israel if you're LGBT).

Or the fact that non-European/North American Jews, notwithstanding that they are the majority, still suffer from de facto inequality.

quote:

---

Or the fact that non-European/North American Jews, notwithstanding that they are the majority, still suffer from de facto inequality.

---

North American Jews are discriminated against in Isreal? Don't you mean eastern european Jews?

...Or North African Jews?

[ 28 January 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

A joint Right of Return would be necessary. Also, both sides would need to renounce any notion of priveliging any particular religion.
the concept of "dhimmi" would need to be abandoned by the Muslims, and the notion that Islam was to be treated as an inferior, inherently inhumane religion would have to be abandoned by the Zionists. Jews and Muslims managed to more or less live as secular equals in Moorish Spain, perhaps they could find the way to do so again.

quote:

---

the concept of "dhimmi" would need to be abandoned by the Muslims...

---

[ 28 January 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Maybe it's a question of presentation.

If there was some way of getting both sides to say "Everybody's welcome, let's live as equals and stop this bullshit squabbling over whose godhead can kick whose godhead's omnipresent ass".

Hamas could help things by agreeing to Abbas' coalition government proposal. They wouldn't really lose anything that's worth enduring global isolation for.

And recognizing Israel, just to clarify a misimpression some have repeatedly expressed on this board, would NOT require Hamas or anyone else in the Palestinian community to renounce their grievances against Israeli policy and actions. It would just mean accepting that Jews have the right to live at least in pre-1967 without facing the constant threat of random violence. As Israeli acceptance of a Palestinian state in all of the West Bank and Gaza would mean that Palestinians have the right to live without the daily threat of humiliation, repression, and random violent death.

I would also like to point out that the failure of the secular movement to achieve its goals, largely because of complete intransigence upon the part of the Israelis is the primary cause of the rise of the status of the Islamic militants in Palestinian society, and that these facts in themselves should show quite clearly that there is little to no resistance to secular ideas among Muslim people as a people, as in the past organizations such as the PLO actively organized across religious devides towards a secular purpose.

Also, Hamas was known for running a lot of its own social service programs, at a time when Fatah was basically refusing to do the work of setting up a real Palestinian government and social and educational infrastructure(granted, they were facing Israeli military attacks, but this didn't stop Hamas from providing the social services it provided).

During a visit to Britain last year,
I read a good article in Jewish Socialist magazine

http://jewishsocialist.org.uk/jewishsocialist.html

(this is the link to the current issue, not the one with the article)

(edited to provide correct link)

that discussed how Israel, during the Occupation, devoted a lot of energy to destroying progressive secular left groups amongst the Palestinians.

I hope the Israeli Labor Party and Meretz are satisfied with what this effort led to.

[ 28 January 2007: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]

[ 28 January 2007: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]