Powered by WebAds

Thursday, July 19, 2012

The one (Jewish) state solution: An idea that can be discussed in public

There was a conference in Hebron last Thursday, attended by more than 500 people, at which the only viable long-term solution to the Middle East dispute was discussed: The one Jewish state solution.
It's an idea that until recently was not politically correct to discuss (and still isn't politically correct in some circles). But here in Israel, many people aren't just whispering it. They're saying it out loud. There’s nothing new about far-right groups holding events in which speakers fantasize about “Greater Israel.” But Thursday’s conference was different: It indicated that the idea of the one-state solution has become respectable within a larger segment of society, including the ranks of Israel’s ruling party.

[Likud MK Tzipi] Hotovely was right: For years, moderate right-wingers tiptoed around the question of what they envision for the future of the territories Israel captured in 1967. Only hardliners openly admitted what perhaps many others secretly desired, but knew to be politically too incorrect to openly demand.


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is on record saying that he does not want to rule over the Palestinians and is ready to accept a Palestinian state. But that no longer prevents some members of his party from openly demanding a one-state solution. MK Miri Regev, speaking on a recorded video clip, boasted that she recently founded the Knesset Lobby for the Application of Israeli Sovereignty over Judean and Samarian Communities. The Likud constitution requires the application of sovereignty over the settlements, she said.

“It’s time to change the discourse in the State of Israel about Judea and Samaria,” said MK Ze’ev Elkin, the chairman of the coalition, also in a prerecorded statement. “For 20 years, we talked about what to give and why. Now the time has come for an entirely different discourse. This is our land, and it’s our right to apply sovereignty over it. Regardless of the world’s opposition, it’s time to do in Judea and Samaria what we did in [East] Jerusalem and the Golan. It’s time to end this system in which the Palestinians take and take and we give and give.”

Most speakers focused on Israel’s right to The Land — all of it — and tried to reassure the audience that they need not fear the so-called demographic threat. Israel would not lose its Jewish majority if it annexed the West Bank and granted citizenship to the Arabs living there, nearly all the speakers promised.


Former Israeli ambassador Yoram Ettinger used his 15 minutes — the organizers strictly enforced every speaker’s time limit — for a slideshow in which he presented a lot of data ostensibly proving that there are a million fewer Palestinians in the West Bank than generally assumed. How come? Because the Palestinian officials dealing with statistics are either incompetent or lying, he said.

Ettinger’s graphs made it easier for subsequent speakers to dismiss the demographic argument against a one-state solution as left-wing demagoguery. Gershon Mesika, the head of the Samaria Regional Council, for instance, called the demographic threat a “big bluff.” Even most Arabs don’t believe the idea of two states for two people would work, he added.

And so the evening went by, with speaker after speaker preaching to the choir, rarely challenging the audience with provocative questions about, for example, Palestinian national aspirations. “This is not Arab land. This is the holy land of God,” said Hebron Rabbi Uzi Sharbaf, adding that it was “absolutely forbidden” by Jewish law to retreat from any centimeter of the Promised Land.
My guess is that if we actually annexed Judea and Samaria, a lot of the 'Palestinians' would leave (and whine about being refugees and demand international assistance). In any event, the idea ought to be publicly discussed, and if enough conferences like this take place, it will be discussed more and more.

Some of you may be surprised to see me refer to the one Jewish state solution as the only viable long-term solution. Aside from the Jewish right to the entire land conveyed in the Bible, please allow me to explain why I believe that the one Jewish state solution is the only one that is viable in the long term.

1. The 'Palestinians' have proven that they will never make peace with a Jewish state.

2. The 'Palestinians' insist that a 'Palestinian state' be Judenrein.

3. Therefore, anything other than a one Jewish state solution will result, God forbid, in a mass slaughter of Jews.

4. On the other hand, Israel's Jews have proven for the last 64 years that they are willing and able to allow an Arab minority to coexist among us.

Simple enough? Anyone who wants to disagree is invited to challenge those four assertions, with proof. That, I believe, is an impossible task.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


At 7:11 PM, Blogger Sunlight said...

Possible framework to change the vocab?

- Mediterranian County (TA, Rehovot, up to Haifa, Tzvat)
- Negev County
-Gaza County
-J/S County

Work on county boundaries, water, electric, etc etc With expanded prospects when all violence ends for a long time, which is what Oslo and every other agreement calls for (do not vacate them). The motto can be "Only extended peace can turn counties into countries." Ha!


Post a Comment

<< Home