Occupied territories
I honestly cannot imagine any final (by that i mean a just and peaceful) end to the Palestinian issue.
First of all, the Palestinians want an independent state. Ok, now that might seem "simple" on paper somehow, but reality is very different. Let us, for argument's sake, say that this "independent" state will be in the Gaza strip and the West Bank, the territories occupied in the June 1967 war. How will this happen? The West Bank is full of Jewish settlements (colonies would be a better word). The "settlers" there do not want to go, and will not go, anywhere. This means that either they will have to live in a Palestinian state, or these settlements will become part of Israel. I cannot see any Jewish settler deciding that he wants to live under Palestinian leadership and rightly so, i cannot imagine Palestinians being any nicer to the Jews than the Jews have so far been to Palestinians.
So we have a fragmented and divided Palestinian "state", if it can be called that, in Gaza and parts of the West Bank. Such a state will be fully dependent on Israel. When and if the Israelis decide to tighten the screws, the Palestinian state will crumble.
The Gaza withdrawal plan is quit the clever move from Israel, which has long been pushing the Palestinians to seeing Gaza as their only "truly" viable option for statehood. So we will see Palestinians with control over Gaza and some form of wierd power structure in the West Bank.
I also do not get what the hell the United States is doing. Condoleezza Rice says that the recent decision to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank is wrong, but then says that Israel will get to keep some of its settlements there. Someone explain this to me. Are we saying that there should be no new settlements, but that the ones already there should be recognized as legal and become part of Israel? Legal according to who?
If this is what we are saying then all we are doing is recognizing the foreful seizure of territory. Israel waged a war, took over Arab lands and now gets to keep them. So why can't any other country do that? I can think of plenty of other countries that would love to get their hands on a slice of some neighboring country's territory.
So what does the term "occupied territory" mean then?
Sell the West Bank settlements to the Palestinians and use the money to build homes for those settlers within Israel. The Palestinians can then use these settlements to house some of the Palestinian refugees living in those awful camps in Lebanon, Syria and other countries in the region.
So there we have it, another population exchange like those that happened in Europe after first and second world wars and India during its independence process. Alot of good that did them.
If we really believe in democracy, human rights and the value of each and every indivdual human being then every person living in "historical Palestine" should become the citizen of one state. I see the "one state" solution as the only way to solve the "holy land's" problems. Palestinan refugees should remain where they are and be given the citizenship of whatever country they reside in.
That is the only way. The settlers won't leave, Israel can't allow any viable Palestinian state on the whole of the West Bank and the refugees will only make matters worse if they return.
The "two state solution" talk cannot and will not ever work on the ground, the two "states" and their populations are too closely tangled for any real separation to be succesful.
I will get into my critisizm of the Arab side of this issue later. I have alot to about that.
First of all, the Palestinians want an independent state. Ok, now that might seem "simple" on paper somehow, but reality is very different. Let us, for argument's sake, say that this "independent" state will be in the Gaza strip and the West Bank, the territories occupied in the June 1967 war. How will this happen? The West Bank is full of Jewish settlements (colonies would be a better word). The "settlers" there do not want to go, and will not go, anywhere. This means that either they will have to live in a Palestinian state, or these settlements will become part of Israel. I cannot see any Jewish settler deciding that he wants to live under Palestinian leadership and rightly so, i cannot imagine Palestinians being any nicer to the Jews than the Jews have so far been to Palestinians.
So we have a fragmented and divided Palestinian "state", if it can be called that, in Gaza and parts of the West Bank. Such a state will be fully dependent on Israel. When and if the Israelis decide to tighten the screws, the Palestinian state will crumble.
The Gaza withdrawal plan is quit the clever move from Israel, which has long been pushing the Palestinians to seeing Gaza as their only "truly" viable option for statehood. So we will see Palestinians with control over Gaza and some form of wierd power structure in the West Bank.
I also do not get what the hell the United States is doing. Condoleezza Rice says that the recent decision to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank is wrong, but then says that Israel will get to keep some of its settlements there. Someone explain this to me. Are we saying that there should be no new settlements, but that the ones already there should be recognized as legal and become part of Israel? Legal according to who?
If this is what we are saying then all we are doing is recognizing the foreful seizure of territory. Israel waged a war, took over Arab lands and now gets to keep them. So why can't any other country do that? I can think of plenty of other countries that would love to get their hands on a slice of some neighboring country's territory.
So what does the term "occupied territory" mean then?
Sell the West Bank settlements to the Palestinians and use the money to build homes for those settlers within Israel. The Palestinians can then use these settlements to house some of the Palestinian refugees living in those awful camps in Lebanon, Syria and other countries in the region.
So there we have it, another population exchange like those that happened in Europe after first and second world wars and India during its independence process. Alot of good that did them.
If we really believe in democracy, human rights and the value of each and every indivdual human being then every person living in "historical Palestine" should become the citizen of one state. I see the "one state" solution as the only way to solve the "holy land's" problems. Palestinan refugees should remain where they are and be given the citizenship of whatever country they reside in.
That is the only way. The settlers won't leave, Israel can't allow any viable Palestinian state on the whole of the West Bank and the refugees will only make matters worse if they return.
The "two state solution" talk cannot and will not ever work on the ground, the two "states" and their populations are too closely tangled for any real separation to be succesful.
I will get into my critisizm of the Arab side of this issue later. I have alot to about that.
posted by Caliph at 7:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home