I'm asking for your answers to the problem of Palestine: What would you do if it were your problem to resolve?
Vox Day recently presented a tongue-in-cheek (I think) solution: give southern California to the Israelis and let the Palestinians have what is now Israel.
But seriously, if you think it is unjust the way it is now, how would you make it just? How would you make it practical as in guaranteed peaceful, even if not totally agreeable to all parties?
So the goal is for justice and guaranteed peace... solve the problem here. You are in charge.
14 comments:
There are only two solutions, and one is cruel... so that narrows it down.
The first is the dissolution of Israel, which I think is unworkable. If every Israeli agreed to peacefully leave, that would solve the entire problem. This will not happen, of course. Forcefully removing Israelis is as morally objectionable as their intrusion on the Palestinians.
The second solution, and I think the only possible choice (as it does not involve an entire nation willingly relocating), is a unified Palestinian/Israeli government. This itself seems almost impossible to some, and I believe each passing day of hostilities between the two makes it more difficult. However, I think it's workable.
The problem is, the Israelis have the position of power in the negotiations, as they currently have control of the land in dispute. Palestinians, on the other hand, are justified in demanding preferential treatment, especially early on in compensation for the ghetto-fication imposed upon them and the complete lack of any infrastructure.
Israel needs to accept the fact that they are in for a long couple decades of paying to rebuild the society they have fought to obliterate and silence. Rather than imposing an embargo, they need to shower the Palestinians with goodwill aid, supplies, and most importantly they must provide building materials for construction of infrastructure.
Can you imagine how strained the ties between black people and the rest of America would be if we seperated black people behind fences and rolled in tanks to punish all black people everytime a black person hurt a white person? Integration and tolerance (even in the face of violence) must be practiced at this pivotal point.
The violence of terrorism is a direct result of the frustrations imposed upon the Palestinians. The only outcome of the current situation is increasingly strained relations and escalation of violence.
Ginx,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I have a question concerning this (OK several questions):
" Rather than imposing an embargo, they need to shower the Palestinians with goodwill aid, supplies, and most importantly they must provide building materials for construction of infrastructure."
Omnibenevolence virtually never works. It leads to an indulged sense of entitlement, which is another form of "victimhood" in the sense that when the indulgence ends (or even is not increased at a 'satisfactory rate'), the indulged is now a victim of the previous benefactor, and the previous benefactor is now the enemy of the previously indulged, due to denying the 'victim' more of the indulgences.
This is problem of spoiled children, for example: over-indulged and unable to cope with withdrawal of the largesse, they rebel against the indulgent parents with violent hatred.
How would you deal with that?
And second, whose homes would you take away in Israel, to be given to the Palestinian influx from Gaza, the West Bank, and Golan / Lebanon?
Third, how do you differentiate between true descendents of the Green Line Israel Arabs who left, vs. greedy illegitimate intruders looking to score?
Last, why do you think that the 'refugees' and the Israelis could live together peaceably, given that the Palestinians believe deeply in Hamas? In other words, when the resurgent Palestinians take control of Israel, with Jews in the relatively diminutive minority, what do you see happening?
I'm almost shocked you bring up "spoiled children," as my proof that omnibenevolence is that all children are provided for in their every need by their parents, and yet most do not grow up to be dependent upon them. I feel you are assuming the worst in the Palestinians, believing that providing them anything will make them ungrateful brats. This is very disconcerting on a human and ethical level.
I would take away no homes. As a commenter in the previous thread pointed out, Jews, Muslims, and even Christians and followers of still other faiths have lived in the region far longer than there have been wars. Sure, there are incidents from time to time, and there is no doubt that the Jewish minority were persecuted in the region, but we must begin somewhere on the path towards peaceful co-existence.
Instead, Palestinians must not be cordoned off like they were in quarentine. Movement must be free and open for all. There will inevitably be security checks at first, and we must accept the inevitability of residual anger resulting in violent incidents, but opening things up will result in gradual healing. The rift will close between the cultures when there is nothing artificially seperating them, though it will take generations.
I think people are too impatient. We want immediate results, instant gratification. A rocket kills an Israeli, they want blood. Hundreds of Palestinians die, and now they are angry and out for vengence. At some point, someone must stand firm and say, "I will not strike back." The best defense will be to present themselves as allies, not enemies, and this can only be attained through tangible action which benefits the Palestinians.
We cannot be discouraged by the fact that this solution will take generations to succeed. It has been several generations since slavery, but the wound of racism has not fully healed in America. We would be fools to expect the situation between Israel and Palestine to be solved in our lifetime, but the process towards that end can begin any day that those with all the chips decide to come to the table.
Ginx, thanks for your participation; this is very interesting to me.
Ginx said,
"This is very disconcerting on a human and ethical level."
Yes it is. But it is a pragmatic truth, which, if ignored, is deadly. Reality bites, yes?
Ginx, it really appears to me that you are not immersed in the history of the conflict. What you suggest has been done. Here's how the Palestinians responded to open borders: suicide bombers, blowing up women and children in Israeli markets... including Arab Muslims who happened to be there.
Over and over and over.
That is exactly why the Israelis closed the borders: the Palestinians would not even promise to TRY to stop the truck bombs, personal bombs, etc. They encouraged them. In fact, suicide bombers were subsidized by cash stipends to the families of the martyred bombers.
So the Israelis closed the borders. Actions have consequences, even for Palestinians who wish to be exempt due to their "victimhood".
Accommodating the Palestinians every wish - except to give them the entire country - has been tried and has failed... with bloody consequences.
As for taking several generations, that was not part of the condition, but I suppose it should have been said, "immediate peace".
Otherwise you are saying, well it's just natural for Palestinians to kill Jews, maybe their grandkids will get over it. So we'll let them continue, so long as the Jews are the 'bigger' party to this, and still give the Palestinians every thing they want, no matter how many of them get killed by Palestinian bombers. Oh yes, no consequences for the Palestinians, such as counter-insurgent operations.
Do you not see the problem with this?
I disagree with your statement about "those with all the chips", referring apparently to the Israelis. The Palestinians have the chips: all they have to do is to say, OK we'll behave like civilized 21st century neighbors, and the conflict is over. It is completely up to them. They can be a nation; they can have diplomatic relations; they can imports and exports and have tourists and get foreign aid and have commerce and open borders. But they refuse. They refused at Camp David, and they refused the UN/EU/US Road Map to Peace. They are just like petulant spoiled teenagers blaming their behavior on their parents. The Palestinians blame their behavior on the Israelis. Because the Israelis are 'evil', the Palestinians are allowed to kill them.
It really is up to them.
However, let's back up a step. Maybe we could engineer this one step at a time.
What is the first, single thing to be done, after eliminating the border and declaring Israel to be defunct, and all Palestine unified (except Jordan, I suppose)?
Let's take the scenario, one step at a time, and look for consequences, intended and unintended... OK? This is an interesting exercise. And since we view this from differing angles, a combined solution might surprise us both.
Thanks for your participation...
Stan
BTW, I am soliciting input from anyone and everyone on this subject; please submit your thoughts and critiques everyone...
Stan
the Palestinians would not even promise to TRY to stop the truck bombs, personal bombs, etc.
I'm not sure how a people collectively do that, especially when it seems to only take a dozen or a hundred or whatever small percentage of the over 1.5 million or so individuals to sour the deal. I don't want to be associated with what America does, but people like the Taliban attack us indisciminately because to them, we're all one cohesive unit... even though I disagree with most of what we do regarding foreign policy.
Actions have consequences, even for Palestinians who wish to be exempt due to their "victimhood".
Isn't that the argument for Israel in the first place? Jewish sympathy = Zionism... it's flawed then, and it's not the argument I'm making here.
Anyhoo, you cannot collectively persecute a people for the actions of a few. If you do, you are morally bankrupt. Individuals commit crimes, not societies. I understand there is frustration that there is often no one left alive to blame, but they cannot allow their outrage to further agitate the Palestinian people as a whole. Most of them did nothing to deserve this treatment, and this is utterly ignored in favor of pointing to the militants as the defining aspect of their society.
Otherwise you are saying, well it's just natural for Palestinians to kill Jews, maybe their grandkids will get over it.
It is "natural," just as it has been natural for Jews to kill several times more Palestinians than they have lost. We must overcome our natural short-sightedness and extend forgiveness, while asking to be forgiven. Neither side is blameless, and though I consider Israel to be the instigator, I would not treat them as horribly as they have treated the Palestinians if I had any say in the matter.
I'm all for justice. I understand there are Palestinians who should be brought to trial for crimes against Israeli people. But that is how it should be done: there needs to be rule of law. There cannot be task force home invasions in the night to assassinate people without due process. Israel is not acting within the law, which is why I am callous to their "plight" as a whole. If you act outside the law, you cannot cry when others refuse to do the same. You have to keep following the law even if someone else ceases to do so.
"Those with all the chips" are not just the Israelis, nor is it just Israelis and Palestinians. There will need to be numerous people involved in the peace process, and all of them will need to set aside their respective cultural narrative of the situation and understand what has happened here: a people were displaced and need to be re-integrated into a society that has massacred them on many occassions.
That is the situation, and it seems daunting if Israel believes they have every right to be there and that Palestinians are just violent neighbors... who inconveniently had to be moved a few times before Israel had all the land it wanted.
(continued)
(continued)
I would solve it by erasing borders in general, but this seems impossible unless you have regional support for such an idea (ha!). I imagine Jordan has no interest in ceding Gaza. As such, Palestinians would hopefully be given the freedom to move and do business in Israel, while being able to return to whatever they have established for themselves in Gaza.
I don't think Israel should be "defunct," rather it should open citizenship and grant civilian rights to those who seek it. I oppose the idea of "Jewish" or "Palestinian" settlements or neighborhoods. I think integration is the only hope for the region, as segregation has proven only to promote a cultural divide.
There would then have to be a period of time when Palestinians were essentially coddled. If everything has been taken from you, you cannot exactly eke out a living in the desert without some established amenities. You can call this welfare or reparations or whatever scary word you want, but it simply has to be done. If the Israelis stop buying weapons for a month, I bet that would be enough (kidding... slightly).
Without a doubt, there would be a lot of violence during this time, which I hope would be handled in a manner reminiscent of domestic terrorism or just simple crime. I wouldn't be surprised if there was violence on both sides, to be frank.
The generations old enough to remember the indoctrination which both sides received will probably always harbor feelings of distrust, but new generations brought up in an atmosphere of tentative peace will be progressively better off, and the violence will begin to taper as those driven to such extreme acts are sought or simply eliminated by virtue of the suicidal attacks.
I believe very firmly that this is the only path to a peaceful solution. There's always war, but I'm really not a fan.
I just want to say one thing about "entitlement." I don't want to peg you as one, but just in case you are... that conservative/libertarian/tea party nonsense about pulling yourself up by your own boot straps is full of shit. Everyone gets help, from the day they are born to the day they're old and can't wipe themselves. We all depend on each other.
Giving to the Palestinians isn't like bequeething a multi-billion dollar fortune to a spoiled rich kid when his dad dies, it's more like picking up a baby from a ditch, feeding it, clothing it, caring for it, and making sure it grows up to not kill people. You have to be a fool not to notice when someone is taking you to the cleaners with some BS sob story. The Palestinians aren't the guy outside the liquor store asking you for change so he can take the bus to see his daughter.
Ginx, again thanks for participating; I hope my responses do not seem too agressive, we do have real differences to discuss, and the written word can seem too terse at times. Let's keep trying.
You seem to feel that the Jews stole the land from the Arabs. How did they accomplish that? The Jews had purchased some 1/3 of 'green line Israel' prior to the creation of the Middle East states including Israel in 1948. Most of the Arab population in green line Israel were tenents, not owners of any property. Much of that property was abandoned by those Arabs who fled, essentially expatriating themselves. When they discovered that the other Arab countries didn't want them either, they wanted back in. They were not allowed back in. So they declared themselves refugees and were treated as such by their Arab hosts. I fail to see how they had their land stolen when for the most part they didn't own it anyway, and they abandoned it. I have seen statistics on this, which I can probably find if you are interested. When tenents abandon properties, why do they have a moral right to re-occupy it upon their demand? How can you steal property from X that is not owned by X?
Further, you have not addressed the legality of the UN action that green-lined Israel, created the state, and approved the state when it was created. Nor have you addressed the issue of the attack on Israel by all the neighboring Arab states one day after the creation of the state of Israel. It was this attack that caused the Palestinian outflow of Arab expatriots to begin with. So the question of ethics and morals and theft of property does not seem to withstand scrutiny. Please address why you think the Jews stole Israel from the Arabs.
As for self-help and your disdain for conservatism etc, of course people get help; but not omnibenevolence, which is toxic. A parent that never says no, is not teaching any self-reliance or judgement capability. A child that never has to cause his own progress will never learn to do so. A child without discipline will never display self-discipline. Omnibenevolence is an inducement to stasis in development, a stasis at a point of juvenile expectations of ever more free provisions, and no expectation of consequences, whether good consequences for effort expended or bad consequences for lack of diligence. Omnibenevolence is toxic to human development. It is not help, it is abuse.
But back to Palestine. We open the borders, treat bombers as criminals, or until they are depleted?
Aren't bombers heros? Of course they are, and they generate more bombers. Families are quite proud of their martyred sons and daughters. The Muslim mind is not a western mind. It does not respond to the same stimuli that western minds respond to. It is not subject to the same ethical considerations that westerners think matter. I don't think westerners can accurately predict the motivations that produce the strange appearing responses of the Muslim mind. That's one reason that I don't think opening Israel's defenses makes any sense at all. The Arab Muslim response is entirely unpredictable.
(continued below)
Build a 100ft wall around Israel to prevent an influx of any further refugees / colonizers. Place the Israeli's and Palestinians into cryostasis for a thousand or so years. In the meantime, we will hopefully be able to locate another planet capable of sustaining human life, as well as having developed a propulsion system to get there in a reasonable amount of time. Relocate one of the two groups to the new planet. I recommend the UN uses a coin toss to make the decision fair. Bring both groups out of cryostatis and explain to the relocated group that they actually got the better deal as they can now claim ownership to an entire planet, instead of just a small piece of land.
Or, we can build a time machine to go back into the past to prevent WW2 from ever happening.
Both suggestions are absurd, but I believe they have a higher probability of success than the current diplomatic solutions on the table.
As Stan pointed out, if the Palestinians laid down their arms and ceased the rocket attacks and suicide bombings, there will be peace. As long as Hamas is calling the shots, that will never happen. As long as Iran and the other anti-Israel nations fund and supply terrorist operations against Israel, that will never happen.
Abandoned... wow. That is one way of putting it. Another way is to point out that heavily armed and aggressive Israelis forced them out, then further pushed them again in 1967.
You want to talk about aid and dependence... again, wow. The Palestinians are living on foreign aid, as they do not have the means to do anything else. We are giving them fish, not fishing poles, and they will never have the hard resources they need to establish an economy until they are no longer penned up.
Suicide bombers create more bombers? How? Are they exploding and infecting other people? They are only heroes to people who are oppressed. People who are treated as human beings by the Israelis won't think suicide bombers are heroic. When Israel is the enemy, then those who attack them are seen positively. I cannot believe I have to explain something so elementary... *sigh* "What? Agitating people with tanks makes them attack you, while helping them makes them like you? Who would have thought..." Seriously just... wow.
You don't see why Palestinians harbor a grudge against people who murder Palestinians on a fairly regilar basis while know-nothing westerners defend the actions of Israel and fund it with our taxes? You know that grudge we have against al-Qaeda? That was 9 years ago and only 3,000 people died. Palestine has lost more than that in the last few years. Their wound is bigger and fresh, and you expect it to be fully healed? They are supposed to be super-human pacifists who take it all lying down, every single one of them? Any who stand up for their rights are labelled as terrorists and bring down the wrath upon the whole group... that seems fair. Only America and its allies are allowed to have testicles.
What religion anyone is, what their ethnic background is, and all other labels are meaningless. There are Jews in Palestinian camps, and there are Muslims in Israel. None of this has nothing to do with the fact that 1.5 million people are being impoverished by Israeli action.
If you want an immediate end to violence, you should just give up. You want the impossible and you are willing to not bother trying because it will mean not retaliating in a childish, over-reacting fashion. There is no microwavable solution to this problem, it will have to be slow-cooked.
I won't be posting about this anymore, because I genuinely believe you have absolutely no idea what the situation there is, nor do you have any knowledge of the workings of political science, geopolitics, or any relevant field of study. Your strategy appears to be "Believe and support Israel. Period." I'm really disappointed that I have essentially spoken to a wall.
Ginx,
I'm sorry that you are leaving. I do think that your response is based on an alternate history that neglects much of the actual facts concerning the formation of Israel, the formation of the Arab states, and the constant Muslim aggression against other Muslims as well as against Israel.
You said:
"If you want an immediate end to violence, you should just give up. You want the impossible and you are willing to not bother trying because it will mean not retaliating in a childish, over-reacting fashion. "
But that is exactly how the North Ireland bloodbath ended: they laid down their arms.
Facts to consider as you go: the Palestinians rejected statehood twice, refusing to acknowledge Israel's right to exist, and immediately returned to deadly attacks on Israel... thereby ensuring their poverty and victimhood. It was purely their choice. Israel had no choice in this matter; it is not Israel's fault that the Palestinians rejected statehood and civilized behavior; the Palestinians had the ability to choose, and they chose terrorism.
Stated another way: the way to stop the Israeli incursions is to stop attacking Israel. The UN/EU/US/Russia "Road Map to Peace" was a way toward national status and accompanying prosperity for the Palestinians. Their choice: rejection, followed by terrorism.
It is their choice. Israel has no say in their choices. The Palestinians are in charge of their future, except for taking charge of Israel. But controlling Israel is exactly what the Palestinians want; so they control Israel in the one way they can, by attacking it and provoking it and then sacrificing/martyring their own citizens to the cause.
The international voices are co-dependently supporting the Palestinians in their quest to control Israel including through terror.
Their victimhood is more important to them than a) behaving themselves as civilizeded members of an international community; b) statehood; c) a self-sustaining economy. They could have all these things just by making the choice to do so.
They are aided and abetted in their 'victimhood' by a world-wide assortment of co-dependent voices, including 'intellectuals' who thrive on the declaration of victimhood of others and championing their violence.
(continued)
(Continued from above)
Thought experiment: Let's assume that the USA were the neighbor of Gaza, and that Israel and the Jews did not exist. Your presumption is that the "Gazans", as I will call them in this thought experiment, just can't stop sending rockets into Chicago, and they are justified by USA repression. What would the USA do in response? Give them citizenship so they would stop? Under Obama and the Left, that is possible. Once they are citizens, could we expect them to then change their behaviors? Why? Why should the USA reward the terrorist behavior and then expect it to change? That is not a rational approach.
Much more likely, the USA would negotiate until it was obvious to the most challenged that negotiations are meaningless in this situation. Rockets into Chicago would continue. Finally the USA would invade in order to eliminate the aggressors. The Gazan militants would make certain that they hide behind citizen targets, and maximal death tolls occur.
The usual worldwide complainers would declare the USA to be a terrorist state (actually they already do that), and that the Gazans are pure, simple folk being oppressed by the terrorist USA, and that the USA should give them citizenship, land, healthcare, etc. Hearing that support, the Gazans are not prone to relent, they are encouraged to continue their attacks, after a Hudna, of course.
The Gazans make their choices; the USA is forced by Gazan choices to make its choices. The USA cannot change that path; the Gazans can change the path, but won't.
I cannot see any change occurring that does not start with a change in the attitudes and behaviors of the Palestinians.
The Palestinians have the choices, and have made some of them, including to be ruled by Hamas. Israel can choose how to deal with the attacks that the Palestinians choose to continue. But they cannot, rationally, give in to terrorism. So the Palestinians have the choices here, not the Israelis.
I encourage you to stick around, but I understand if you wish to leave.
I submit that the situation is a classic Mexican standoff, and if I were in charge I would run away.
Seriously.
That's my solution.
Run away.
I think that is what the USA is doing, only slinking away, not running.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the Iranianian "aid ship" reaches the Israeli blockade. This appears to be a deliberate provocation with war in mind.
How much longer can the Israelis allow the nuclear intentions of Iran to continue? I'd wager not much longer.
Post a Comment