Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:16 AM May 2015

The Bennett-Bibi era of ‘no solution’

Control over the Palestinian people always appeared to be a temporary situation that Israel was seeking ways to end. When the left claimed that the right wing didn’t want peace, the right explained that it in fact did want peace and was interested in ending Israeli control over the Palestinians, but only when security arrangements were worked out that would allay its fears. In other words, the right was simply seeking to be the one to represent the country’s interests in negotiations with the Palestinians.

The political system organized around this narrative, which from a critical, retrospective view looks like a methodical lie. But all of this was shattered when Bennett revealed his view that Israel and the Palestinians are not in a process leading anywhere. Israel will not return territories, and the Palestinians – other than about 50,000 whom Bennett proposes giving Israeli citizenship to – are to simply remain under Israeli control. In other words, millions of stateless people will live under Israeli military rule.

Following Bennett, and apparently in an effort to appeal to Bennett’s Habayit Hayehudi electorate, Netanyahu declared a few days before the March 17 Knesset election that if he was reelected, there would be no Palestinian state. The election therefore was dominated by the possibility – articulated by Bennett and adopted by the prime minister – of continued military control over the Palestinian people until further notice, and without apology. In light of the new diplomatic option placed on the map of reality, the political system had to reorganize.


http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.655471

The author maintains that it is impossible for this to be the case, and it cannot be that there is no solution. This is morality, not reality unfortunately. There is no credible means by which the Israel's military rule and control over the Palestinians will end. There is neither the internal will nor the external intervening forces required to do so.

Pursuing the "no solution" approach definitely has its costs, in that it will eventually lead within a century or two of the Jewish state of Israel disappearing entirely to be replaced by a binational state. But that doesn't mean it won't happen.
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
1. Honestly, why would Israel want the current situation to change?
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:35 AM
May 2015

A One-State-solution would incorporate troublemakers. A Two-State-solution would give away control over precious land.

But as it is right now, Israel enjoys peace and prosperity at the tolerable cost of having to bomb Gaza every few years.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
3. That's what P.W. Botha thought.
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:39 AM
May 2015

Netanyahu, Bennett and their voters are cut from the same fabric as the Afrikaaners, so not hard to see things going that path.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
2. I will repeat, good luck Palestinians, watch out for those killer land swaps the allegedly
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:36 AM
May 2015

reasonable people may impose on you. The intervening forces could certainly do damage
geek, I would not underestimate them.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
4. Land swaps are not the obstacle to a negotiated resolution.
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:43 AM
May 2015

Israel's absolute unwillingness to let the Palestinians be free to make their own decisions is the obstacle, and that will not change.

Power, control, force and domination are what Israelis see as the foundation to security. So, a negotiated settlement creating a Palestinian state of any kind would undermine the pillars of their entire security strategy.

They view the Palestinians as feral creatures who can only live in peace if they are locked in a cage--we've all seen the "cultural" smear on the Palestinians as their pretext for continuing the occupation.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
5. I agree how they view the Palestinians, yet you're over looking the significance of those
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:52 AM
May 2015

major settlement blocs and who I am referring to in being complicit in an imposed deal
through a resolution that will have everyone on board..that leaves them without a viable
state..that could very well happen. Everyone on board except the Palestinian citizens,
counting on Abbas would be a mistake.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
6. The key settlement bloc for me is Ariel. Any plan that includes Ariel and its finger as
Fri May 8, 2015, 10:55 AM
May 2015

part of Israel is a fraud.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»The Bennett-Bibi era of ‘...