Israel Thread

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It's a bit more than that - it finally gets a resolution on the books, one voted for by everyone but the US. That sends a significant message to the people of Israel on both sides of the argument - settlement building is not acceptable, it is illegal.

It also provoked a reaction from the Israeli Government that frankly betrays just how bizarre their position is.

It's not as much as the World needs, but it's something, more than nothing.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Israel will continue to colonize their conquered territories. They will do this until someone stops them with armed force (not annoys them or hurts them).

[LittleGrizzly]

I think its symbolic, but coming so late in the Obama administration and with such a pro-Israeli president about to be inaugurated it'll mean very little.

I do slightly disagree with the above assessment though, if Israeli got a similar treatment to the one Apartheid South Africa got then they would be forced to relent as so many voters would lose out financially. There may be enough support to keep the settlements going when it doesn't really cost Israeli's that much but if they started taking big financial hits then that support might disappear quite quickly.

[Montmorency]

I think its symbolic, but coming so late in the Obama administration and with such a pro-Israeli president about to be inaugurated it'll mean very little.

I do slightly disagree with the above assessment though, if Israeli got a similar treatment to the one Apartheid South Africa got then they would be forced to relent as so many voters would lose out financially. There may be enough support to keep the settlements going when it doesn't really cost Israeli's that much but if they started taking big financial hits then that support might disappear quite quickly.

This is a pitfall I think too many are lured in by.

1. Sanctions and disinvestment had very little concrete effect on the South African economy, and temporarily bolstered support for white supremacist rule. That is the flaw of principle for the comparison.
2. Sanctions were undertaken as political will allowed, meaning the lowest hanging fruit; this contributed to the largely-symbolic effect of sanctions by the countries undertaking them. Countries from whom sanctions on Israel would count most have the most to lose from them, in turn lowering political will.
3. Alternative economic partners are more readily found in today's world than in the 80s and 90s.
4. The political regime in South Africa was steadily weakening, while in Israel it is steadily strengthening - perhaps more appropriately said, it is hardening.
5. Afrikaners projected power outwards from white enclaves, while Israelis project power inward to Palestinian enclaves. Jewish supremacists lording over a Jewish state with minor colonial holdings (or else genuine apartheid with full administration of Palestinians as second-class citizens) stands on much firmer ground than white supremacists trying to hold tens of millions of black Africans in thrall, in the midst of a black African geography.
6. Palestinian Arabs are not looked upon favorably by the European mass, the American mass, the Israeli mass, or even the Arab mass. The Russians and Chinese would prefer they remain a restive thorn, if anything.
7. Black South Africans had the paradoxical advantage of both numbers in comparison to Palestinians and of not really being anything like a single cohesive ethnic group (to the extent Palestinians may be such).

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I think its symbolic, but coming so late in the Obama administration and with such a pro-Israeli president about to be inaugurated it'll mean very little.

I do slightly disagree with the above assessment though, if Israeli got a similar treatment to the one Apartheid South Africa got then they would be forced to relent as so many voters would lose out financially. There may be enough support to keep the settlements going when it doesn't really cost Israeli's that much but if they started taking big financial hits then that support might disappear quite quickly.

Possibly, but they have been somewhat of a pariah state as it is.

When they concede the settlements, the next point will be Jerusalem and full control of the West Bank as Palestine. After that, the next step is to continue the pressure until they forfeit all of the lands not accorded them by the 1947 mandate or to compensate/underwrite Palestine in lieu of "the right of return."

Moreover, since a Jewish state on the Arabian peninsula is anathema too all the hard core Salafist types, the violence never stops no matter what concessions are made.


The conflict in Israel/Palestine will cease when the Jews have been wiped out or the bulk of Arab cultures actually shift towards modernity.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Possibly, but they have been somewhat of a pariah state as it is.

When they concede the settlements, the next point will be Jerusalem and full control of the West Bank as Palestine. After that, the next step is to continue the pressure until they forfeit all of the lands not accorded them by the 1947 mandate or to compensate/underwrite Palestine in lieu of "the right of return."

Moreover, since a Jewish state on the Arabian peninsula is anathema too all the hard core Salafist types, the violence never stops no matter what concessions are made.


The conflict in Israel/Palestine will cease when the Jews have been wiped out or the bulk of Arab cultures actually shift towards modernity.

Israel is a state established by terror and forced expulsion, it's also a major Cause Celebre for extremist Islam.

It is for these reasons that it is in constant danger, but that does not give them the right to oppress the Palestinians. In reality, Israel is not a viable state as it is, it is currently only half a state, caught between stability and annihilation.

[Greyblades]

Personally I think Israel should evict the palestinians and be done with it, Israel's enemies can hardly hate them more than they allready do and thier allies have long since lost sympathy for islam.

Way I see it save for the inevitable violence during the eviction the removal of an eternal fifth collumn to a neighbouring region would be nothing but a net benefit for the state of israel.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Personally I think Israel should evict the palestinians and be done with it, Israel's enemies can hardly hate them more than they allready do and thier allies have long since lost sympathy for islam.

Way I see it save for the inevitable violence during the eviction the removal of an eternal fifth collumn to a neighbouring region would be nothing but a net benefit for the state of israel.

Not sure that I would agree with the "5th column" label, since I don't believe they are enemies within, so to speak. The majority of them have never accepted Israel's right to the conquered territories, so they aren't really working against their own government/culture.

And while the expulsion bit mentioned by PVH is arguable, the use of terrorism as a pressure tactic by Israel's founders is well documented. It may have had more of a guerilla war overtone in terms of targets, but Israeli terrorists certainly did take out civilian and mixed targets along with security forces targets. Moreover, once the Palestinian Arabs had cleared out to make way for the military assault on Israel, Israel, in practical terms, did not let them come back and did take all their land.

The only right to land Israel really has -- since they jumped the gun on the mandate land grants anyway -- is by right of conquest. Conquest is not the generally accepted legitimation strategy it once was...


Of course, I have to say this as a citizen of a country that was founded by rebelling against our own acknowledged government for the heinous behavior of moderate taxes enacted, in part, to defray costs incurred in defending our territory militarily. This rebellion was begun with doses of terrorism -- admittedly not too many that were lethal -- but which featured repeated acts of brutality, terrorism, and theft perpetrated between rebel and loyalist sympathizers. Once having been established, my new country proceeded, somewhat haphazardly, to acquire vast territories from those already living there through force expulsions, wars of aggression, pogroms (not genocide since it was never programmatic enough, but featuring many of the joyous tactics of ethnic cleansing). We absorbed an entire state of 5th columnists who'd rebelled successfully against the government they'd sworn to abide under, trumped up a war against our Southern neighbor to fulfill our "manifest destiny" after that huge new state was not enough; invaded foreign territory to conduct war against the native population living there and then forced the 'legal' owner to sell us the territory; launched two campaigns of conquest against our Northern neighbor (not wars of aggression, but when wars against England occurred, 'on to Quebec' was apparently on the to-do list); supported a 5th column effort in Hawaii and then absorbed the territory; allowed a journalist to foment a war to free Cuba from tyranny, which just happened to require us to invade and take over the Philippines and Puerto Rico as part of our campaign to free Cuba; and aided a provincial rebellion in order to establish Panama and get exclusive control of a lucrative and strategically important trans-oceanic canal (curiously, no Panamanians were physically around to sign the treaty that established Panama....).

It's all okay though, since this was all pre WW1, we got it "in under teh lock" so we cool.

[Greyblades]

Hrm, in my eyes Israel is lesson one on the forgotten reasons for the brutality of states past.

I wonder how much time money and blood would have been spent compared to history if Israel could have enacted a convert or leave policy with the palestinians once their millitary superiority was established.

[LittleGrizzly]

Monty I wouldn't expect a sea change in Israeli national opinion but just a strong enough targeting of enough moderates wallets to convince them that its worth changing their vote (slightly) rather than losing money and the hypothetical did entail a fair few countries following through with it, realistically I wouldn't expect anything like it to happen just feel the hypothetical of countries following through with it could lead to a small change.

Greyblades and I wonder if you could make a similar argument about letting many of the Europeans who formed Israel die at the hands of the third reich instead?

Regardless of either actually saving lives or money (if they would) in the long run I don't think you can justify either.

[LittleGrizzly]

Seamus (can't seem to reply so this is my version of it)

It is all well and good claiming that a peaceful Israel willing to give land back and treat the Palestinians fairly would not be tolerated but it is somewhat difficult to prove given the lack of evidence one way or the other. I wouldn't wildly disagree that there are some zealots who, regardless of their actions would not accept Israel, these people are nutters. Unfortunately it can become quite difficult to spot these nutters in amongst all the other people who dislike Israel and strike out at it for quite legitimate reasons.

Whilst an element could still rail against Israel to an extent it would become increasingly difficult message to convince people of, more moderate voices would actually be empowered, the misdeeds of Israel could no longer boost their extremist opponents. It would be a long process but in time progress would be made and most Palestinians would rather get on with their lives given such an opportunity than fight for a cause not so closely linked to their survival.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Seamus (can't seem to reply so this is my version of it)

It is all well and good claiming that a peaceful Israel willing to give land back and treat the Palestinians fairly would not be tolerated but it is somewhat difficult to prove given the lack of evidence one way or the other. I wouldn't wildly disagree that there are some zealots who, regardless of their actions would not accept Israel, these people are nutters. Unfortunately it can become quite difficult to spot these nutters in amongst all the other people who dislike Israel and strike out at it for quite legitimate reasons....

What frustrates me is the percentage of zealots in Islamic societies, especially Arabian ones. Morocco and Algeria both have their Islamist zealots, but the percentages seem to be about the same as with Western culture zealots -- an annoyance but not a vexing concern. Why is it so much more prevalent in the rest of those areas? I am pretty sure the answer has to be cultural, not religious, because ALL religions can spawn zealotry. Heck, the original zealots were, themselves, Jewish.


As you may have noted with my posts, I am despairing about the whole issue and well aware that all parties' behaviors have been....flawed...to say the least. Yet it seems that ANYTHING that is tried to improve the situation ends up becoming counterproductive, often in unpredictable ways.

Even the Camp David Accord mediated by Carter. He focused on two parties, knowing that if he brought the two of them permanently off the battlefield with one another that the Israelis could defend themselves readily against any other military threat posed by the Arab world. He figured that by making war unwinnable, the various players would gradually move towards brokered agreements. Instead, the Accord created the conditions under which international Salafist terrorism thrived and morphed from occasional plane hijackings to highlight a message into ISIS beheadings of the week and nowhere is safe.

[rory_20_uk]

Obama's administration didn't want to wade into one mess in the middle east which was (relatively speaking) stable. Bad, unjust but stable - Israel was much more necessary to help with Syria. Fine. Understandable from a hard-nosed, morally neutral point.

This is nothing but an own-goal. Before the vote, the Israeli PM was rather concerned about Trump coming to be President. Now, by a master stroke, Trump is being lauded as the positive candidate.

The piece of paper the UN has crafted is itself irrelevant. Much more important is the $38 BILLION the USA is giving to Israel over the next decade.

[spmetla]

It's all okay though, since this was all pre WW1, we got it "in under teh lock" so we cool.

Not sure why the West thinks that the rules changed, the rules remain the same, just because Western Europe and the US doesn't partake doesn't make conquest any less true or legitimate than it has in the past. Tibet was forcefully 'repatriated' by the PRC. North Vietnam did forcibly 'reunify' the South. The current PRC policy in the South China Sea and the de facto annexation of Crimea show that hasn't changed. The Iraq War and subsequent Syrian/ISIS crisis has an ongoing genocide on both sides that will award territory to the 'victors' again. If Argentina had won the Falklands War the UN wouldn't give two licks about the 'illegal imperial britons' that would be evicted. If the US and Coalition nations hadn't forced Saddam out of Kuwait no amount of sanctions and harmless condemning declarations would have returned Kuwaiti sovereignty.

Why is Israel somehow the bad guy for doing what everyone else has done and continues to do except a lot more light-handedly. If Israel had been wiped out in '48, '67, or '73 no one would be forcing the Palestinians to allow Jewish communities to exist just like no one cried over the forced expulsion of Jews throughout the middle east following the establishment of Israel. I actually agree with Greyblades wholeheartedly on this and wish that the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza were relocated to Egypt/Jordan and compensated for loss of homes in land or money.

The forced expulsion of ethnic germans from Czechoslovakia certainly ended any issues over the Sudetenlands. The exchange of Turks and Greeks between the two countries in '23 and after has certainly made it far less likely for war between the two again (unless Cyprus throws us another loop).

The two state solution will always fail seeing as Israel will see it's neighbor as a knife to its throat while the other sees no right for Israel to exist.

[HopAlongBunny]

... Much more important is the $38 BILLION the USA is giving to Israel over the next decade.

That's probably the whole thing. Israel is secure so long as the U.S.A. says so.
Obama may have just wanted to highlight that fact to Israel.

[rory_20_uk]

The rules haven't changed, the window dressing has. We now "liberate" rather than invade, or "proactively defend" rather than invade. We have the rules of law and then we ensure that they don't really apply when we are doing what we want. Hell, even the EU manages to gobble up countries since the leaders decide to let it. No guns, no bullets but somehow the final sovereign power has shifted. The Ottomans / Romans / Chinese would understand the process.

The two state solution will always fail seeing as Israel will see it's neighbour as a knife to its throat while the other sees no right for Israel to exist.

So they are the only country on earth that has a neighbour that wants them dead? Hardly. But they are one of the few who have nukes and the other side don't.

[LittleGrizzly]

spmelta If a group of Chinese moved to a different continent and started taking the natives land, one they owned a kingdom in thousands of years previously, they'd probably get criticised just as strongly as Israel does, if not more so.

Less sure regarding Falklands but most of the examples you mention the countries had some legitimate claim to, or at least a far more legitimate claim on the we had a kingdom here thousands of years ago. If Britain decided to forcefully take back some of its previous holdings, say Canada or India, in the same way Israel is doing, so we don't just take charge, we actually displace the locals to replace them with our own people, the criticism would be far stronger than anything Israel receives.

[spmetla]

The chinese are essentially doing what you mention in their semi-autonomous regions to the Uighurs, Tibetans, and Mongols. Instead of removing the natives though they oppress them and have a policy for han-ization which brings in lots of Han chinese and essentially makes the former natives an insignificant minority through the passage of time. When they conduct crack downs no one can protest because media is just not allowed in these regions.

I'm not defending the creation of Israel, it was a very stupid idea and shouldn't have happened. Fact of the matter though is that Israel does exist now, it has defended and expanded it's borders against all its neighbors and still managed to establish the most modern, liberal, safe and progression country in the region. There hadn't been an independent Palestinian arab state in all of history either, it was always a part of another country such as the Ottomans or the Mamluks. Point being the creation of a Palestine is just as much fabrication as that of Israel or even Kosovo. The local arabs were there of course in 1948, there were also a lot of jews there at the time too. The difference is that when the nation of Israel was created the Palestinians attacked it together with every other arab nation around it. Israel won, in 1967 it pre-emptively attacked and expanded it's borders, in 73 it was attacked and again expanded its borders and then gave the Sinai away in exchange for peace with Egypt.

We can't wind the clock back to 1948 and undo it's creation unless you are willing to remove all the Jews as well. Creating a Palestinian state based on the '67 borders will not work. They will of course reserve the right to attack Israel and Israel will then counter attack and occupy again. If Gaza were given to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan then there could be peace because those countries would certainly stamp out the terrorist elements that constantly fire rockets and commit attacks within Israel. As an independent county with no natural resources, no industry, infrastructure, and sharing half it's capital city and with its employment dependent on its neighbor means it would not be a feasible country.

Do you really think that the 2-state solution will work? Peace in the region requires the cycle violence to stop, the tit for tat needs to end. Israel won't stop its occupation so long as the PLO and Hamas encourage and orchestrate attacks. In my mind either Israel should formally take the West Bank and Gaza and implement its settler program making the arabs a minority in their own land as in China, and the US or those two regions should be annexed by Egypt and Jordan.
As for Jerusalem, I say no matter what let the Israelis have it. They actually tolerate and keep safe muslim worship, the modern arab States typically don't show the tolerance (outside tourist zones) that they demand and get (Copts, Jews, Maronites, Shia/Sunni infighting, Druze, pagans/shaminists).

[Montmorency]

We can't wind the clock back to 1948 and undo it's creation unless you are willing to remove all the Jews as well. Creating a Palestinian state based on the '67 borders will not work. They will of course reserve the right to attack Israel and Israel will then counter attack and occupy again. If Gaza were given to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan then there could be peace because those countries would certainly stamp out the terrorist elements that constantly fire rockets and commit attacks within Israel. As an independent county with no natural resources, no industry, infrastructure, and sharing half it's capital city and with its employment dependent on its neighbor means it would not be a feasible country.

That is why Israel would more readily permit a sovereign Palestinian state forming from Gaza and the West Bank over having Jerusalem and half the country surrounded by the established powers - however cooperative or non-threatening they may presently be - of Egypt and Jordan. Regardless, any state within Israeli borders is untenable unless it holds the west bank of the Jordan river. Think Danzig between Brandenburg and Prussia.

[Idaho]

As settlements increase, the Israeli right are cementing control of the nation's politics. Palestinians are not considered citizens - with barely a tiny fraction of settler attacks on Palestinians being investigated :
Troops allow 5 day attack by settlers

Israeli police brutal beating of lorry driver caught on video

Also internal opposition by Israelis is being attacked by increasingly suspect tactics :
Attempt to collect data on Israelis who oppose occupation

The aim is clear. The maps don't lie. Nothing short of the ethic cleansing of the west Bank and the construction of greater Israel is planned.
israeli-settlements-explained-in-5-charts

And Gaza, too populated to be taken over is strangled slowly :
Israel tightens travel restrictions

Meanwhile Trump cancels all foreign aid except for Israel

[Sigurd]

[Greyblades]

Damn, how long had you been sitting on that bombshell?

[Kralizec]

I didn't realize that Idaho was an Arab nation

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I didn't realize that Idaho was an Arab nation

The western USA has changed a good bit over the years.

[Idaho]

Israel has always been lucky in its enemies.

It has a practiced and well drilled counter strategy. Firstly, don't talk about the allegations. Don't mention them at all. Then attack your attackers. Make the human rights in Algeria or Sudan or Qatar the issue.

[Idaho]

In the west bank, justice is meted out by Israeli military courts. They are testament to the detective skills of the occupying army as they have a close to 100% conviction rate.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.prem...F2AAA9788F2E59

[Sigurd]

Israel has always been lucky in its enemies.

It has a practiced and well drilled counter strategy. Firstly, don't talk about the allegations. Don't mention them at all. Then attack your attackers. Make the human rights in Algeria or Sudan or Qatar the issue.

Its like the saying of another famous Jew: "​Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone..."

[Idaho]

Its like the saying of another famous Jew: "​Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone..."

And while it may be pithy and suggest, on a personal level, that we shouldn't kill someone who has had minor indiscretions - on the field of international law and relations, its nonsense.

It means that any issue you raise about another state cannot be discussed until you discuss first whatever the accused wants discussed.

It would be like you being tried for murder, and insisting that before *any* discussion of your case, the complete background of all the jurors, solicitors and judges be first examined.

[Pannonian]

Israel has always been lucky in its enemies.

It has a practiced and well drilled counter strategy. Firstly, don't talk about the allegations. Don't mention them at all. Then attack your attackers. Make the human rights in Algeria or Sudan or Qatar the issue.

TBF, its enemies are their own worst enemies. Israel is among the worst of the "western" countries on human rights, if it's considered a "western" country. However, it's by some distance the best of the "middle eastern" countries on the same terms, if it's considered a "middle eastern" country. Not because they're any good. But because the others, and more specifically Muslim countries, are far, far worse. Which makes it hard to care about Israel's undoubted abuses. IMHO we should just wall off the whole region and leave them to their own devices, without any judgement, and more importantly, without any action, from us. Pay what we have to for oil, and leave them alone otherwise.

[Idaho]

TBF, its enemies are their own worst enemies. Israel is among the worst of the "western" countries on human rights, if it's considered a "western" country. However, it's by some distance the best of the "middle eastern" countries on the same terms, if it's considered a "middle eastern" country. Not because they're any good. But because the others, and more specifically Muslim countries, are far, far worse. Which makes it hard to care about Israel's undoubted abuses. IMHO we should just wall off the whole region and leave them to their own devices, without any judgement, and more importantly, without any action, from us. Pay what we have to for oil, and leave them alone otherwise.

Your analysis has all the depth of a post by Greyblades.

Within the borders of Israel, if you are a full citizen, then your rights are greater than many in the region enjoy. But travel further east, and you are born with Palestinian papers, the situation is different. Your rights are as bad (if not worse) than anyone in the region. Arbitrary arrest and imprisonment are routine. You have no right to travel. Your property is subject to confiscation or destruction as a "collective punishment".

Although on the plus side, you went a whole post without mentioning Jeremy Corbyn. So well done.