Ok, the Israeli Palestine conflict... Can we talk solutions?

(55 Posts)
Boysclothes Mon 04-Aug-14 22:13:20

Loads of threads on here criticising various parties/criticising the way the Israeli state was established etc etc. Can we have a solution based thread?

Starting from these parameters....

Israel exists and will continue to do so.
Hamas are totally uninterested in negotiation.

What can be done? What action should Israel/Hamas take now?

Would be great if we could steer away from unbridled criticism and try and think what should come next.

Boysclothes Mon 04-Aug-14 22:16:58

My view.... It's totally unacceptable for Israel to be killing these innocent civilians. End of. I'm pro-Israel and a borderline Zionist.

Israel stops retaliating on this scale. Stop bombing schools and hospitals and accept that Hamas will use these sites to launch rockets.
Send Mossad in wherever possible to take out key Hamas individuals.
Remove the settlements.
Not sure what to do next if Hamas won't sit down?

VeryLittleGravitasIndeed Mon 04-Aug-14 22:31:29

I agree with you that carpet bombing Gaza is unlikely to do much more than create a new generation invested in politics of hate. And is very hard to defend, from a moral perspective.

I would certainly be making use of Mossad if I were Israel, but I suspect they've already tried that approach.

I think part of the solution would be for Jerusalem to be given to someone neutral to manage as their territory. Perhaps to New Zealand, for example. Neither the Israelis nor Palestinians will budge on Jerusalem so neither gets it.

I think another part of the solution involves the rest of the world butting out. No other conflict on earth gets such high level attention, and I don't think it's helpful. Religion clouds people's thinking, it's just another war over a patch of dirt. If everyone stopped scrutinising everything with such intensity Hamas wouldn't get such mileage out of their guerrilla tactics and Israel wouldn't think "fuck it, everyone hates us anyway".

And the settlers religious nutbags should be forcibly removed, ceding their rights to pretty much everything by virtue of having such a poor excuse for a land grab ("god told me it was ok"... Really?)

VeryLittleGravitasIndeed Mon 04-Aug-14 22:32:33

(Have just re-read that and to summarise - treat them like toddlers)

lbsjob87 Mon 04-Aug-14 22:44:13

I don't really get it so apologies if I offend, but the theory at the moment seems to be that every single person in Gaza is or may be Hamas (which obviously they're not) so if they die, so be it.
All Israel seem to be doing at the moment is boosting the Palestinian cause.
I don't know the solution. Evacuate Gaza, maybe, but then Israel have won. Force talks/sanctions - but they've been fighting since 1948 and nothing has been solved yet. Leave them to it - but that's essentially condoning genocide, which, like it or not is what Israel are committing.
I have never really understood why the West is so pro-Israel when Palestine was there first, but that's my ignorance I guess.

It seems that the Northern Ireland peace agreement is working out - could a similar model be applied?

Like I say, I'm not 100% sure what makes this conflict so very different to so many others, or why one side seems to be the good guys but admit to doing bad things....... Maybe I'm naive....

DogCalledRudis Mon 04-Aug-14 22:50:34

Go back to 1967 borders, end the siege and keep the international agreements

UrbaneLandlord Mon 04-Aug-14 23:12:00

Perhaps someone can dissuade me from this rather bleak view (I'd say pessimist-realist).

Both the Israeli and Gaza Hamas governments have at least a degree of democratic legitimacy.

Hamas is either tacitly acquiescing or actively conniving in the continuing rocket attacks on Israel. That is an on-going act of war by Gaza against Israel. Israel has a world-class army, and responds in the way that we have all seen.

Can we not conclude from this that it is the will of the people of Israel and of Gaza to be at war with each other? If so, there's not much that any third party can do to bring peace.

DogCalledRudis Mon 04-Aug-14 23:25:40

Well, sadly it was the "third parties" who created the whole shitty situation from the start...

meltedmonterayjack Mon 04-Aug-14 23:25:59

I'm with Urbane in that there's little point trying to find possible solutions until until both sides really want peace badly enough. Which they don't. And until they do, this hideous war of attrition will run and run with civilians bearing the brunt of the loss and misery and people on each side hating and avenging the other.

There won't be peace any time soon sadly.

YetAnotherHelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Wed 06-Aug-14 14:18:26

Hi all,
we have moved this to In The News, where it might pick up more interest.

halfdrunkcoffee Wed 06-Aug-14 20:30:16

If I were Supreme Commander of the World, I would put the following options on the table:

1. A two-state solution, comprising Israel within the pre-1967 borders and a sovereign state of Palestine consisting of the West Bank and Gaza. Jerusalem to be shared between the two countries. All Israeli settlers to leave the West Bank, unless they are happy to live under Palestinian jurisdiction. I presume there would be arguments on the exact allocation of land. An end to the blockade on Gaza. Hamas to disarm in return (or better still elections to be held and Hamas to be replaced by a more secular party). Massive investment to rebuild Gaza and to help those who have suffered so terribly.

2. A one-state solution: a binational secular state (or one observing Muslim and Jewish holidays and traditions) in which anyone of any religion could live. I don't think this is a popular option in Israel under than among some left-wingers and the Arab population.

3. A three-state solution: Israel and Palestine as described in Option 1. Citizens have free movement between the two states (as in EU member states) and can choose to live and work in either.

In addition, an end to violence on both sides; great effort to build mutual trust and respect, Arabic to be made a compulsory subject in Israeli schools, lots of effort to get children on both 'sides' to meet and get to know each other, joint economic cooperation. A realisation, that as Amos Oz has said, both sides will have to realise through gritted teeth that neither side is going away.

I would also make all countries in which Palestinian refugees reside (for example Lebanon) grant them full citizenship and equal rights. After nearly 70 years Palestinians and their descendants in Lebanon are still barred from many professions and often living in refugee camps. I would have some kind of right of return although I don't know how it would work in practice if some five million people wanted to go back and live in Israel, which is already quite crowded. I would also instigate a big compensation package for refugees and some kind of truth and reconciliation commission to acknowledge wrongs of the past.

wafflyversatile Wed 06-Aug-14 21:22:37

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

WooWooOwl Wed 06-Aug-14 22:10:52

If I were boss of the world, I'd want all of the land now known as Israel, Gaza and the West Bank to become one new secular state where people of any faith can worship their God in whichever way they choose, as long as it doesn't negatively effect anyone else.

The Palestinians deserve justice, so I would give them a full right of return. Those who chose not to return to their former land and displaced settlers would be offered financial incentives to live in newly created cities and towns. America would also offer some of their land to make up a connecting state for refugees.

Non violence would be enforced by a government made up by proportional representation in half of it, and neutral leaders from around the world in the other half.

Neither side would get what they really want, but they would be forced by the rest of the world into learning to live with it.

halfdrunkcoffee Wed 06-Aug-14 22:16:01

I have never really understood why the West is so pro-Israel when Palestine was there first, but that's my ignorance I guess.

There wasn't a sovereign state of Palestine pre-Israel; it was part of the Ottoman Empire then the British Mandate. The UN proposed a partition plan to divide it into Jewish and Arab land.

halfdrunkcoffee Wed 06-Aug-14 22:16:36

Sorry boysclothes I realise that wasn't the point of your thread.

Boysclothes Wed 06-Aug-14 22:30:40

Really stunned at being told to fuck off for a "stance".... I thought the fact that Israel exists and Hamas will refuse to negotiate with them were facts rather than a stance.

I like option 1 half drunk and I think it's the most achievable. Jerusalem is the kicker though. Israel needs to budge on this although the distribution of religious sites would make it hard. Shared government of the whole rather than splitting it?

Woowoo, do you see no benefit/need for a Jewish state?

wafflyversatile Wed 06-Aug-14 23:23:17

How can it be fact when Hamas has negotiated every bit as much as Israel have. I object to you implying Hamas is the sticking point when Israel is destroying Palestine. Israel who are illegally occupying Palestine.

Anyway. I'm not sure a 2 state solution is feasible considering just how much palestinian land has been taken now. I can't see it. Even if the west had the inclination to intervene and reinstate previous borders and protect them.
A 1 state solution - Israel maybe thinks destroying Palestine and driving those who remain out of the area altogether will bring them the security they claim is their goal, but I doubt it. Which leaves one state where the Palestinians have justice, are treated as equal citizens. Not seeing that any time soon either.

things have improved in NI though so who knows.

VeryLittleGravitasIndeed Wed 06-Aug-14 23:29:23

I'm not sure it's accurate to describe an area as "occupied" that has historically belonged to the Ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, the Sunni Arab Caliphates, the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, Crusaders, Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottomans, the British and modern Israelis and Palestinians (thank you Wikipedia)...

It's a bit of dirt that lots of people have a claim over, if you use squatting rights as the measure...

Boysclothes Wed 06-Aug-14 23:50:06

I meant it more as in Israel have sat down to negotiate with previous Palestinian leaders so the possibility at least is there. Hamas will never sit down. As in those are parameters in reality of achieving a solution. Hamas can't be part of a solution, their very existence is anti-negotiation. Israel must of course be part of the solution if we accept parameter 1, that they exist and will continue to do so for the foreseeable. The Gazans must elect a new leadership though.

Please, please, whatever Israel has done and is doing, don't mistake Hamas for noble freedom fighters who fight the only way they can for the freedom of their people. That is NOT who they are. They are evil terrorist who give as much of a shit about the average Palestinian as they do about the average Israeli. Don't legitimise their cause or their methods. They would see every Gazan dead before they sat down with Israel, and they are vocal about it.

wafflyversatile Thu 07-Aug-14 00:15:39

I'm no fan of Hamas but if you call them evil terrorists please afford Israel's leaders the same moniker.

VeryLittle. Israel is illegally occupying Palestine. It is a military occupation. That is the correct term.

ilovechristmas1 Thu 07-Aug-14 00:16:37

op you are clearly biased towards Israel reading your post's,while talking solutions,what utter rubbish

you have no intrest in a solution reading your comments

reading your op it's clear where your opinion lies,you have no intrest in talking solutions in your post's

wafflyversatile Thu 07-Aug-14 00:17:44

And the British govt was very vocal about not negotiating with the IRA. I hope your opinion of them is as low.

Backinthering Thu 07-Aug-14 07:18:55

Hamas uninterested in negotiation? That's a nonsense. What does anyone think they are doing in Egypt for a start?
They recently formed a unity government with Fatah in the West Bank.
It's the Israelis who refuse to negotiate with Hamas.
They don't have much interest in a solution as they want the rest of the land. Basically everything they accuse Hamas of.

Scabetty Thu 07-Aug-14 07:34:44

Israel need to remove blockades and stop land grabbing before any negotiation can be taken seriously. Negotiation where Palestinians are still treated as less than human will never work. How can Israel expect negotiation when they control so much of Palestinian's daily lives by restricting movement, water and medical supplies, etc. Give them back their land rights and stop saying God promised them it all ffs.

Boysclothes Thu 07-Aug-14 08:19:08


What a weird thread.

Yes, I'm pro-Israel, or at least a supported of israels right to exist. They are millions if not billions of people across the world who are the same. This isn't the same as supporting their current actions, which I do not, for the record. Someone being pro Israel doesn't mean they don't want peace or a solution. Can you only want peace if you're totally neutral? Weird point.

Anyway, Hamas and nethanyahus regime are all shits. Let's take that as read. What actions should be next? That's what I was trying to tease out of the thread, what solution there are going forward. Who should make the first move and whether we can see what the consequences of that might be. The discussion seems to be going the usual way though, maybe everyone is just too angry at the moment.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now