Netanyahu rules out two state solution

Thanks for that stats, interesting post.

But if living conditions were improved and the rule of law fairly applied, do you think it would be very different from being say a Hong Kong citizen?
I don't think Hong Kong is great at the moment either. Hence why we have so many Hong Kong citizens moving to the UK. But it's not really a comparable situation.

FWIW I understand that the two state solution might make Israelis feel less safe, but paradoxically they might actually be safer if the Palestinians had self determination and their own state. There would be less of a legitimate grievance for extremists to build off, and more reason for Palestinians to root out extremists like Hamas from their government to maintain a good relationship with their neighbour.

Also I think the Saudi position is interesting as that provides some additional leverage into Arab countries and also some additional protection to Israel.

@statsfun

We are in the era of social media and identity politics. People's understanding of complex arguments is abysmal. Most people grab the "book" and just look at the cover. A minority will browse the blurb; fewer still will read the contents. And only a handful will comprehend the arguments presented between the pages.

For instance how many Feminist activists today can claim to have read, let alone understood, Julia Kristeva, Helen Cixous, Luce Irigaray, and Simone de Beauvoir, for example?

Kristeva's famous interview "woman can never be defined", Irigaray's "The Sex that is Not One", and de Beauvoir "One is not born a woman; rather, one becomes a woman" can be said to offer the theoretical foundations of contemporary Trans theory, despite none of these women being trans. Yet we see push back from Feminists toward Trans. The notorious Judith Butler just took the ball an ran with it. Then we can credit Cixous for promoting a kind of gender essentialism.

All modern philosophical theory (as distinct from linguistics): Trans, Queer, Race, Post colonial, and of course Feminism have a lineage of ideas both lateral (they "borrow" from each other) and longitudinal. If you draw a timeline you can go back through French communist Louis Althusser (interpellation, the idea that we perpetuate ideology without actually being aware of it; it's the argument used by those who want to blame present day people for the ills of the past - collective guilt, if you will), and of course our Antonio Gramsci, who coined the term "hegemony" and who kicked off "top down" communism and the rich tradition of morally relativistic and incoherent cultural Marxism we see today.

So what am I saying? Theory is hard. Ball/boob bustingly so and even academics struggle with it (the dry, turgid prose of Heidegger, for example, deserves some kind of award). Activists claim to understand the arguments, but to paraphrase, "if you waded through the thoughts of most activists, you wouldn't even get your feet wet".

The combination of ignorance and an unwavering certainty in one's own moral rectitude is a dangerous one. But these are the kind of people driving public discourse.

/End rant

You could well be right about Netanyahu!

But hopefully others are more reasonable.

It's not relevant though because (as I said) I don't understand what more security could be put in. So Netanyahu demanding "more security" means nothing.

It's not that they are looking for more security than already exists, it's that a 2 state solution as previously envisaged would remove all those current security protections, which the Israelis know they depend on. Particularly a militarized West Bank - that was the sticking point which Arafat couldn't let go of, and which Israel couldn't accept.

The Iron Dome wouldn't protect against rockets from the West Bank.

No longer controlling the borders would mean unlimited weapons going to a hostile army meters from their capital and 20km from their biggest city.

What other populations of people are stateless

That's true. But if living conditions were improved and the rule of law fairly applied, do you think it would be very different from being say a Hong Kong citizen?

Who are you envisaging will make those changes, given there is no single Palestinian administration, Gaza is stateless and without basic civil functions

I'm suggesting that this might be a better goal for Palestinian negotiations at this time, rather than statehood. Practical measures, rather than the abstract of self-determination.

This is a false dichotomy of the type beloved on these threads

I don't think either of those things are true. Personally i think Netanyahu believes Israel can only be safe with no Palestinians so I think he wants a one state solution. I think his view is probably that the Palestinians are someone else's problem, probably Egypt and Jordan.

That's only my opinion.

It's not relevant though because (as I said) I don't understand what more security could be put in. So Netanyahu demanding "more security" means nothing.

I don't think that if a 2 state solution isn't possible right now then some other way for the Palestinians to have a state right now must be found. Many people have lacked self-determination for very long periods of time.
What other populations of people are stateless? Are there other highly populated areas that don't belong to any country? I think Gaza is pretty unique in that respect.

I think that changes to give Palestinians better lives are more important. Who are you envisaging will make those changes, given there is no single Palestinian administration, Gaza is stateless and without basic civil functions?

@statsfun you and your ilk in support of the Israeli state are making the world more dangerous for the rest of us, and you ought to be ashamed. But I realise that if even the US government can't persuade Israel, there's little hope for the rest of us to.

Yeah, sure.

There is no convincing some people.

Oh, and I don't think multinational peace keeping troops would help much. They don't bother to keep Hezbollah away from the Lebanese border, despite a UN resolution.

Israel has evacuated their northern border region, but that wouldn't be feasible to protect against a hostile West Bank.

It is not minimisation of either the tragic death toll or the devastating loss of civilian infrastructure to point out the huge difference between 50% of infrastructure destroyed and 1% of lives lost. Nor to point out that if Israel was not making significant efforts to evacuate civilians before bombing buildings then those numbers would be much closer. Especially in a heavily-built up area like Gaza, with no access to bomb shelters for civilians.

I'm sure someone will make a comment about the IDF being trigger-happy. But that doesn't change the fact that Israel has chosen to evacuate buildings even where it will allow Hamas targets to escape, and that the death toll of innocent civilians would be much, much higher if they didn't make that choice.

I do admit to having little patience with the lack of critical thinking evident in statements like 'Israel are killing as many Palestinians as they can in Gaza' which you see too often on these boards. 50% vs 1%. Come on, think.

You asked how forcing a 2 state solution on Israel would harm the Palestinians. I've laid out how removing the existing security (control over borders and imports, demilitarization of the WB, enough distance from the incoming rockets for the Iron Dome to work) could easily result in an all-out war where Israel was fighting for its survival, and so would not be making that humane choice. This would be devastating to both, not only Israel. There is no 'winner takes all'. Both would lose.

First of all, your minimisation of the Palestinian death toll left me astounded! And to call it fashionable to be concerned about this! They haven’t dug everyone out of the rubble and people are now starving. The degree of infrastructure structure loss in itself may represent a war crime.

Any way- deep breath- if we were to proceed with your flight of fancy as to what may happen with a 2 SS without any caveats to prevent the things you mentioned (such as multinational peace keeping troops - could do with those in the WB!!) what happens to Israel in the long term?

I don’t think Israel has a chance for long lasting peace without a 2SS. No normalisation with Saudi Arabia, pariah status in the region and potentially elsewhere, bombing by Hezbollah and Hamas (they are not going to disappear), Iranian agitation as they strive to get nuclear capabilities - now that sounds like a dooms day scenario that the US are actively trying to prevent. Why do you think US is pushing for a 2SS?

Even if suffering were integral to the human condition - doesn’t mean we don’t act to ease it. You can also acknowledge someone’s else suffering without being emotionally succumbed by it- and we each have different tolerances and ways of protecting ourselves. You do you, but don’t make assumptions about others ability to empathise but retain their emotional well being.

I completely agree that a differential lenses should not be applied to empathy.

I disagree with lack of agency - after all, there are some important elections coming up where this will play a role for some. Apparently Biden risks losing voters who may make a crucial difference.

@stormy4319trevor yes sadly 17 year old Tawfiq Hijazi who was killed after being shot in the head with life ammunition.
Netanyahu has always done everything possible to prevent a future Palestinian state, to the extent that he has been accused by many for deliberately propping up Hamas, just to prevent any future Palestine. its just now he is openly admitting it.

@Parkingt111 I think I saw news that an American boy was shot in the West Bank the other day. US said they would be asking questions. Have seen a number of reports of violence, raids and killings, it does look bad there. The new homes in East Jerusalem will make it very difficult for it to be part of a Palestinian state indeed.

@stormy4319trevor yes it has. With the war raging on, it didn't get the attention that it normally would have. The focus is on Gaza but the situation in the occupied territories have reached a boiling point

The settlements are placed strategically to prevent a future Palestinian state and to isolate parts of the occupied territories. It's terrible and the US has always been a critic but have never done anything further to prevent it

As well as all the reasons, such as appeasing the religious nationalists, garnering votes, etc. I've always had the suspicion that the settlements were also put in place because they could be used in the future as bargaining chips in any negotiations that were yet to come. They were a sort of "having one in the bank".

Half the "new neighbourhood" comprising 1,738 housing units will be in the city's annexed east, the Israeli NGO Peace Now said.
"If it weren't for the war (between Israel and Hamas), there would be a lot of noise. It's a highly problematic project for the continuity of a Palestinian state between the southern West Bank and east Jerusalem," Peace Now's Hagit Ofran told AFP.

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231206-israel-approves-new-settlement-in-east-jerusalem-ngo

@Itoosurvive I'm surprised Netanyahu's approval rating stayed the same. I thought he was becoming unpopular with the supreme court business, and that the security failure would make him eve more so.
@Parkingt111 1700 homes. Wow. Seems to be speeding up.