Offer made to Israel

It's an open discussion. I'm genuinely interested in what anyone thinks might be a solution that doesn't involve continued slaughter of Palestinians and terrorist attacks on Israel.

An attempt at Partition (not dissimilar to India and Pakistan) of an area which had a very tumultuous history - recently being part of a collapsed empire (the Ottoman empire) and then a British mandate - which failed and descended into civil war.

Followed by one of the partition states declaring itself a nation, and the other not.

As far as I'm aware deciding the boundaries of the states of Israel & Palestine is not in my job description - nor is it in yours. Strange how entitled people feel on this subject.

How would you describe the Palestinian expulsions of 1947 and 1948?

@mids2019 1947 UN boundaries? There are something like 750,000 people living in the occupied territories.

No it wasn't.

I think you maybe setting the scene for a permanent war if there isn't an acceptance of the existence of Israel as a state with boundaries at least set by the UN.

Many gulf states have reached peace with Israel (hence the op offer) so it is only those states and non state actors that act as a barrier to the eventually launch of a 2 state settlement.

We also have such a heightened sense of animosity between Palestinians and Israelis that a two state solution may look like a 'loss' for either side. Israel does not want to concede after tactical victories and Palestine can't now examine a 2 state solution after bearing a large civilian discomfort

It will take differing govenances of both Israel and Palestine to be in place before meaningful negotiations and also well defined security arrangements

@SharonEllis of course.

But where would the borders be? How would Israel account for the forced exodus of Palestinians in 1947 48? The 1967 occupation etc. Who should Israel negotiate with?

@itsmabeline

"Are the 57 states offering to militarily force compliance"

From the speech there was no explanation of how this guarantee of security would be enforced and no mention of offering military force to enforce it.

So just words really.

See post above.

@SharonEllis would you agree that a two state solution is the only viable long term solution?

Obviously no point in engaging but for anyone else who is still struggling with the idea that the Jewish people have a legitimate right to a state in this region (as do the Palestinians) please read this which is helpful www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/decolonization-narrative-dangerous-and-false/675799/

There's no such thing as the Holy Land as you well know.

Which borders are talking about?

Back to square one. The Jewish people came from the Holy Land as you well know.

But it was founded on the ethnic cleansing of the existing population.

Of course. But Israel continues to build settlements which the UN says are illegal, on Palestinian land. And the same is happening over at the West Bank. Those borders are not being respected.

As for the maps, there is one showing Israel taking the whole region as far west as the Nile.

I see no difference in the rights and claims of the two sides, and I would no doubt be condemned by each as a supporter of the other. I can live with that.

Absolutely, and I think @SharonEllis makes it clear how many people think. But its also pretty hard to escape the fact that Israel is a Jewish colony forced on the region by Western imperial powers.

I'd question whether displacing any group of people in favour of another from outside is ever going to be a good idea, under any circumstances.

If Israel wants to see an end to the violence against it it absolutely has to recognize the injustices it has passed on to the Palestinians over the last 100 years or more.

I find it incredulous that some can be so myopic not to see that the conflict in the ME didn't start on October 7th, or 2006, or 1967, or even 1948. Just because Israel keeps "winning" doesn't give any moral justification for their actions.

Where do you draw the line with history? I guess the Italians could argue they could claim a lot of Europe through reestablishing the Roman Empire.

I think the idea that we can go back to some historical establishment is tantamount to saying Israel as a state should not exist and should never has existed which is exactly the ideology that needs to be dismissed now for a hope for a way forward.

Israel is a Jewish state and it is founded as such.

Yes, I agree.
And like it or not, Jewish and Palestinian people DO both have legitimate, historical claim to the area. Ironically, because they both share the same ancestors.

Genetics can bring Jews and Arabs together - JNS.org

@GladAllOver

I agree but then it all becomes about borders and security.

In order to ensure a functioning Palestinian state there needs to be that fundamental acceptance of borders and the mutual respect of them. This includes a peace deal where the borders aren't transgressed and hostilities cease.

I keep receiving Facebook feeds with an Israeli map with all the city names renamed in Arabic, how is this helpful? Yes you need an Israeli government that respects Palestine but this can't be done until everyone accepts we can't go back to 1948.

There has to be respect for Palestinian territorial integrity at the hear of any negotiation or defensive commitment
When we have groups ideologically wedded to the idea of Palestine destruction then those discussions can't begin. If you remove the actors that won't deviate from this position you have hope.

You see, it works both ways.

There has to be respect for Israeli territorial integrity at the hear of any negotiation or defensive commitment

When we have groups ideologically wedded to the idea of Israeli destruction then those discussions can't begin. If you remove the actors that won't deviate from this position you have hope.

This just about sums it up. It’s a very bleak prospect…

In the last few weeks Tehran, Iran and Lebanon have attacked Israel, plus the Palestinian rocket attacks.