Towards a sustainable peace

[mids2019]

I think for a peace to be obtained constructive dialogue has to be started but in order for this to happen in my opinion Palestine has to acknowledge and their leaders publically denounce the heinous acts of October 7th and make clear such an event will never be repeated.

There have been to many senior Palestinian politicians wishing their grievances to be heard without mentioning October 7th and this will only have the effect of enraging Israel.

We need Palestinian leadership that is willing to sit down with Israeli leaders and from the outset denounce violence specifically making it absolutely clear there will be no 'revenge' for the current Israeli incursion.

We also need to be pragmatic and understand Israel will not be giving Gaza any financial aid so it will be up to the richer gulf states primarily to discuss funding some sort of rebuilding within Gaza. Also eventually there needs to be opportunities for Palestinians to emigrate in order to gain jobs and allow future generations to thrive. I think ultimately you would have to view Gaza as a city state with a multi million rebuilding package coming from those supportive nations in the middle east.

We also need to ensure education in Gaza is such that anti semitiism isn't promoted from a young age so we have a chance for a generation of Palestinians growing up knowing the only way forward is peace.

I think there is a peace to be had if both sides want it and are willing to negotiate positivist with a commitment to prevent terrorism and ensure there is security for both parties.

@Humdingerydoo yes there has been a history of violence by both sides perpetuated against each other.

Yes so while Israelis haven't been living under occupation, they have still been living under constant threat and terror. So it's not as simple as "Israel leaves Palestinian territories and there will be peace". There is literally no evidence for that in history as Israel has always been under attack, even when Palestinian territories belonged to Egypt and Jordan. Before Hamas existed. People seem to forget that, which is why it has all become so polarised.

Not trying to get in to a debate with you about it, just wanted to remind posters. A lot seem to have forgotten.

What a fabulous girl. I hope she survives this horror in Gaza.

@Parkingt111

it very much depends on what you mean by occuparion. This is why borders are important to establish civilian governance? Israel is a state so the Palesrii moans can't claim Israel 'occupies' it's own sovereign teritory. Indeed I wonder how much the historical grievance is about the fact Israel exists which obviously has to be put aside in the pursuit of lasting peace.

what do you feel about a previous suggestion where you have one state and the Palestin Ian have democratic rights within that state (plus civil rights). You would have two people s living side by side in harmony with a democratically elected government respecting the religious freedom of all?

Fab. But equally from the other perspective, taking the points you've made:

1. defined borders, absolutely. They already are pretty defined, so Israel needs to withdraw it's seekers from the west bank, leave east Jerusalem and withdraw from Gaza.

2. Jerusalem under the defined borders is a shared city. Either it can be both states capital, or neither if we want to treat them equally.

3. agreement from Israel that Palestine has a right to exist as an independent state, and that they are not there enemy.

4. both countries will have a right to prioritise security and border defences if they wish. Any defences need to be in their own territory. Israel must no longer 'mow the grass' and the rockets must stop.

5. Israel can't interfere with an independent Palestine any more than Palestine can interfere with Israel. Israel must have no say about what goes across Rafah, or elsewhere via plane or ship (it can no longer prevent a port or airport or control its waters or air). They're just be free movement between Gaza and the West bank.

@mids2019 I don't think a one state solution would work
There is an AMA by an Israeli citizen active right now and some of her recent posts talks about this. I don't agree 100% with everything but I think she does try to be fair in seeing things from both sides and she has explained some of what you have asked quite well

@Babyboomtastic

I agree there is a lot to work with there. The whole thing will need a massive increase in trust and international support.

in order for there to leave between a nascent Palestinian peace then other neighbouring countries need to accept the existence of Israel and reduce tensions and not use Palestinians as proxies in a bit quite hot war.

extremism on both sides needs to be avoided for this to work and perhaps with governance changes after the war the slow work to peace can begin.

I think because Israel is surrounded by enemies it has needed to respond with great force in its defence as the very existence of Israel is under threat by some. It will take a lot of work to get the peace dividend but a less militarized middle East must have benfits.

When people are talking about occupation, I think what people are referring to is the occupation of land that was recognised as belonging to Palestine, as Palestinian sovereign territory, which was then taken by 'settlers' and forces supporting them. Unsurprisingly, people aren't happy about that.

To draw comparisons with Ukraine... When the USSR dissolved, borders were established to say "this bit here is Ukraine and this bit here is Russia". Russian forces invaded parts of Ukraine and said "this is ours now". That's occupation. In Palestine, borders were established (not to everyone's happiness, but they were established) to say "this bit here is Palestine and this bit here is Israel". People with weapons came into parts of the West Bank and said "this is ours now". That's occupation.

If you agree that sovereign territory should be respected, do you agree that Palestinian sovereign territory should be respected? Or does that not count?

@Scirocco .

Sovreignty is key and therefore a two state solution may have to be worked for.......

All players in the region would have to be happy with the arrangement which is a challenge. The settlements are a problem but is any Israeli government going to be forcibly remove its own citizens? How do you reverse the settlements in reality?

I would suggest that the 'settlers' either remove themselves or be removed on the orders of the Israeli government. They invaded and occupied land that didn't and doesn't belong to them. They should give it back.

My not-quite-2 year old DC understands that if they take something that doesn't belong to them, they should give it back. This isn't a hard concept.

Ideally, there should be legal proceedings against 'settlers' where there is evidence of theft of property and land and violence.

There may be some exceptions where for specific reasons it would be more appropriate to re-designate territory (eg if there's a humanitarian reason why a settlement or part of that settlement can't be removed without disproportionate harm to innocent civilians now living there). In those situations, I would suggest that Israel and Palestine 'swap' land of equivalent size and use/value.

They should. I mean settlers are being supported by IDF in Palestine. IDF should be forced to remove the settlers rather than helping and supporting them on their acts.if IDF can arrest Palestinians then they can arrest as well settlers.

also are you aware that Israel a few weeks ago set some money for creating new settler areas in Palestine land?

Give it back to who? Jordan? Or do you teach your 2 year old to give something back to a third party?

The state of Palestine is something we're striving towards, not something anyone is trying to get back to as it has never existed before. It's a new concept. One that I am personally all for, but let's not pretend the land was occupied from the Palestinians. It wasn't. It was occupied from what later became known as Jordan. It's part of what makes the whole situation so incredibly tricky. People misrepresenting the history really doesn't help.

Settlers should be removed like they were from Gaza in 2005. However, I agree with you that it probably won't work in big settlements so I guess there will have to be some kind of land swap like you suggest.

@Humdingerydoo , I'm talking about the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Land that is internationally recognised as Palestinian land. Where Palestinians lived and were (and continue to be) forcibly evicted. Which should be returned to Palestinians.

It's not misrepresenting history to say that land in the West Bank, within the agreed borders of that, has been taken, often by force or the threat of force, and settlements and outposts have been constructed there. It's not even really history, given that this is an issue very much in the present.

The settlements are a problem but is any Israeli government going to be forcibly remove its own citizens? How do you reverse the settlements in reality?

Hasn’t that already happened with Gaza? Some of them did have to be forcibly removed iirc.

The main problem is the instability in the Palestinian territories which leaves it open to groups like Hamas taking hold. The Palestinian people would need to be convinced that terrorism is not their only option and the citizens in Israel would need to be sure they are not going to suffer constant terrorist attacks.

They would both therefore need governments/leaders who are willing to negotiate. That’s the biggest stumbling block at the moment as neither will do any such thing.

The state of Palestine is something we're striving towards, not something anyone is trying to get back to as it has never existed before

The idea of Israel and of Palestine came about at the same time (the two state solution). I don’t think you can really argue one can exist but the other can’t.

And what’s the alternative? A one state solution? That will never work.

I definitely think that more settlements in the west bank should be stopped straight away. That any violent settlers should be removed the moment they act illegally. That anyone with a long history of violence towards the arabs should be removed straight away.

Unfortunately there is a however here. The issue of removing all settlements is that some have been there years now and grown adults were born there.
Plus when Jordan took over the west bank the indigenious Jewish population and any other Jewish people (I think Christians too but can't remember at the moment) where ethic cleansed from the west bank. Not one left there, all killed or had to flee to Israel. In the 60s when Israel took over the west bank 70k Jewish people returned to their houses and land. This means that not all the Jewish people in the west bank are settlers. Some are the people that returned or there offspring. So a lot more people than the original 70k

Then there is the issue of terrorism. When Israel moved Jewish settlements off Gaza and the IDF left too terrorism got worse. When the IDF left southern Lebanon the terrorism got worse as well actually. This suggests that at least one or a coalition of Arab states need to police the west bank and Gaza until such time the economy can get better, employment is better and things are more stable in general. An stable country will be a breeding ground for terrorism no matter what else has happened.

The issue of removing all settlements is that some have been there years now and grown adults were born there.
Plus when Jordan took over the west bank the indigenious Jewish population and any other Jewish people (I think Christians too but can't remember at the moment) where ethic cleansed from the west bank. Not one left there, all killed or had to flee to Israel. In the 60s when Israel took over the west bank 70k Jewish people returned to their houses and land. This means that not all the Jewish people in the west bank are settlers. Some are the people that returned or there offspring. So a lot more people than the original 70k

I guess there’s no reason why they would have to leave but they’d be living in Palestine rather than Israel 🤷‍♀️(if the two state solution was implemented I mean).
What was the plan for the two state solution back in 1948?.
Were people going to migrate from one place to the other or stay where they were or what?

Edit:
Also you mention Jewish people returning to West Bank as they had been living there prior to 1948 but I don’t think many of the Arabs displaced in the 1948 got to return to their homes as that was/is now part of Israel?

Those are good points, @Trulywonderful .

In terms of settlers and people who returned to what had been their homes, I think there could be options to explore and discuss as part of peace negotiations. Compensation and relocation packages for people willing to relocate. Rights of residence / settled status processes so that people could remain in their homes within the recognised borders of Palestine and remain Israeli citizens. Appeals/exemption processes for cases where people feel disproportionate harm would be caused by relocation. It's never nice to think about people being told they have to leave their homes, so it would be important to have consideration of how this affects the individuals actually living in the occupied territories as well as the people evicted from there or living under threat there.

I absolutely think we need external peacekeeping and oversight. Of the two main government/leadership powers in Palestine, one is being dismantled and cannot be in power when this ends and the other is taking a real political hammering too, and likely won't be in any sort of position to rebuild. An external entity could help establish and maintain border security and improve relations, and reduce the risk of further hatred between both countries. They would need to be impartial and independent, so that both countries could be satisfied that the negotiated and agreed limits would be enforced justly.

If this conflict has taught me one thing, it is that the UN is ineffectual and potentially corrupt and I have therefore lost all faith in it's ability to deal with the situation in the middle east.

There is a lot of misunderstanding of the position of Palestine and the West Bank. Unfortunately it is not as clear cut as many would believe and it is very important to understand the history on both sides. Israel have occupied the West Bank since 1967 prior to which it was ruled by Jordan, so a free Palestinain state ruled by Palestinians has never really existed.

There are also many Arabs living within the borders of Israel and there are many cities in Israel with areas that could be described as predominantly Arab. Likewise, there are Jews living in the West Bank, many of whom can claim historic roots pre-dating their expulsion by Jordan and the Jordanian occupation of the area.

I am totally against settlor violence (or any other violence), but it is important to remember that not all settlors are violent or necessarily living illegally. In my simplistic view, Jews should be allowed the freedom to live in Palestine in the same way that Arabs can live in Israel.

Historic borders can be fought over ad-infinitum but in our modern world we should be striving to allow people from all religions and backgrounds to be able to live together harmoniously. Whilst I accept that borders must exist to allow for Governments to administer their own areas, the whole concept of displacing people needs to be relinquished to history. If Arabs wish to live in Israel they should be welcomed and vice-versa.

In the long-term, Gaza itself is probably not sustainable with the high population density of recent years. Just by way of example, the water gathering restrictions that seem so draconian were brought about with good intentions - to avoid the individual harvesting of rainwater impacting on the salinity of the water supply. Unfortunately, like with many well-intentioned policies, it was misunderstood and ineffectual. Desalination is not a viable long-term option for a large population.

Gaza will never have the natural resources to survive so its only realistic lifeline would be through trade and ideally that would need to come from the sea as it's people would not want to be dependent on either of its former occupiers, Israel or Egypt. Historically other small maritime states have achieved this (Singapore, Monaco etc), but it takes significant wealth and I can't see where this would come from - another wealthy state looking for a remote outpost? Gaza seems an unlikely choice. I struggle to see how even a free Gaza can free itself from the confines of its geography.

There is a lot of misunderstanding of the position of Palestine and the West Bank. Unfortunately it is not as clear cut as many would believe and it is very important to understand the history on both sides. Israel have occupied the West Bank since 1967 prior to which it was ruled by Jordan, so a free Palestinain state ruled by Palestinians has never really existed
Yes but Israel didn’t exist before 1948. That didn’t stop it coming into being.

There are also many Arabs living within the borders of Israel and there are many cities in Israel with areas that could be described as predominantly Arab. Likewise, there are Jews living in the West Bank, many of whom can claim historic roots pre-dating their expulsion by Jordan and the Jordanian occupation of the area.
I am not really surprised to learn that both the Israeli/Jewish and Arab/ Palestinian people have links to the land since both have lived there for generation's 🤷‍♀️So there are Jewish people with links to what is now the West Bank or Gaza and Arabs within links to what is now Israel.

But either they all live together in the same country (which would be Israel I suppose, I don’t know how realistic that would be) or the land originally intended for Palestine will have to be given to the Palestinians. This would mean Israel relinquishing quite a bit of land (including East Jerusalem) though it is land they are occupying to be fair.

I would have thought the bigger problem would be potential security threats. Given that the Palestinians have no state, a wreaked economy, barely any real government and have been under the control of either terrorists or Israel whats to stop it all descending into chaos?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/qatar-and-kuwait-join-condemnations-of-ben-gvir-and-smotrich-for-advocating-displacement-of-gazans/

Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir on Monday called for promoting “a solution to encourage the emigration of Gaza’s residents” and the re-establishment of Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip.

His comments came the day after far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also called for the return of settlers to Gaza, adding that Israel should “encourage” the territory’s approximately 2.4 million Palestinians to leave.

Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir on Monday called for promoting “a solution to encourage the emigration of Gaza’s residents” and the re-establishment of Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip
That sounds like ethnic cleansing to me.

Is Bethlehem what you would call 'Palestinian' or would you call it 'Arab'? What about Nazareth, Ramallah, Jericho? I think it's all a mighty mixture. And, yes, I could weep for it all.
It's good to have a thread which is trying to think constructively.

So, apparently, it would seem to be Malcolm Shaw - not Dershowitz - representing Israel at the ICJ hearing next week - or at least this is what several sources are reporting.

A way less puzzling choice than Dershowitz, if true, in that he is, in fact, specialised in international law.

Erm, Palestinians are an Arab nation - sort of like Lebanese, Egyptians, or Iraqis!

The confusion might stem from the fact that, in Israel in particular, you sometimes hear "Arabs" instead of "Palestinians" - this, for that matter - is somewhat ideologically loaded in that the terminology is often used to deny that there is such a thing as a distinct Palestinian identity at all. On the other hand, there are Arab people within the area who do not necessarily identify as part of the Palestinian people - many Beduins, for example.

But, as for your question: Bethlehem, Ramallah, and Jerico are all cities on the occupied West Bank - they are not only clearly Palestinian, they are also all so-called "area A" under Oslo, i.e. supposedly Palestinian-administered.

Nazareth is located within Israel proper (1948 borders) but is inhabited, predominantly, by members of the Arab-Palestinian minority within Israel.