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.

He's in the news for the wrong reasons at the moment with the whole Epstein thing. May not be relevant though.

Perfectly aware ... I posted this to the wrong thread (this one).

Context was rather "puzzling choice seeing as - apart from the Epstein issue - he also has absolutely no track record in international law".

I wasn't sure what would be the best thread to add this to but as it was being discussed on here today I will repost on here. There has been alot of inflammatory comments made by some politicians with extremist views, which has been criticised by the US, the UN and the EU. I believe this statement may be to clarify Israel's position on the matter which is not to re-occupy Gaza.

From the Guardian
Palestinians to be 'in charge' of Gaza after war ends, says Israeli defence minister Israel’s defence minister, Yoav Gallant, has said that there will be no Israeli civilian presence in Gaza and Palestinian bodies will be “in charge” of the territory after the war ends.
In a statement by his office, reported by Reuters, Gallant said Hamas would no longer control Gaza and Israel would reserve its operational freedom of action. He was quoted as saying:
Gaza residents are Palestinian, therefore Palestinian bodies will be in charge, with the condition that there will be no hostile actions or threats against the State of Israel.”

Tbf Ben Gvir and Smotrich have been mentioned on this board before and it sounds like both are considered extremists so maybe they aren’t the best example. As I’m not Israeli it’s difficult to know what the views expressed by the various politicians /parties really are.

@theoldweirdalbion the statement from the Israeli defence minister that I posted clarifies that Israel does not intend to re-settle Israeli civilians in Gaza. Which is contrary to what Ben Gvir and Smotrich were both saying.
A positive point one could say

That is, to be fair, not really the whole story and not quite the whole story of what Gallant actually said (watched his press conference live, earlier).

Trying to recall from memory, it was something along the lines of:

• Yes, Palestinians to be in charge - specifically of civil(!!!) affairs [read: this specifically excludes security].
• Specifically to the point of "security", he also stated that Israel will reserve the right to operate militarily within the Gaza Strip if and when it pleases.
• He also, specifically, said this would be "Palestinians who are not hostile to Israel" and speaks about "local commitees" as well as international involvement by both Arab and non-Arab powers.
• Furthermore, he essentially engaged in an attempt at damage control opposite his fellow cabinet members openly calling for ethnic cleansing.

Now, to take a deliberately uncharitable(!!!) view, what this might mean - again, deliberately not being kind in my interpretation:

• Essentially, no Palestinian unity will be accepted!
• Recipe for disaster (for Palestinians): "if you want some power, you better help us enforce the occupation".
• This is, essentially, the West Bank model - there is a reason why the Palestinian Authority is so hated by West Bank Palestinians. It is exactly that: they are seen as "having sold out and helping to enforce the occupation in exchange for a little personal clout" - this is especially true for Mahmud Abbas.
• Except, in this case, it is even sort of worse: when the PA was established, Yasser Arafat was PLO chairman and became president. He ended up loosing a lot of support on the back of this - but, at the very least, he entered into the whole thing as a respected figure and on the back of something that had not been "tried, tested, and found to be a recipe for divide and conquer" when he did. Anyone who agrees to this deal now will not enjoy these benefits.

Long story short: "worst case scenario" interpretation is "recipe for Palestinian in-fighting", followed by "see, we told you they were horrible, violent people!"

Well, they are both senior government ministers so ...

@HeidiInTheBigCity I better watch the full speech, thanks for the heads up

@theoldweirdalbion the statement from the Israeli defence minister that I posted clarifies that Israel does not intend to re-settle Israeli civilians in Gaza. Which is contrary to what Ben Gvir and Smotrich were both saying.
A positive point one could say

Yeah that’s what I meant

Well, they are both senior government ministers so..
**
While I’m aware that Israels government are right wing and presumably pro settler(?)I don’t really know how senior individual people are or how mainstream their ideas are. If most of their politicians are like Gvir and Smotrich then that’s a bit scary.

From what you’ve said it doesn’t sound like they do intend to remove the Palestinians from Gaza but take control of it or just continue messing it around. Doesn’t sound like a massive change of MO so not sure if it will stop the terrorism.

I suppose a lot of this comes down to views of Israel having a continued miltary presence in Palestinian territory. I can understand the security this will afford Israel given they cannot have a repeat of October 7th but it will be undoubtedly expensive and present targets within the Paletinian territories to those who wish to attack Israel. I suppose after WW2 Germany did not have control of its own security or a working armed force so there is president in this arrangement producing (eventually) a strong prosperous natiion.

I think a lot depends on the economic fortunes of the Palestinian people. If by some means the economy can be grown and advantage taken of better educational opportunities then in the long term you may have a more positive picuture.

The difficulty remains though external actors will still try and influence extremist Palestinians to be effectively a thorn in Israel's side and promote groups like Hamas that can exploit the poverty and hatred of some of the Palestinian people to horrific effect i.e. October 7th.

Going forward there has to be a decoupling of the jihadist mindset that undoubtedly had a role in the October 7th attacks and this will require a cultural change in the Palestinian territories where extremism is called out and shunned. Similarly if there are extremist views on the Israeli side there should be those that argue against them in a democratic manner. Religion has not been mentioned much on this thread but I don't think it can be discounted from considerations of a working solution to this decades long conflict. My personal opinion is that when you have extreme poverty or inflamed tensions between population groups extremist religious views can flourish as it gives a philosophical basis for your own prejudices and actiions. Is this possibly why a one state solution won't work in that the Palestinians wish to feel they live in an Islamic country with their cultural values along with fellow arabs?

The proposed removal from Gaza is in line with de facto Israeli government policy on the West Bank. This is enabled by Israeli governments over decades, and actively supported by the IDF.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2023/october/ethnic-cleansing-in-the-west-bank

Nothing new here...business as usual...

Revealed: how US residents are funding illegal settlements in the West Bank

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/23/crowdfunding-us-residents-fund-settlements-west-bank

If you want to donate here is the link
https://www.oneforisrael.org/

I think a lot depends on the economic fortunes of the Palestinian people. If by some means the economy can be grown and advantage taken of better educational opportunities then in the long term you may have a more positive picuture
The blockade pretty much wrecked Gazas economy. Not sure how that would improve if they remain under Israel’s control (which seems inevitable at this point).
With regards to education my understanding is that there is no real issue with this.

Going forward there has to be a decoupling of the jihadist mindset that undoubtedly had a role in the October 7th attacks and this will require a cultural change in the Palestinian territories where extremism is called out and shunned.
I’m not sure calling Hamas out and shunning them would have achieved anything to be honest. People who caused them problems probably just disappeared.

Similarly if there are extremist views on the Israeli side there should be those that argue against them in a democratic manner
Well some of their senior ministers are apparently calling for ethnic cleansing. Is anyone arguing against them?

"Well some of their senior ministers are apparently calling for ethnic cleansing. Is anyone arguing against them?"

Yes, plenty of people. Your average Joe as well as government officials. That's the beauty of a democracy - lots of different voices that are heard and can oppose the insanely extremist views of a vocal minority.

In a normal democracy a government Minister calling for ethnic cleansing would be sacked.

Yes, plenty of people. Your average Joe as well as government officials. That's the beauty of a democracy - lots of different voices that are heard and can oppose the insanely extremist views of a vocal minority

So is it your view that the more belligerent right wing elements of Israel society (the settlers, politicians such as mentioned above, IDF who shoot at children for lobbing stones) are challenged effectively?

In a normal democracy a government Minister calling for ethnic cleansing would be sacked
At least the minister who suggested they drop a nuke on Gaza was sacked. That’s something I guess 😬

Shows how little you are aware of other countries and their politicians, really. There are plenty of extremist right-wingers in politics all over the world. I don't agree with their views but you can't deny their existence. And just remember, people voted them in. I mean, even Suella Braverman was democratically elected, as was the guy who decided child-friendly murals should be painted over in refugee asylums. Truly despicable human being 🤷🏻‍♀️

It can be very hard to challenge anyone effectively when there's proportional representation. It doesn't mean people aren't trying. They've been trying since long before October 7th.

I don't think he was sacked
'Suspended indefinitely' although that is one case that was widely reported as receiving criticism from both left and right wing politicians in Israel.

Who are you talking about here?

What do you mean?

Seriously, no good can come of this statement, surely? It's going to be racist in one way or another