What should have israel done instead?

Calistas · 2011-07-15T15:27:12.000Z

Madness, it’s all because of teh islam!

De_Treville · 2011-07-15T23:33:30.000Z

Not very PC but frankly I think Israel has been flirting with fascism for quite some time -in its foreign policy and to a lesser degree in its internal one too. They are not there yet, but while not really a big deal by itself this is not a step in the right direction.

The Mad Hatter:

Israel is in an desperate position. They are the client state of a failing power, demographics are completely against them and they have already missed golden opportunities for peace. They have already compromised on the original secular principles of the state of Israel through deals with the Shas party in the Knesset (courtesy of their terrible proportional representation political system which gives minority parties far more power than their popular vote warrants). They are surrounded by old enemies and new, such as Turkey under its Islamic government, post-Mubarak Egypt, etc. Now they are facing a General Assembly vote in the UN that will almost certainly produce overwhelming support for a Palestinian state. Isolated, besieged states pass laws like that one.

Meh, desperate, I don’t know. If Israel was really desperate it would have jumped at the good occasions to negotiate and made some decent compromise, so judging by the official policy chosen again and again I’d guess it feels very secure in its strength. As it should be, they have nukes, so they don’t need to fear foreign invasion. About the internal Palestinian problem, I have no idea how they plan to solve it, but they appear confident they won’t need to negotiate.

Lum · 2011-07-16T01:11:39.000Z

De_Treville:

About the internal Palestinian problem, I have no idea how they plan to solve it

The centrist plan (Kadima):

Withdraw to the 1967 borders minus territory swaps to annex the settlements closest to the border, and withdraw from most of Arab Jerusalem
Establish demilitarized Palestinian state

The right wing plan (Likud, current Israeli government):

Withdraw from as little of the West Bank as possible
Annex territory currently held by settlements, along with all of Jerusalem
Establish the remainder patchwork territory left to Palestinians as a “bantustan” independent mostly in name only, so that Palestinians are not citizens of an Israeli state

The far right wing plan A (Yisrael Beitenu):

Withdraw from part of the West Bank
Exchange Arab-populated parts of Israel with settlement-held parts of the West Bank, creating ethnically ‘pure’ Jewish and Arab states
Establish demilitarized Palestinian state (given Lieberman’s past statements it’s doubtful it would be independent in anything other than name)

The far right wing plan B (Israeli settlers):

Annex the entire West Bank
Kick out all the Palestinians (and depending on whom you talk to, Israeli Arabs)
Palestinian state? That would be called “Jordan”

The left wing plan (Labor):

You’re joking, there is no left wing left in Israel any more

The moderate Palestinian position (Fatah/most Arab states):

Israeli withdrawal from all of the West Bank, removal of the settlements
Israeli withdrawal from East Jerusalem
Return or (most likely) compensation for generations-old refugees of Arab-Israeli conflicts

The extremist Palestinian position (Hamas/Iran)

Israeli withdrawal from all of the West Bank
Israeli withdrawal from East Jerusalem
Israeli withdrawal from Israel

The_Mad_Hatter · 2011-07-16T04:15:41.000Z

melak:

I think it’s important to point out that Turkey’s recent enmity towards Israel has little to do with the Islamic nature of their governing party and very much to do with a combination of grossly mismanaging diplomatic relations with the Turks prior to the war in Gaza, the delibarate insult of the Turkish ambassador by the Israeli foreign minister, and the death of nine unarmed Turkish citizens when Israeli commandos stormed the Ship To Gaza convoy.

I didn’t say which side was to blame for the current breakdown in relations, but while what you say is true it’s also true that the previous secular party and its military allies were much more in tune with western priorities, like maintaining ties with Israel. In that part of the world, when governments align themselves less with Washington and more with their own people, they’re inevitably aligned against the “Zionist entity”.

Jason_Townsend · 2011-07-16T05:42:03.000Z

Lum:

The moderate Palestinian position (Fatah/most Arab states):

Israeli withdrawal from all of the West Bank, removal of the settlements

Israeli withdrawal from East Jerusalem

Return or (most likely) compensation for generations-old refugees of Arab-Israeli conflicts

I guess it’d depend on how one defined “position,” but in a non-rhetorical sense my understanding was that many moderate Palestinians were grudgingly alright with land-swaps so long as Israel actually moved on East Jerusalem, no?

The trouble being of course that few remaining parties in the region who are actually interested in negotiating are the ones with an incentive to stake out strong positions that they can horsetrade away.

Lum · 2011-07-16T12:08:59.000Z

The Palestinians are interested in negotiating, but from the starting position that they hold 100% of the West Bank and thus land swaps would be bilateral from there. It’s a fairly reasonable position.

melak · 2011-07-16T12:25:36.000Z

The Mad Hatter:

I didn’t say which side was to blame for the current breakdown in relations, but while what you say is true it’s also true that the previous secular party and its military allies were much more in tune with western priorities, like maintaining ties with Israel. In that part of the world, when governments align themselves less with Washington and more with their own people, they’re inevitably aligned against the “Zionist entity”.

You referred to Turkey as a being an enemy of Israel which is simply not true, and you seemed to blame it on the Islamic governing party. Israel is no longer enjoying a close relationsip with Turkey because they have shown a remarkable lack of interest in pursuing such a relationship. Remarkable because I hardly think Israel is in a position where it can afford to lose one of the few regional allies it has. Turkey has never shown any hostile intent towards Israel, not under the AKP government nor under any previous government, but if Israel is not willing to act in a friendly manner towards Turkey then they should not be surprised if the Turks give them the cold shoulder. Diplomacy is a two-way street.

Turkey is a long-standing member of NATO, an important ally to the United States, and Turkish domestic politics are a lot more complex than the silly US - Populist axis you seem to be trying to draw.

Brettmcd · 2011-07-16T12:43:16.000Z

Lum:

The Palestinians are interested in negotiating, but from the starting position that they hold 100% of the West Bank and thus land swaps would be bilateral from there. It’s a fairly reasonable position.

I wouldnt call a side that sends rocket attacks and suicide bombers as reasonable in any way.

melak · 2011-07-16T12:49:17.000Z

Brettmcd:

I wouldnt call a side that sends rocket attacks and suicide bombers as reasonable in any way.

And I wouldn’t call a side that settles occupied territory resonable in any way.

Tim_Partlett · 2011-07-16T12:52:40.000Z

Well I think there is an argument that Erdogan has been highly critical of Israel, and that the Israeli government actions have been in response to this. There’s a lot of support for Palestinians in Turkey, and a populist like Erdogan can get a lot of political mileage out of criticising Israeli actions, even when it makes him look like a hypocrite.

But Erdogan is about as “islamic” as the German Christian Democrats are theocratic. He’s also just the current president, and there have been, and likely will be again unless Israel fucks it up completely, Israel friendly Turkish presidents. I mean it was only a few years before Erdogan came to power that Turkey and Israel signed an unprecedented (for the region) free-trade agreement.

Israel’s actions towards Turkey have been exceptionally petty and short-sighted. They may appease the far-right in Israel that wants to punish those who criticise them, but it serves to insult Turks and destroy relations with a significant partner for peace in the region. Sure Erdogan has been critical, but it seems Netanyahu would be happy to turn the Turks into an enemy forever rather than riding out a bit of negativity from a head of state who will be gone in a few years.

Tim_Partlett · 2011-07-16T12:55:14.000Z

Brettmcd:

I wouldnt call a side that sends rocket attacks and suicide bombers as reasonable in any way.

What a stupid generalisation.

Brettmcd · 2011-07-16T13:15:14.000Z

melak:

And I wouldn’t call a side that settles occupied territory resonable in any way.

And you would be correct there as well, neither side is reasonable, but I would call the side that uses rocket attacks and suicide bombers the worse of the two.

Brettmcd · 2011-07-16T13:16:28.000Z

Tim Partlett:

What a stupid generalisation.

And why is that? Its far less stupid then calling them reasonable.

melak · 2011-07-16T13:45:08.000Z

Brettmcd:

And you would be correct there as well, neither side is reasonable, but I would call the side that uses rocket attacks and suicide bombers the worse of the two.

And I would question your logic. The impact of rocket attacks on a few border communities has nowhere near as big an impact as the Israeli occupation and settlement policies nor has it claimed anywhere near as many lives. Rocket attacks makes for catchy headline-grabbing news, the systemic violations of life and liberty perpetrated by Israel over the settlements does not, but one is clearly worse than the other.

Brettmcd · 2011-07-16T13:50:34.000Z

melak:

And I would question your logic. The impact of rocket attacks on a few border communities has nowhere near as big an impact as the Israeli occupation and settlement policies nor has it claimed anywhere near as many lives. Rocket attacks makes for catchy headline-grabbing news, the systemic violations of life and liberty perpetrated by Israel over the settlements does not, but one is clearly worse than the other.

Yes one is clearly worse then the other, the rocket attacks and sucide bombers are worse.

Between 2001 and 2009 over 8,600 rockets were launched at Israel, that you want to dismiss that as not being a big deal is troubling. Hundreds have been injured and 28 are dead as a direct result is also not something that should be dismissed. Also the people there lived every day in fear of their lives, I would call that a systemic violation of their lives and liberty as well.

ShivaX · 2011-07-16T13:50:40.000Z

Brettmcd:

And why is that? Its far less stupid then calling them reasonable.

I think he was saying your average Palestinian isn’t firing any rockets or blowing themselves up.

Brettmcd · 2011-07-16T13:55:48.000Z

ShivaX:

I think he was saying your average Palestinian isn’t firing any rockets or blowing themselves up.

The groups they support are.

I could also say the average isreali isnt living in the occupied territories. But they support the government that wants to keep those areas.

melak · 2011-07-16T14:20:33.000Z

Brettmcd:

Yes one is clearly worse then the other, the rocket attacks and sucide bombers are worse.

Between 2001 and 2009 over 8,600 rockets were launched at Israel, that you want to dismiss that as not being a big deal is troubling. Hundreds have been injured and 28 are dead as a direct result is also not something that should be dismissed. Also the people there lived every day in fear of their lives, I would call that a systemic violation of their lives and liberty as well.

No, it should not be dismissed and I’m not suggesting that it should be, I am saying that bad that it is the Palestinians have suffered far worse.

If you want to talk casualties there have been numerous Israeli military operations on Palestinian territory since the first Intifada with a death toll in the thousands if not tens of thousands. On the west bank Israeli settlements annex the best land and Israeli-only roads and military checkpoints subject Palestinians to several hour-long waits or detours to get to the closest town. This include ambulances, where patients die because they are prevented from taking the speediest route to the hospital.

On the Gaza strip the Israeli economic blockade, under the guise of preventing Hamas from importing weapons, forbade the import of toys, fishing nets, spices, cement, and a multitude of other daily necessities.

Systemic violations on a scale that dwarfs the rocket attacks.

Timex · 2011-07-16T14:26:33.000Z

What military operations are you thinking of, that killed tens of thousands of palestinians?

Brettmcd · 2011-07-16T14:32:40.000Z

melak:

No, it should not be dismissed and I’m not suggesting that it should be, I am saying that bad that it is the Palestinians have suffered far worse.

If you want to talk casualties there have been numerous Israeli military operations on Palestinian territory since the first Intifada with a death toll in the thousands if not tens of thousands. On the west bank Israeli settlements annex the best land and Israeli-only roads and military checkpoints subject Palestinians to several hour-long waits or detours to get to the closest town. This include ambulances, where patients die because they are prevented from taking the speediest route to the hospital.

On the Gaza strip the Israeli economic blockade, under the guise of preventing Hamas from importing weapons, forbade the import of toys, fishing nets, spices, cement, and a multitude of other daily necessities.

Systemic violations on a scale that dwarfs the rocket attacks.

Im sure the people who lived under the threat of daily rocket attacks for almost a decade would disagree with you.