Thursday, July 22, 2010

One-state debate explodes, Amazing Map of Middle East

From: Abie Dawjee

Amazing Map of Middle East
This is an amazing, constantly changing map of the Middle East region,
illustrating how various "empires" have risen and fallen in the past 5000
years. See it all in just 90 seconds.

see it here: http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/EMPIRE17.swf

***

From: "Sid Shniad"

http://mondoweiss.net/author/jonathan-cook

One-state debate explodes myth about the Zionist left

by Jonathan Cook
Mondoweiss: July 20, 2010

A fascinating debate is entering Israel's political mainstream on a
once-taboo subject: the establishment of a single state as a resolution of
the conflict, one in which Jews and Palestinians might potentially live as
equal citizens. Surprisingly, those advocating such a solution are to be
found chiefly on Israel's political right.

The debate, which challenges the current orthodoxy of a two-state future, is
rapidly exploding traditional conceptions about the Zionist right and left.

Most observers -- including a series of US administrations -- have supposed
that Israel's peace-makers are to be found exclusively on the Zionist left,
with the right dismissed as incorrigible opponents of Palestinian rights.

In keeping with this assumption, the US president Barack Obama tried until
recently to sideline the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyhau, Israel's
rightwing prime minister, and bolster instead Ehud Barak, his defence
minister from the left-wing Labour party, and the opposition leader Tzipi
Livni, of the centrist Kadima party.

But, as the Israeli right often points out, the supposedly "pro-peace" left
and centre parties have a long and ignominious record in power of failing to
advance Palestinian statehood, including during the Oslo process. The
settler population, for example, grew the fastest during the short
premiership of Mr Barak a decade ago.

What the new one-state debate reveals is that, while some on the right --
and even among the settlers -- are showing that they are now open to the
idea of sharing a state with the Palestinians, the left continues to
adamantly oppose such an outcome.

In a supplement of Israel's liberal Haaretz newspaper last weekend largely
dedicated to the issue, Yossi Beilin, a former leader of the ultra-dovish
Meretz party and an architect of Oslo, spoke for the Zionist left in calling
a one-state solution "nonsense". He added dismissively: "I'm not interested
in living in a state that isn't Jewish."

The Israeli left still hangs on resolutely to the goal it has espoused since
Mr Barak attended the failed Camp David talks in 2000: the annexation to
Israel of most of the settlements in the West Bank and all of those in East
Jerusalem. The consensus on the left is that the separation wall, Mr Barak's
brainchild, will ensure that almost all the half million settlers stay put
while an embittered Palestinian population is corralled into a series of
ghettoes misleadingly called a Palestinian state. The purpose of this
separation, says the left, is to protect Israel's Jewishness from the
encroaching Palestinian majority if the territory is not partitioned.

The problem with the left's solution has been summed up by Tzipi Hotoveley,
a senior Likud legislator who recently declared her support for a single
state. "There is a moral failure here [by the left]. … The result is a
solution that perpetuates the conflict and turns us from occupiers into
perpetrators of massacres, to put it bluntly. It's the left that made us a
crueler nation and also put our security at risk."

The right is beginning to understand that separation requires not just
abandoning dreams of Greater Israel but making Gaza the template for the
West Bank. Excluded and besieged, the Palestinians will have to be
"pacified" through regular military assaults like the one on Gaza in winter
2008 that brought international opprobrium on Israel's head. Some on the
right believe Israel will not survive long causing such outrages.

But if the right is rethinking its historic positions, the left is still
wedded to its traditional advocacy of ethnic separation and wall-building.

It was the pre-state ideologues of Labour Zionism who first argued for
segregation under the slogans "Hebrew labour" and "redemption of the land"
and then adopted the policy of transfer. It was the Labour founders of the
Jewish state who carried out the almost wholesale expulsion of the
Palestinians under cover of the 1948 war.

For the right, on the other hand, the creation of a "pure" Jewish territory
has never been a holy grail. Early on, it resigned itself to sharing the
land. The much-misunderstood "iron wall" doctrine of Vladimir Jabotinsky,
the Likud's intellectual father, was actually presented as an alternative to
Labour Zionism's policies of segregation and expulsion. He expected to live
with the Palestinians, but preferred that they be cowed into submission with
an iron wall of force.

Jabotinsky's successors are grappling with the same dilemmas. Most, like Mr
Netanyahu, still believe Israel has time to expand Israeli control by buying
the Palestinians off with such scraps as fewer checkpoints and minor
economic incentives. But a growing number of Likud leaders are admitting
that the Palestinians will not accept this model of apartheid forever.

Foremost among them is Moshe Arens, a former defence minister and Likud
guru, who wrote recently that the idea of giving citizenship to many
Palestinians under occupation "merits serious consideration". Reuven Rivlin,
the parliament's speaker, has conceded that "the lesser evil is a single
state in which there are equal rights for all citizens".

We should not romanticise these Likud converts. They are not speaking of the
"state of all its citizens" demanded by Israel's tiny group of Jewish
non-Zionists. Most would require that Palestinians accept life in a state
dominated by Jews. Arens, for example, wants to exclude the 1.5 million
Palestinians of Gaza from citizenship to gerrymander his Jewish-majority
state for a few more decades. None seems to be considering including a right
of return for the millions of Palestinian refugees. And almost all of them
would expect citizenship to be conditional on loyalty, recreating for new
Palestinian citizens the same problematic relationship to a Jewish state
endured by the current Palestinian minority inside Israel.

Nonetheless, the right is showing that it may be more willing to redefine
its paradigms than the Zionist left. And in the end it may confound
Washington by proving more capable of peace-making than the architects of
Oslo.

*Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His
latest books are "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the
Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and "Disappearing Palestine:
Israel's Experiments in Human Despair" (Zed Books). His website is
www.jkcook.net.

A version of this article originally appeared in The National
(www.thenational.ae), published in Abu Dhabi.*
_______________________________________________
Rad-Green mailing list
Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu

No comments:

Post a Comment