Thursday, June 24, 2010
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman (Israel's Prince of Darkness to some) takes to the pages of the Jerusalem Post to lay out his vision for what certainly sounds like a perfectly reasonable end to the conflict. His point is that binational states simply don't work. If people don't feel themselves part of the same Nation, that Nation simply won't function properly (A house divided against itself...). It's simply untenable to have a large population of Arab Israelis whose expression in the political arena is to constantly undermine the state. Far better to re-draw the boundaries so as many Jews and Arabs are on opposite sides as possible: My blueprint for a resolution
...IF THE conflict returns to the pre-1967 lines, it will inevitably pass beyond those borders and into Israel. Most of the country's Arab population defines itself as Palestinian politically and culturally.
Many openly identify with the Palestinian national movement to the point where they openly act against the state which provides them with full civil rights. In 2006, the Arab leadership wrote a paper titled "The Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel," which was deeply troubling as it questioned Israel's legitimacy and raison d'être as the realization of Jewish self-determination.
Even worse, some Arab leaders actively assist those who want to destroy the Jewish State. Former MK Azmi Bishara directed Hizbullah rocket attacks on Israel and Ahmed Tibi advised Yasser Arafat and current Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, even though he is a member of the Knesset whose wages are paid by the taxpayers.
Large-scale demonstrations against Israel regularly appear in Arab cities all over the country, where it is not infrequent to hear the cries of "Death to the Jews" and where pictures of terrorist leaders from Hamas and Hizbullah are prominently displayed. These phenomena are a clear indication that a conflict between two peoples is the cause of friction.
The solution lies not in appeasing the maximalist territorial demands of the Palestinians, but in truly creating "two states for two peoples."...
More.
I suspect that the international community will not stand for it, even if the logic is there, the legality, whatever else recommend this program. The reason is that if Israel benefits, even a little, then it is a very good reason to call it a fascist program which goes against basic human rights.
The International community subscribes to the same premise that guided the early church in its dealings with Jews: they must be allowed to exist but not to thrive.
Lieberman can come off as coarse at times, but he draws a simple and, imo, a prima facie point far, far more often than not.
And Noga, there were many junctures where the church was, variously, intolerant, that too is a prima facie, an all too apparent historical fact. Otoh, many of those junctures were the secular powers that be (e.g., Ferdinand and Isabella, not the church, inaugurated the Spanish Inquisition, and it was always first and foremost a function of the Spanish Crown, very often abrogating Rome's counter orders).
However, the "early church," if by that you are suggesting the first three or four centuries, was no more intolerant than were Jewish anti-Christian polities during that same period (and subsequent periods). And after Constantine, when inter- as well as intra-communal animosities perhaps became still more deeply ingrained, Jewish polities aligned themselves with everyone from Persians, prior to the advent of Islam, to the Bolsheviks in the 20th century, against would-be "Christian" (if in name only) interests and polities.
It's much more a two-way street than is commonly acknowledged.
A couple of supportive references:
Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance
Jesus in the Talmud
Both are well documented - bibliography, extensive documentation, footnotes and references.
Correction: Multicultural states dont work.