I think the right to return is a red herring. Jews are afraid of a mass of people coming in. But where will they live? The area is tiny to begin with. These aren't rich people who have the ability to live anywhere.
I think this can be solved with a reparations settlement. It would be hard since records from the 40s would be problematic by now. Names changed, areas switched hands. But that's probably not the hardest problem here.
Jerusalem has always been a problem. I don't have an easy answer about that. Israelis won't budge on that due to the logistics of city division.
> another way is the human rights violations as reported by independent bodies (Amnesty, HRW, and even B'Tselem) which can't be merely dismissed as agenda of the Arab states?
Those I trust. Mostly B'Tselem who actually do the legwork here. Unfortunately, the UN includes countries like UAE/Saudis who are amazing human rights violators to begin with...
> Then, he posits the notorious Mandela quip
The problem we have here is one of religion. It amazes me that liberals side with a murderous religious extremist organization. Although, I do get the distaste towards the current Israeli government and its policies. I share it to a great extent.
> Understandable, but their response has been, from what I can tell, to incite Islamophobia. Remind the West that this is "a clash of civilizations". I'd rather relinquish all of Levant to Israel to have it stopped, because the previous wave wasn't at all easy.
Yep. Israel has the WORST government in its history. Incompetent. Corrupt. Cowardly and evil. Luckily Biden is smart and experienced enough to gently pull the strings and manipulate the situation.
> Sigh. Not to downplay or compare, but such triggers (Shoah v Nakba) exist on both sides, and it seems limitless, this cycle of anguish.
When I was 17 just before the Oslo accord I went on a trip to Austria with a group of Jewish and Palestinian youths. We had this "peace forum" where we talked and the Austrian government used that to sort of "shame the adults". Sort of: if kids can reach an agreement, then you can too.
As part of that trip we went together to a concentration camp. Up until that point I recall the Palestinian kids talking about their suffering a lot. That changed them and I think helped them reframe the conflict. I think the right education, trips like that etc. can really make a difference in the long run. But it requires will on both sides to sit down and talk. Unfortunately, the only people who are willing to sit down and talk are the people who are moderate to begin with.
The lunatics remain stupid and ignorant. During the Oslo bombings I was taking a cab and the driver was bemoaning "these Arabs". "They're the only people who do stuff like suicide bombings, it's barbaric".
I explained that Bar Cochva was an inspiration to a lot of that. Also mentioned Trumpeldor (who famously said "it's good to die for our country"), Japanese Kamikaze pilots etc. He wasn't pleased...
> Don't think the Arab states trust the US...
This is very true. Trump did tremendous damage there and the fact that Biden's middle east meetings were canceled made things worse.
> I think some hefty compromises are a way forward unless Israel believes it can remain a "security state" forever, and wait out a total Palestine defeat (as in Arabs leaving voluntarily).
I think that's what Biden is pushing for. He's supporting Israel seemingly with no strings attached but it's obvious there are strings. Moderation in the combat is one of them. Clear and defined goals is another.
> (ps sincere apologies if any of my replies have been inconsiderate / tone-deaf)
No. You're good. I think a lot of the problems we see in the middle east is due to ignorance and lack of communication.
I can see why that is; otoh a few Palestinians I've spoken to feel a deep longing for the farms and the lands they lost. This impasse must inform them that their violent struggle (Fidayeen etc) did more harm than good. So much so that, their non-violent struggle is also met with violence. A first step could be for the Israeli government to acknowledge that pain, even if they won't grant them their right (which, personally, I think they should on a case-by-case basis, like how the US hands Green Cards, for instance).
> Jerusalem has always been a problem.
Whatever solves Jerusalem and Hebron is what the eventual solution should look like too. The Ottomans established the status quo, but that's all gone. Perhaps, a new status quo can be agreed. Normalization efforts are a great start in that direction.
> UAE/Saudis who are amazing human rights violators to begin with...
They even persecute us, so no objections to that (:
> It amazes me that liberals side with a murderous religious extremist organization.
Not defending him, but to clarify, I believe, Finkelstein is left / far-left? And that he isn't approving of their terror, but he says he can't condemn them as well (which perhaps can be misconstrued as siding with them... very thin ice to stand on) as he sees Gaza as a concentration camp, and Hamas' attacks as a natural outcome of an oppressed people (not my view).
> As part of that trip we went together to a concentration camp. Up until that point I recall the Palestinian kids talking about their suffering a lot. That changed them and I think helped them reframe the conflict.
Yeah the peoples must be humanized in each others eyes: I see Israelis (in tech) latch on to anything that's pro-Palestine as pro-Hamas and framing almost any support for their cause as antisemitism. The pain and the suffering that can lead to such a world-view (on both the sides) is just unfathomable. May be, via education (like you say) and with time, this will go away.
> Biden's middle east meetings were canceled made things worse.
Biden's initial remarks and actions were overwhelmingly one-sided. Sunak's remarks still continue to be. As politicians, I think they understand better than most that the issue of Palestine is emotionally charged unlike any other (this has nothing to do with antisemistism like some claim, but a sense of injustice and loss of pride from being repeatedly trounced across decades in defeats), and equating this war as war against ISIS isn't going to convince anyone in the Muslim world. I refuse to believe the policy makers are this out of touch, and so, the only other possible explanation is, they are out of their depth.
> Moderation in the combat is one of them.
Appreciate Biden for this, but 6000+ bombs and the ongoing siege isn't exactly moderation. The Palestinians aren't sufficiently protected. I don't have a good answer to what else the Israeli government could do, but some have suggested doing nothing might have won Israel world's empathy (ex: after the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai, the worst in India's history but not at the scale of 7 Oct, by Pakistan-sponsored militants, India did nothing violent; though, granted Pakistan's nuclear deterrence also plays a role in this). In fact, despite the scale of Israeli response, there already exist vocal factions within the Arab world that vehemently condemn Hamas for summoning this war and unrest, and squarely blame them (not Israelis) for the plight of Gazans.
> Clear and defined goals is another.
The news has been that there isn't any apart from either driving civilians in to Sinai or destruction of Gaza in a bid to weed-out Hamas; both of which will destabilize the region. Even if there's a ceasefire tomorrow, the worrying part is, how many billions and years are needed for Gaza to even recover from this? There's also the psychological side for the 2million subject to this war. I stumbled upon a video of Israeli bombardment recently, and it truly seemed like apocalypse (https://twitter.com/fatimazsaid/status/1716611673597841541).
Hebron shouldn't be a problem. The Jews living there are nuts, the worst of the worse.
> but he says he can't condemn
Yes. That's pretty much the same as an endorsement when faced with stuff like this...
> latch on to anything that's pro-Palestine as pro-Hamas and framing almost any support for their cause as antisemitism.
This is annoying to me too. It does a disservice to their claim. Like equivocating anti-occupation with anti-Israel or worse antisemitism. That's stupid.
I think that in the past few weeks a lot of people who would normally not say such things became overly triggered. So I'd take it in that context. A lot of people who would normally be very responsive to the plight of the Palestinian people just don't want to hear that at this moment. Having seen the celebrations and the comments online after October 7th, lots of moderate Israelis shifted to the right as a result of that.
> Biden's initial remarks and actions were overwhelmingly one-sided.
Yes. This was also a one sided issue. The history isn't new and his support for a 2 state solution has been well documented. So has his disdain for Netanyahu and his lies.
Biden filled in a leadership vacuum. He was widely hated by the right wing in Israel and in one speech he flipped that completely. The aircraft carriers he placed on the shores serve two purposes. One is indeed to deter Iran. But the more subtle one is to remind Israel of US power. He uses it to pull the strings in the cabinet. He and his people actually sit in on security cabinet meetings to form a strategy and make sure Israel doesn't do anything stupid or evil.
He was discussing the problems and trauma of Mosul. There's serious concern that the Israeli army would just go into Gaza with no real plan and turn it into something similar.
> equating this war as war against ISIS isn't going to convince anyone in the Muslim world
I think this is aimed mostly at the west. Probably the aim for the Muslim world is to connect Hamas and Iran. There are many hints that Iran is pulling the strings with Hamas as it did with Syria and Lebanon.
> Appreciate Biden for this, but 6000+ bombs and the ongoing siege isn't exactly moderation.
The claim is that once the ground troops go in the number of civilian casualties will be MUCH higher.
> doing nothing might have won Israel world's empathy
The problem is that Israel maintained peace through fear of its mighty army. Yes, there are peace treaties but the Muslim Brotherhood is a step away from the throne of Egypt. The region can flip. Empathy doesn't help in this regard, Israel is perceived as weak and this projects on the USA as well.
India is in a very different situation. It's the most populous country on earth, even though they have issues with China and Pakistan they have no actual existential fear. Also, having been to India quite a bit... They are turning into a police state over there. Not a great place to be in anymore.
As in, Hebron is the worst of the problems, you mean?
> I think that in the past few weeks a lot of people who would normally not say such things became overly triggered. So I'd take it in that context.
Makes sense. I must say though, these same folks are going about that they "won't forget, won't forgive" (IDF-style?) people who are either silent or being "antisemitic". Looks like they're ready to begrudge forever. The mob and cancel culture isn't making things easier either, especially for folks in tech, who speak up. And if their promise to never forgive / forget is real... then G-d help the cancelled.
> He and his people actually sit in on security cabinet meetings to form a strategy and make sure Israel doesn't do anything stupid or evil.
Interesting. Stupid things by the government or IDF / Shin Bet? Is their will to do stupid things only reserved for Hamas (Gaza) / Hizb (Southern Lebanon), or is it quite a general response when it concerns any adversarial or contentious issue (like those involving civilian citizen / non-citizen Arabs, for example)?
> There are many hints that Iran is pulling the strings with Hamas as it did with Syria and Lebanon.
Not sure what Iran wants in this strained economic climate? The timing's all off? The scale of destruction this brought seems utterly wasteful if it was done just to stop Saudia normalizing w/ Israel. And now, if Israel has its way and wipes out Hamas and/or displaces the Gazans permanently, what would Iran have achieved? Personally though, I don't think Iran green-lit this, because it doesn't really make strategic sense for them to sacrifice Hamas to delay normalization by a few years, at best. Some say, even the Hamas' political leadership may not have known about 7 Oct (https://twitter.com/h_lovatt/status/1717119243156688963)
> The claim is that once the ground troops go in the number of civilian casualties will be MUCH higher.
Makes me want to yell "stop!"... but: if I were an Israeli, I can see why I'd think retaliation is fair game.
> The problem is that Israel maintained peace through fear of its mighty army.
Yep, came across a nice tweet that sums up why this tragedy was an inevitable outcome: https://twitter.com/HusseinAboubak/status/171723213179603361... Folks like Mohammed Deif did not decide to take up arms against a very sophisticated military out of lunacy, but did so in a fit of rage. And even then, the best that could be mustered up were rockets that fail most of the time and barely register any damage. The way Hamas acts and behaves reeks of fantasy and desperation. I saw the released IDF interview of the captured al-Qassam members, and they said (without any awareness of what they're up against) that part of the 7 Oct plan was to "occupy" new territory. Bonkers.
> India is in a very different situation.
India is supremely diverse. There's disagreements every which way you look, but the people, together, have endured under a single government. Indians, as a collective, sure aren't under any threat; but there exists ethnic groups within India that are on the brink. I mean, they aren't persecuted or anything (mostly because they aren't up in arms fighting their neighbours thinking they're out to wipe them off the face of this earth), but they thrive alongside others, in this chaotic milieu, just fine.
That said, surprisingly, one of the major roadblocks to an eventual one-state solution / even a 2-state solution are the (Baptist) Christian politicians in the US who won't allow it (https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/1717246361446551736) even if Israel itself (also unlikely) proposes.
> They are turning into a police state over there. Not a great place to be in anymore.
For minorities, yeah it isn't particularly nice; but you're always welcome to explore. The country is not at all homogeneous, least of all in its policies and politics. It is pretty much a federation of nations in all but name.
If I am being Machiavellian, I can see why ethnic cleansing might be an eventual option when push comes to shove, while morphing the well-meaning Oslo Accords into apartheid (some object to use of this term, I am none the wiser) is the ongoing preference.
> I don't think there's a preference for millitia ... There's also execution of a solution which is MUCH harder, e.g. clearing settlements, etc.
This then seems like a federated government with two sets of laws and two power centers (like the one proposed to prevent the partition of British India) might be probable after a sustained period of peace, with free movement of goods and people; especially since going back to 1967 borders is non-workable to make way for a 2-state solution, on top of the already non-negotiable (from Israel's pov) Right to Return for the Arab refugees in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan.
> The problem is that it's really hard to root out extremists.
Such tragic events are as much a chance for the centre / left to root out far-right and far-left as they're for them to cement their political ideology. I genuinely hope the US and the UK push the Israeli Government to abandon this concept of "security state" (as some put it) and work towards equal rights of the Palestine people (ie, make it part of the constitution). Some might say that it is an unfair outcome for Israel, but frankly, there's nothing that's been fair in this overwhelmingly one-sided conflict. Hopefully, the Arab League can offer wholesale normalization in exchange (not sure about Syria re: Golan Heights and other proxies of Iran). It'll be nice to see what peaceful Middle East looks like, for once.
> The vetos in the UN are related to resolutions brought about by Arab countries who have more influence in the UN due to their numbers.
Geo-politics is one way to look at it; another way is the human rights violations as reported by independent bodies (Amnesty, HRW, and even B'Tselem) which can't be merely dismissed as agenda of the Arab states? As one example: The 2006 Lebanon War, in particular, had heavy Lebanese civilian casualties (2 town centers leveled, for all intents and purposes, which still don't show much signs of infrastructure recovery), and another report claiming that Israel launched 5million mortars into Southern Lebanon after a cease fire was agreed (and 1 million of it remained unexploded). I am in the camp that believes that this recklessness is due to the impunity US affords Israel, which invariably, makes me very apprehensive of the US policing the region in general, even though, I genuinely think the US has much better ideals than most other Arab countries (not a high bar).
> They wrote that Israel is 100% to blame for everything even the attack on its own people. That is delusional and scary.
The critics (not me) come from a place where they say though Hamas violently lashes out for the sole purpose of spreading terror, their previous offers for a long truce (hudna; apparently accepted by the IDF but denied by the Israeli Government) and attempt at non-violent protests (The Great March of 2018) against the siege hasn't worked, as reportedly IDF maimed and killed 200+ Gazans.
Norman Finkelstein says that as the reports of 7 Oct were coming out, it wasn't clear just what had happened, and that the left were wrong to put out statements in support of them.
Then, he posits the notorious Mandela quip ("One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"; I don't ascribe to it, because I haven't personally been subject to apartheid, but my community, not too dissimilar to the Druze, has been in 12th to 17th centuries in Iraq, Iran, Egypt, and Yemen; and thereafter across most of the British Empire) applies to Hamas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m36CUGA1Ucw&t=2700); and that while their terrorist acts are reprehensible as a matter of fact (innocent lives lost), the moral judgement is however harder to pass (ex: Nat Turner's rebellion against slavery in the US), given Israel's role in inciting / incentivizing such a response (again, not my view).
> There's concern that Israel will find itself isolated again if it lets such rhetoric slide.
Understandable, but their response has been, from what I can tell, to incite Islamophobia. Remind the West that this is "a clash of civilizations". I'd rather relinquish all of Levant to Israel to have it stopped, because the previous wave wasn't at all easy.
> It's about as triggering as can be.
Sigh. Not to downplay or compare, but such triggers (Shoah v Nakba) exist on both sides, and it seems limitless, this cycle of anguish.
> Biden is actually pushing to something that would resemble a Marshal plan for Gaza with UN rule.
I predict a month or two from now, there will come a point when other (uninvolved) populace (in the West, even if not in the Arab world) will simply exhaust their emotional capacity to follow the conflict. It'll be interesting to see how things proceed then. I instead hope for war/crime trials (of those responsible on both sides), long-term truce, and effecting a 2-state plan (either Palestine as a protectorate / federate (without 1967 borders) enshrined in the Israeli constitution, or a sovereign republic (w/ 1967).
> They don't have the capability of nuance or diplomacy that the US has.
Don't think the Arab states trust the US... and all the nuances has what has led us to this complicated situation in the first place. I mean, neither of us are experts here, but in my own naive way, I think some hefty compromises are a way forward unless Israel believes it can remain a "security state" forever, and wait out a total Palestine defeat (as in them leaving voluntarily).
PS sincere apologies if any of my replies have been inconsiderate / tone-deaf.