Jews in Palestine: Why Not?
The Milwaukee chapter of Americans for Peace Now (APN) sponsored a program at UWM on March 9 featuring Ghaith Al-Omari, former security advisor to Mahmoud Abbas, and Steve Masters, President of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom. Most of the audience was Jewish, including a former Israeli, but there were also a few Muslims and Christians present.
The speakers urged American Jews to support the current negotiations between Abbas and Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert . Mr Al-Omari outlined a proposed two-state solution to the Middle East conflict, similar to the offer that Yassir Arafat rejected in 2000. To his credit, he asserted unequivocally that there would be no "Right of Return" of Arabs to Israel (1). The discussion following the formal presentation was very amiable until I asked this provocative question:
"Mr Al-Omari, over a million Arabs live in Israel, and they are not considered an obstacle to peace. Why, then, do Palestinians insist that every Jewish settler leave the West Bank before a Palestinian state can be set up there? Why must the area be Judenrein?" (2)
The Arab spokesman bristled at the reference to "Judenrein". He insisted that the issue is not religion, but citizenship. "The settlers are Israeli citizens---that is the problem! Jews could apply to immigrate to Palestine (after independence) and they could be admitted on a case-by-case basis."
"But why couldn't the settlers become Palestinian citizens, and be governed by the same laws as everyone else?" I inquired.
"Because there would be attacks on the settlements, and maybe the settlers would attack the Palestinians. Every time the idea was discussed,it was shot down. Even the Israeli negotiators shot it down!" Al-Omari replied.
The Palestinian speaker admitted that the proposed state could not (or would not) protect Israeli settlers from terrorists. ( If he is really afraid that the settlers would harm Palestinians, he should be glad that the Israeli Army is there now to stop them, but he is not. ) In Al-Omari's view, there should be no "path to citizenship" in Palestine for Israelis now living in the West Bank.
There are about 250,000 Jews living in East Jerusalem and the West Bank; many younger residents were born there, some older ones have lived there up to forty years. The idea that these people would leave their homes and fields to seek housing in Israel (or elsewhere) is a "poison pill" for the peace-talks. Expelling a just few thousand settlers from Gaza in 2005 was a painful process, and the consequences have not been encouraging. Imagine dragging a quarter of a million from their homes!
APN and Brit Tzedek believe that Israelis and Palestinians can and should work together for a peaceful resolution to the ongoing crisis. They say that both sides should sacrifice for peace. But the plea is deceptively symmetric: Israel is asked to give up land that it has; the Arabs are asked to give up only demands for what they do not have, such as the "Right of Return." If even the most moderate of Palestinians, such as Ghaith Al-Omari, are adamant that no Jewish settlements should be permitted in the proposed State of Palestine, then how can Israelis trust their Arab neighbors to enforce a peace treaty? Will they stand up to Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and tell them that absolutely no terrorism against Israel will be tolerated?
Many countries have either become independent or undergone fundamental political change in the past few decades: Lithuania, Serbia, South Africa and Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia), to name a few. All of these nations have included sizeable ethnic minorities . Those that have become true civil societies have accorded citizenship and equal rights to the minorities; those that have chosen the path of "ethnic cleansing" are justly reviled for their actions.
If the proposed State of Palestine is to become a civil society, it should accept all persons living on its territory at the time of its inception as full citizens. Dual citizenship should be permitted. All should enjoy "equal protection of the laws." Jews who would not feel safe under Palestinian rule could leave, but neither the Government of Israel nor that of Palestine should evict them.
But will the ongoing negotiations lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state at all? As noted in our January 1 Glazerbeam ("Dr No"), I do not believe that President Abbas has any intention of making the kind of concessions that would be necessary to achieve an agreement. Moreover, his term as President of Palestine expires in 2010, and he has already declined to seek another term. By that time, US President George W Bush, the prime mover behind the current talks, will also be out of office. I do not know who will succeed Abbas (if he actually completes his term), but my guess is that the next leader will not be more conciliatory toward Israel.
Though the Fatah leadership in Ramallah apparently does not realize it yet, Gaza has effectively withdrawn from the Palestine Authority and is waging its own war against Israel. If only a "peace now" movement would take hold there!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) It is a lot easier to forego this "Right" in Milwaukee than it would be in Ramallah. Last I heard, the Palestine Authority is still advocating it, though perhaps only to trade it for some other concession.
(2) German for "Free of Jews", a Nazi term.
The speakers urged American Jews to support the current negotiations between Abbas and Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert . Mr Al-Omari outlined a proposed two-state solution to the Middle East conflict, similar to the offer that Yassir Arafat rejected in 2000. To his credit, he asserted unequivocally that there would be no "Right of Return" of Arabs to Israel (1). The discussion following the formal presentation was very amiable until I asked this provocative question:
"Mr Al-Omari, over a million Arabs live in Israel, and they are not considered an obstacle to peace. Why, then, do Palestinians insist that every Jewish settler leave the West Bank before a Palestinian state can be set up there? Why must the area be Judenrein?" (2)
The Arab spokesman bristled at the reference to "Judenrein". He insisted that the issue is not religion, but citizenship. "The settlers are Israeli citizens---that is the problem! Jews could apply to immigrate to Palestine (after independence) and they could be admitted on a case-by-case basis."
"But why couldn't the settlers become Palestinian citizens, and be governed by the same laws as everyone else?" I inquired.
"Because there would be attacks on the settlements, and maybe the settlers would attack the Palestinians. Every time the idea was discussed,it was shot down. Even the Israeli negotiators shot it down!" Al-Omari replied.
The Palestinian speaker admitted that the proposed state could not (or would not) protect Israeli settlers from terrorists. ( If he is really afraid that the settlers would harm Palestinians, he should be glad that the Israeli Army is there now to stop them, but he is not. ) In Al-Omari's view, there should be no "path to citizenship" in Palestine for Israelis now living in the West Bank.
There are about 250,000 Jews living in East Jerusalem and the West Bank; many younger residents were born there, some older ones have lived there up to forty years. The idea that these people would leave their homes and fields to seek housing in Israel (or elsewhere) is a "poison pill" for the peace-talks. Expelling a just few thousand settlers from Gaza in 2005 was a painful process, and the consequences have not been encouraging. Imagine dragging a quarter of a million from their homes!
APN and Brit Tzedek believe that Israelis and Palestinians can and should work together for a peaceful resolution to the ongoing crisis. They say that both sides should sacrifice for peace. But the plea is deceptively symmetric: Israel is asked to give up land that it has; the Arabs are asked to give up only demands for what they do not have, such as the "Right of Return." If even the most moderate of Palestinians, such as Ghaith Al-Omari, are adamant that no Jewish settlements should be permitted in the proposed State of Palestine, then how can Israelis trust their Arab neighbors to enforce a peace treaty? Will they stand up to Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and tell them that absolutely no terrorism against Israel will be tolerated?
Many countries have either become independent or undergone fundamental political change in the past few decades: Lithuania, Serbia, South Africa and Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia), to name a few. All of these nations have included sizeable ethnic minorities . Those that have become true civil societies have accorded citizenship and equal rights to the minorities; those that have chosen the path of "ethnic cleansing" are justly reviled for their actions.
If the proposed State of Palestine is to become a civil society, it should accept all persons living on its territory at the time of its inception as full citizens. Dual citizenship should be permitted. All should enjoy "equal protection of the laws." Jews who would not feel safe under Palestinian rule could leave, but neither the Government of Israel nor that of Palestine should evict them.
But will the ongoing negotiations lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state at all? As noted in our January 1 Glazerbeam ("Dr No"), I do not believe that President Abbas has any intention of making the kind of concessions that would be necessary to achieve an agreement. Moreover, his term as President of Palestine expires in 2010, and he has already declined to seek another term. By that time, US President George W Bush, the prime mover behind the current talks, will also be out of office. I do not know who will succeed Abbas (if he actually completes his term), but my guess is that the next leader will not be more conciliatory toward Israel.
Though the Fatah leadership in Ramallah apparently does not realize it yet, Gaza has effectively withdrawn from the Palestine Authority and is waging its own war against Israel. If only a "peace now" movement would take hold there!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) It is a lot easier to forego this "Right" in Milwaukee than it would be in Ramallah. Last I heard, the Palestine Authority is still advocating it, though perhaps only to trade it for some other concession.
(2) German for "Free of Jews", a Nazi term.
Labels: "Peace Now", Palestine Israel
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 8:51 AM
2 Comments:
Yes it is just outragious that the entire world is bent on establishing the first and only judenrein state in the history of the world. Even the Nazis and the Romans could not accomplish this, but now the entire world is attempting to accomplish this in this new Arab state.
I applaud your asking this question and it fully discloses the dishonesty of the proceedings and the self hatred of the members of Peace Now.
Might I remind you about the either racially, religiously or politically bigoted denial of equal rights, or dare I say human rights outside of the status of Dhimmi to Jews, Hebrews, Israelis, etc. in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as well as, other Arab and Islamic states?
Benyamin
Post a Comment
<< Home