Right. Given the high quality of discussion on OTC about other issues, it would be nice to have some Troper input on this thorniest of Middle Eastern issues. Tropers wanting a brief overview of Israel should check out its Useful Notes page, or Israel
and Palestine's country profiles on the BBC.
At the outset, however, I want to make something very clear: This thread will be about sharing and discussing news. Discussions about whether the existence of Israel is justified would be off-topic, as would any extended argument or analysis about the countries' history.
So, let's start off:
At the moment, the two countries, prodded by the United States, are currently attempting to negotiate peace. A previous round of talks collapsed in 2010 after Israel refused to order a halt to settlement building on Palestinian land. US mediators will be present.
The aim of the talks is to end the conflict based on the "two state solution" - where independent Palestinian and Israeli states exist alongside each other. Both sides have expressed cynicism, although the US government has said it is "cautiously optimistic".
Key issues of the talks:
- Jerusalem: The city is holy to both Islam and Judaism. Both Palestine and Israel claim it as their capital. Israel has de facto control over most of it, a situation its Prime Minister has said will persist for "eternity". Some campaigners hope it can become an international city under UN or joint Israeli/Palestinian administration.
- Borders and settlements: The Palestinian Authority claims that the land conquered by Israel in the Six Day War of 1967 (the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) is illegally occupied, and must be vacated by Israel in the event of a future Palestinian state. However, there are over 500,000 Israeli citizens living in settlements across the "Green line". Israel claims that a future Palestinian government would oppress or ethnically cleanse them, whilst many settlers claim that the land is rightfully theirs, as they have an ethno-religious link to it as part of the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people.
- Palestinian refugees: In 1948, around 700,000 Palestinian Arabs left the territory of the new Israeli state. The reasons why are still debated - preferably elsewhere. The Palestinian negotiators wish for them and their descendants to have a right of return to Israel. The Israeli government considers only those who were actually forced away all those years ago to have a legitimate claim (if that). The US government considers them all refugees, to Republican fury.
So you can see why its never been fixed. The religious dimension in particular has a lot of people vexed - asking Muslims or Jews to abandon Jerusalem has been likened to asking Catholics to skip communion.
Still, there's hope. Somewhere. The latest developments in the region:
- Israel has released 26 imprisoned Palestinian prisoners convicted of attacks on Israeli civilians and agreed to release another 78 in the future.
- Israel has OK'ed development of 900 new homes east of the "Green Line" in a controversial move ahead of the talks.
- Hamas is to execute publicly two prisoners in Gaza
- The new Palestinian government will not reunite the feuding Gazan and Transjordanian (West Bank) elements of Hamas and Fatah.
edited 15th Aug '13 2:10:49 PM by Achaemenid
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Part of it is the narrative tht israel is in a constant fight for survival and only doing hard stuff with hard men while hard can kept israel alive.
I don't think this is necessarily wrong, but I think it's inaccurate to call it the main reason right of return is a sticking point from Palestinians. Lots of outsiders from both the Western and Arab worlds attribute Palestinians' anger to a strong sense of history or morality. In reality, these things exist, but they're secondary to practical considerations.
Palestinian families were destroyed and forcibly separated in '48 and '67. The divisions created by Israel still exist today. Palestinians living in the West Bank are not just unable to visit their relatives in Israel—they are often unable to visit their relatives in other Palestinian cities due to the arbitrary and changing nature of the illegal checkpoints in the region.
Furthermore, the economic effects of land theft and expulsion are very much so still around today. Many Palestinians were dependent on the fruit trees and livestock that they tended to. Expulsions stripped people of their entire livelihoods in addition to their homes.
Many people who directly experienced these crimes are still alive and suffering today. It's not just a matter of principle—it's first and foremost a matter of the basic real-world rights that are dependent on right of return.
There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
@Marq: I do read about old stories in middle east or central asia about a man who leave his home to go kill another man on the run who have killed one of his family members or sometimes his close friend who has no family to avenge him. So, he has to kill the guilty man to set things right and can’t go back home until he does so.
Edited by SteamKnight on May 7th 2022 at 12:22:27 AM
I'm not as witty as I think I am. It's a scientifically-proven fact.
A procrastination in of itself
So making people live as second-class citizens in an attempt to force them to ‘choose’ to leave isn’t a violation of the system of justice your talking about? Because that’s something that a slightly more liberal Israeli government might agree to, allowing a right-of-return in exchange for said people not having full citizenship rights, but it’s something that I know would violate the sense of justice of people in the western world.
I do wonder if the existence of democracy is playing a big factor in this. Allowing a right of return if Israel was an authoritarian dictatorship would be a much smaller ask, because the returning Palestinians would be ignored by the government like everyone else. But within a democracy they’d have an actual voice, so they’d have a level of power that marginalised groups are never able to achieve in Arab countries.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
I mean, it's also just false, see e.g. the Armenian Genocide, Greek-Turkish 'population exchanges' and the wonderful world of the post-Israel Mizrahi populations...
ETA: If we mean original conquests centuries ago, then I think we probably lack the information to properly evaluate, though those mostly don't seem to have involved mass deportations, as subjects (and slaves) were wanted.
But the question of how far back you go is a hard one. The line I usually draw is 'is anyone still alive who directly was harmed,' which does mean that there are people who are owed some form of recompense here (though whether that's right of return, or compensation for lost property, or something else is a hard question I don't have a good answer on).
Edited by ECD on May 7th 2022 at 4:31:44 AM
The current US liberal thinking seemingly drifts toward indefinite time for recompense. At least for African-Americans and American Indians…
A procrastination in of itself
A lot of that is due to systemic issues still existing that draw their roots back to the original government lead direct discrimination. There’s not a focus on territorial concessions.
Which I suspect is where my earlier point about democracy comes in. The right of return isn’t about territorial concessions if the returning Palestinians don’t have the right to elect leaders and exert self-determination, but if they do have that right then the right of return just looks like an elaborate way to transfer Israeli territory to a Palestinian state.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
I mean, yes and no?
You'll hear a lot of rhetoric about reparations for slavery, but in TNC's piece that largely kicked off the conversation (at least as I recall it? Oh, god, it's eight years old...I'm old...) it was far more focused on more recent activity. And for American Indians, there's usually a slightly different set of arguments (at least by the more sophisticated folks) focused on the treaties agreed to and living up to those terms.
Ah, oops, I owe folks an apology, just read the first page and noted:
"At the outset, however, I want to make something very clear: This thread will be about sharing and discussing news. Discussions about whether the existence of Israel is justified would be off-topic, as would any extended argument or analysis about the countries' history."
My apologies, I'll disengage.
Which I suspect is where my earlier point about democracy comes in. The right of return isn’t about territorial concessions if the returning Palestinians don’t have the right to elect leaders and exert self-determination, but if they do have that right then the right of return just looks like an elaborate way to transfer Israeli territory to a Palestinian state.
It's not like there's an abundance of options.
A two-state solution doesn't work if the West is so concerned with the rights of Settlers, otherwise you can only have a one-state solution. And for that the choice is either full equality which inevitably means that Israelis won't be dominant or they maintain their privilege in the form of apartheid.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 7th 2022 at 6:02:43 AM
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
A procrastination in of itself
Who counts as a settler? All Israeli citizens? Anyone not born within the state of Israel/Mandate of Palestine? Any Israeli citizen who lives past the Green Line? Any Israeli citizen who migrated past the Green Line?
That’s the complication, not just establishing who counts as a settler but also establishing what happens to the non-settler people that end up on the wrong side of any border that gets draws.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
That's why I support a one-state solutions. Several Israeli politicians have proposed expelling Palestinians living in Israel as a tradeoff for limited reductions in settlement development.
I think the problem with an one-state solution is that you'd need to balance religions/ethnicities somehow so that one does not begin to dominate over the other. Federalism would be tough to implement there without splitting Israel into two or more sub-entities and the Lebanese solution doesn't exactly have a great record at producing effective governments.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Obviously that would be challenging, but I don't see a situation in which domination could be any worse than it is now.
This is only marginally related, but I really hate "demographic threat" arguments. People who worry that the Palestinian population in Israel will overwhelm the Jewish population numbers-wise correctly recognize a current statistical trend, but...anything beyond that recognition is worrying. Israel's declaration of independence already enshrines the rights of Jewish people, and changing demographics can't change that. When people discuss "solutions to the demographic threat," they almost always hinge on eugenics, more forced expulsions, or murder.
Edited by indigoJay on May 7th 2022 at 1:45:19 PM
There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
Changing demographics can change election outcomes however and these the interpretation of laws, appointment of judges etc. Although I admit that I don't like demographic arguments because they tend to rely on extrapolations, and these have a tendency of being disproven by events.
You probably don't agree that it is a problem, but I suspect that Palestinians would see an Israeli domination as more of the same problems and Israelis a Palestinian domination as a threat.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I agree. My issue, as I stated, is with people who seek "solutions" to this "problem." People might not like the thought of being outnumbered, but that doesn't mean they're justified in systemically disenfranchising people or resisting the fairest and most democratic possible systems in response.
There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Japan and South Korea, on the other hand... Most people I know who talk about either one are awestruck by their economic power, cleanliness of the streets, the efficient organization of various aspects of society, the sheer politeness of the native people, and many other things. The ignorant fools, unaware of their horrendous job environments, the hideous racism and xenophobia lurking under the surface, and the myriad of other grave issues and flaws that riddle these two countries.
No idea what Arabs generally think of the rest of East Asia, however.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Weren't in a lot of cases, the more orthodox clergies who interpreted the islamic laws usually bigger bigots than the actual rulers themselves? Like for example with Shaik Ahmed Sirhindi of the Naqshbandi sect.
Usually in India afaik, it was the rulers that weren't strict followers of the orthodoxy and were willing to curb the power of the clergy that treated the non muslims well while the orthodox rulers or those who tended to appeal to the orthodoxy ended up being somewhat poor in their treatment of the non muslim populace.
Edited by xyzt on May 9th 2022 at 12:42:43 AM
I think it's worth noting that mandating non-believers pay a special tax while obviously unfair by modern standards is fairly tolerant by many historical standards. For example, compare that to the standard practice of their direct competitors the Christians. I know I'd vastly prefer to be a Jew in a Muslim empire then a Jew in a Crusader state, the former could get ugly at times but the latter was pretty much always brutal.
Jizya was not a bastion of tolerance by modern standards and I don't know if I'd call it that by ancient standards but you could very easily be worse.
(After typing this I realized that we've veered off-topic, if we want to continue I'd recommend going to a religious themed thread that no doubt have 
)
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 8th 2022 at 12:19:26 PM
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
Life for Jews was hardly always brutal. It really sucked by our standards and there were many pogroms and expulsions, but Jewish communities could often live and thrive for centuries relatively unmolested. Which made them often wealthy (at least some of them), which sadly gave their neighbours and others reason to envy them which, well... .
Edited by Zarastro on May 8th 2022 at 11:55:13 AM
For the record, Jizya wasn't an 'extra' tax per se. Muslims and non Muslims were both obligated to pay taxes. Since Zakat is a religious obligation, non-Muslims couldn't be included in it, so Jizya was applied instead. I'd argue that the lack of legal rights given to Dhimmis were much more unfair than the taxes.
This is very off-topic, though. Many Palestinians aren't even descended from the Arab tribes that followed these practices. I'd prefer it if we stuck to discussing Palestinian and Israeli news and culture rather than moral and historical debates about tangentially related groups.
Edited by indigoJay on May 9th 2022 at 4:00:10 AM
There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
In the name of being honest
CNN: Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh shot and killed in West Bank.
The Palestinian Ministry of Health said she was shot in the head by a live bullet in Jenin, and confirmed her death shortly afterwards. A second journalist, Ali Al Samudi, was also shot and is in a stable condition, the ministry said.
Al Jazeera has accused Israeli security forces of deliberately targeting and killing Abu Akleh and called on the international community to condemn and hold Israel accountable.
The Israel Defense Forces said its security forces had been operating in the area "to arrest suspects in terrorist activities," and both Palestinian suspects and Israeli forces were firing at the time.
"As part of the activity in the Jenin refugee camp, suspects fired heavily at the force and threw explosives. The force responded by firing. Hits were detected," the IDF said.
"The possibility that journalists were hit, possibly by Palestinian gunfire, is being investigated. The event is being examined" the IDF added.
Al Jazeera journalist, Al-Samudi, who was with Abu Akleh when she was killed, said there were no Palestinian gunmen in the area at the time. "The Israeli army shot us," said Al-Samudi who was also shot. "There was no Palestinian gunman in the place."
In response to the shooting, Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said on Twitter his government had offered to conduct a joint Israeli-Palestinian investigation, adding: "Journalists must be protected in conflict zones and we all have a responsibility to get to the truth."
Tributes have started pouring in for Abu Akleh as news of her death spread.
Abu Alkeh's colleague, Nida Ibrahim, said she was a "very well respected journalist" who had been working with Al Jazeera since the beginning of the second Palestinian Intifada in 2000, according to the network.
"As you can imagine, this is a shock to the journalists who have been working with her," Ibrahim said, in tears.
Abu Akleh was born and raised in Jerusalem and belonged to a Christian family, according to Bir Zeit University, where she was a teacher. She was 51, according to the university.
"She initially studied architecture at the University of Science and Technology in Jordan, then moved to the written journalism specialization, and obtained a bachelor's degree from Yarmouk University in Jordan," according to her university bio.
She had worked with UNRWA, Voice of Palestine Radio, Amman Satellite Channel, the Miftah Foundation and Monte Carlo Radio before joining Al Jazeera.
In the name of being honest
Al Jazeera streamed some live footage from Shireen Abu Akleh's funeral procession in Jenin, where Israeli security forces moved to disperse mourners by force and assaulted the pallbearers (right at the beginning of the stream):
Now that is a new low for israeli forces. I want to see what kind of excuses they find out now.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
Honestly if Israel did go the full mass extermination route I have no doubts the US wild continue to support them. And this is coming from an American.
And that's really a sticking point - a lot of people conflate supporting Israel's right to exist with supporting Israel's government - the same government that is continuously working to build an ethnonationalist apartheid state.
Edited by DrunkenNordmann on May 6th 2022 at 3:56:42 PM
Welcome to Estalia, gentlemen.