Be sure to follow me on Twitter @leftiblog

Wednesday, February 11, 2009


The one-state solution

Shimon Peres, President of Israel, and Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States, both think it's a bad idea. Gee, I wonder why?


"From Israel's perspective, it is not possible for the Jewish people to accept an arrangement that signifies the end of the existence of a Jewish state."
"A move toward a one nation or one state solution is a catastrophe, not only for the Palestinians and other neighbors but also for the Israelis because there are already a majority of non-Jews in that one nation arena. And Israelā€˜s only option would be to deprive their citizens, if it is one nation, of a right to vote or try to expel them from the area. And neither of those two things are acceptable.

"If they are given the right to vote, in just a few years, the Palestinians or the Arabs will have a majority vote in the one nation and this would also be a catastrophe for what Israelis define as a Jewish state."
This is, of course, what all the nonsense about "requiring Hamas/the Palestinians to recognize 'Israel's right to exist'" is all about. It isn't about Israel's "right to exist." It's about Israel's alleged right to exist as a Jewish state, a country in which Jews have special privileges (like the privilege of unlimited immigration to a country while the actual original residents of that country are forbidden that right - I started to write "privilege" but of course it's not a "privilege" for such a person, it's a right).

There are, of course, other religious countries. Iran, just to name a nearby example. But the international community doesn't recognize Iran's "right" to exist as a "Muslim state" (indeed, the "international community" led by the U.S. would very much like to end that situation, even though it has no such intentions in another Muslim state, Saudi Arabia). Only Israel is accorded that special status, and not only that, only the Palestinians are punished (allegedly, anyway; it's really primarily an excuse) for not acknowledging it.

By the way, it's interesting to read Carter's formulation, calling a unified state in which Arabs had the majority as a "catastrophe." A "catastrophe"? Really? What exactly does he think would happen under those circumstances? Has the end of apartheid been a "catastrophe" for the white minority of South Africa?

An interesting choice of words.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com High Class Blogs: News and Media