Does a State of Palestine have a right to exist?

mickeyrat, it's a good question, but I believe they have a hell of a lot to lose.

If an independent Palestinian state is declared in what is currently seen as Palestinian territory, or even if they somehow managed to get an agreement from Israel to move back to 1967 borders, the Palestinian government risk losing their ability to try and combat the injustices which began in 1948. When Khaled Meshaal states that it is for the future people of an established Palestine to decide whether Israel has the right to exist, I believe that he is saying that a two-state solution should be seen only as a temporary solution, with citizens of the state of Palestine to determine whether they should continue to fight for the states of Palestine and Israel to be amalgamated into one secularly governed state or not.

Israel seems to have fought for Jewish sovereignty over the region since its inception, and naturally the potential for the introduction of a unified secular government would challenge the notion of Jewish superiority within Israeli borders - something any Zionist would find repulsive and unacceptable. Hence, the only way I could see Israel allowing Palestine to exist in its current form as a recognized and established state is if the Palestinian governing bodies were to accept that this comes with finality and peace (i.e. the understanding that any conflict beginning from the Palestinians would lead to the destruction of their nation). I think this, in turn, would be deemed equally repulsive and unacceptable from the perspective of the Palestinian government, and would allow major injustices (see: Nakba) to continue and flourish (the 700,000 Arabs displaced in '48 are now around 5 million in refugee camps).

Something's got to give, and personally, I put the onus on Israel to accept a major and life-altering shift for literally every Jew in the region: Israel may be the Jewish homeland, but it should not be a Jewish state. A two-state solution is likely dead as Netanyahu stated, but it certainly isn't dead for the reasons he's stated. I believe that it's time for Israeli Jews to lower themselves from their place of assumed moral superiority, and do the thing that they've preached a necessity to do for so many years: coexist.

mickeyrat said:

benjs said:

mickeyrat, it's a good question, but I believe they have a hell of a lot to lose.

If an independent Palestinian state is declared in what is currently seen as Palestinian territory, or even if they somehow managed to get an agreement from Israel to move back to 1967 borders, the Palestinian government risk losing their ability to try and combat the injustices which began in 1948. When Khaled Meshaal states that it is for the future people of an established Palestine to decide whether Israel has the right to exist, I believe that he is saying that a two-state solution should be seen only as a temporary solution, with citizens of the state of Palestine to determine whether they should continue to fight for the states of Palestine and Israel to be amalgamated into one secularly governed state or not.

Israel seems to have fought for Jewish sovereignty over the region since its inception, and naturally the potential for the introduction of a unified secular government would challenge the notion of Jewish superiority within Israeli borders - something any Zionist would find repulsive and unacceptable. Hence, the only way I could see Israel allowing Palestine to exist in its current form as a recognized and established state is if the Palestinian governing bodies were to accept that this comes with finality and peace (i.e. the understanding that any conflict beginning from the Palestinians would lead to the destruction of their nation). I think this, in turn, would be deemed equally repulsive and unacceptable from the perspective of the Palestinian government, and would allow major injustices (see: Nakba) to continue and flourish (the 700,000 Arabs displaced in '48 are now around 5 million in refugee camps).

Something's got to give, and personally, I put the onus on Israel to accept a major and life-altering shift for literally every Jew in the region: Israel may be the Jewish homeland, but it should not be a Jewish state. A two-state solution is likely dead as Netanyahu stated, but it certainly isn't dead for the reasons he's stated. I believe that it's time for Israeli Jews to lower themselves from their place of assumed moral superiority, and do the thing that they've preached a necessity to do for so many years: coexist.

Thank you. Very insightful.

Couldn't tell if this was sarcastic or not, but if so, sorry if this rubbed you the wrong way, it's just my opinion on the answer to your question.

Shit man, I say hell yes they have a right to exist. Not sure what/how you mean by "force the hands of the 2 countries who stand in the way". If it's just a matter of declaring independence, why haven't they done it?

And please, all you experts on this topic please, hold back on throwing the insults. I really would like to learn more about all this without the usual castigation.

Byrnzie said:

brianlux said:

Shit man, I say hell yes they have a right to exist. Not sure what/how you mean by "force the hands of the 2 countries who stand in the way". If it's just a matter of declaring independence, why haven't they done it?

And please, all you experts on this topic please, hold back on throwing the insults. I really would like to learn more about all this without the usual castigation.

He means we need to force the hands of the U.S and Israel - the two countries who stand in the way of a peaceful settlement. (The U.S having used it's power of automatic veto at the U.N to block any and all criticism of Israel for the past 46 years).

How do you see that happening, Byrnzie. How does tiny Palestine force the hand of Mega U.S. and Mega U.S. fueled Israel?

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Byrnzie said:

brianlux said:

Shit man, I say hell yes they have a right to exist. Not sure what/how you mean by "force the hands of the 2 countries who stand in the way". If it's just a matter of declaring independence, why haven't they done it?

And please, all you experts on this topic please, hold back on throwing the insults. I really would like to learn more about all this without the usual castigation.

He means we need to force the hands of the U.S and Israel - the two countries who stand in the way of a peaceful settlement. (The U.S having used it's power of automatic veto at the U.N to block any and all criticism of Israel for the past 46 years).

How do you see that happening, Byrnzie. How does tiny Palestine force the hand of Mega U.S. and Mega U.S. fueled Israel?

Pretty sure he's said a number of times what one of the best ways is: BDS.

That would help. Not sure it would force the U.S. hand. And I didn't know he had said that a number of times because after getting shit on once too many times I stopped reading this stuff for a while. But hey, by gones be by gones.
Anyway, yes, good idea, I don't buy any of the crap those companies sell.

Byrnzie said:

There's also direct action, like the blockades of Israeli cargo vessels at some U.S ports going on right now.
Either way, the same methods used to overthrow Apartheid South Africa - which was supported by the U.S until the very end - need to be employed against Israel. The U.S government won't stop giving 100% unconditional support to Israel, so the only way is to pressure Israel economically, along with artistic boycotts.

Makes sense, Byrnzie but I hate to say this (because I don't want to sound pessimistic) but the difference with South Africa was one major factor: popular entertainment support. Steven Van Zandt and the hugely popular and diverse enertainers in Artists United Against Apartheid etc. come to mind. I don't see that happening at that level in this culture. Let someone prove me wrong-- please!

Byrnzie said:

brianlux said:

Byrnzie said:

There's also direct action, like the blockades of Israeli cargo vessels at some U.S ports going on right now.
Either way, the same methods used to overthrow Apartheid South Africa - which was supported by the U.S until the very end - need to be employed against Israel. The U.S government won't stop giving 100% unconditional support to Israel, so the only way is to pressure Israel economically, along with artistic boycotts.

Makes sense, Byrnzie but I hate to say this (because I don't want to sound pessimistic) but the difference with South Africa was one major factor: popular entertainment support. Steven Van Zandt and the hugely popular and diverse enertainers in Artists United Against Apartheid etc. come to mind. I don't see that happening at that level in this culture. Let someone prove me wrong-- please!

I think we're actually getting closer to the same level of artistic boycotts that we saw employed against South African Apartheid.
During Israel's most recent large scale massacre of Palestinians a large and diverse group of musicians and actors came forward to speak out against it.
I think It's only a matter of time before somebody forms a collective group like the one you mention.

That would be great- let's watch for it/support it.

gimmesometruth27 said:

mickeyrat said:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/04/palestine-formally-joins-international-criminal-court-150401073619618.html

shit is about to get real in the next few months...

I don't expect Israel to participate, and I expect the typical empty condemnations against them as a result. This time, however, the refusal of Israel to participate in a body which exists to put war criminals on trial according to the same Statute used by Israel to prosecute war criminals in Nazi Germany has the potential to really disturb the world to a point of action.