Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu was heavily criticized for his recent “No Jews” video.
But was his essential point factual and accurate?
I put together this little video to answer that question.
Menu
More results...
More results...
Menu
Israellycool, one of Israel’s largest English-language blogs, is a project of Israellycool Israel Advocacy, a registered Israeli non-profit.
Daily Updates
Delivered straight to your mailbox
- Copyright © 2024 Israellycool
- Built & Designed by Netmii
It is instructive to view both Netanyahu and Abbas in one video. It is clear both are playing to their own base, neither of whom could ever really support a two-state solution. New leadership from the Israelis and the Palestinians would be a good thing for both sides.
we have a two state solution
was made in 1922 when jordan was created from the mandate
You think Bibi could convince King Abdullah to accept millions of West Bank Palestinians into Jordan? If so, Bibi would be worth his weight in matzo ball soup.
Israeli leadership (and pretty much all the “right wing” leaders, already support a two state model – Israelis in Israel and Palestinian Arabs in Palestinian Territories. When Israeli leaders say they believe that a two state solution is far off, they are referring to the Pslestenians’ behaviour.
Ya’alon doesn’t. Danon doesn’t. Hotlovey doesn’t. Shaked doesn’t. Lieberman doesn’t. Bennet doesn’t, either. (I could on). If your policy is aggressive settlement expansion and/or annexation of all or part of the West Bank, then you don’t support the two-state solution in any conventional sense of the term.
Once again, you can’t conceptualise the facts on the ground because you haven’t been to Israel. Same words have different meanings, depending on who is saying them. When you say “settlement expansion”, it sounds like Israel physically expanding to take over any area that is planned to be a Palestinian state. What the Palestinians refer to as “settlement expansion” is when Israelis live in a community, in an area that they claim for their future state, and they see any construction happening. Now they actually claim all of Israel for their future state, but to cover up the lies, they restrict their screaming about Israel’s “acts of aggression” to areas over the green line. But you get my point, no physical borders have moved. No Palestinians have been displaced. All that has happened is that an Israeli (Jew or Arab, more likely Jew since there are more of them, so statistics), BOUGHT land in town and built a house on it! The other lie that gets called “settlement expansion” and annexation is when Israelis call for greater security, and reinforcing security at existing borders of Israel. The lie goes like this: since the Palestinians claim this land, putting Israeli soldiers and checkpoints on any part of this land, is settlement expansion. Again no borders have moved in the present. That’s what those leaders, you mentioned, advocate, reinforcing security, keeping Palestinian Arabs (not Israeli Arabs) out, not moving Jews into any new areas. When these leaders talk about “annexation” they mean delineating the borders of the current “majority Jewish” areas and stating unequivocally that they are part of Israel (stating what are facts on the ground is considered very controversial and right wing). They do not advocate moving the Palestinian Arabs out of Palestinian Territories. They do advocate stating the truth, without mincing words, that those Palestinian Arabs will not be moving into Israel. And another thing, a city like Ariel, or a town like Maale Adumim, are over the green line, so the Palestinians (and the world) refer to them as settlements. There are Israelis living in these towns, all types of Israelis like in all of Israel, Jews of all backgrounds, religious, not religious, and Israeli Arabs. But when the Palestinians (and Mr Obama and “the world”) refer to these people as settlers (since they are in “settlements”), they refer to the Jews, not the Arabs. In reality, there are no “settlers” and “non settlers”, just all different Israelis. And don’t get me started on the idea of Palestinian Arabs living in the Palestinian Territories, the precise area they claim to want to live in, as part of their state of Palestine, and calling themselves refugees. Refugees from where?
A more honest approach would be to annex those areas where Israelis live in the West Bank. I do see Naftali Bennet as a more transparent and honest player than either Netanyahu or Abbas. They would no longer be settlements; the would become Israeli commu nities the same as Haifa or Tel Aviv. Might have some negative blowback from international community, though.
That’s the rub – when they talk about annexation, they talk about calling the borders what they are, borders. But even talking of them in those terms causes absolute conniptions in the “international community”, not to mention the Palestinians. The fact is that they are living in these communities just the same as residents in Tel Aviv, as are Israeli Arabs. Their status would not change, but leaving them where they are, but calling it an annexation would be immediately branded “an act of war”, by Abbas, and looks like by the U.S. administration too, if they had a conniption over the suggestion that the PA would “ethnically cleanse” Palestinian state of any Jews. You would think that if the Palestinians really wanted a state of their own, they wouldn’t object to Israel calling borders borders. The reason that they object, is that they would have to officially recognise Israel as a state within those borders, and they have no intention of doing that. IN FACT, WHAT YOU PROPOSE AS THE SOLUTION, IS THE MAIN OBSTACLE: YES, THE ISRAELI COMMUNITIES WOULD TECHNICALLY NO LONGER BE CALLED SETTLEMENTS (or they would but it would stop being a dirty word), BUT THE PALESTINIANS WOULD ALSO STOP BEING REFUGEES, AND THAT’S WHAT THEY CAN’T ALLOW. So, while more honest, it would bring little benefit to reality on the ground, but a lot of grief.
I do believe you are catching on. There may be hope for you yet!
“Ah, arrogance and stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you!” — AMBASSADOR LONDO MOLLARI, Babylon 5: In the Beginnning (1998)
Jim is still married to the moral equivalence between Bibi and the worst Arab terrorists and American racists.We both know he belongs with that delusion. It’s part of his work, the thing that keeps him going. If that plane leaves the ground and that delusion is not with him, he’ll regret it. Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of his life
There is no way in hell that Israeli authorities will forcibly remove 700,000 of its citizens back across the Green Line. Only far left political parties would contemplate such actions, and their standing with voters is lower than the Dead Sea. If outside forces want this to happen, let them do it themselves if they have the manhood to carry it out.
jews will be allowed to live in the pali state..as long as they accept dhimmi status
Not according to Hamas, for certain.
And while the Fatah charter does allow for some Jews with dhimmi status, every time a high ranking PA official speaks on the subject, he talks about how they will not tolerate any Zionists (read Jews) in their intended state.
And of course they don’t want any Arabs in their state either, as they demand they all live in Israel…
It would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.
Israel has a peace agreement with Egypt. How many Jews (of nearly 80,000) have returned?
Just a guess 0
Apparently a handful did – less than 20.
The Palestinkinians don’t want Jews in the Gaza strip or the West bank – what they want is the total destruction of Israel. The have repeated that statement every time they have been offered Statehood.
You know, hearing Bibi’s line again, I’m rather bothered by the fact that he said “one precondition” when there are in fact several very significant other ones.
Respectfully, I disagree. Israelis deserve for the Palestinians to have a state. They deserve for them to be able to call themselves proud citizens of Palestine, instead of refugees. As refugees, they await their return to where? As Palestinian citizens, they would be home. Instead of the bottomless pit of aid billions to refugees, they could get financial aid to a fledgling country, as they establish themselves. This money would be a loan (of the “who are we kidding” variety, but still), which at least in principle would have a plan to be returned, and which would have accountability as to how it’s spent.
The situation with the checkpoints needs to he highlighted. Much of the media and Israel haters have made the checkpoints this symbol of oppression, but the only way to view them as such is to support the idea of Israel being replaced by an Arab state. In any scenario of Israel co-existing side by side with a Palestinian state, wouldn’t the checkpoints become border patrol points? If these people wanted a state, they would support the idea of borders, which would delineate their country too. Their bristling objection to the checkpoints, and especially their cynical practice of making checkpoints the stage for acts of terrorism (or for them, “martyrdom”), shows that they don’t at all see them as borders, but as obstacles to their free movement to areas they feel entitled to, that is, all of Israel. Normal people do not send unaccompanied 13 year old children to border patrol, where they are encouraged to become “martyrs” by getting shot. Until the Palestinians can see the checkpoints as borders between their country, and another, there is no indication that they accept Israel within any borders, or that they don’t assume Israel’s destruction as part of their claim to their future.