Many point out that Palestinians are an invented people since ethnically they are Arab making them the same ethnicity as 22 Arab states. However, that doesn't change the demographic reality of the conflict that you can't have a Jewish and democratic state and hold onto the West Bank at the same time. This is due to Palestinians being a separate ethically, group, and culture. Right wingers often argue that it's not the reality by citing Caroline Glick; however, she cites a study done by American-Israeli Research that has several flaws to it and is a study not believed by demography experts including Israeli. http://www.politicalforum.com/middle-east/415083-caroline-glick.html The Arabs are not the only case of one ethnicity having multiple states. For example, One example is Latin America where due to previous Spanish colonization majority of population in these countries is mestizo(combination white-Amerindian ancestry) Another example is Germany(which before unification in 1871 composed of several German states with Prussia being the most notable), Austria, and Switzerland are all ethnically German(or in Austria's case origins as German) states. Another example is United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada which all have ethnic origin as English since they started out as colonies settled by the English. Nationhood is also a concept that emerged with treaty of Westphalia after 30 years war 1618-1648. In the case of Middle East historically it has been tribal rule under empires like Persian, Roman, variety of caliphates and Ottoman empire with borders of Arab(in the case of Israel it;s borders recognized by most of the world have became what emerged after it's war of independence) states outside gulf states drawn by the French and British as punishment for being on losing side of WW1.
Palestinians are a mix of everyone who lived in Palestine over the past 2,000 years including Jewish farmers who didn't leave, Turks, Greeks, Crusaders and so forth.
That's all true and I agree it doesn't matter for today's reality, however, since we do need a solution, here are a few points that I think do matter when trying to silve it: 1) The Jewish settlements/area C justification is due to the nature of the disputed land between Jordan and Israel - this is since the Palestinians were historically regarded as part of the Jordanian ppl since before the creation of Jordan trou the Jordanian occupation (where they officially got citizenship) and till the Israeli occupation, since the late 80's the Palestinians were regarded as separate and the 2 state solution came to be, but the settlements already existed. 2) Unification as a nation - I think the height of the feud between Hamas and PLO was in 2006 fighting between them - they are not united and Im not sure they can close the gap, I mention it here because it may well be that they will never unite, WB ppl belong to Jordan and Gaza ppl belong to Egypt, I know they tried all kinds of agreements and I know Israel threaten them as well but bottom line is they are not united in agenda, secular- religion nature of state and at times opposing patron countries. so it will affect solution. 3) Since it can only formalize throu Israel in negotiations, with who Israel is supposed to negotiate? PLO as in Oslo accords or Hamas? separate negotiations ? this is a major setback in the solution path. 4) By now the Palestinian identity is very much national one for the Palestinians, unification with Israel is out of the question, they will agree to either a separate state OR a "merge" in order to destroy Israel from within or in process (form a new country)
They were considered Jordanian ??? Even before there was a country called Jordan? Was the Jewish minority in Palestine also considered Jordanian? How could the Palestinian people be a distinct ethnic group when Jews are not?
They were considered "Arabs", they couldn't be considered "Jordanians" before there was a Jordan. the League of Nations sought a country for the "Arab" part and the "Jewish" part, they were districted by ethnics for nationality, as in the self determination law.
In the very early 1950s the Americans in Saudi Arabia referred to them as Palestinians and they were a real presence in our community... both Christian and Muslim Palestinians.
Earlier than that, since the creation of Jordan in 1946, since it was created it was obvious the Jews and Palestinian Arabs had to share Palestine land - in the eyes of the UN that is. Jordan wanted to add Palestine to its borders, the Palestinian leadership was destroyed by the British but before that - they also sought one country united with Jordan. Only in the 80's did they formally accept - or perhaps, others recognized - the PLO leadership and the idea of 2 countries.
That sounds quite benign but, in 1949 when ARAMCO was building TAPLINE and had to divert it to Sidon instead of Haifa, Chaim Weizmann approached Ibn Saud and Aramco to take in the rest of the Palestinians and give them jobs at the expense of Saudi workers. He also asked the US to pay for their forcible removal from Palestine....
I'm talking high level here, the classic approach to the Palestinians as a nation, the topic of this thread, what the use of turning this to another "who stabbed who first" ? Do you think the Palestinians can be truly united as one nation with one mature goal as country ?or should we start talking about 2 countries - that is 3 separate ones.
So many Palestinians were forced off the land and there was a huge influx of refugees into Lebanon and Syria...
A new research was published by Dr. Rivka Shpak Lissak, that showed that the Arabs (so called "Palestinians") was came to the land in in four waves, and which in the 9th century only few Arabs were in the Land of Israel, according to Arabic sources. The second was was in the Middle of the 10th Century – 11th Century, where alot of Beouins came from the desert of Arabia: The population in 1099- 1260 was only some Arabs: Here is some numbers of the population in that time: Between the years 1260 – 1516 all the population of this region was reduced, and Charistians that lived in "Palestine" was forced to convert to Islam: At the time of the Ottoman rule (1516 – 1918 ), a lot of the areas was remain mostly uncultivated: Between the 16th to the 17th century, the population that remained was once again reduced because of econimic problems and a lack of personal security. The reduction continued betweeb the 7th century to the 18th century, and alot of visiters that came to this lands discribed is as "no-men land": Moreover: According to the book "Jews in Palestine" by Abraham Revusky, The Vanguard press, 1936: Source'1: http://chersonandmolschky.com/tag/dr-rivka-shpak-lissak/ Source'2: https://books.google.co.il/books?id=-DO7AAAAIAAJ&q=25000&redir_esc=y Source'3: https://books.google.co.il/books?id=1a0cAAAAMAAJ&dq=hauran&redir_esc There are no "Palestinians". History shows that "Palestinians" didnt exist, like the Arabs themselves say.
This is not even clever revisionism.. Ibn Battuta and Rabbi Benjamin of Tuldea kept detailed journals... Arabs began moving into Mesopotamia and the Levant in waves around 10,000 years ago. There is lots and lots of evidence for Trade routes between Arabia, Egypt and Babylon .. as well as to the Indus Valley... count over 4000 clay tablets found in Dilmun. Much later.. Sargon2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria about 700 BC. Creating a history and/or justification for themselves dates back to the Pentateuch... its simply not true.. The Hebrews or Apiru were just a tribe of landless, unaffiliated Canaanites.
Everything that you wrote here is not contradicting what I wrote to you. I never talked about the bible nor the biblical periods. * 10,000 years ago was the Neolithic Period when the domestication of animels was started by humens. 10,000 years ago there were no Arabs.
1. The settlement issue can be negotiated with. During 2008 talks Abbas agreed to Israel annexing all of settlement blocs except for Ariel and all Israeli neighborhoods in East Jerusalem except Har Homa. Also Abbas's offer left 60 percent of settlers remaining. The settlement buildings themselves consist of 1% of West Bank. Before Oslo the Labor party's policy was Jordan is Palestine negotiating with King Hussein to return West Bank. The last attempt was 1987 Peres-Huessin London agreement which was blocked by then prime minister Yitzhar Shamir and 1988 during first intifada Jordan renounced all claims to the West Bank. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/group-israel-controls-42-of-west-bank/ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/magazine/13Israel-t.html?_r=0 2. Unification with Gaza and West Bank is a difficult issue considering how Hamas and PA has fought each other. Wouldn't be surprised if Gaza stays separate from West Bank if a Palestinian state is established years from now. 3. Negotiate with PA(though with current gov that won't happen). The closest negotiations were in 2008 between Olmert and Abbas after Hamas took over Gaza. 4. I agree Palestinian identity is a very much national one for the Palestinians meaning that a binatonal state is not solution for conflict. The Palestinians won't merge to try to destroy Israel. Beside not having the capability to, the PA doesn't have an interest in destroying Israel with Abbas months away from a deal with Olmert in 2008. While Hamas does have a desire to destroy Israel; the reality of running a government in Gaza has meant that Hamas since ceasefire ending operation pillar of defense in November 2012 has tried to avoid attacking Israel in fear of retaliation. Most of the rockets since the ceasefire have been conducted by Jihadist groups in Gaza and often have been arrested in response; exception was rockets launched by Hamas following crackdown in West Bank during Operation Brotherkeeper after a Hebron Hamas cell not acting from central leadership from Hamas kidnapped and killed three Jewish teenagers. The solution may end up resembling the two states-one homeland initiative. The initiative is a private one formed by Israelis and Palestinians. https://www.facebook.com/notes/711885432271832/
Speaking of <revisionism> The name of the Rabbi Benjamin of TUDELA is written this way! The Rabbi passed away in 1173. Benjamin of Tudela Benjamin of Tudela (tōdāˈlä) [key], d.1173, rabbi considered the first European to approach the borders of China, b. Tudela, Spain. He traveled (1159–73) through Italy, Greece, Palestine, Persia, the western borders of China, Egypt, and Sicily. His account, Massaoth Schel Rabbi Benjamin, sheds light on the situation of Jews in Europe and Asia. Despite errors, the book is an invaluable historical source. An English translation was published in 1840 as The Itinerary of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela. See the critical text, tr. and ed. by M. N. Adler (1907, repr. 1964). The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. This is REAL the rest is wishful thinking. In fact <Israel is here to stay> and all your attempts at rewriting history, belittling it, demeaning its 3000 years old rich history when Islam started ONLY 1400 years ago, is an exercise in futility. Your hate of Israel... is a <fait accompli> a fact that cannot be denied, then you complain that others are not civil... well I have good news for you... your version of history is so convoluted that it is not even funny... I rest my case!!!
Forget it friend there will NEVER be nor Israel will EVER create a <revanchist entity> in the center of Israel... because of one reason ONLY... Israel is here to stay, <Am Israel Hay> and is very far from committing <self immolation> ...
Sure there were Arabs and they domesticated the horse 10,000 years ago in the Asir region Oh I get it.. You think there were no Arabs before Islam.
Did I misspell the Rabbi's name? Have you read his travel journal.. Its fascinating and he says there were very few Jews in Palestine... so does Battuta.
10,000 there were no religons, no nationals no nothing, only humens. 10,000 there were no Jews, not Christians, no Muslims, no Arabs no nothing.
How does he hate Israel? All he is pointing out is that Palestinians have a connection to the land since they have lived there longer most Israelis. He hasn't done anything like praise Hamas or say Israel doesn't have a right to exist. No one is saying Israel isn't here to stay. Israel is a regional superpower with biggest tech economy outside California. What non Israelis and many Israelis too including security experts from establishment like former Shin Bet heads don't want is the occupation to go on endlessly. The latest settler attack a grave reminder(attacks on Palestinian property by extremist settlers are nothing new in that case arson attack on Palestinian house in village cost the life of an 2 month baby and leaving one of the parents and older sibling critically injured.
No one is saying Israel isn't here to stay. Israel is a regional superpower with biggest tech economy outside California. Israel survived from 1948 to 1967 despite arguable worse security conditions which quotes from several Israeli generals below point out. While some of the Palestinians especially Hamas want Israel destroyed. They have the capacity to make life for Israelis living hell like during second intifada or in southern Israel with rockets from Gaza(however since ceasefire in November 2012 ending operation pillar of defense the few rockets launched from Gaza Strip have been ISIS aligned groups opposed to Hamas and have been arrested, exception of this was during Operation Brother Keeper after a Hamas cell in Hebron acting independently from Hamas central leadership kidnapped and killed three Israeli settler teenagers caused Israel to crack down on Hamas in West Bank). However they aren't a threat to Israel's existence since Israel has Merkava tanks, F-15,F-16, Apache helicopters, and one of the best trained armies in the world. In contrast occupation is a threat to Israel's since it makes a mockery of a Jewish and democratic state since If you don't want a Palestinian state than you either have an apartheid state(by denying citizenship to 2.7 million Palestinians living in the West Bank) or bi-national state due to Jews losing their majority. Leaving most of the West Bank as experts like Amos Yadlin(former head of military intelligence and was involved in 1981 Osirak strike, 2007 Syrian nuclear reactor strike, and have been involved against Iranian nuclear program) have supported is the only way to keep Israel as a Jewish democratic state. Within the next couple of decades if not before there probably will be a Palestinian state/or state and Confederacy if one homeland two state initiative is picked up. No one here is asking Israel for self immolation which keeping occupation does that for reasons mentioned above. A Palestinian state would not be doing that either as security experts have pointed out with former Shin Bet chief Yaakov Peri stated "Even with the creation of a Palestinian state, every Israeli settlement is “defensible.” There is a larger “security menace” now in the absence of a Palestinian state than there would be with the establishment of a Palestinian state". Shlomo Brom former director of IDF strategic planning.Israel is a state without strategic depth, regardless of whether its border is along the 1967 lines or the Jordan River. It can create “artificial strategic depth” by “building its relationship” with its neighbors. "Maintaining an Israeli presence beyond the Green Line is not the security solution for Israel’s tight airspace and land size. "The best solution is to increase the reliability of the barrier along the Green Line between Israel and Palestine particularly through an Israeli-Palestinian agreement on security arrangements.". Amos Lapidot former commander of chief of Israeli air forces and former head of air force intelligence. "Netanyahu’s claim that Israel’s 1967 borders are indefensible is inaccurate. “We were small and we won” several wars in which conditions were less even less advantageous. The borders are defensible" Nehemiah Dagan former chief education officer and former first commander of coordination headquarters. “IDF can protect any borders, it's just the question of developing the right strategy to do it.” Nathan sharoni former chief artillery officer “In 25 years, we had five wars with Egypt, from different territorial positions, and before there was a peace agreement, no borders deterred them from going to war against us. Control of the territory can be replaced with advantages of other security arrangements.Shaul Arieli former brigade commander in Gaza strip. http://www.israelnsp.org/what-they-say/defensible-borders.html https://www.facebook.com/notes/711885432271832/
Martin Van Creveld, Israel's foremost military historian, also says that Israel doesn't need the West Bank for defense......
Martin Van Creveld was born in Rotterdam Holland in 1946... I doubt he served in the IDF to know the demographic/geography of the region, to me he has yet to develop enough gumption to live outside of his quasi secure Jerusalem... I also doubt if Holland someday will ever share its territory with Germany... The foremost Israeli historian has yet to prove in practice what his mind has generated in theory...
Bibi is far from being anything like that... in fact, I am not a Bibi fan either... I predict that if ever things will turn that Israel should relinquish part of the Jewish patrimony freed from the enemy in a war, a bloody revolution my happen where <milhemet ahim> = <civil war> will be predominant in this area... Israel does not owe the Arabs anything!!!
