Will Israel still exist in 2048 ?

Will Israel still exist in 2048?


(its most unlikely that the Status Quo can continue for that long.)


The choice might be between a fortress state and one so weak that federation with a burgeoning Palestine becomes plausible


This time last week the diplomatic world was on tenterhooks, as President Mahmoud Abbas prepared to make Palestine's claim to recognition at the UN General Assembly. Seven days on, his historic demand languishes in a vague limbo, as Americans and Europeans try to pre-empt an ill-tempered stand-off in the Security Council and the US veto that would surely follow. The idea seems to be to try to deflect the Palestinians with a promise of revamped peace talks with Israel.


Whether or not this tactic works, however, there can be little doubt that one day, sooner rather than later, a fully fledged Palestinian state will come into being.

There have been many mis-starts, including the 2006 elections that much of the West rejected retrospectively when Hamas emerged as the biggest party. But the momentum is inexorable. The Arab Spring, better described as the Arab awakening, can only speed the process along.


The bigger and longer-term question relates not to the existence, or even the viability of a Palestinian state – which should be a given. The demographics, economics and politics all point the same way. It relates to the future, and long-term survival, of Israel. In short, will Israel, as the Jewish state, still be around to celebrate its centenary in 2048?



Let me make it absolutely clear: the question is not whether Israel should continue to exist. That is beyond doubt. It is a legally constituted state with full UN recognition. It is a stable, albeit fractious, democracy and has survived more than 60 years in a distinctly hostile neighbourhood. It has created a thriving economy, with intensive agriculture and advanced industry, from almost nothing. It has a rich cultural life. It is not alone in having borders that are not finally demarcated and are regarded by some as illegal. The fact that it has enemies who withhold recognition does not negate its legitimacy.


No, the question is not whether Israel should survive, but whether it can and will survive. And here there must be room at the very least for doubt. A string of recent developments contains hints that the state of Israel, as currently constituted, may not be a permanent feature of the international scene.

One is the new porousness of its borders. Despite massive spending on security and recent, controversial, efforts to erect physical barriers along what Israel defines as its border with the Palestinian Authority, its other frontiers have become, or threaten to become, porous. On several weekends in May and June, Palestinians in Syria breached the border with Israel. They did not use overwhelming force. Numbers were enough, against Israeli troops – rightly – reluctant to mow down dozens of young people.

The incursions appeared to be encouraged, if not actually incited, by the Syrian authorities seeking a diversion from their own difficulties. They have since ceased; but the threat remains, and could soon escalate were the situation in Syria to deteriorate. If, in the worst case, Syria descended into civil war, chaos could present an even greater danger to Israel because there would be no one in Damascus with the authority to call the crowds of frustrated young Palestinians back.

Something similar, perhaps even less tractable, applies in the south, on Israel's border with Egypt. Sinai is a vast territory and hard to patrol. Security on the Egyptian side has already deteriorated as a by-product of the fall of the Mubarak regime, and there have been attacks on Israeli convoys in the Negev. If unrest in Syria and Egypt were to extend to Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, the consequences for Israel's security could be even worse.


Add to these growing security problems the demographics – very young and fast-increasing populations in the countries all around – and it is clear that present trends will not easily be reversed. It is just about possible to imagine Israel resorting to the sort of impenetrable fortifications that extend along stretches of the US frontier with Mexico, but the investment would be huge, the message one of isolation, and the effect on daily life in Israel almost entirely negative.

A second reason why Israelis might be justified in having qualms about their future relates to the political aftermath of the Arab Spring. For a long time the fear was that any change in Arab countries would bring Islamist regimes to power, with fiercely anti-Israel agendas.

That still cannot be ruled out. But what has happened so far could have more insidious consequences for Israel. Not only is the Jewish state losing its kudos as the sole democracy in the region, but those Arab leaders who actively supported peace have lost, or are losing, power, and the US is giving up on intervention.


One hope was that the emergence of more democratic regimes around Israel might foster a climate of normalisation and mutual respect. That may yet happen. But another effect is that leaders will have to be more responsive to the wishes of their people. As can already be discerned with Egypt, this may not bode well for stability in Arab-Israel relations. With the Arab Spring also bolstering the self-confidence of the Palestinians – a factor in Mr Abbas's decision to take his case to the UN last week – the political balance in the region is shifting.


A third reason for doubt about Israel's future lies within the Jewish state itself. With the early pioneering spirit fading, and even the Holocaust – dare one hazard – less of a unifying force, Israel is not the same country it was 60, 30, even 10 years ago. And demography means that it will continue to change, with the Arab, Orthodox Jewish and second-generation Russian populations increasing much faster than other groups. The Israel of the next 30 years is likely to be more divided, less productive, more inward-looking and more hawkish than it is today – but without the financial means and unquestioning sense of duty that inspired young people to defend their homeland by force of arms.

Recent mass protests against inequality and the cost of middle-class living also suggest that the social solidarity that has prevailed hitherto could break down. In such circumstances, it must be asked how much longer Israel can maintain the unity it has always presented against what it terms the "existential threat".

An Israel whose borders are leaky, which is surrounded by states that are at once chaotic and assertive, and whose citizens are less able or willing than they were to fight, could face real serious questions about its viability. The choice then might be between a fortress state, explicitly protected by nuclear weapons, and a state so weak that association, or federation, with the burgeoning independent Palestine would become plausible: the so-called one-state solution by other means.

In either event, those with other options – the younger, more educated, more cosmopolitan sections of the population – might well seek their future elsewhere, leaving the homeland of their ancestors' dreams a husk of its former self. The emotive call, "Next year in Jerusalem" would be the wistful vestige of a noble ambition overtaken by cruel demographic and geopolitical reality.


Mary Dejevsky
http://www.independent.co.uk/

 

The day the Jews become a minority in Israel they will brutally persecuted and forced into diaspora again by an Arab majority. You know it, I know it.. stop pretending it's not going to happen or that it's something you don't want to happen. This idea that Jews and Arabs can get along inside Israel without Jews being reduced to 2nd class citizens is a naive falsehood pushed by you people to get the International Community to sign on to allowing millions Palestinians a 'right of return' into Israel so they can swamp out the Jews and take all the political power away from them in the Knesset.

You, like all Jew Haters, don't want Jews having a nation where they remain in complete political control in the Middle East. You prefer Jews scattered about the world, with no political power anywhere.

 

Thats so wierd, because before "Israel" was created, Jews - who were a minority in the Middle East - including Palestine - lived happy, free lives along with their Muslim and Christian neighbors.

In fact, while they were being killed and prosecuted in Christian Europe, they were not in Muslim Middle East.

But, let us ignore how Zionism changed the relationship. Believe the fairy tale that one sunny Mid-East morning, the majority of the Arabs woke up and all of them said "Boy, do I ever hate Jews" the end.

Salam

 

I don't care if "zionism" changed the Equation. The Jews want a State where Jews, and Jews Alone have the majority of political power. They deserve it, they need it, and they have it and attempts to take it away from them are cruel and mean.

 

Of course you don't care.

Middle Eastern Jews didn't want to create "Israel", the Zionists of Europe did. It was the Europeans who created "Israel".

 

I wish I could start a poll to see if, coming from an American, this isn't one of the most absurd posts of all time. Israeli should not be stopped from fighting over argued turf, to the victor goes the spoils. Just like the global community should have stayed out Iraq, Libya, and Bosnia. But to say that Jews have no political power around the world, especially in western nations, is disingenuous. They probably have the most disproportionate amount of power comparatively to every group living in each western nation. Here is an article just about here in America:http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein19-2008dec19,0,4676183.column

 

The Arabs never forced the Jews into diaspora the first time... nor did the Romans..

Jews began leaving Palestine 300 BC.. and by the time of Christ more were living in Rome, Egypt. north Africa and Persia than in Israel.

 

So did greeks and yet they have their own country...

 

The Muslims should give up on the idea of eradicating Israel. The Israelis are not going away without a fight, which is why a combined Israel/Palestine with a majority of non-Jews is a non-starter. Israel is not South Africa and if push comes to shove Israel will shove the Palestinians out and take the political consequences. This crunch will come because the demographics don't favor the Israelis (the Palestinians are taking revenge through the cradle).

Israel is the Jewish homeland, like it or not. The question is where the borders of Israel are and what role the Palestinians have vis-a-vis Israel. Israelis no longer truly fear the Arabs so they no longer have much incentive to make peace with a very hostile Palestinian population or restrain their own Israeli extremists (the settler movement). The Palestinians think they have very little to lose and are already basically permanent prisoners on what land they have left, so they are not inclined to compromise either.

Thus, in 2048 Israel will either be a Jewish fortress state despised by most nations on earth (the expulsion of the Palestinians will be pretty ugly if it happens) or it will be a radioactive wasteland along with most of the Middle East (idiot Muslims actually successfully attack Israel, creating a "we'll take you with us" response). I have very little hope of a just peace being made (both Israel and the Palestinians are becoming increasingly obdurate) and there is no honest broker in sight (even the Quartet is a joke).

 

What nonsense. They were a persecuted minority.

 

I'm not sure that Greeks and Jews are terms derived from the same family. Can you elaborate on what you mean? Greece is not a state for Greek Orthodox Christians only...?

 

Irrelevant...Religious orthodox Greeks do not exclusively have their own country.

 

Well, I'm on the other side.
Technology, especially that on the communication side, has changed the face and shape of the world and society. News is instant. There is catch-up at work in some countries who are still a little behind, but during troublesome time, information still gets out (cellphone/youtube/etc).

Continued technological development across the world and instant communications everywhere mean, from my point of view, that the chances of wars become less. Ignorance becomes less. Friction becomes less.

Will it happen? Come back in 30-odd years and prove me wrong, I'm sure I will care.

 

I was replying to Margot whio said there were more jews in rome and other part of the world than in Judea... The same was true for the greek at one time...

And you are using a strawman. We're not debating if the jewish character of Israel is exclusive of other creed or races. This isn't the reality on the ground anyway since you have muslim, christian (many denomination), atheist and of difference ethnic background presently living in Israel.

 

Neither does the jews...

 

I'm not using anything, I was asking a question - specifically asking you to clarify your position. I wasn't refuting anything. Stop letting your thuggish forum attitude blind you of all common sense. IF there is any straw man, it is you bringing up Greece as if that refutes the position. That's not part of this debate at all.

That's nothing to do with what I was asking about. The issue was not about Israelis, as a national identity. The trouble in the ME is not to do with an "Israeli State". Being Greek, and being Israeli, as you pointed out, is not the same as being a Jew. Margot was talking about Jews, NOT Israelis.

 

Margot , true, all the Inhabitants, irrepsective of which god they worshipped were classified as ROMAN CITIZENS.

There also seem to be many political motivated versions. According to my limited readings , policies of expulsion/extermination/genocide was introduced to that region by the - former Egyptian runaway slaves - HEBREWs slaughtering all in their path through the land of Canaan.
Omar Al-Khattab arrived 600 + AD.

, Here's C + P from MideastWeb

------

"About 638 AD, the Caliph Omar Ibn al-Khattab, entered the city of Jerusalem, then called Aelia Capitolina by the Romans or "Ilia" by the Arab conquerors. According to tradition, Omar granted to the people of Jerusalem and to the Patriarch Safronius a covenant of peace and protection which came to be known the Covenant of Omar, or the Code of Omar. In addition, to ensure the care and protection of Christian and Jewish Holy places, Omar entrusted each of the major holy places to the care and protection of a different Muslim family. Many non-Muslim scholars believe that the covenant of Omar was actually written at a later date, since the earliest manuscript can only be dated from the eleventh century, and because they believe that it represents customs that had accumulated over the centuries. However, there is no definitive proof that the document is not genuine.



For some reason, this document has gained a very bad reputation among critics of Islam. However, considering the fate of conquered populations in general at that time, it seems to be very liberal, and the intention was to protect and reassure the Christian population of Jerusalem. The institution of the (*)(*)(*)(*)iya tax and other marks of second class citizenship were not invented by Omar, but rather copied from the custom instituted in other conquered Muslim cities, based on the Qur'an. We must remember that when the Crusaders conquered Jerusalem several hundred years later, Muslims and especially Jews were evicted.



Omar seemingly did not keep one promise of his covenant, which reads "None of the Jews shall reside with them in Ilia'." In fact, Omar allowed the Jews, formerly excluded from Jerusalem by the Christians, to return and live there, though under Muslim rule, each group lived in different quarters of the city.

Ami Isseroff

MORE :

http://www.mideastweb.org/covenantofomar.htm


....

 

OP might want to watch this video before predicting Israels demise.

Scrub arab cavemen are going to need more than a few rocks and crappy missles.

Oh BTW good luck sabotaging all their Nukes!..lol

Israel is strong, much stronger than the muslim sheep lickers that surround them.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhdalQdtzfY&noredirect=1"]IDF - Israel Military Power - YouTube[/ame]

 

According to some sources , that has always been the case , even before the Hebrew tribes invasion into the land of Canaan , pretending the biblical Israel/Judea - was a land promised to a so-called "Chosen People"



Which seems to make it a bit of ridiculous nonsense demanding it to be called "A JEWISH STATE - DER JUDENSTAAT " does'nt it ?


....

 

Yep you did use a strawman... And now you are ressorting to PA...

And yes what I said was in context and was a valid counterpoint to what Margot said. You can think differently but you know what your opinion is worth...

 

No more then pretending there were such a thing as pallestinian before the 60's...

 

Sorry, can't have a strawman if I didn't argue for or against. But nice try though... what do YOU think my position is and what strawman did I give to refute the other position?

Resorting to PA? I'm not resorting to anything because I haven't declared a position. I call it exactly as I see it. Your thuggish attitude was apparent when attacking my post because you "think" it was attempting to refute your post. I was asking for clarification of what you meant and once received I was likely to support your statement.

Regardless of your attitude, you may still have some points to make, but alas they get lost under the laced words you type out.

 

You are projecting...

 

So no answer then. Probably what I expected.

 

Like I said, you're projecting. Any answer that I could give you would be meaningless...