Israel's survival

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Dear Secretary Powell, my question is, if the Arabs (Muslims) ever won any of the wars against Israel would there be an Israel today? Is it true that the Arab and Muslim leadership openly declair that their intentions are to destroy Israel? Sincerely Alfred

Alfred Paraiso, Wednesday, 10 September 2003 21:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Jordan, Syria and Egypt have all at one time or another vowed to destroy Israel. Jordan and Egypt have given up this aim. If the Jews had lost the 48 war there would be no Israel, the same is probably true of '56, but not the later wars. Israel wasn't strategically important to the US until the 60s when soviet influence in the middle east started to grow. One could even argue that the US would not have come to Israel's rescue in '67 because of deepening commitment in south east asia.

It's almost not worth arguing about though. It doesn't really affect the situation today which can only be solved by the re-secularisation of Israel, the end of apartheid in Israel and the end of the bantustanisation of the remaining palestinian areas of the West Bank and Gaza strip.

As for today many arab states passively or actively oppose or fail to recognise the existence of Israel.

Ed (dali), Wednesday, 10 September 2003 21:28 (twenty-two years ago)

More tomorrow when I am not so tired.

Ed (dali), Wednesday, 10 September 2003 21:28 (twenty-two years ago)

It doesn't really affect the situation today which can only be solved by the re-secularisation of Israel, the end of apartheid in Israel and the end of the bantustanisation of the remaining palestinian areas of the West Bank and Gaza strip.

so, in other words, it's all israel's fault?

ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 10 September 2003 21:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Ed, when you are not so tired, I'd be interested in hearing your views on the original proposal.

felicity (felicity), Wednesday, 10 September 2003 22:08 (twenty-two years ago)

The yanks I've met seem to be in favour of Israel. Fuck them is what I say. What the Israeli government is doing in Palestine is a fucking disgrace. I'm not condoning suicide bombings (although where was America's sympathy when we had the IRA blowing up shopping centres? Typical) but Israel has effectively been promoting ethnic cleansing and the recent destruction of a building because it "might" (re: did in fact not) have some rebels in it was a total disgrace. It left three innocent people dead.

Calzer (Calzer), Thursday, 11 September 2003 00:13 (twenty-two years ago)

so, in other words, it's all israel's fault?

no, it's all the Palestinians' fault. how dare they want to live free in their own country?

DV (dirtyvicar), Thursday, 11 September 2003 08:51 (twenty-two years ago)

which of course incorporates the Balfour Declaration which Britain went back on in favour of establishing Mandatory control over Palestine.

It is my understanding that the founders of israel up until as late as '48 always envisaged Israel as a place where the indigenous population could coexist with the jewish influx but gradually as the 20s and 30s progressed the statements became more colonial in nature. I wish I could find one of my histories of Israel because they have some great quotes from David Ben-Gurion, Chaim Weitzman, Theodor Hertzl, Moshe Dayan and the like saying things along the lines of, 'the arabs will welcome the jewish influx because it will bring progress'. Which is almost a version of the 'white man's burden for Israel, the sustaining premise for the later british empire. From that colonial beginning has grown today's apartheid system, largely brought on by the de-facto annexation of the West Bank and Gaza strip and the inability to recognise that the Palestinian arabs don't wish to go and live in some other arab land they want to live in their own land, just as much as the jews do.

It's far from being all Israel's fault, Britain, the US, France, the Arab nations all have had their parts to play in the fuckup that is israel. What I was trying to express is that it is futile trying to re-fight the battles of the past. Instead we should concentrate on the problems of now and the unresolved issues brought up by the past.

Any settlement at the very least should include:

Due compensation for any lands or property lost by Palestinians, (in much the same way that european jews have been compensated for property appropriated by the nazi government and by other subsequent governments and organisations). This is assuming Palestinians will not be given the right to return to land long since developed by Israel.

Normalisation of relations between Arab nations and Israel

the return of the Golan Heights to Syria.

Appropriate sharing of water resources in the region.

What seems to be obvious is that a state comprising the west bank and Gaza, even including all of the pre '67 areas. Even going back to the partition lines of '48 does help. The only viable state is a state comprising Israel the west bank and Gaza to be inhabited equally by Jews and Palestinians. If this is going to happen then some things are going to have to change and 'Greater Israel/Palestine' will have to loose some of the trapping of Jewish state hood, not least the right of all Jews to 'return' to Israel.

You can't kick the Jews out, you can't kick the Palestinians out so they have to get along and orthodox/fundamentalist wackjobs on both sides are going to have to deal with it.

Ed (dali), Thursday, 11 September 2003 09:20 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't honestly think a multiracial secular Israel-Palestine is a goer at this stage, as there is no basis of mutual trust and confidence to imagine that the communities could credibly work joint institutions. A two-state setup based on the pre-1967 borders works as an interim basis. I reckon over time the two states would become more friendly and semi-merge organically with each other, with Nordic or Benelux integration as a model for how this would develop. I also think that in peace time Israel might become a less neurotic and racially based country.

Israel's development on a less ethnically driven course is more or less inevitable as the percentage of non-Jewish people living there rises due to immigration and demographic factors. You can't really talk about a "Jewish State" when a third of the population are not Jews.

btw Ed - top marks for mentioning water resources... this is the politically unexciting topic that is perhaps the key to the whole issue.

DV (dirtyvicar), Thursday, 11 September 2003 10:35 (twenty-two years ago)

It was the reason for seizing the Golan and for settling the eastern west bank was to protect Pumping stations on the Jordan

Israel also needs to heal its internal differences as well, since the 70s, or even the late 60s, the consensus that Israel was a secular state Jewish in character has been breaking down, largely because significant sections (ultra-)orthodox Jewish community is trying it's hardest to destroy this consensus and make the state more
Jewish in a religious sense rather than Jewish in a cultural/ethnic/national sense. One must not forget that the chain of events that got us here (i.e the destruction of the peace process) was started by a Jewish fundamentalist bullet in Yitzak Rabin's heart.

Admittedly most of my arguments for a unified state are from an unrealistically idealistic position but I do believe that the only way for true peace in the Levant is for the Jews to give up the idea of a singularly Jewish state in return for a peaceful and equal existence in the land they call there own.

Ed (dali), Thursday, 11 September 2003 10:46 (twenty-two years ago)

twenty-two years pass...

Seems to be the thread to drop this essay on Zionism's collaboration with the Nazis in the run up to the formation of Israel.

https://mouinrabbani.substack.com/p/zionists-nazis-and-the-holocaust

xyzzzz__, Wednesday, 15 April 2026 11:54 (one month ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.