Advertising

  • Advertise here

Blog Awards


  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogrunnerupgroup

  • Sablogrunneruppost

  • JIB

Miscellaneous

« Unhelpful South Africa Off to Annapolis | Main | A Failed Diplomacy? »

November 25, 2007

Comments

The Blacklisted Dictator

"Regular readers may remember that Saliem was forced to cancel his
'coexistence' speaking tour to South Africa last year following an
intimidation campaign launched by the Palestine Solidarity Committee
(PSC)."
New readers to this blog should note that Na'eem Jeenah who is
spokesperson for The PSC is also actually the Director of The Freedom
of Expression Institute (FXI) in South Africa. However, The FXI has
supported Prof Adam Habib in his attempt to get a visa for The US (
Habib had been invited to speak in the US and The FXI claim that he
has been excluded for "ideological" reasons).
Clear evidence that The FXI sees freedom of expression as something
that must be manipulated.

Mike

I have a couple of problems with that statement. I understand it is a comprise document and for that it should be lauded but ... I don’t like the premise that there should be no Jewish settlement in Palestine. Can you imagine if we had said there should be no Arab villages in Israel? There needs to be an understanding that certain areas of the West bank are holy to Jews. For this reason, some way needs to be found for Jews who wish to live there to be able to do so. If they adhere to the laws of Palestine, I don’t see why they should not. In numerous colonial disputes around the group the settler have been give the option of becoming equal citizens of the newly independent state. So much more so this should be case in Palestine given the historical Jewish connection to that land.

I also think it falls into the same trap as Oslo. Peace is much more complex than Palestinian independence. The lives of ordinary Palestinians need to improve. They need a sustainable economy, democratic institutions and social services. This takes years. i prefer the idea of separating the agreement from the implementation. So while the final status deal can be negotiated now upfront, its implementation needs to be conditional on changes on the ground. I am not taking about the usual 30 days of quite. I am thinking more along the lines of development benchmarks.

Steve

You quite right.

Jews should be allowed to stay, but perhaps not in the framework of existing settlements. I.e. they become Jewish villages but not Israeli settlements with Israeli sovereignty.

Because that requires security - Israeli only roads, checkpoints and the persistence of the occupation.

The problem is that they said 'evacuation' - so I agree with you.

The only solution then is, as you say, separation of the deal from the implementation, whereby we see real signs that Jews can one day live there without the IDF protection. I don't see that ever happening actually. But it really is the way to go.


Another problem here where I slipped up is that the evacuation within their borders term seems to preclude our existence in Hebron. But perhaps it allows there will be a small Israeli bantustan within Hebron - i.e. Jews living inside Israeli and not Palestinian borders.

Still, noting that it came from civil society its closer to what we can accept than we from anything the Palestinians have said before. And its mountains away from what the Palestinian politicians will demand.

Hillel

I have to agree with Mike, if Israeli Arabs are to be treated as citizens in Israel then "palestine" must treat all it's citizens equally as well. This includes allowing citizenship for Jews who wish to live there and providing them with adequate measures for their personal security.

Sadly though, I think we all know that the "palestinians" have no intention whatsoever of allowing any Jews to live on any land within their control. Certainly the other 22-odd Muslim Arab states have done nothing of the sort (sorry Saeb to burst your bubble about states not having religions) and therefore there is no reason to suspect that Abu Mazen, in particular given his power base, political positioning and historical revisionism is likely to somehow buck the trend.

In consequence then, by pretending that Annapolis is anything other than a farce, and by pretending that the document above is anything other than capitulating to a mortal enemy is suicidal.

Certainly in theory Palestinians are entitled to land, human rights etc. but practically sustainably delivering them these things (as it's quite clear they can't achieve them for themselves) will not be attained with a head-in-the-sand strategy and cow-towing to a feeble-minded rose-tinted glasses "imagine-all-the-people" left thinking dumb-teliggentsia who insist on assuming everyone else buy into their culture and dreams.

Not everyone views the world as a place to revert to a perpetual state of childhood, inane games and endless entertainment - chemical and otherwise. Until the European driven left-thinking populace realises that their efforts to impose their culture of immaturity is as destructive as their previous efforts to colonise they will continue to support strategies based on their dreams.

Olmert's campaign to divide Jerusalem resulted in numerous Arab neighbourhoods making an effort to be able to stay within the control of the evil zionist enterprise rather than become controlled by their brothers in the PA. Not recognising this as a serious wake-up call as to the desirability of PA/Hamas control over anything other than their own homes is nothing short of delusional myopia.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this Blog


Contact Us


  • Email_1

Events & Lectures

  • Advertise your event or lecture here

News Feed



Comments Disclaimer

  • Comments on this site are the views and opinions of the persons who write the comments and do not reflect the views of the authors of this blog. Comments are often left unmoderated. Should you feel that you have been personally slandered in the comments, please let us know and we will remove the offensive comment.