| Submit your comments on this article |
| Middle East |
| Why one should oppose a second Palestinian-Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza - Part 19 of 23 |
| 2003-01-27 |
| This piece continues a series of which the first 18 parts were posted on September 8, 9, 11, 17, 20, 22, 23; October 7, 24, 28, 29; November 6, and 26; and December 5, and 13, 2002, and January 7, 10 and 21, 2003... Recapitulation: The first nine parts of this series dealt with arguments based on fundamentals and principles: the historical right of the Jewish people to a home in their ancestral land, which has had a Jewish population continuously for millenia; the international acceptance of the Balfour declaration and the British Mandate to ensure the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine; the fact that Israel is in possession of Yesha as a consequence of a defensive war; the argument that the current Arab population of Palestine consists mainly of immigrants who came to Palestine as a consequence of the development brought about by the Jewish pioneers since the 1880's; and the fact that the Arabs of Palestine have rejected numerous opportunities to establish a state by peaceful means, indicating that their real objective is to destroy Israel. The second group of nine parts dealt with arguments based on Middle East realities. The points made include the assessment that a sovereign Palestinian State would obviate Israelâs ability to defend herself; that such a state, by the admission of the Palestinian Arabs themselves, would not solve their grievances; that violence within and among Arab states has a long history, and adding another Arab state will not pacify the region; and the economic base of Yesha, as well as the water resources in the area, do not permit the creation of an additional, viable state. 19. Judea, Samaria and Gaza (âYeshaâ) are disputed territories, not âoccupied Arab landsâ, and the settlements are not âillegalâ. Even if a sovereign Palestinian-Arab state were to be created, it is incomprehensible that Jews be allowed to live in any European or North American city, but not in Yesha. One of the most spectacular triumphs of the Arab propaganda machine has been its ability to inject the Arab agenda and terminology into our life, to the point that such expressions as âoccupied Arab landsâ have become ubiquitous. In fact, Yesha is no more than one of many disputed territories around the globe and it must be seen in this light... The full article may be found at the link given below. |
| Posted by:Joseph Alexander Norland |
| #2 " Even if a sovereign Palestinian-Arab state were to be created, it is incomprehensible that Jews be allowed to live in any European or North American city, but not in Yesha. " Yeah but its quite comprehensible that only Palestinian citizens be allowed to live in a Pal state. How many of the yesha settlers are prepated to renounce israeli citizenship and take Palestinian citizenship? How many will renounce appeal to Israel and the IDF for protection when they have run ins with the the Pal authorities. The issue is a red herring. (oh, and by the way, settlements remaining in Yesha is not ruled out by the idea of a Pal state, unless you accept the Palestinian position on what the boundaries of such a state have to be. The Barak proposals would have left the majority of settlers in Isreal, and IIUC the current Sharon proposal would leave almost ALL settlers in Israel.) |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-01-27 11:31:42 |
| #1 The link for the full article is: http://israpundit.blogspot.com/2003_01_01_israpundit_archive.html#90237361 (IsraPundit). |
| Posted by: Joseph Alexander Norland 2003-01-27 10:34:05 |