Israel-Palestine, a binational state in the making

[Israeli]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is contemplating an important policy change on the Palestinian issue. From his 2009 Bar Ilan speech to the peace talks led by US Secretary of State John Kerry, the leader of the Israeli right has supported a two-state solution. The revisionist Zionist leader Zeev Jabotinsky surely turned in his grave, while Netanyahu's ideological partners in the Likud could hardly believe their ears. The US administration, not to mention the Palestinians, was also initially suspicious of his intensions.

Yet during recent secret talks with Kerry, Netanyahu showed surprising flexibility on the issue of the borders of a future Palestinian state. According to senior sources at the State Department, the Likud leader agreed that the borders would be based on the 1967 lines, with mutually agreed land swaps. Netanyahu indeed sought progress toward a two-state solution, although with unrealistic conditions in regard to the size of the settlement blocs and on the future of Jerusalem.

Officials who have the prime minister's ear today, however, speak of the two-state solution approach in the past tense. Netanyahu will, according to them, talk of a two-state solution at most as lip service to his more moderate coalition partners and in his shaky dialogue with Washington. The prime minister is expected to resume his focus on a defensive policy argument, presenting a dangerous "Hamas-stan" both in the Gaza Strip and in the West Bank. He will also ask the international community for a gradual demilitarization of Gaza and make the case for "Israel-only" supervision of the future demilitarization of the West Bank, which for all intents and purposes means the continuation of the occupation. Settlements will be expanded with less fanfare and more vigor.

Senior sources in the Likud close to the settler movement claim that they are developing concrete plans for the alternative to a two-state solution. Palestinian citizens will have citizenship in an autonomous Palestinian area, which will comprise 40-50% of the West Bank. Only 50,000 Palestinians living today in Area C will be offered Israeli citizenship. Israel, according to these right-wing political circles, will assist Palestinian autonomy to develop economically in what is called "economic peace." The prime minister is aware of these plans, yet in typical fashion, he will not adhere to them or to the two-state solution.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/08/israel-palestinians-binational-state-right-wing-netanyahu.html#ixzz3BOSTRQVo

[Israeli]

1. More :

There are several reasons for the return of the "good old Bibi": growing mistrust in Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as a partner; no lesser suspicion of the Barack Obama administration (so it is not difficult to guess who Netanyahu hopes will win the midterm congressional elections); and — perhaps the most important aspect of this undeclared policy change — the assumption around the prime minister of the eventuality, and even desirability, of early elections in 2015. That, in the Bibi camp, is the best way to secure him a third term. He now needs to reach out to his natural base on the right and balance the image of relative moderation that characterized his handling of the Gaza war.

Naturally, Netanyahu will not speak of a binational state, although that seems to be the direction his policies will take the country. The Palestinian leadership is well aware of this trajectory and never suspected anything else. In Ramallah as well, there is talk of a policy that leads to a binational state. It exists in the following circles: Fatah veteran leaders, who see no hope for a two-state solution; officials close to Abbas, who want to use the eventuality of a binational state as tactical pressure on Israel and the United States; and hard-liners in Fatah's young guard, who actually believe in such a vision and count on the Arab demographic edge.

This eventuality in Palestine is not ruled out by some and is preferred by others. Palestinian policy planning experts have begun to prepare for a binational state process. These plans focus on the share of authorities and powers between the Israeli and Palestinian parts of the binational state. They are consulting experts on international law as to how to ensure, through the international community, equal rights for Palestinian citizens. An anti-apartheid state campaign is envisioned, adopting the South African model to Palestine.

US officials are fully aware of these policy developments in Jerusalem and Ramallah. In the view of State Department officials, the trend toward a binational state is more possible and dangerous than ever. They do not think that a binational state with equal rights is at all realistic and therefore warn, like Kerry, of an Israeli apartheid state. This prospect would not only contradict President Obama's international human rights policy, but also jeopardize US interest in the region and in the world. US-Israeli relations would come under strong criticism from all the Arab countries as well as the European Union.

Is this prospect dangerous enough to prompt the US administration to engage in a serious peace process attempt to obtain a two-state solution? The answer is most probably the negative. At the very least, however, it will lead to more forceful communications from the Oval Office and State Department to convince the prime minister's office in Jerusalem and the Muqata in Ramallah to pursue policies that at least leave the door open to a two-state solution and refrain from unilateral acts to the contrary.

Ambassador Uri Savir has spent his professional life on the strategies of peacemaking in Israel. In 1996, he established the Peres Center for Peace, over which he presides today.

As director-general of the Foreign Ministry from 1993 to 1996, Savir served as Israel’s chief negotiator for the Oslo Accord, as a member of the Israeli Negotiations Delegation with Jordan and as head of the Negotiation Delegation with Syria. Once the head of the executive board of the global daily newspaper Metro International, Savir also established the Glocal Forum, and founded the Yala Young Leaders online Peace Movement.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/08/israel-palestinians-binational-state-right-wing-netanyahu.html#ixzz3BOULbnIi

[Israeli]

2. Israeli right-wing politician: 'Annex territories, grant Palestinians citizenship'

Israeli right-wing politician and former IDF general Efi Eitam has made remarks that few would have expected to hear from him.


Effi Eitam

Former IDF general and politician Efi Eitam is known for his extreme right-wing views and sharp tongue. From calling Arabs a “ticking bomb” to a “cancer,” Eitam has never shown much warmth for his neighbors.

Which is why it was surprising to read reports from the national religious website Srugim, quoting Eitam as saying the following remarks in a panel held last night to commemorate Berl Katznelson:

The State of Israel should annex Judea and Samaria and grant full citizenship to all Palestinians. Demography is not a numerical predestination, it is an expression of the joie de vivre of the nation. When a nation is happy, its number of children grows, that’s why I’m not scared of demography. Whoever can’t live with Arabs is not a partner of mine.
I trust the Arab public in Israel, it has proved itself. I have no fear of a bi-national state, the solution is not B-class citizens nor high fences. It is a simple and humane solution, Palestinians must be granted full rights and should vote for the Knesset. Whoever truly wants peace, should agree to accept more Arab citizens to his state, and whoever is part of the State of Israel whose borders need to be between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea for many reasons, needs to be a citizen with full rights and obligations.

Now, I’m not that naive to believe everything coming out of Eitam’s mouth. The bi-national state he talks about is probably not exactly what we think it is. But since there are more and more voices on the right talking about one state, it’s important to listen, find the nuances, and try to understand where these people really stand.

Is the right going through a major shift in ideology – or is this a different way of reaching the same target? My money’s on the latter, but… never say never?

http://972mag.com/israeli-right-wing-politician-annex-territories-grant-palestinians-citizenship/96102/

[Jefferson23]

3. Where do you think this man is coming from? n/t

[Israeli]

4. He is religious Right wing ....

very pro settler and very pro settlements ....for him its all about the land and God ...for that you should read this :

Lords of the Land: The War Over Israel's Settlements in the Occupied Territories

http://www.amazon.com/Lords-Land-Settlements-Territories-1967-2007/dp/1568584148

or you could read here : ( in fact you should read here ...all of it )

Will they destroy Israel?

By Jeffrey Goldberg
The New Yorker, May 31, 2004

http://www.jeffreygoldberg.net/articles/tny/a_reporter_at_large_among_the.php

I heard similar talk from Effie Eitam, a hard-edged former general who leads the National Religious Party, a coalition partner in Sharon’s government. Eitam, who is Sharon’s housing minister, said, “I don’t call these people animals. These are creatures who came out of the depths of darkness. It is not by chance that the State of Israel got the mission to pave the way for the rest of the world, to militarily get rid of these dark forces.” Eitam told me that he believes there are innocent men among the Palestinians, but that they are collectively guilty. “We will have to kill them all,” he said. “I know it’s not very diplomatic. I don’t mean all the Palestinians, but the ones with evil in their heads. Not only blood on their hands but evil in their heads. They are contaminating the hearts and minds of the next generation of Palestinians.”

Or here :

Eitam: Expel Palestinians, dismiss Arab MKs

During memorial ceremony for officer killed in Lebanon, right-wing MK says, 'we cannot be with all these Arabs, we'll have to expel the overwhelming majority of West Bank Arabs from here and remove Israeli Arabs from political system.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3302275,00.html


So ....as Ami Kaufman says ....." Is the right going through a major shift in ideology – or is this a different way of reaching the same target? My money’s on the latter ".....so is mine Jefferson.....anybody willing to bet otherwise ???

[azurnoir]

12. well my take away is it's in no small part about control - damage and otherwise

the glaring omission is there is no mention of the refugee population, especially those refugee's living outside of Palestine. I've read a number of things over the last couple of years that would indicate Israel's rightwing does not want any Palestinian refugees returning anywhere, not to Israel certainly but not to a Palestinian state either, as the resulting upswing in the Palestinian population is considered dangerous, so give the Palestinians that already live there the same equality that Palestinians with Israeli citizenship already 'enjoy' leave IDF in place and you've 'solved' the PR problems associated with the occupation and you have a close control over the 'enemy' population and the bothersome blowback from the Left can be more easily dismissed

[Israeli]

14. I think the correct phrase in English...

would be .... pulling the wool over someone's eyes azurnoir.

"" and the bothersome blowback from the Left can be more easily dismissed ""

This kind of " bothersome blowback " ???..... notice the date

Alarming Developments on the Ground

7/7/14

In the last few days, following the killing of the three Israeli teens, we witness alarming developments on the ground in settlements: Three new (serious) outposts were established and a new road to Givat Eitam outpost was paved, in addition to other several protest tents and other developments that the settlers put up in different places in the West Bank.

The settlers are taking advantage of the killing of the three teens in order to set facts on the ground that they wouldn't dare to do before. We don't know if they got a green light from the government (although such a green light could not have made the acts legal, short of planning procedures), however, those developments will be judged by the government's reaction.

If the government doesn’t evict them in the coming days, it will be much harder to remove them and they will stay and develop as settlements. The settlers might continue to seize the opportunity of the current political and security situation in order create more facts on the ground.

http://peacenow.org.il/eng/3-New-Outposts

[Israeli]

5. Unprecedented land confiscation of 4,000 dunams near Bethlehem

31/8/14

The Civil Administration declared 4,000 dunams (990 acres) as State Land near the settlement of Gva'ot west of Bethlehem. As far as we know, this declaration is unprecedented in its scope since the 1980's and can dramatically change the reality in the Gush Etzion and the Bethlehem area. For an explanation about state land declaration see here.

Gva'ot was established in 1984 as a Military Base between the Palestinian villages of Al Jab'a and Nahhalin. During the 90’s, the soldiers were replaced by Yeshiva students that occupied the 30 caravans on site, and in 1998 the site was included within the official Municipal Borders of the settlement of Alon Shvut, which is located 3 km away. Recently, some 10 families moved in Gvaot and established an education institution on site.

In the past, Peace Now has exposed that the Ministry of Housing had an initial plan to build 15,000 units to establish a city in Gvaot. This plan was never promoted, however smaller plans have been approved for promotion by the Minister of Defense to build 523 units (plan no. 418/2/1) and another 61 units (plan no. 418/2/2) on lands that have been declared as State Lands in the past.

The new declaration will allow to expand the settlement even further, it is possible that the current announcement will connect Gva'ot to the Green Line.

Peace Now views this declaration as proof that Prime Minister Netanyahu does not aspire for a new 'Diplomatic Horizon' but rather, he continues to put obstacles to the two state vision and promote a one state solution. Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ya'alon are directly responsible to the declaration, which cannot pass without their approval. By declaring another 4,000 dunams as state land, the Israeli government stabs President Abbas and the moderate Palestinian forces in the back, proving again that violent delivers Israeli concessions while nonviolence results in settlement expansion.



Source : http://peacenow.org.il/eng/GvaotDecleration

[Israeli]

6. Israel recognizes 4,000 dunam in Gush Etzion as state land

Settlement Gva'ot now declared part of Israeli land in West Bank; Peace Now: 'This is a message to the Palestinians that Israel would negotiate with Hamas and at the same time destroy chance to reach true accord with moderates.'

Elior Levy, Itay Blumental Published: 08.31.14, 11:43 / Israel News

Gva'ot, located at the western part of Gush Etzion, is officially considered a neighborhood of the settlement Alon Shvut. In actuality, it operates as a separate community a few kilometers away.

Gva'ot has not been officially recognized by Israel since it was built without zoning permits, so in order to start the process of declaring it a recognized community, the state had to delineate the boundaries of the community.

Most of the territories in the West Bank are divided to three categories: private land (whose ownership is registered with the state), state land (areas that haven't been worked and are not listed in the with the Israel Land Authority that are considered state-owned), and lands under survey or "admot seker" (land that has reverted to the state due to lack of use for 10 years and lack of registered ownership, but which has yet to be declared as such).

These surveys, which in many cases take years to carry out, aim to determine the ownership of the land based on several criteria. In most cases, the declaration of status is delayed because the government has yet to make the decision on the issue.

Gva'ot is located in the heart of Gush Eztion, near the hill on which the men of the Haganah Convoy of 35 were killed during Israel's War of Independence in 1948. In order to create territorial continuity from the communities to the Green Line, the government decided in 1982 to build a Nahal settlement in Gva'ot.

In June of 2014, the three Israeli teenagers - Gil-Ad Shaer, Naftali Frenkel and Eyal Yifrach - were kidnapped and murdered in that area.

"The announcement paves the way to establishing the new city of Gva'ot," the head of the Gush Etzion Regional Council, Davidi Perl, said. "The murderers of the three teens wanted to plant fear in our hearts and disrupt our daily lives, and our answer is strengthening the settlements and constructing both inside the main blocs and outside of them."

The deputy director of the Yesha Council of Settlers Yigal Dilmoni called the decision on Gva'ot "an appropriate Zionist response to the terror attacks on Israel."

He also called on the government to go further in developing settlements in the West Bank.

"The Defense Ministry needs to authorize the construction of hundreds of housing units in the territory and the building of additional neighborhoods throughout Judea and Samaria. In the past, declaring lands as state lands was the routine work of the Israeli Civil Administration and not a one-off thing. We have to go back to that as soon as possible."

Peace Now director Yariv Oppenheimer, on the other hand, said the move was "a knife to the back of Abbas and it is sending a message to the Palestinian people that the government of Israel is negotiating with Hamas, while at the same time destroying any chance to reach a true accord with the moderate people."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4565930,00.html

[oberliner]

7. We must stand up for the two-state solution

It is the only way forward.

[Israeli]

8. Netanyahu misreads Obama on settlements

The Israeli right is overjoyed at the opportunity to gloat over the weakness of US President Barack Obama. The Yesha Council, the settlement umbrella organization, says that instead of dabbling with a handful of houses built by Jews in their historical homeland and trying to intimidate Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Obama would be better demonstrating resolve vis-a-vis Russian President Vladimir Putin, and get him out of the Crimean Peninsula.

This insignificant "triumph" blinds their eyes from viewing the Russian-Ukrainian conflict as yet another warning signal, of what is likely to happen to a binational state whose peoples cannot free themselves from baggage of the past.

In an interview given by Obama to Bloomberg View columnist Jeffrey Goldberg (March 2), Obama acknowledged that, in fact, there was a limit to the power of the man who bears the title "leader of the free world." The United States is no longer willing to jump head first into every gory arena in the world, including the Middle East. That is the meaning of this key sentence in the interview: “If you see no peace deal and continued aggressive settlement construction,” Obama said, “If Palestinians come to believe that the possibility of a contiguous sovereign Palestinian state is no longer within reach, then our ability to manage the international fallout is going to be limited.”

To remove any doubt regarding his meaning, Obama added, “We had to stand up in the Security Council in ways that 20 years ago would have involved far more European support, far more support from other parts of the world when it comes to Israel’s position.” This distinction is most probably connected to what Meretz Party leader Zehava Gal-On heard from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on March 3. Abbas warned the Israeli guest that failure of US Secretary of State John Kerry to cobble together a framework agreement for a permanent agreement, and continued building in the settlement, will leave him with no choice but to turn to the United Nations institutions.

Obama’s words were geared to get a message across to Netanyahu: the US president is sick and tired of fighting on Netanyahu’s behalf vis-a-vis the Europeans and automatically vetoing their proposals condemning the settlements. An Israeli source met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and said that the German friend — considered Israel's defensive wall within Europe — told him that Netanyahu's settlement policy evokes great skepticism in her as to the sincerity of his peace policy.

In his interview with Goldberg, Obama rejected the criticism hurled at Kerry by Israeli senior officials after the secretary of state warned of intensification of the boycott against Israel. Israel has become more isolated internationally, Obama said, adding that Kerry ''has been simply stating what observers inside of Israel and outside of Israel recognize.'' Like Kerry, Obama also drew a straight line between the boycott and the settlements. He noted that recent years have seen “more aggressive building in the settlements.”

Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) published its findings for 2013 several hours before Netanyahu’s meeting with Obama. The CBS noted that 2,534 housing units began construction in the settlements (in 2013), an increase of 123% when compared to the year before, and a record number for the recent decade. The data does not include accelerated construction in the outposts.

In a speech he delivered on March 4 to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Netanyahu tried to downplay the harshness of the boycott that is spreading mainly in the European continent. He consoled himself with the long arms extended by Israel’s technological branch to Asia and Latin America.

In addition, Netanyahu designated the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement as a label that should be treated “exactly as we treat any anti-Semite or bigot.” Netanyahu encouraged the audience to boycott the boycotters, arguing that BDS doesn’t seek a solution with two states, but to eliminate the State of Israel. Thus, he asked to untie the knot created by Obama and Kerry between deepening of the occupation and intensification of sanctions against Israel.

Netanyahu also waxed enthusiastic over the profits that Israel could reap over a peace agreement with the Palestinians, first and foremost establishing formal ties between Israel and leading countries in the Arab world. “Many Arab leaders — and believe me, this is a fact, not a hypothesis, it's a fact — many Arab leaders today already realize that Israel is not their enemy, that peace with the Palestinians would turn our relations with them and with many Arab countries into open and thriving relationships,” Netanyahu said.

However, only a few minutes earlier during the opening of the speech, Netanyahu talked about “Jerusalem, the eternal, undivided capital of Israel and the Jewish people.” How can this announcement be reconciled with the peace declarations of the prime minister? Is there even one Palestinian leader who would sign a permanent agreement with Israel that does not give Palestine sovereignty over East Jerusalem, and provides special arrangements regarding the Old City? Is there one Arab leader who does not view the construction of new Jewish neighborhoods in the Holy Basin as a slap in the face, vis-a-vis the peace initiative of the Arab League?

In the first section of his speech, before condemning the boycott against Israel and calling it a “farce” destined for failure, Netanyahu called for intensifying the sanctions against Iran. He expressed his confidence that this was the most efficacious method for stopping the Iranian nuclear plan. “The greater the pressure on Iran and more credible the threat of force on Iran, the smaller the chance that force will ever have to be used,” Netanyahu ruled. But as Ambassador Seyed Hossein Mousavian wrote on March 3 in Al-Monitor's Iran Pulse, Netanyahu’s words on this issue, as on the settlement issue, have consigned Israel to isolation.

As was written in this column this week, even AIPAC leaders who greeted Netanyahu with loud applause retracted their support for the boycott law. All six members of the forum favor holding negotiations with Iran, preferring to conduct talks in a positive atmosphere and not under threats.

How strange it is that an experienced and astute diplomat such as Netanyahu preaches on behalf of a boycott against a nation that presumably violates international law, without taking into account that by doing so this weapon may become a double-edged sword. Is he taking into account that by doing so he grants legitimacy to those who feel that settlements and occupation violate international law, to use the same weapon against Israel?

Is Netanyahu really unaware that Obama has neither the power nor the will to squander his remaining prestige and his country’s international interests on behalf of a government that portrays the United States as a paper tiger to the entire world?

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/03/israel-aipac-boycott-settlement-constructions-iran-obama.html

[Ken Burch]

18. Then denounce Netanyahu and all that he's done. n/t.

[King_David]

9. Speaking selfishly ,

A binational state will mean the end of the vibrant open Gay life enjoyed in Israel.

It will mean an end to all the equal rights gained by the LGBT community and no reason to believe that as far as the LGBT are concerned it will become just as primitive and backward as Israel's neighbors are .

No thanks .

[Israeli]

10. Probably King_David....

...but not in the sense that you have misinterpreted or misunderstood, intentionally or otherwise , the above posts .

Its a Right wing religious settler binational state that we are headed towards .

BTW ..... two links for you ....that you really should read :

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.612954

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.613224

[King_David]

11. They behind paywalls

I'll have to read them at my Dads later tonight he has a Haaretz subscription .

[Israeli]

15. So ...

did you read them ....and all the way thru King_David ?

I could post them in full for you if you like .

[azurnoir]

13. "A binational state will mean the end of the vibrant open Gay life enjoyed in Israel." How so?

are you claiming that Palestinians will take over the Israeli government and change existing laws? Seem rather far fetched to me as under the outline of a rightist bi-national Palestinian will still be a highly controlled minority, not to mention your assumptions that the laws would be changed in the first place

[Israeli]

17. Looks like he is ignoring both of us azurnoir....

So.. if I'm not going to get an opinion or even a responce from him for the two links I gave him to read ...then lets just publish and be damned :

Israel is my home, but I can no longer live here

Israel is not worth the price it is exacting from us. There is a nationalist-religious-ultra-Orthodox majority, and our lifestyle will not survive.

I need to leave the country. My Israeliness and my Jewishness are not essential to my identity. I hold a foreign passport, not just technically, but psychologically. Israel is my home but it is not correct to say I have no other.

Like every cosmopolitan person, strictly secular and with a universalist worldview, well-steeped in the global culture and speaking fluent English, I can have many other homes. There are quite a few countries where I could settle, make a living and feel comfortable. Like anyone who believes strongly that he lives only once and has a right to fulfill his personal desires and flourish with a minimum of sacrifice required for the country where he pays taxes and receives educational, welfare and other services, it is clear to me that Israel offers me a bum deal and there are far better deals out there in the world. Like any parents who believe that their children have no patriotic duty toward the Israel of today, and they do not need to risk their lives or die serving it, I have no doubt that I am doing them wrong by raising them here.

I’m not talking about morality. I don’t want this article to be yet another empty debate about the occupation. I am talking in a practical and sober language. I am trying to be realistic, like Pensioner Affairs Minister Uri Orbach. He claims that we must concede that in our lifetime and that of our children, every few years we will have to wage a war in which civilians will be killed too. He is right. These are the facts of our lives. Missiles will continue to fall on us, because of settlers like him and because of extremist Arab groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Islamic State.

My fate and the fate of my children will be determined here by people who have a God whom they talk to and in whose name they act. I think they are crazy. What are the alternatives? The racist forces of Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman? The empty words of Yair Lapid? The useless pessimism of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? For them, and for their voters, to be a Jew living in Israel is the most important thing, and it’s worth dying for. And they shape our lives according to that principle. They live at Yad Vashem.

I belong to a dying breed in Israel. I can’t influence the situation. I have no interest in devoting myself to the struggle against the occupation. I believe that it is useless. There will be no compromise. No Palestinian state will be established, and a binational state will be hell.

I watch Channel 2, listen to Army Radio, read the website Walla and the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth – and feel like I don’t belong; that there’s nothing for me here, not even in the Tel Aviv bubble. I don’t want to live in a bubble, certainly not one that’s protected by an Iron Dome.

If you identify with me you will certainly admit that you will encourage your children to seek their future elsewhere in the world, for the sake of their personal security, psychological and economic wellbeing. Israel is not worth the price it is exacting from us. There is a nationalist-religious-ultra-Orthodox majority, and our lifestyle will not survive in our homeland. We have a much better chance of maintaining it elsewhere. That’s the truth.

I cannot justify to my children continuing to live here. Israel is a dangerous place, which takes much more than it gives, for reasons that I do not accept. From my perspective, what goes for Tel Aviv goes for the communities on the Gaza border: You cannot live a good life here. You can die here, you can take shelter or you can simply leave.

Source : http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.613224

[Ken Burch]

19. Then speak out for a REAL two-state solution

which would mean that the ENTIRE West Bank would be Palestine...with no IDF presence...and no Israeli control of the water supply...AND direct air service between Palestine and the rest of the world(like every other country in the world has), AND with a guarantee that the Israeli government will not revoke Palestinian sovereignty any time it feels like it.

If you don't want gays to be oppressed in Israel, you have an obligation to be against the oppression of Palestinians BY Israel. Your freedom isn't any more precious than theirs is. They are human beings too.

[Israeli]

16. UK, France condemn Israeli decision to appropriate West Bank land

Following US rebuke of Netanyahu administration's move to claim 400 hectares in Gush Etzion, European powers warn 'it will do serious damage to Israel in international arena.'

Reuters Published: 09.01.14, 17:17 / Israel News

The UK and France condemned on Monday an Israeli government decision to appropriate 400 hectares of land near Gush Etzion in the West Bank. Late on Sunday night, the US rebuked Israel, calling the move "counter-productive" to efforts to achieve a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians and urging Jerusalem to reverse the decision.

The British government said on Monday it deplored an Israeli decision to appropriate a large swath of land inside the occupied West Bank, saying the move would seriously damage Israel's international reputation.

On Sunday, Israel announced the appropriation of land in the Etzion Jewish settlement bloc near Bethlehem, a move which an anti-settlement group said was the biggest such claim in 30 years.

Some 988 acres in the Gush Etzion settlement bloc near Bethlehem were declared "state land, on the instructions of the political echelon" by the military-run Civil Administration on Sunday.

"The UK deplores the Israeli government's expropriation of 988 acres (1.54 square miles) of land around the settlement of Etzion," British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said in a statement which echoed US calls to reverse the decision.

"This is a particularly ill-judged decision that comes at a time when the priority must be to build on the ceasefire in Gaza. It will do serious damage to Israel's standing in the international community."

France also rebuked the Israeli announcement on Monday. Paris "condemns" and "calls on the Israeli authorities to reconsider their decision," said spokesman Romain Nadal Quai d'Orsay.

The notice published on Sunday by the Israeli military gave no reason for the land appropriation decision, while Israeli media reported the move was in response to the kidnapping and murder of the three Israeli teens.

Tensions stoked by the kidnapping quickly spread to Israel's border with Gaza, which is controlled by Hamas, and the two sides engaged in a seven-week war that ended on Tuesday with an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire.

Peace Now, which opposes Israeli settlement activities in the West Bank, territory the Palestinians seek for a state, said the appropriation was meant to turn a site where 10 families now live adjacent to a Jewish seminary into a permanent settlement.

Construction of a major settlement at the location, known as "Gva'ot", has been mooted by Israel since 2000. Last year, the government invited bids for the building of 1,000 housing units at the site.

Some 500,000 Israelis live among 2.4 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4566459,00.html

[Israeli]

20. It's time for a diagnosis: Israel's settlement disease is terminal

Now it's official: the settlements are a punishment. A collective one, of the sort considered a war crime under international law.

By Gideon Levy

We should be grateful to the Netanyahu government for its straightforwardness. It determined this week that the settlements are a punishment – from now on, it’s official.

We should also ask the same government to order the cessation of all investigations, real and fabricated, of “price tag” attacks, because then the nationalization of roughly 4,000 dunams of land belonging to five Palestinian villages, in response to the murder of the three teenagers, is a price tag that is much heavier (and a greater crime) than all the defamatory graffiti, burned mosques and slashed tires. It is also a clear case of collective punishment, of the sort that is considered a war crime under international law.

So leave the investigations of trifling incidents alone. Leave the shrieks over the appropriations alone too; they will not change anything. The battle has been decided. The settlers have won. The settlements have accomplished their goal. The two-state solution is dead. Anyone who does not believe that should go to Gush Etzion.

It is not clear when or how Gush Etzion became a “consensus.” Suddenly – like the man in the old song made famous by Shlomo Artzi, who got up in the morning feeling like he was a nation – Gush Etzion arose and felt it was a national consensus.

Everyone is in agreement that it has been agreed upon; Gush Etzion from time immemorial. And it is not the only bloc that is agreed upon; so are the Jordan Valley and Ma’aleh Adumim, with its terrifying and hilly area, and Ariel goes without saying. Look at the map and you will realize how the supposed Palestinian state-to-be was put to death. From what remains it might be possible to establish another amusement park, “Mini-Palestine,” but no more than that.

The 4,000 dunams that have been stolen, something more than 1,000 dunams for each murdered Israeli teenager, have not slept much. It is true that this is territory that falls under the jurisdiction of Gvaot, but who’s counting?

What is there to count anymore, when within a year or two the hills will become Gvaot, another (Jewish) city in occupied Palestine with thousands of pioneering, principled and Zionist settler families, with a community center built by the national lottery and a swimming pool, boarding schools for girls and yeshivas, all on stolen land. The euphemistic term is “state-owned land,” deep in the bosom of the warm and pleasant consensus, and no country on earth recognizes it, nor can a single criterion of justice tolerate it.

Gush Etzion of the consensus was established after the 1967 war as the mother of all Israeli acts of recognition of the right of return. Not the Palestinian right of return, of course, only the Jewish one.

Land that had been conquered in 1948 was returned to its rightful owners, whose descendants returned en masse to their stolen land. How very just. It is true that the current area of Gush Etzion is seven times larger than the original, but who’s counting that either? The main thing is that the children have returned to their borders and the right of return was granted, and generously.

The right of return of 650,000 Palestinian refugees who lost their world in 1948 must not even be mentioned. But a handful of Gush Etzion’s offspring is allowed to return. Returning to Ein Tzurim, Kfar Etzion and Masu’ot Yitzhak is a matter of right; returning to the adjacent villages of Zakaria, Ajur or Beit Natif is heresy. That, after all, is Israeli justice, which did not even seek out a fig leaf for itself in Gush Etzion.

But Gush Etzion did not become just another abandoned district of deprivation and dispossession. It became a consensus. Why? Because. Because that is what the settlers said, what the politicians decided, what was written in the newspapers and what was broadcast on television. The Israelis were never asked, but they all know already that everyone agrees because that is what they were told. Ibei Hanahal, Ma’aleh Amos and Ma’aleh Rehavam — whoever heard of them?

Twenty thousand settlers, 20 communities, not including Efrat, which is independent – and see, we have returned to Alon Shvut, to Tekoa, to Bat Ayin. The Green Line? A tired old joke. Now comes the retaliatory action of the government of the Bar-Ilan speech to wipe it off the map once and for all (as if that did not happen long ago).

The Israelis who shout for the two-state solution say in the same breath that the settlement blocs belong to us. And they do – they are our disease, our terminal disease, which somehow remains to be diagnosed.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.613988