An End to Israel’s Invisibility

[Shaktimaan]

NEARLY 63 years after the United Nations recognized the right of the Jewish people to independence in their homeland — and more than 62 years since Israel’s creation — the Palestinians are still denying the Jewish nature of the state. “Israel can name itself whatever it wants,” said the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, while, according to the newspaper Haaretz, his chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said that the Palestinian Authority will never recognize Israel as the Jewish state. Back in 1948, opposition to the legitimacy of a Jewish state ignited a war. Today it threatens peace.

Mr. Abbas and Mr. Erekat were responding to the call by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, enabling his government to consider extending the moratorium on West Bank construction. “Such a step by the Palestinian Authority would be a confidence-building measure,” Mr. Netanyahu explained, noting that Israel was not demanding recognition as a prerequisite for direct talks. It would “open a new horizon of hope as well as trust among broad parts of the Israeli public.”

Why should it matter whether the Palestinians or any other people recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people? Indeed, Israel never sought similar acknowledgment in its peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. Some analysts have suggested that Mr. Netanyahu is merely making a tactical demand that will block any chance for the peace they claim he does not really want.

Affirmation of Israel’s Jewishness, however, is the very foundation of peace, its DNA. Just as Israel recognizes the existence of a Palestinian people with an inalienable right to self-determination in its homeland, so, too, must the Palestinians accede to the Jewish people’s 3,000-year connection to our homeland and our right to sovereignty there. This mutual acceptance is essential if both peoples are to live side by side in two states in genuine and lasting peace.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/opinion/14oren.html?scp=1&sq=an%20end%20to%20israel%E2%80%99s%20invisibility&st=cse

[Recursion]

1. Bwah

Just as Israel recognizes the existence of a Palestinian people with an inalienable right to self-determination in its homeland

Sorry, I didn't realize this piece was satire until that sentence. Good one. There's plenty of people who deny the existence of "a Palestinian people" on this very board, let alone inside Israel.

[aranthus]

2. Uh huh.

So you think that the small minority who deny the existence of the Palestinians speak authoritatively for Israel, and the majority which does recognize the Palestiian people, including Ambassador Oren, are just chopped liver?

[Recursion]

4. When they stop letting that "small minority" dictate Israeli policy...

...they'll be more than chopped liver as far as this discussion goes. Until then...

[Tripmann]

3. "Today it threatens peace."

What a crock of shit.

The palestinian side have recognised israels right to exist and want israel to define its borders before it recognises its statehood proper.

The israeli side won't discuss palestinian statehood and are continuing to grab land which is supposed to form part of the palestinian state.

So, whos threatening the peace?

Pure propaganda falsehoods and bullshit.

[Recursion]

5. They're hoping to drown out Fatah's statement from the other day...

...which said if they're presented with borders they will recognize Israel as a Jewish state, a Chinese state, or whatever else anyone wants them to recognize it as.

[Poll_Blind]

6. A lugubrious plea of a love-note to the ignorant or the Abe Foxmans, nothing more.

I'm surprised he didn't provide an appropriately melancholy piece of klezmer clarinet to listen to while reading this editorial- the thing's all veneer and no wood.

Why he even bothered to gingerly touch on the Right of Return, albeit obliquely, is a mystery to me given the rest of his piece. Conscience or an editor injecting that there might be a little more to the reality of the situation? And speaking of the editor, they should be fired for entirely omitting the second page of Oren's piece where he would invariably have to address the fact that many of the American Jews reading the piece might not even qualify for recognition as Jews under the new Israeli conversion law.

A people yearning to be recognized, indeed!

Oren is just a shill for another right-wing Israeli government. His sentiments are superficial, maudlin and (worst of all, IMO) rely on another wheeling-out of the creaky Jewish Plight in order to cover for his right-wing government's absolute fucking fiasco of an administration.

PB

[azurnoir]

7. Israel prefers "invisibility" it refused this out of hand

This is the official translation of the Saudi-proposed Arab peace initiative adopted at the annual Arab League Summit in Beirut in 2002.

The Council of the League of Arab States at the Summit Level, at its 14th Ordinary Session,

- Reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extra-Ordinary Arab Summit that a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab Countries, to be achieved in accordance with International Legality, and which would require a comparable commitment on the part of the Israeli Government.

- Having listened to the statement made by His Royal Highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, the Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in which his Highness presented his Initiative, calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land for peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel.

- Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:

1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.

2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:

a. Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights to the lines of June 4, 1967 as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

b. Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

c. The acceptance of the establishment of a Sovereign Independent Palestinian State on the Palestinian territories occupied since the 4th of June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

3. Consequently, the Arab Countries affirm the following:

a. Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

b. Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.

5. Calls upon the Government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab Countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighborliness and provide future generations with security, stability, and prosperity.

6. Invites the International Community and all countries and Organizations to support this initiative.

7. Requests the Chairman of the Summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the Secretary General of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim States and the European Union.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1844214.stm

[whosinpower]

8. What does #4 mean?

4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.

What does this mean?

[azurnoir]

9. IMO it means that Palestinians only have power within their country

a·tri·ate (pā′trē āt′)

transitive verb patriated -·at′ed, patriating -·at′·ing
Cdn. to return or turn over full legislative powers, as of amendment, to (a constitution) that were formerly held by the government of another country: a term used in Canada to describe the action of taking over the power to amend the constitution from the British parliament in 1982

Origin: back-form. < repatriate

Related Forms:

* patriation pa′·tri·a′·tion noun

http://www.yourdictionary.com/patriation

[whosinpower]

10. Thank you

I should of done that....thank you for looking it up for me.