![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png)
Originally Posted by
Palatine
I responded to a very specific post that suggested Muslims in Jerusalem had lost their holy places after the 1967 annexation. Most people commenting on this tragedy are mindlessly aligning their views with their tribe. On the left - pro-Palestine. On the right - pro-Israel. Most of that is simplistic nonsense that adds nothing but sideline cheerleading for your favourite team. The only thing I added to this conversation was to add my personal experience of Jerusalem. That's it - I've never been to Gaza and my time in the West Bank was far too short to make any personal observation. But Jerusalem, I know, and what was characterised here was miles off the reality of being in that city.
One of the other simplistic views of the region is that there are two groups there - Muslim Palestinians and Jewish Israelis. The reality is that there are also Christian Palestinians, Israeli Arabs, Druze, Ultra-orthodox anti-Zionist Jews, Ultra-orthodox Zionist Jews (and most Israelis don't like the last two groups at all), Israeli peaceniks, Palestinians who recognise Israel's right to exist, Palestinians who are determined to drive every non-Muslim into the Mediterranean, Jewish settlers in the West Bank who want to drive Palestinians across the Jordan, and more.
My views on the Balfour Project are about as relevant as my views on the Plantation of Ulster.
If we want peace then what we have to deal with what is here and now, and I certainly don't agree with expelling Jews from the holy land. If you're starting point is that Israel should be destroyed because of a historic injustice done to the Arab population then the only path to that is an all-out war and genocidal clearance of the land. If your starting point is that Palestine needs to be razed to the ground, then you're also a genocidal warmonger. Unfortunately, there are far too many of these people - even if they are few in number there is enough of them to trigger what we've seen in the last few weeks.
What most of us should want, if we truly want peace, are two viable states living side by side not in fear of their security, with people going about their business going to work, fucking, marrying, having babies and dying of old age.
The problem the Israelis have always had is that they've rarely been able to negotiate across the table with an opponent that at least recognises that Israel exists and is going nowhere. They see and read what is written about them in Arabic media. They know that too many openly say that the Jews are subhuman and rats, and should be exterminated or expelled. There's no graffitti on the wall calling for a two-state solution. They've heard that message in the 1930's, and they didn't believe it. They believe it now, and they refuse to let it happen again. So what do they do - when they withdrew from Sinai, they get peace with Egypt. Great. But when they withdraw from Gaza, they get rockets. When they build walls in the West Bank, they get peace. Now tell me which country's leader would choose the "good" option that gets it people killed over the "bad" option that keeps its people safe. I'm not saying it's right, but I damn well know I'd be demanding if I were under the rockets. The Israelis have learned that they get peace when they're tough, and they killed when their weak. That's not an excuse and it certainly doesn't justify what asshole settlers are doing in the West Bank, or the over-reaction that is happening right now in Gaza (which plays right into the Iranian plan to scupper the Israeli-Saudi agreements). What is happening now from Israel is not just a strategic mistake but most importantly against international law and should be classified as a war crime. This doesn't mean that I don't think Israel has a right to exist. Maybe that's a hard thing for the armchair cheerleaders to comprehend.