Should Palestine be granted statehood?

[nursebenjamin]

Should Palestine be granted statehood? Why does Obama oppose Palestine statehood at this time, all the while supporting self determination in other Arab countries? Why are U.S. Republicans rejecting aid to Palestinians, even though Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, supports sending such aid which, among other goals, is intended to build an economically viable, politically moderate Palestinian state. Should the international community oppose Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank? Do such settlement expansions make "direct negotiations" between Israelis and Palestinians impossible? Should any Resolution be delayed until the West Bank is sufficiently populated by Israelis so that their presence is irreversible? Can the 4.6 million Palestinian refugees now living abroad[1] ever be allowed to return to Israel? Does the American right-wing secretly hope that negotiations between Israel and Palestinian fail, with war and Armageddon being the ultimate goal? What role does religion play in the Mid-East peace process?

[Goat]

Should Palestine be granted statehood? Why does Obama oppose Palestine statehood at this time, all the while supporting self determination in other Arab countries? Why are U.S. Republicans rejecting aid to Palestinians, even though Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, supports sending such aid which, among other goals, is intended to build an economically viable, politically moderate Palestinian state. Should the international community oppose Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank? Do such settlement expansions make "direct negotiations" between Israelis and Palestinians impossible? Should any Resolution be delayed until the West Bank is sufficiently populated by Israelis so that their presence is irreversible? Can the 4.6 million Palestinian refugees now living abroad[1] ever be allowed to return to Israel? Does the American right-wing secretly hope that negotiations between Israel and Palestinian fail, with war and Armageddon being the ultimate goal? What role does religion play in the Mid-East peace process?

I personally would love to see a separate and independent Palestinian state. The main point that is causing a lot of problems with that is the fact that Hamas, a major player in the potential state , has the destruction of the State of Israel in their charter, and refuse to remove it.

That makes it politically impossible for Israel to support a Palestinian state at this time. It's hard to hold out an olive branch to someone who is very verbosely declaring your destruction. (That, and the series of suicide bombers they try sending over to Israel, and the rockets that get launched into Israel).

[Darias]

Should Palestine be granted statehood? Why does Obama oppose Palestine statehood at this time, all the while supporting self determination in other Arab countries? Why are U.S. Republicans rejecting aid to Palestinians, even though Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, supports sending such aid which, among other goals, is intended to build an economically viable, politically moderate Palestinian state. Should the international community oppose Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank? Do such settlement expansions make "direct negotiations" between Israelis and Palestinians impossible? Should any Resolution be delayed until the West Bank is sufficiently populated by Israelis so that their presence is irreversible? Can the 4.6 million Palestinian refugees now living abroad[1] ever be allowed to return to Israel? Does the American right-wing secretly hope that negotiations between Israel and Palestinian fail, with war and Armageddon being the ultimate goal? What role does religion play in the Mid-East peace process?

I personally would love to see a separate and independent Palestinian state. The main point that is causing a lot of problems with that is the fact that Hamas, a major player in the potential state , has the destruction of the State of Israel in their charter, and refuse to remove it.

That makes it politically impossible for Israel to support a Palestinian state at this time. It's hard to hold out an olive branch to someone who is very verbosely declaring your destruction. (That, and the series of suicide bombers they try sending over to Israel, and the rockets that get launched into Israel).

HAMAS shouldn't be confused with the Palestinian National Authority. Yes HAMAS is a political entity which retains control over the Gaza Strip, but HAMAS isn't appealing to the UN, the PNA is.

The PNA does recognize Israel, and while HAMAS is a terrorist organization -- and while they do deny the legitimacy of the Israeli State in their own charter, it does not mean that HAMAS can't be reasoned with -- not that they have a say in the new potential Palestinian State anyways.

The Hamas movement is ready to recognize agreements signed with Israel, and in fact recognize Israel, but only within the '67 borders, senior Hamas member Khaled Suleiman said Wednesday.


According to Suleiman, the movement will be ready to accept a Palestinian state inside the '67 borders and will not operate to thwart diplomatic negotiations held by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.


In a Ramallah conference, the Hamas faction spokesman in the Palestinian Legislative Council said that "the Palestinian government is unauthorized according to the Palestinian constitution to negotiate with Israel, but does not oppose a possibility that Abbas will do so."


"All the government can do is reach a calm, and we, Hamas, are committed to a calm up to this moment," he added.
_____
SOURCE

These guys aside, the PNA is the group which legitimately represent the Palestinian people as whole. They are the ones appealing to the UN... and they are appealing to the UN for statehood, just like the Israel did, simply because they feel that decades of failed peace-talks with Israel have produced nothing -- and have served only to breed protests and violence.

Israel has refused to address the refugee matter. They also refuse the idea of allowing East Jerusalem to be part of a Palestinian State capital. They also continue to build settlements on Palestinian land -- all of which fuels protests and violence.

HAMAS got elected to power in Gaza precisely because people believed that they were responsible for getting Israel to abandon its occupation of Gaza -- whereas the PNA and all the decades of peace talks with Israel were blamed for the status quo -- many Palestinians began to believe that violence was the only answer because it gave them their land where peacetalks had failed to do so.

Despite this, a majority of Palestinians who voted for HAMAS do actually support a peace with the Israeli State.

Still, the legitimate representatives of Palestinians are not HAMAS, but the PNA.

The PNA isn't declaring Israel's destruction. They already recognize Israel -- they simply want a nation for their people -- with the borders that the UN said they could have.


And we can blame the failed peace process on HAMAS and terrorists all day long, but if you think that nearly a decade of Israel's overpowered retaliatory strikes (Palestinian dead three times as many as Israeli dead) -- or the decades of failed peace negotiations in which Israel offered Palestinians unfair deals -- "our terms or nothing" has nothing to do with the conflict ---- well you're only kidding yourself.

Now that the PNA is pursuing a peaceful attempt to statehood -- something which would ultimately help stop protests and violence by giving an occupied people rights and a national home -- America and Israel opposes it. Half of the time many Americans oppose Palestinians' their right to exist -- "just give all the land to Israel."

Israel ultimately is not interested in negotiating with the PNA. Sure they want HAMAS to stop and they want everyone to settle down and be happy, but Israel also wants to maintain control over all of Jerusalem and to continue to build settlements on land that is not theirs. If Israel does want a neighboring state, it would be one which conforms to their terms only -- one that has no authority over any part of Jerusalem -- one that is accommodating to existing illegal settlements in the occupied territories -- one that is completely demilitarized -- etc, etc.

That's just Israel's national interests as of now. Sure Israelis might have different opinions but then again your average joe has no say in what the government does.

[Goat]

Should Palestine be granted statehood? Why does Obama oppose Palestine statehood at this time, all the while supporting self determination in other Arab countries? Why are U.S. Republicans rejecting aid to Palestinians, even though Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, supports sending such aid which, among other goals, is intended to build an economically viable, politically moderate Palestinian state. Should the international community oppose Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank? Do such settlement expansions make "direct negotiations" between Israelis and Palestinians impossible? Should any Resolution be delayed until the West Bank is sufficiently populated by Israelis so that their presence is irreversible? Can the 4.6 million Palestinian refugees now living abroad[1] ever be allowed to return to Israel? Does the American right-wing secretly hope that negotiations between Israel and Palestinian fail, with war and Armageddon being the ultimate goal? What role does religion play in the Mid-East peace process?

I personally would love to see a separate and independent Palestinian state. The main point that is causing a lot of problems with that is the fact that Hamas, a major player in the potential state , has the destruction of the State of Israel in their charter, and refuse to remove it.

That makes it politically impossible for Israel to support a Palestinian state at this time. It's hard to hold out an olive branch to someone who is very verbosely declaring your destruction. (That, and the series of suicide bombers they try sending over to Israel, and the rockets that get launched into Israel).

HAMAS shouldn't be confused with the Palestinian National Authority. Yes HAMAS is a political entity which retains control over the Gaza Strip, but HAMAS isn't appealing to the UN, the PNA is.

The PNA does recognize Israel, and while HAMAS is a terrorist organization -- and while they do deny the legitimacy of the Israeli State in their own charter, it does not mean that HAMAS can't be reasoned with -- not that they have a say in the new potential Palestinian State anyways.

The Hamas movement is ready to recognize agreements signed with Israel, and in fact recognize Israel, but only within the '67 borders, senior Hamas member Khaled Suleiman said Wednesday.


According to Suleiman, the movement will be ready to accept a Palestinian state inside the '67 borders and will not operate to thwart diplomatic negotiations held by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.


In a Ramallah conference, the Hamas faction spokesman in the Palestinian Legislative Council said that "the Palestinian government is unauthorized according to the Palestinian constitution to negotiate with Israel, but does not oppose a possibility that Abbas will do so."


"All the government can do is reach a calm, and we, Hamas, are committed to a calm up to this moment," he added.
_____
SOURCE

These guys aside, the PNA is the group which legitimately represent the Palestinian people as whole. They are the ones appealing to the UN... and they are appealing to the UN for statehood, just like the Israel did, simply because they feel that decades of failed peace-talks with Israel have produced nothing -- and have served only to breed protests and violence.

Israel has refused to address the refugee matter. They also refuse the idea of allowing East Jerusalem to be part of a Palestinian State capital. They also continue to build settlements on Palestinian land -- all of which fuels protests and violence.

HAMAS got elected to power in Gaza precisely because people believed that they were responsible for getting Israel to abandon its occupation of Gaza -- whereas the PNA and all the decades of peace talks with Israel were blamed for the status quo -- many Palestinians began to believe that violence was the only answer because it gave them their land where peacetalks had failed to do so.

Despite this, a majority of Palestinians who voted for HAMAS do actually support a peace with the Israeli State.

Still, the legitimate representatives of Palestinians are not HAMAS, but the PNA.

The PNA isn't declaring Israel's destruction. They already recognize Israel -- they simply want a nation for their people -- with the borders that the UN said they could have.


And we can blame the failed peace process on HAMAS and terrorists all day long, but if you think that nearly a decade of Israel's overpowered retaliatory strikes (Palestinian dead three times as many as Israeli dead) -- or the decades of failed peace negotiations in which Israel offered Palestinians unfair deals -- "our terms or nothing" has nothing to do with the conflict ---- well you're only kidding yourself.

Now that the PNA is pursuing a peaceful attempt to statehood -- something which would ultimately help stop protests and violence by giving an occupied people rights and a national home -- America and Israel opposes it. Half of the time many Americans oppose Palestinians' their right to exist -- "just give all the land to Israel."

Israel ultimately is not interested in negotiating with the PNA. Sure they want HAMAS to stop and they want everyone to settle down and be happy, but Israel also wants to maintain control over all of Jerusalem and to continue to build settlements on land that is not theirs. If Israel does want a neighboring state, it would be one which conforms to their terms only -- one that has no authority over any part of Jerusalem -- one that is accommodating to existing illegal settlements in the occupied territories -- one that is completely demilitarized -- etc, etc.

That's just Israel's national interests as of now. Sure Israelis might have different opinions but then again your average joe has no say in what the government does.

Well, although the PNA did say they were going to remove the language calling for the destruction of Israel in their charter, that was never done. It's still in there to this day.

To his credit, Arafat did try to remove that language, but that was never ratified...

So, the PNA's charter still has language calling for the destruction of Israel in it.

[Nilloc James]

I just went and skimmed a few different charters etc. relating to the issue. Goat, could you please provide quotes, I can't find anything demanding the destruction of Israel? I might be looking at the wrong one.

[Goat]

I just went and skimmed a few different charters etc. relating to the issue. Goat, could you please provide quotes, I can't find anything demanding the destruction of Israel? I might be looking at the wrong one.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinia ... l_Covenant

First, the declaration that it intends to change the charter

Yasser Arafat wrote letters to President Clinton and Prime Minister Blair in January 1998 explicitly listing the articles of the Charter referred to in the PNC's 1996 vote. While this was seen as progress in some quarters, other Palestinian officials contended that the Charter had not yet been amended, and there were also reportedly discrepancies between the two letters.

The operative language of Arafat's letter to Clinton reads:

The Palestine National Council's resolution, in accordance with Article 33 of the Covenant, is a comprehensive amendment of the Covenant. All of the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the P.L.O. commitment to recognize and live in peace side by side with Israel are no longer in effect.

As a result, Articles 6-10, 15, 19-23, and 30 have been nullified, and the parts in Articles 1-5, 11-14, 16-18, 25-27 and 29 that are inconsistent with the above mentioned commitments have also been nullified.[11][12]

Then it continues on this part
In January 1998, before the second Gaza meeting, Faisal Hamdi Husseini, head of the legal committee appointed by the PNC, stated "There has been a decision to change the Covenant. The change has not yet been carried out".[31]


So, while the was the negotiated change to the charter, you will find that the actual change has not yet happened. It's still there.


Unless you have further information that shows that the changes have indeed been ratified...

[Nilloc James]

It does not appear to have been ratified. Though here is the entire Charter for reference (bold or non text is my annotation).

It does appear there is a fair bit that could be problematic.

THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL CHARTER:

Resolutions of the Palestine National Council
July 1-17, 1968

Article 1:Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.

Okay: nothing major here

Article 2:Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.



That could be a problem, both nations need security and land, they both can't have it all

Article 3:The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.

I don't deny their right to self determination, problem is THEY BOTH CAN'T HAVE IT ALL

Article 4:The Palestinian identity is a genuine, essential, and inherent characteristic; it is transmitted from parents to children. The Zionist occupation and the dispersal of the Palestinian Arab people, through the disasters which befell them, do not make them lose their Palestinian identity and their membership in the Palestinian community, nor do they negate them.

See article 20

Article 5:The Palestinians are those Arab nationals who, until 1947, normally resided in Palestine regardless of whether they were evicted from it or have stayed there. Anyone born, after that date, of a Palestinian father - whether inside Palestine or outside it - is also a Palestinian.


Nothing wrong, just defining who could get citizenship
Article 6:The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.

Won't this bring us back to square 1? I sense a vicous circle!

Article 7:That there is a Palestinian community and that it has material, spiritual, and historical connection with Palestine are indisputable facts. It is a national duty to bring up individual Palestinians in an Arab revolutionary manner. All means of information and education must be adopted in order to acquaint the Palestinian with his country in the most profound manner, both spiritual and material, that is possible. He must be prepared for the armed struggle and ready to sacrifice his wealth and his life in order to win back his homeland and bring about its liberation.

Violence is how these problems self-perpetuate

Article 8: The phase in their history, through which the Palestinian people are now living, is that of national (watani) struggle for the liberation of Palestine. Thus the conflicts among the Palestinian national forces are secondary, and should be ended for the sake of the basic conflict that exists between the forces of Zionism and of imperialism on the one hand, and the Palestinian Arab people on the other. On this basis the Palestinian masses, regardless of whether they are residing in the national homeland or in diaspora (mahajir) constitute - both their organizations and the individuals - one national front working for the retrieval of Palestine and its liberation through armed struggle.

I'm getting the vibe someone wants a fight

Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it. They also assert their right to normal life in Palestine and to exercise their right to self-determination and sovereignty over it.

They realize that militarily this won't end well for them, right?

Article 10: Commando action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution. It also requires the achieving of unity for the national (watani) struggle among the different groupings of the Palestinian people, and between the Palestinian people and the Arab masses, so as to secure the continuation of the revolution, its escalation, and victory.

Why must there always be guns?

Article 11:The Palestinians will have three mottos: national (wataniyya) unity, national (qawmiyya) mobilization, and liberation.

Can't help but think of Liberté, égalité, fraternité

Article 12:The Palestinian people believe in Arab unity. In order to contribute their share toward the attainment of that objective, however, they must, at the present stage of their struggle, safeguard their Palestinian identity and develop their consciousness of that identity, and oppose any plan that may dissolve or impair it.

Another "self-determinations"/we want unity clause

Article 13:Arab unity and the liberation of Palestine are two complementary objectives, the attainment of either of which facilitates the attainment of the other. Thus, Arab unity leads to the liberation of Palestine, the liberation of Palestine leads to Arab unity; and work toward the realization of one objective proceeds side by side with work toward the realization of the other.

Okay, Arabs get along with Arabs. Good to know.

Article 14:The destiny of the Arab nation, and indeed Arab existence itself, depend upon the destiny of the Palestine cause. From this interdependence springs the Arab nation's pursuit of, and striving for, the liberation of Palestine. The people of Palestine play the role of the vanguard in the realization of this sacred (qawmi) goal.

Huh?

Article 15: The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (qawmi) duty and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland, and aims at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine. Absolute responsibility for this falls upon the Arab nation - peoples and governments - with the Arab people of Palestine in the vanguard. Accordingly, the Arab nation must mobilize all its military, human, moral, and spiritual capabilities to participate actively with the Palestinian people in the liberation of Palestine. It must, particularly in the phase of the armed Palestinian revolution, offer and furnish the Palestinian people with all possible help, and material and human support, and make available to them the means and opportunities that will enable them to continue to carry out their leading role in the armed revolution, until they liberate their homeland.

Oh damn! this sounds dangerous. As ineffective peace talks are I think we are obligated to keep trying, no one wins when the weapons come out.

Article 16:The liberation of Palestine, from a spiritual point of view, will provide the Holy Land with an atmosphere of safety and tranquility, which in turn will safeguard the country's religious sanctuaries and guarantee freedom of worship and of visit to all, without discrimination of race, color, language, or religion. Accordingly, the people of Palestine look to all spiritual forces in the world for support.

We all have to share this. The holy land is a lot like kids fighting over a toy, share, or else we take it away and give it to the Buddhists (can we try this?).

Article 17:The liberation of Palestine, from a human point of view, will restore to the Palestinian individual his dignity, pride, and freedom. Accordingly the Palestinian Arab people look forward to the support of all those who believe in the dignity of man and his freedom in the world.

Okay, alls good, but that sentiment has to be extended to all, Including Israeli individuals

Article 18:The liberation of Palestine, from an international point of view, is a defensive action necessitated by the demands of self-defense. Accordingly the Palestinian people, desirous as they are of the friendship of all people, look to freedom-loving, and peace-loving states for support in order to restore their legitimate rights in Palestine, to re-establish peace and security in the country, and to enable its people to exercise national sovereignty and freedom.

Isn't this the exact justification used to found Israel?

Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and to their natural right in their homeland, and inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.

Well Israel exists now, no amount of Chest beating will change that, best to focus on how to end the current situation

Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.

Wait isn't this hypocritical: see article 4

Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aiming at the liquidation of the Palestinian problem, or its internationalization.

NO ONE CAN HAVE EVERYTHING THEY WANT, THAT ISN'T POSSIBLE AT THIS POINT!

Article 22: Zionism is a political movement organically associated with international imperialism and antagonistic to all action for liberation and to progressive movements in the world. It is racist and fanatic in its nature, aggressive, expansionist, and colonial in its aims, and fascist in its methods. Israel is the instrument of the Zionist movement, and geographical base for world imperialism placed strategically in the midst of the Arab homeland to combat the hopes of the Arab nation for liberation, unity, and progress. Israel is a constant source of threat vis-a-vis peace in the Middle East and the whole world. Since the liberation of Palestine will destroy the Zionist and imperialist presence and will contribute to the establishment of peace in the Middle East, the Palestinian people look for the support of all the progressive and peaceful forces and urge them all, irrespective of their affiliations and beliefs, to offer the Palestinian people all aid and support in their just struggle for the liberation of their homeland.

And I'm sure Israel would say the same thing back about Palestine, they both antagonize the other and no progress is made.

Article 23: The demand of security and peace, as well as the demand of right and justice, require all states to consider Zionism an illegitimate movement, to outlaw its existence, and to ban its operations, in order that friendly relations among peoples may be preserved, and the loyalty of citizens to their respective homelands safeguarded.

See article 22 for the odd definition of "Zionism"

Article 24:The Palestinian people believe in the principles of justice, freedom, sovereignty, self-determination, human dignity, and in the right of all peoples to exercise them.

Except if it is Israel's right to self-determination!

Article 25:For the realization of the goals of this Charter and its principles, the Palestine Liberation Organization will perform its role in the liberation of Palestine in accordance with the Constitution of this Organization.

Let's hope they don't get too carried away with all the "armed revolution"

Article 26:The Palestine Liberation Organization, representative of the Palestinian revolutionary forces, is responsible for the Palestinian Arab people's movement in its struggle - to retrieve its homeland, liberate and return to it and exercise the right to self-determination in it - in all military, political, and financial fields and also for whatever may be required by the Palestine case on the inter-Arab and international levels.

Article 27:The Palestine Liberation Organization shall cooperate with all Arab states, each according to its potentialities; and will adopt a neutral policy among them in the light of the requirements of the war of liberation; and on this basis it shall not interfere in the internal affairs of any Arab state.

Article 28:The Palestinian Arab people assert the genuineness and independence of their national (wataniyya) revolution and reject all forms of intervention, trusteeship, and subordination.

Article 29:The Palestinian people possess the fundamental and genuine legal right to liberate and retrieve their homeland. The Palestinian people determine their attitude toward all states and forces on the basis of the stands they adopt vis-a-vis to the Palestinian revolution to fulfill the aims of the Palestinian people.

Problem: more than one group shares the area, must compromise....

Article 30:Fighters and carriers of arms in the war of liberation are the nucleus of the popular army which will be the protective force for the gains of the Palestinian Arab people.

Article 31:The Organization shall have a flag, an oath of allegiance, and an anthem. All this shall be decided upon in accordance with a special regulation.

Article 32:Regulations, which shall be known as the Constitution of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, shall be annexed to this Charter. It will lay down the manner in which the Organization, and its organs and institutions, shall be constituted; the respective competence of each; and the requirements of its obligation under the Charter.

Article 33:This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose.

[Wootah]

First let's see the Arab world recognise Israel.

Then explain why Jordan isn't already the Palestinian state.

Then understand this about control of Jerusalem.

Finally why do you think you have a right to decide another country's affairs.

I don't think we should consider making Palestine a state until the religious aspect of things is no longer a factor. A vast majority of the world's population think that Jews need to be killed.

[Nilloc James]

First let's see the Arab world recognise Israel.

Then explain why Jordan isn't already the Palestinian state.

Then understand this about control of Jerusalem.

Finally why do you think you have a right to decide another country's affairs.

I don't think we should consider making Palestine a state until the religious aspect of things is no longer a factor. A vast majority of the world's population think that Jews need to be killed.

I will refute the post paragraph by paragraph

1) Well some do, generalizations are bad:

Israel has full diplomatic relations with the following:
1. Egypt (the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty was signed in 1979), 2. Jordan (the Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed in 1994) and 3. Mauritania. Israel has some ties with Morocco, Tunisia, Omar, Qatar and Bahrain

2) Well, Jordan is a distinct nation wiki lists people of Jordan and Palestine individually

Jordan's Arab population mainly consists of Jordanians, Palestinians and Iraqis.

And because many of the Palestinians in Jordan are DISPLACED: they lived in regions that were given to Israel or occupied and lost their homes in the process. This is like someone invaded Canada and said we should "all move to the states because we're similar". Additionally I'd encourage you to look up the mandate that Britain gave to Israel, It was actually called, "the British mandate for PALESTINE".

3) Look at the population of Jerusalem:

Jerusalem had a population of 747,600—64% were Jewish, 32% Muslim, and 2% Christian

It is important to all the abrahamic religions and much of the population Isn't Jewish (though not a majority by any means I don't like to think you'd willingly crush minority rights). Also much of the international community REJECTS Israel's claim to use it as a capital, locating their embassies in Tel Aviv. Also I recall seeing theoretical suggestions of making Jerusalem an international city do to its extreme cultural and religious significance.

4) So many ways to respond:
a) This is a debate site: do you expect us not to discuss a religiously charged political situation in the Religion and Politics subforum? This is fun!
b) You say we can't decide a countries fate then declare we shouldn't make Palestine a nation, the pot calling the kettle black? (I'm bad with idioms forgive me if that is incorrect)
c) We aren't actually deciding: we are offering opinions, learning, and none of us have any actually sway.

5) Where did you get your statistic that 50% + 1 of the world’s population thinks Jews should be killed? Do you honestly think repressing a religious and ethnic minority will make the problem go away? And the only way to remove the religious aspect would be to destroy the abrahamic religions, you go first.


Edit: Spelling, grammar, syntax, all those things I mangmangled

[Darias]

First let's see the Arab world recognise Israel.

The official representatives of Palestinians do. Since 1993 after the Oslo accords, the PLO recognized Israel as a state, and Israel recognized the PLO.

As for the rest of the Arab world, they do as well.

Turkey was the first -- yet even now the Israeli government has threatened to help terrorists in Turkey because Turkey is demanding an apology for the killing of 9 Turkish protestors - including the Turkish American, who were on a boat protesting the Gaza blockade. They were all shot by the IDF and they didn't even have weapons. Yet, Turkey, one of Israel's closest ally, is now being threatened by the current administration of Israel for no good reason.




Jordan and Egypt also fully recognize Israel. Other nations like Iran don't have diplomatic relations with Israel.

But these countries are a detraction to the real issue here, which is whether or not Palestinians will have a state -- and whether or not there will be any peace. We can make sweeping judgements about "the Arab," but that gets us no where - and is the equivalent of anti-semitism.

Then explain why Jordan isn't already the Palestinian state.

There are Palestinian refugees who live there. There are also a variety of other groups. Jordan became a State in 1921, but Jordon is its own entity -- geographical proximity does not mean that cultures and national pride/heritage are the same.

If you live in Texas, and you wanted your State to have independence from the Union -- no one would say "You can't have that. Your state is Mexico anyway."

And that is of course an absurd answer for anyone who has little if any ties with that country.

Then understand this about control of Jerusalem.

Yes. You see, Jerusalem belonged to the natives of Palestine before Israel ever became a state -- such natives included Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

The UN defined the borders of Israel and Palestine, but after the 1967 war, Palestinians have lost more and more land.

Take a look:





There are both Jewish and Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, but Israel wishes to retain control over all of Jerusalem, even the Arab neighborhoods -- this is unacceptable for most Palestinians who feel they have equal right to the city.

All Palestinians really want is not for Israel to dissapear and all Jews to die -- some extremists may, and the state of human condition in the occupied territories explains how hatred like that can exist --

But all the Palestinians really want is a State that they can call there own -- a State based on historical and cultural ties to the land -- just like Israel. Your average Palestinian also wants peace, but not peace at the cost of having nothing.

The government of Israel wants peace, but they honestly don't want a Palestinian State. They want the territories to be demilitarized, and they want to continue building illegal settlements on Palestinian land -- the 22% of all of Palestinian Land that the UN said they could have -- now is far less than that. The Israeli government wont stop building a huge wall to essentially impose a ghetto upon these people. They have few political rights, so it's no question why some resort to joining extremists -- or hating Jews -- or hating Israel. But most don't. To not make such distinctions just paints the "other" as this evil faceless Arab-Muslim threat to poor innocent peace-loving Israelis. That's just not reality. It's just as inaccurate to say that there's an "evil Jewish Zionist entity" that wishes to crush peaceful innocent Palestinians.

Both sides are guilty of bloodshed (3 times as many Palestinians have died as a result of the conflict if you want to get picky with numbers).

But the majority of people of both sides do want a peace with a 2 state solution. The problem is, compromise is difficult -- when the Palestinians believe that they are already compromising by only demanding 22% of their ancestral homeland and only East Jerusalem instead of all of Jerusalem as defined by the UN before the 1967 borders -- and when Israelis believe they are compromising by slowing or temporarily stopping illegal settlements on the 22% of land that Palestinians feel they have the right to have.

Yet Israel has the upper hand in diplomacy -- they have US support -- so Palestinian demands are deemed "unreasonable" and that they must simply accept not having Jerusalem, and that they must accept the presence of illegal settlements -- and the growth of said settlements on their land -- and they must tolerate Israeli soldiers paroling their streets and Israeli air-forces controlling their skies. That is what seems fair for Israel -- but for Palestinians that's getting the short end of the stick.

Even though the US govs stance is for a 2 state solution based on pre-67 borders -- they are against Palestinian push for statehood -- because they feel it will only work if both sides sit down and negotiate... but the problem is, negotiation isn't possible and produces nothing.

By negotiating with Israel, Palestinians would simply be succumbing to Israeli demands. Palestinian refugees would not be allowed back into their homes in Israel. Palestinians would not have any block of Jerusalem as their capital. Palestinians would not have an army to defend itself. Palestinians would have to accept the presence of Israeli bases and more settlements -- on their land. But they could have the title of "State" and they would be called a "State" on Wikipedia. Isn't that great?

In reality they would still be occupied and they wouldn't have the sovereignty other nations enjoy.

In truth, a Palestinian State is not in the national interests of the Israeli government. The Israeli government wants peace and an end to uprising and terrorist attacks, but only by their terms -- which of course won't happen.

And the Palestinian National Authority wants a State but not a neutered and occupied state with receding borders for the sake of peace.

And until Palestinians have a state, the status quo will continue. Once Palestinians have a state, peace will be possible -- sure there will always be terrorists but there certainly wont be as many.

However Israel wants peace to come first. They expect Palestinians to be happy and quiet -- and if they are maybe they have have a state -- maybe... but why give them anything when they are already behaving?

Finally why do you think you have a right to decide another country's affairs.

We all have and exercise the right to be critical of other countries. Don't pretend like you aren't.

I don't think we should consider making Palestine a state until the religious aspect of things is no longer a factor. A vast majority of the world's population think that Jews need to be killed.

So you think that until the entire region becomes Atheist, peace should be postponed? I take it you believe the conflict is entirely based upon religion and ethnicity right?

Are you saying that if Christian and Muslim Palestinians deconverted that they would no longer have any interest in having East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state? Do you think that they would be willing to let the State of Israel have the entire city as their own? You're neglecting the factor of National pride and cultural heritage altogether. Do you actually think Jerusalem only contains Jews? Do you think that no Muslims and Arabs are native to the city?

Can you substantiate that Most of the world believes that the Jews should be killed?

Sure that's true of Europe in the past, but is that true now?

Does criticism of Israel = anti-Semitism? Is the State of Israel wholly Jewish? Is Israel to be distinguished between the modern state and the Israelites of Biblical times, or is Israel justified in everything they do because the Bible says Israelites could bring genocide on the natives (Canaanites), and take their land?

Does supporting a State for Palestinians mean the destruction of Israel or the genocide of Jews? Do you feel most Palestinians feel this way? Do you think most Arabs around the world feel this way? Can you prove it? Do you have demographics?

Sure we can quote HAMAS and a few terrorists but do you feel they represent the whole of Arabs, Muslims, and Palestinians?