Official Guardian editorial legitimizes a ‘one-state solution’.


So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot - George Orwell

We’ve long believed that chances were strong that the historic editorial preference at ‘Comment is Free‘ towards commentators (and even Islamist extremists) who seek a ‘one state solution’ to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict would eventually translate into an official editorial position in favor of such a final solution.  Whilst that position may not yet have been explicitly expressed, today’s official Guardian editorial, on Jerusalem’s municipal elections, seems to have at least taken a step in that direction.

g

Ignoring polls indicating that Palestinian residents of Jerusalem would prefer – in the event a Palestinian state were created resulting in a divided Jerusalem – to remain citizens or residents of Israel, their Oct. 21 editorial (Jerusalem elections: the ballot and the boycott) starts off by legitimizing the most radical and unrepresentative Palestinian voices:

To cast a vote [in the Jerusalem municipal elections] is to acknowledge the legitimacy of the occupation, or so it is argued. “Participating in the process merely gives [the Israelis] political cover,” insists Hanan Ashrawi, from the PLO’s executive committee. “They want to create a reality where the Palestinians participate in the occupation of their own country.

The Guardian editorial continues:

But this year, for the first time ever, there is a Palestinian candidate [Arab Israeli] Fuad Saliman…[who] is running as a part of an Israeli coalition of left-wing parties. Given that Palestinians make up well over a third of the city’s population, their participation in the political process could transform a political landscape…

So, what is the Guardian’s interest in increasing Palestinian voter strength? It becomes apparent in the following paragraphs:

As a thought experiment, however, it is fascinating. Extrapolating from the local situation in Jerusalem, what if all Palestinians made a strategic decision to seek full voting rights within the reality that is Israel, rather than demanding a separate Palestinian state? In other words, what if they transformed their struggle from a nationalist one into a civil rights one?

Of course, Palestinians don’t all have the same access to the ballot box. But far from looking to exert their electoral presence on the national stage, those who do have the right to vote have been exercising it less and less. Seventy-five per cent voted in the 1999 elections. Ten years later, it was 54%. The fact that it didn’t dip below half earlier this year was put down to a last-minute intervention by the Arab League urging the million or so Palestinians living in Israel to get out and vote. Amid deepening despair as to the viability of a two-state solution, this [one-state] option…is only going to attract more attention.

While it is curious that their latest expression of “despair” over the two-state solution was published at a time when serious peace negotiations between the two parties are currently taking place, it’s more important to understand what exactly their little one-state “thought experiment” actually means: the legitimization of a radical reconstitution of Israel from the world’s only Jewish state into a binational state in which Jews would likely again be at the mercy of the ‘benevolence’ of a hostile Arab majority.  

The overwhelming majority of Jewish Israelis, possessing a sobriety informed by an understanding of the catastrophic history of such political powerlessness, would of course violently resist such a scenario, rendering any attempt to impose such a solution a recipe for endless war.

Finally, in 2011, following the Guardian’s release of its highly skewed “expose” of the ‘Palestine Papers’ (which among other stances, characterized Palestinian compromise on the refugee issue as a “craven”) Ron Prosor, who was then Israel’s Ambassador to the UK, blasted the paper in a Huffington Post essay titled “The Guardian’s Assault on Peace in the Middle East”.  Prosor decried the “self-appointed ‘guardian’ of Palestinian truth” who “maximized its opportunity to pledge allegiance to the hard-line, national fantasies which have crippled the Palestinian cause for decades.”

The one-state scenario, however it is couched, is not a “solution” but, rather, the racist anti-Zionist end game of Palestinian extremists (and their far-left supporters) who seek to deny Jews, and only Jews, their inalienable right to self-determination.  

77 comments on “Official Guardian editorial legitimizes a ‘one-state solution’.

  1. “”The overwhelming majority of Jewish Israelis, possessing a political sobriety informed by an understanding of the catastrophic history of such political powerlessness, would of course violently resist such a scenario, rendering any attempt to impose such a solution a likely recipe for endless war.”

    Well considered and expressed.

    And yet there are those who wish to express the superiority of their sensitivity (the yaffei-nefesh) and to ignore painfully plain fact who would decry this truth.

  2. The opinion of the Guardian editors on the I/P conflict has the influence of a papillonfart in a tornado. The solution is in the hands of the Israeli voters and the Palestinian vot… (sorry) leadership. These latte and aragula filled assholes in the Guardian offices will fight from their secure and comfortable offices for the one-state solution to the last drop of Palestinian blood.

  3. Awaits the Guardian letter page in the next 2-3 days to resonate with letters in favour of the one state solution.

  4. As a thought experiment, however, it is fascinating.

    Well, that’s one word beginning with an ‘f’ for it. Not one I’d use, though.

  5. Eventually, boys and girls, a single state with equal political, civil and religious rights for all irrespective of race, colour, creed, ethnicity or gender between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea will emerge. As you like to play blame game, you can blame Israeli hubris. But you won’t coz you are too one-eyed.

    • And your next genius masterplans: re-unite Sudan or Yugoslavia?
      Going back a bit … how about France and Germany?

      Shit – how about the entire world?

      Then again: how about consulting the people on the ground?

      • The Israelis on the ground have been consulted, in every general election since 1967. And every government since then has built colonies in the occupied territories. The Israeli population, then, must be approving and they knew the consequences. A single state will result from that. Israel created this mess. You make your bed, you sleep in it.

          • Israel never negotiated in good faith. It negotiated for negotiations’ sake. It doesn’t want to resolve the issue, hoping the Palestinians will get bored and go away.

            • Really? Never ever? Same tired old Chomskyite refrain of Israeli perfidy. Good news though. Reality is out there if you ever wish to participate. Or did you already once dip your claw in that water and find it too cold?

            • Oh, you mean like when Ehud Barak offered Arafat, 95% of the West Bank, all of Gaza, and joint sovereignty of Jerusalem?

              Or when Bill Clinton told Arafat that if he was unwilling to negotiate then everyone just may as well go home?

              Go back to the sandlot.

      • pretzelberg,
        I was think North America. We Yanks out populate the Canadians by by quite a lot. We need contiguity between Alaska and the lower 48, you know. : )

    • Please try to teach your visions to Palestinians if you dare. I wonder what Abbas or Haniyeh will do to you. Screwing, hanging, vanishing, burning?

          • Yawn. Yet more YouTube-style rhetoric from the bigot.
            I see his supporters share his juvenile sense of humor.

            But we knew that already.

            • It is the privilege of the youth to imagine itself as moral beacon, but to get adult, you should concentrate on improving your intelligence instead.

                • It is a bad sign of mental health to outsource own faults to other persons, they usually come back to haunt the owner down.
                  Self awareness is quite important step for your intelligence, now you just have to insert “I`m” instead of “You`re”, and for some seconds the window of opportunity will open and say “welcome to reality”.

                • It is a bad sign of mental health to outsource own faults to other persons

                  You sure have plenty of those, FW!

                  Same applies to all the bigots lapping up your juvenile posts.

                • I never denied having faults, but neither I`m haunted by the illusion of being a moral beacon. That`s a matter of intelligence and self awareness not to claim such a stance in my age. You are sanctioned by your youth, not by your intelligence.

                • neither I`m haunted by the illusion of being a moral beacon. That`s a matter of intelligence and self awareness not to claim such a stance in my age.

                  Assuming that’s true in your case, the above is something else we have in common.

                  Your problem – and that of the mental midgets supporting you – is that you are blind to your own hypocrisy.

                • That’s not the point. Your (and I mean both of you here) tiresome to and fro with insults is what is so boring.

      • Hmm, Chaim, you manage to overlook the fact that Palestinian Arab Muslim and Christian nationalists only accepted a two state principle in 1988: up to then, the official PLO position was that no Jew resident in Palestine ‘before the Zionist invasion’ (probably contextually 1917, at best 1948, but perhaps even 1888), could become a Palestinian citizen (begging the question of what would happen to most Israeli Jews).

        That only happened because Israel conquered territory in 1967, which she could exchange for recognition and peace.

        1988 was not 1947 or 1967: all developments subsequent to 1967, including the settlements, had to be negotiated.

        Now, if those negotiations have not been as fruitful as is desirable, Palestinians bear no less responsibility than Israelis. And if the current round of talks fail, Abbas will surely bear as much responsibility as Netanyahu, certainly no less: Abbas looks to the worldwide BDS movement, and may well calculate that BDS will bring him everything he wants without conceding Israel anything.

        But that is unlikely to happen: what is more likely is that Israel unilaterally withdraws to a self-dictated border, approximately that of the border fence, annexing the Old City and selected settlements.

        Then the only way to change that border will be war, which the Palestinians and allies can try, along with the BDS movement, to which Israel will respond in kind.

        Now, that is not what I want, and I don’t think it is what Netanyahu wants, either, for all his faults. But if that happens, the BDS movement, and its tentative ally, The Guardian, may well bear some responsibility.

        • Excellently reasoned and very well thought out (which is why it has not a hope in hell of being accepted by Chaim Pesach).

          • “the official PLO position was that no Jew resident in Palestine ‘before the Zionist invasion’ (probably contextually 1917, at best 1948, but perhaps even 1888), could become a Palestinian citizen (begging the question of what would happen to most Israeli Jews).’’

            Correction

            “the official PLO position was that ONLY A Jew resident in Palestine ‘before the Zionist invasion’ (probably contextually 1917, at best 1948, but perhaps even 1888), could become a Palestinian citizen (begging the question of what would happen to most Israeli Jews).”

    • “But you won’t coz you are too one-eyed.”
      Millions of people in this world have lost an eye to accidents, disease and the like. But people with one eye can still see, and they can see you coming, forked tongue and all.

  6. Zachary, do you blame women for rape too? You are blaming the victim and getting in Israel’s alibis for creating the failure first.

    • Zachary posted a very even-handed response – which makes Chaim’s rape-themed response all the more pathetic.

    • CP “do you blame women for rape too?”

      We can leave that to your good friend George Galloway, and you can stick to the European script of blaming the Jews for everything else.

  7. “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot” – George Orwell

    And who does the Guardian turn to?
    Hanan Ashrawi, undisputed queen of doublespeak.

    Here we have a country which allows non-citizens full suffrage in municipal elections. This act of liberal benevolence is decried as oppression – liberalism is once more turned on its head in service to racist dreck.

    • I realize that “rape” is an analogy to the issue under discussion, not the main topic; however, I need to point out that it makes little sense to imply that victim blaming in cases of sexual assault is confined to Islamic countries. It happens everywhere, every month if not more frequently–including in the United States where I live. Here’s a story of a town with residents who created a living hell for a 14 year old girl and her family, for two years after she was dumped in freezing weather, close to unconscious, on the lawn of her home.
      http://www.kansascity.com/2013/10/12/4549775/nightmare-in-maryville-teens-sexual.html
      The case against the young men involved was dismissed & harassment of the girl and her family continued, including burning down their home. Now, more than two years later, the case will be reopened.
      It should go without saying that this is only one example. Many more could be linked. As i mentioned above, please excuse the digression, but it seems important to state the reality.

      • Please note that I wrote about institutional bias of states, not of communities and individuals.

        • Which reminds me of discussions with feminists about phallocracy back in the eighties.
          Strange nothing to hear anything similar about that states from this side. Phallocratic states, if there ever were, here you have them.

  8. There’s a not incisiderable amount of hypocrisy here, because several here, including the person who runs this site, are one-staters no less than the far left

      • I couldn’t give a flying f*ck where the technology comes from, actually. But that still doesn’t absolve most of the people here, including Mr Levick, from hyporcrisy. They are no less one-staters than the far left.

        • Hello Chaim. I can’t speak for Adam, nor would he want me to, but I am a firm believer in the “two-state” solution i.e. one that offers security and peace to all the people of the region. I am not, however, in possession of a magic wand which can decide the borders of said states nor how we get from the current state of play to that ideal goal. One thing I am sure of is that I will never support a solution that does not give Israel reasonable guarantees that she will be left in peace to continue as a Jewish state.

          Everything I post on here is with those principles in mind, so you can go and flying f*ck yourself with your accusations of hypocrisy.

          • The only two-state solution you hypocrites favour is the one where there is a Jews’ only state to the West of the Jordan and all the Palestinians are expelled (sorry… transferred) to beyond the river. Now f*ck yourself with that in mind

            • The only two-state solution you libero-fascist hypocrites advocate is one with the Jews in a state on the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea.

              It would be nice if you went back where you came from, but they probably don’t want you down there either.

  9. The Guardian leader is very confusing. Who does it mean when it refers to “Palestinians”? For most of the article, it seems it means those in “East” Jerusalem and the West Bank (i.e. those who are NOT Israeli citizens), but then it refers to the “million or so Palesitinians living in Israel”. Could it be referring there to Israeli Arabs? Who defines these people as “Palestininasns”? Why|?

    • Yes. I suppose “Arab Israeli” wouldn’t make such a slick headline for the G.
      Saliman himself has referred to himself as an Israeli – even though he presumably identifies as Palestinians as well (given his history and views).

      • Thank you for proving your laughable ignorance and stupidity. Every Arab citizen of Israel without exception defines him/herself by using the expression ערבי ישראלי means Israeli Arab.. Saying that they define themselves as Palestinians only shows that you are either a liar or your familiarity with Israel is nil. (Naturally the total lack of knowledge wouldn’t prevent Jew-haters using Jewish monikers to spit their shit on any blog.)

        • You might think they use the term Aravi Yisraeli. You probably even hope they do. But they don’t. They describe themselves Palastinim ezrachei Yisrael – Palestinian Citizens of Israel.

          • “They describe themselves Palastinim ezrachei Yisrael – Palestinian Citizens of Israel.”

            The two Arab parties with the most seats in this Kneset are Hadash and Ra’am-Ta’al (4 seats each).
            Ra’am: הרשימה הערבית המאוחדת (רע”ם; בערבית: القائمة العربية الموحدة)
            Ta’al: תנועה ערבית להתחדשות (בערבית: الحركة العربية للتغيير)
            Hadash: From the Hadash’s site: “The aim of its founders was simple: to unite most of the supporters for peace, equality, democracy and workers’ rights, Jews and ARABS…”

            And here’s what Azmi Bishara, founder of Balad has to say about the existence of “Palestinians”:

            In short, “Chaim”, get a life!

            • A|-quarbage, where, precisely, does it say in your examples that they describe themselves as Aravim Yisraelim?

              • I proved that they call themselves Arabs. One of their most prominent leaders even denies that there is such a thing as “Palestinians”. So shithead, which one of the voices in your sick head whispered “Palastinim ezrachei Yisrael – Palestinian Citizens of Israel.”? And you’re right, you shouldn’t be compared to Nazis. You’re worse. The Nazis at least didn’t try to masquerade as “progressives”….

                • Azmi Bashara a prominent leader? That’s a laugh. Tell me another one.
                  He is a pan-Arabist so he would say that.

                • “Azmi Bashara a prominent leader? That’s a laugh”
                  The founder of one of the biggest Arab parties in Israel, and the first Israeli Arab candidate for the post of Prime Minister of Israel is a prominent leader of the Israeli Arab community. That makes you laugh? Tell me shithead, did you also laugh when they told you that the earth wasn’t flat?
                  “He is a pan-Arabist so he would say that.”
                  Why does it matter WHY he says that? The point is that he believes that he is an Arab, and not a Palestinian.
                  But you still didn’t answer me, asshole:
                  which one of the voices in your sick head whispered “Palastinim ezrachei Yisrael – Palestinian Citizens of Israel.”?
                  In short, with each comment you’re digging your hole deeper. So why don’t you crawl back there? But who am I kidding, an antisemite troll like you going away? (Yes, an asshole that denies the Jews, and the Jews only, the right to a nation state is an antisemite). You’ll probably come back using a different moniker, after “Chaim Pesach” showed what a ridiculous scumbag he is…

                • His party, Balad, got barely a third of the votes in the Palestinian-Israeli sector. Prominent leader, my arse.

                • The second largest Arab party’s founder is a prominent leader. But shithead, you’re still deflecting: ALL Arab parties in Israel describe themselves as “ARAB”s, not as Palestinians. So I’ll repeat my question: “which one of the voices in your sick head whispered “Palastinim ezrachei Yisrael – Palestinian Citizens of Israel.”?”
                  In your next comment, try to stop deflecting and answer, for a change.

          • Do you really think that repeating a lie will make it true? I don’t think and I don’t hope that they call themselves Aravi Israeli but I hear it every day from them personally and otherwise (media etc.) Chaim, Chaim what happened? They wouldn’t accept any more applications for the SS and you are forced to vent your hate on the Internet? Tough luck…

            • Is everyone who points out you are wrong a Nazi, peterthehungarian? Ever heard of Godwin’s Law? It apples to you.
              And, to be brutally frank and honest with you, I don’t believe a word you write. You’ve probably never spoken to a Palestinian in your life.

              • You are correct asshole I never ever spoke with any Palestinians only with many Arabs – Israeli Arabs. BTW you didn’t point out whether I’m wrong or not, you simply threw in an outright lie. Everyone -I repeat everyone living in Israel knows this. Regarding your Nazi credentials – your unequivocally antisemitic smears, lies and libels are demonstrating your real ideological affiliation.

              • And, to be brutally frank and honest with you, I don’t believe a word you write.
                Chaim you are seriously misunderstanding my intentions saying that you don’t believe a word of mine. I’m not and never have wanted to convince your kind of ignorant and malevolent dirt – for this purpose there are much better and effective means (see Jorge Semprun – The Great Voyage)., I simply want to show to the other readers of this blog the fact (what probably they know already) that antisemites like you are pathological liars and clueless ignorant as well.
                Are you a member of Jobbik? I thought as much
                No Chaim I,m definitely not. I left Hungary for Israel about a quarter of a century ago, exactly because of the popularity of the Jobbik and its brother forces in Hungary (and in Europe). BTW You certainly know nothing about Hungary and Jobbik, their rhetoric is exactly the same as yours. You would be very welcome among their members.

  10. We also get that lovely little misleading point “Of course, Palestinians don’t all have the same access to the ballot box.” Suggesting that those Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens are somehow disenfranchised, which is of course absolutely true. They are disenfranchised by their own “leaders” who are currently on their umpteenth year of their term of office and can’t be bothered to subject themselves to the will of the ballot box.

  11. All this talk about Palestinians and Israel occupation. Please explain where the Palestinians came from? As far as I learned in history class – before 1948 the area was called Palestine – that means whoever lived there were Palestinian. Just as whoever lives in America – no matter what religion or culture – are called Americans.
    There were Jews living in “Palestine” before 1948 -many years before 1948 so they too would be considered Palestinian.Which would mean they too have a right to the land.
    In 1948 when the UN declared the area be the State of Israel – the land was divided – between Jews and Arabs – the State of Israel and Jordan. No such thing as Palestinian.
    So, again, my question – please explain where these so called Palestinians came from and why Israel should give up any land to them. What land is Israel occupying?

Comments are closed.