Palestine: If America won’t do what is needed Europe should and here’s why
Yes, that would mean the de-Zionization of Palestine and the end of Israel as a “Jewish state”, but for the Jews who wanted to be citizens of whatever the one state was called it would be only the beginning of a bright, new future, one in which their security was guaranteed and their general wellbeing was best served. And what a contrast that would be with what Israel’s Jews currently have – growing insecurity and fear of the future as the global tide of anti-Israelism rises higher and higher.
That in my view is what Europe led by Britain and America should make clear to Israel, all of its Jews as well as their leaders.
Footnote
A few years ago I asked a Jewish friend of mine what one state for all could be called. Without a pause for thought, and with good humour, he said “PALESTEIN!”
Page 4 of 4 | Previous page
ontogram:
November 22nd, 2014 at 8:22 am
“Zionist” – someone who does not believe in G*d but is convinced He gave Palestine to him!
Banda:
November 22nd, 2014 at 8:55 am
Does this mean that Israelis will leave the West bank and Israel will return to UN resolution 242 and the 1967 Green Line boundary.
Sami:
November 22nd, 2014 at 12:42 pm
The Zionists are inebriated by their success in controlling the corridors of power in the western world to the extent that they cannot see beyond their snouts. They have never ever had any Israeli leader who had the foresight to acknowledge that they live on stolen land in an hostile environment and that sooner or later there will be a day of reckoning. It is in their very best interest to make peace on Palestinian terms; yes, I said Palestinian terms.
Let us face it, if I were an Israeli Jew, the very last place on planet earth that I want my children and their offspring to be is usurped Palestine.
Rehmat:
November 22nd, 2014 at 12:49 pm
Dear Hart – your last paragraph reminds me two of my friendly Jewish bloggers, Gilad Atzmon (UK) and Roger Tucker (US), who did not agree with my views on a united Palestine for both Muslim-Christian natives and the foreign Jews. They insisted that the foreign Jews should return to their ancestral lands.
http://rehmat1.com/2010/06/18/palestine-the-third-option/
Roberto:
November 25th, 2014 at 11:15 am
Barenboim attitude has several flaws: it put same weight in both sides (Israel/Palestine): security, suffering, responsibility for peace, rights… which seems cynical or suspiciously naive. Maybe he is 20% Palestinian and 80% Israeli. I was shocked when he made the Diwan orchestra performs to “celebrate” the 60th anniversary of Israel.
Benares:
December 1st, 2014 at 4:04 pm
In this context, I strongly recommend a recent book by American journalist Alison Weir (note: not identical with British historian by the very same name): “Against Our Better Judgment, how the U.S. was used to create Israel”; check at If Americans Knew. Ms Weir tells the story of Zionism’s actions in the beginning of the 20th Century, to bring the U.S. under the yoke of Zionism.
pabelmont:
December 14th, 2014 at 8:52 pm
The Europeans (like the USA) have signed on to the Geneva Conventions but refuse to do what they promised to do — ensure compliance with the conventions in all circumstances.
The EU seem to day closer to doing something positive about I/P but the powers of stasis (be it the USA, the AIPAC and its European partners) have made the EU very timid. However the European people seem farther along in recognizing what’s happening — for example recently in Gaza.
I’m not a betting man, but I’d favor the EU over the USA if the question were which group is going to seek to enforce international law first.