As usual, Lakrosse spews propaganda. There is a difference between denial of a "right of return" and denial of citizenship in any nation, denial of the protection of civil law, denial of travel, commerce, education, and forcing a perpetual military occupation.
If Israel's military occupation of land (which it does not even formally claim) was just an issue of "denial of right of return" then this debate would not be as necessary and desperate.
Lakrosse, if you want to make the argument that Palestinians do not deserve to be citizens of any nation, and do not deserve protection of civil law, and should always be ruled under military occupation.. then make that argument.
If you believe that Israel's denial of civil law to the Palestinian people decade after decade is as evil as I believe it is, then why don't you join the conversation and bring some honest contributions.
I thought Yitzhak Rabin gave his life for peace. Wasn't it right-wing Israelis who assassinated their own prime minister because he was willing to end the status of Palestinians as a perpetual stateless people?
60 years since the Nakba was condemned by the nations of the world, and 40 years since the occupation of the West Bank, and serious debate in the US is paralyzed by pissy little philological digressions?
If terms of the debate have not been settled after half a century, I doubt that more care on my part would facilitate a better discussion. I would submit that reductionist escapes are the last refuge of those would chose to defend the indefensible.
I think something that we both can agree on is that Palestinians deserve to citizens of a nation, any nation, and that until they are protected by civil law, all Americans need to demand that the US not facilitate Israel's refusal to come to a disposition.
Then open Google Earth and scroll over the West Bank. You can tell which are Israeli colonies and which are Palestinian refugee camps from 5 kilometers up. Here's a clue: all those beautiful California type subdivisions are Israeli. Why would Israel spend billions building houses and infrastructure on land that the country doesnt even formally claim? Because Israel does not recognize Palestine's right to exist.
Again, in this thread, I don't think we are disagreeing.
Israel is a nuclear-armed regional superpower, it does not need a group of displaced refugees to recognize its existence.
Palestine is a UN dream, kept from reality by Israel. And yet the slogan chanted by Israeli apologists is that there can be no peace until Palestinians recognized Israel's right to exist. How fucked up is that?
"Palestine's right to exist", however, can be read as "Israel's need to stop existing", which is why I think it is such an incredibly and intentionally destructive string of words.
This is your baggage not mine. Israel needs to undergo a South Africa type transformation in the dismantling of its apartheidism, and an end to its vicious policy of ethnic cleansing. Like South Africa, this will only happen when the US decides to stop it. Israeli politicians, since the assassination of Rabin have made it clear that they will not make these moves independently.
Yes, the Palestinians could settle for the scaps of peace that Israel throws into their refugee slums.
Post Facto consent for their ethnic cleansing.
Agreement to abandon the rights promised them by the UN and other nations including the US
Facilitate the creation of internal Bantustans where they would trade citizenship in any nation for a flag and national anthem, and be perpetually ruled by military occupation, while the resources of their land are turned over to immigrants with actual rights.
There is no parity between Israel and Palestinian interests. It is transparent Israeli propaganda that the Palestinians are too difficult in peace negotiations. Anyone who knows the history of the peace process in the 1990's knows that the Netanyahu faction killed the Rabin advances, and now blame the failure on the Palestinians.
Israel does not want peace. It wants exactly what it has now. The ability to continue massive settlement expansion in the West Bank, continuing the blockade of Gaza, destroying Palestinian homes, and shrugs when faced with concerns about Palestinian welfare, "they are not serious about peace."
I think this would be the best solution, the establishment of a secular state in the land currently controlled by Israel, and universal suffrage, with special economic assistance to the displaced Palestinians. I have no doubts that this would lead to sustainable peace.
Lakrosse calls this a "demographic time bomb," reducing the humanity of a race of people to a simple disgusting idea, of how their very existence in their own land is a threat to an ethnically-cleansed state of Israel.
That is why there is no talking to the likes of Lakrosse.
I think you are agreeing with me or you have completely missed the point. Stability can only come when countries dismantle apartheidism. The US is a great example. If it was policy in the US to ethnically cleanse California of Mexicans, or ethnically cleanse Hawaii of Hawaiians, there would be ethnic unrest.
The US was founded by Europeans who created an ethnic apartheidism in a foreign land. Slavery, and even genocide have been practiced. But Americans have found stability and peace by criminalizing discrimination against formerly enslaved, or occupied people.
Indigenous Hawaiians are full and equal citizens of the United States. The are allowed protection by civil law, passports and the right to travel, the right to vote and fully participate in government. They are allowed to buy land and travel freely throughout the state and the rest of the country.
Palestinians have never enjoyed these rights under Israeli occupation. Ethnic strife won't end until Israel recognized Palestine's right to exist.
In the history of Europe many people have been displaced from their land. However, in the 21st century, no ethnic group in Europe is systematically denied citizenship in the nation of their birth.
Palestinians, victims of European ethnic cleansing and apartheidism, are denied citizenship in any nation. They may not have passports, they are not allowed to travel or engage in commerce, they do not have the security of civil law. They live under a brutal military occupation.
These false analogies vomited out by Lakrosse are the last desperate lies to try to convince Americans that there is a national interest in denying a true peace and disposition for the Palestinian people.