Today’s Dominion-Post editorial – and if you missed it, Tom Scott’s cartoon – sums up the Israeli position that has become more strident under Netanyahu’s government. It’s now angered the US more severely than has been seen for some time.
Israel gets away with settling around 500,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank (what is occupied Palestinian territory) in violation of international law simply because it can.
Israel’s overall population growth is around 1.9% a year. But its population growth in the West Bank is 5.8%. In other words, its population is growing three times faster in land that belongs to someone else.
The reason is pretty straightforward. Land is cheap, in fact the land is free because its Palestinian territory and developers receive incentives to develop there. That makes for pretty cheap housing.
There are two bigger questions – as the Israeli population grows – where do the Palestinians go? Currently they’re crowded into small fragmented pieces of the West Bank and need a complex system of permits to go from one area to the next.
And, what’s Israel’s longer strategic plan? Inhabit all of the West Bank alongside a growing Palestinian populaton?
None of it sounds very peaceful.
Sad thing is nothing good is ever going to come from this for the Palestinians. Makes me so angry that USA can blatantly defend Israels position on pushing thousands of people out of their own land, who is going to stand up to USA though? The UN? Like USA will listen to them. Tis a sad situation indeed.
I just can’t believe the hypocrisy of those Jewish people given what happened in Germany. Frightening.
sadly the lesson some (not all!) Jewish people learned from the Holocaust was “get your retaliation in first”. There are some brave Israelis standing up against the outrageous behaviour of the Israeli government. A high proportion of them were holocaust survivors (now sadly few in number of course) while the most aggressive expansionists are often immigrants from the US with no personal experience of oppression.
And the solution is David?
A lot of people were worried about American occupation of Iraq and an attempt to secure contracts for the Iraqi oil fields before elections were held. Sistani forced a the Americans, then struggling with Sunni resistance, to hold elections first (or face Shia opposition as well).
Yet on the West Bank, where the coveted asset is land, the occupier is appropriating land and building on it (houses or fences) without any consent from the local sovereign people.
Nothing this corrupt has occured since we took Maori land for Auckland lawyers and then for public projects (once Pakeha society became more egalitarian) and ultimately housing on Bastion Point.
When the occupying power does it just to build housing, it’s a sign of the end for the perpetrator. They should be ashamed of themselves and of course can soon look forward to a century of guilt and compensation arrangments.
It’s time the Americans simply said they might support the PA declaring a West Bank Palestinian state within 67 borders (given Hamas has turned Gaza into an area which is unfit to be part of a modern nation state) and one including existing Jewish settlements. Simply requiring the PA to guarantee Jewish settler security when they did so when they asked the IDF to withdraw to within 67 borders (relocate the fence). That is if there is no significant progress on peace talks. If that will not change Israel’s attitude to peace talks then nothing will.
Israel’s plan has always been to get rid of the Palestinians. They started off in the 19th century buying land from absentee “land owners” (who almost invariably couldn’t actually prove ownership) and then kicking the Palestinians off land that they had occupied and used for centuries. Going into the 20th century they started using terrorism against both the British and the Palestinians meanwhile getting high level support from Britain and the US. Once WWII finished they then went to the UN and got them to “give” them a homeland – one that belonged to another people (which is actually against the UN mandate). Once they had that they then pushed the Palestinians out as much as possible using extreme violence and which they keep up to this day.
If the US wanted to stop it they could by the simple expedient of removing the several billion dollars per year of aid that they give Israel but they won’t as that aid is pretty much a back door subsidy of the US military-industrial complex.
deleted. Please find something constructive to say if you want to participate in the debate. Grant.
One of the premises for going to war with Iraq was their breach of UN resolutions. Israel has breached a hellova lot more than Iraq. I am NOT saying that groups in Palestine are not vicious or terrorist, but in a country based on refugee camps you have to ask yourself what you expect frompeople with nothing left to lose.
I endorse the comment above that MANY Israelis do not support their own Government’s stancein al this, young and old.
It also is not in the media, Israel or terrorist groups interests to show us the large number of arabs and israelis living and wokring side by side within Israel.
The USA have long been hypocrites in this. They need this strategic base, they wont jeopardise that.
Israel is America. Without American money and armaments it would not exist. The reason for this support is twofold – - – the huge political power of the Jewish population in the States and the huge strategic advantage of Israel as an American “outpost” in the middle east.
Draco, I think I disagree with every comment on your post (but this issue should not be distracted by that debate about historical matters). Yet we are equally critical of Israel’s current actions, because they are wrong. I guess this is why there are some Israelis and many American Jews who agree with us on that. The current Israeli government has more support from local residents for its policy than it does from those Americans.
The problem for American Jews is that, while critical of Israeli government policy (and also Bush Iraq policy), they do not want to be seen supporting their government forcing Israel into anything.
American policy, in regard to Israel, is a lot more nuanced than it may appear – the UN set up Israel (premised on the earlier LON Palestine mandate) and recognises it and also a Palestinian state alongside it. The UN is committed to collective security for its member nation states, which is why its resolutions support the establishment of a Palestinian state, albeit without prejudice to Israel’s continuance. The US sets itself up as a global super power providng international security (the actual rationale for the MI complex) for Americans doing business on a global basis (think big oil, banking etc). While denying Israel a security alliance, as part of collective security, they supply aid to Israel for their self-defence and also aid to Arab states which are at peace with Israel. Since Oslo, in 1993, that has included, to varying degrees, the PA. Thus they can play peace talks broker.
I will make one commment about historical matters – it is some irony that the strongest supporters in America for its unconditional support to Israel come from fundamentalist and evangelical Christians (otherwise security hawks who supported the war in Iraq).
Listen here Grant, maybe you don’t understand what the freedom of speech means but what it means to me is that I have the right to say what I think. Balance deleted
I didn’t see the original comment but you certainly don’t have the right to put whatever you think on Red Alert. Much of what you do try and put on is offensive. Trevor
Wonderful David, but honey, are you the MP for the middle east or for Mt. Albert? Because you don’t come here much, and when you do I would hope you are looking towards NZ, and Mt. Albert and not the middle east.
I would like to know you mind is focused, on not on some UN position from your former position.
Yours in happiness, a Mt Albert voter
Hey sweetd – you’d better watch out, buddy, when the Westbank fills up guess where they’re coming next? Mount Albert! Mwahahahahaha!
BTW this post is good, cheers David.
Spud, if they pay taxes, are not a burden to our health system, integrate into our communities, and obey NZ law, then I care where they are from. If they play rugby/cricket and love BBQ’s, then they are especially welcome.
Please disregard above, typo/wine incident.
Spud, if they pay taxes, are not a burden to our health system, integrate into our communities, and obey NZ law, then I (don’t) care where they are from. If they play rugby/cricket and love BBQ’s, then they are especially welcome.
SPC
I will make one commment about historical matters – it is some irony that the strongest supporters in America for its unconditional support to Israel come from fundamentalist and evangelical Christians (otherwise security hawks who supported the war in Iraq).
Tis indeed.
This interesting. The background to the flare up in US/Israel contains some actually new developments, which are rare enough things in this conflict.
Petraeus (sp?) saying that Israel’s actions, (given the perceived US support for her, and her reliance on US military aid) endanger US troops serving in conflict zones is political dynamite. I’m not sure that it has really sunk in yet.
Now it becomes public that…
…and the underlying tensions become more apparent. If the US military is lobbying against Israel, any President’s hands are tied.
So those saying (in the links at the link above there should be some) that the diplomacy is aimed at forcing a coalition change in Israel towards something more moderate look like they might be on to something.
Interesting times for sure, and not only Presidents, but hawkish US citizens are going to have to make the ‘Pentagon lobby vs. Israel lobby’ choice as well.
The problem will be realising any impact on the politicians of the Israeli coalition. It will be taken seriously by some – those “defence/ex military” with historic perspective and current responsibilities.
The only way to change the make-up of the political coalition is to impact on voters the seriousness of the situation and like any other group of people there is the possibility of a reaction to any appearance of pressure on their nation’s sovereign decision-making.
If that is not problematic enough, there is the issue of a division between pro US military/defence/security and the fundamentalist and evangelical Christians – Obama is between a rock and a hard place there – neither is his (or Democrat) natural constituency, but for differing reasons that dilemma also falls on Republicans.
Surprisingly those with the most to gain may be American Jews (Democrat), they want tougher US policy on Israel, but will not openly advocate for it. As long as they are not blamed for it, they can live with it.
To Trev:
I stated I support any country (in this case Israel) in that area that stands up against the arab countries
Its my personal opinion, I’m entitled to it and I’m concerned that opposing views are deleted, contrary to the values of free speech
I havent said anyone else is wrong in their views on this thread because everyone is entitled to their own opinion and should be allowed to freely express them
Unlike you i happened to have actually served this country (peacekeeping in East Timor)protecting peoples rights on this very issue
so there
I’ve noticed over time the tide of feeling on this issue amongst NZers shifting from being traditionally pro-Israel to siding with the Palestinian situation – at least amongst those who follow the debate.
The solution as Ian asks: there are really only 3 and variations around them. 1. A two-state solution Israel beside Palestine 2. Expelling all Palestinians to Jordan, hardly a solution, but pushed by some hardliners 3. A one-state solution where Jews and Arabs live in the same country. This is the nightmare solution for Israel because Arabs would outnumber Jews.
Back to the point – why would Israel undermine with settlement expansion a future Palestinian state? The two-state solution is held up as the only seemingly sane solution.
Strategically, it’s incomprehensible and can only harm Israel itself in the long run.