Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 14:18:24 -0400
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
From: Samuel Lubell <lubell at cais.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Political Inventions
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

At 10:09 AM 4/7/02 -0400, Ron wrote:
>
>On Thu, 04 Apr 2002 16:24:08 -0500 Ted White <tedwhite at compusnet.com>
>writes:
>
>... the Nazi-like invasion of surrounding
>> territories by the (right wing, fundamentalist) "settlers."   These
>> "settlements" are naked land-grabs and have caused great misery.
>> They are also the main sticking point in any peace efforts.   They
>*should* be
>> razed to the ground and wholly abandoned, but since it was Sharon who
>initially > established them, that appears unlikely.
>>
>
>On the face of it, it is not a wrongful act to buy land and settle on the
>land - people do that every day just about everywhere in the world.  The
>real problem with the settlements, I think, is in the intentions of the
>settlers, and of Israel, and not in the act of settling and habitation
>itself.  Doubtless most of the settlers wish to have Israel officially
>take possession of and sovereignty over the West Bank, Palestinians be
>damned.  The Palestinians now living in the West Bank territory, under
>that scheme, would have to accept second-class status under Israeli rule,

Why would they be second-class?  There are plenty of Arab citizens in
Israel proper who are full citizens with the right to vote.  There are even
Arabs in the Israeli Parliament.

However, one of the reasons why Israel has never annexed the West Bank is
that adding all the Arabs who lived there would make the Arab population
close to a majority.

>or leave Israeli jurisdiction.  But I observe that that is pretty much
>what the status is now.
>
>During Ottoman rule, and under the British Mandate, Jews and Palestinians
>got along peacefully living together in Palestine, except toward the end
>of the Mandate era, when it became increasingly apparent that creation of
>the long-anticipated Jewish state was imminent.  The peaceful conditions
>in the first 40 years or so of the 20th century are explained, I think,
>by the fact that Ottoman rule, and British rule, were mostly even-handed,
>not favoring any group over another.

The Jews and Palestinians may have lived peacefully but neither had any
real political rights.  That's like saying the solutions to the problems of
a democracy are to become a dictatorship.

>> In the meantime, the leaders of the Arab states have offered normal
>> relations to Israel if it returns the lands it seized in 1967.  This is
>a Major > Breakthrough -- and one Israel has turned its back on.

First don't forget that the Israel-Arab problems didn't start in 1967.
There were a few wars before that had nothing to do with those territories,
which Israel seized in part to have a buffer.  Israel understandably
believes that if it just gives up the territories, there'd be nothing to
stop them from being used as a base to attack all of Israel.

Second, the reason Israel has "turned its back" on the Arab peace process
is that it was accompanied by over 100 civilians being killed in terrorist
attacks in the last month.  I can't see any country being willing to
negotiate while civilians are under fire like that.

But somehow, when it is Jews being killed, the killers are called
"militants" not terrorists.