Should The Palestinians Be Permitted to Have Their Own State?
United States (U.S) Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will convene a trilateral summit in Jerusalem tomorrow, Feb.19th, with Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority (P.A.) President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen).
This will be the third time Olmert and Abbas have met in recent months. The meeting comes 11 days after Fatah and Hamas signed the Mecca Agreement, which details the formation of a Palestinian unity government, following weeks of bloody Palestinian infighting in Gaza that left scores dead, hundreds wounded and caused millions of dollars in damage to infrastructure.
Talks between Israel and the Palestinians broke down after Hamas took power in January 2006.
As Secretary Rice is now acting as a negotiator between representatives of the State of Israel and the Palestinians, there is quite a bit of tension in the air in the Middle East at the present moment. There are many, both Jews and Arabs who desire to co-exist peacefully, which can be evidenced through one's eyes when in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, even as this sentence is written, the Palestinians are ruled by Hamas, a very radical party who still refuses to recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist.
All readers of this blog know that I have questions so many of the policies of Bush and his administration, from his decision to invade Iraq to the lack of response to Katrina and his failure to acknowledge same sex unions and be an advocate for stem cell research. But when it comes to the State of Israel, there is something about Bush's politics that, at least for this reader, rings true, which is that any Palestinian State must recognize Israel and make an attempt to live with Jews in a peaceful manner.
In the past, I always felt that a two state solution was the proper answer, i.e., one for Israel and one for the Palestinians, however, with the state of the current affairs in the world, I question whether this goal can in fact be accomplished for the best interests of both Jews and Arabs alike.
What does it mean to have Statehood, one may ask? For one, it allows a body to have an organized government, with laws and protections, and a military formation and response. How can it be that the ruling government of the Palestinians, Hamas, would be allowed to form its own state when it fundamentally refuses to recognize the right of Israel to exist? How would we feel if our neighbors refused to recognize us, and allied themselves with governments who concluded that we should be wiped off the map and had no right to exist? How could we be allowed to exists with such a neighbor, who starts out as an enemy instead of a friend? Additionally, what about Jerusalem and its future? Would allowing the Palestinians the right to have their own state be tantamount to turning over the Holy City to Iran or Hezbollah?
Here is the question of the week: Do you believe that the Palestinians should be permitted to have their own state in light of the current politics that exist in the Middle East? What, if any safeguards, do you believe should be put in place to protect the security and safety of Israel?
Thank you for your minds.
This will be the third time Olmert and Abbas have met in recent months. The meeting comes 11 days after Fatah and Hamas signed the Mecca Agreement, which details the formation of a Palestinian unity government, following weeks of bloody Palestinian infighting in Gaza that left scores dead, hundreds wounded and caused millions of dollars in damage to infrastructure.
Talks between Israel and the Palestinians broke down after Hamas took power in January 2006.
As Secretary Rice is now acting as a negotiator between representatives of the State of Israel and the Palestinians, there is quite a bit of tension in the air in the Middle East at the present moment. There are many, both Jews and Arabs who desire to co-exist peacefully, which can be evidenced through one's eyes when in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, even as this sentence is written, the Palestinians are ruled by Hamas, a very radical party who still refuses to recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist.
All readers of this blog know that I have questions so many of the policies of Bush and his administration, from his decision to invade Iraq to the lack of response to Katrina and his failure to acknowledge same sex unions and be an advocate for stem cell research. But when it comes to the State of Israel, there is something about Bush's politics that, at least for this reader, rings true, which is that any Palestinian State must recognize Israel and make an attempt to live with Jews in a peaceful manner.
In the past, I always felt that a two state solution was the proper answer, i.e., one for Israel and one for the Palestinians, however, with the state of the current affairs in the world, I question whether this goal can in fact be accomplished for the best interests of both Jews and Arabs alike.
What does it mean to have Statehood, one may ask? For one, it allows a body to have an organized government, with laws and protections, and a military formation and response. How can it be that the ruling government of the Palestinians, Hamas, would be allowed to form its own state when it fundamentally refuses to recognize the right of Israel to exist? How would we feel if our neighbors refused to recognize us, and allied themselves with governments who concluded that we should be wiped off the map and had no right to exist? How could we be allowed to exists with such a neighbor, who starts out as an enemy instead of a friend? Additionally, what about Jerusalem and its future? Would allowing the Palestinians the right to have their own state be tantamount to turning over the Holy City to Iran or Hezbollah?
Here is the question of the week: Do you believe that the Palestinians should be permitted to have their own state in light of the current politics that exist in the Middle East? What, if any safeguards, do you believe should be put in place to protect the security and safety of Israel?
Thank you for your minds.
13 Comments:
Jeff Jacoby has a good piece on this. I found it at Robert Avrech's blog.
Here is an excerpt from the article:
" The wonder is not that the Palestinian Authority seethes with violence and instability; there are other places too where bloodshed is the daily fare. The wonder is not that the Palestinians, who receive copious amounts of international aid — more than $1.2 billion last year from Western governments alone — channel so much of their resources and energy into weapons and warfare. The wonder is that so many voices still push for a Palestinian state.
But has any population ever been less suited for statehood than the Palestinians? From the terrorists they choose as leaders to the jihad promoted in their schools, their culture is drenched in violence and hatred. Each time the world has offered them sovereignty — an offer that the Kurds or the Chechens or the Tibetans would leap at — the Palestinians have opted instead for bloodshed and rejectionism."
Jack,
Thank you for this excellent excerpt from the article.
There indeed are some very good, salient and interesting questions posed.
I think that even if a palestinian state is made, radical groups like Hamas will still try to destroy Israel, G-d forbid. And so I don't know what should be done.
Very well written Barbara.
OK
I have a number of responses
1 They already have a state, its called Jordan
2 They already run a state, Israel
3 Which nationality is looking for a state, the Syrian, Lebanese and Egyptian 1948 exiles?
4 A state for the 'palestinians' will not bring peace, we all know that.
5 Maybe Mr Kahana was right, a bit loud and racist but maybe he knew something that no Israeli government has ever figured out, yet.
6 Eh screw it just get the British back to run the place.
7 Ooh I know, the UN (LOL) should declare the middle east a weapons free zone, open free schools and get everyone a job and housing and then everyone will live happily ever after! Tralalala.
Read by type : NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!
luv- I hear you clearly.
Thank you captain.
Yingerman - you make some very good points, especially the one about Jordan.
Do you believe that the Palestinians should be permitted to have their own state in light of the current politics that exist in the Middle East?
Yes. The continued denial of statehood gives them an excuse to continue their "armed resistance" (codewords for terrorism). Once they are granted statehood, and the terrorism continues, the rest of the world should have no problem with backing Israel in annexing the West Bank and Gaza and completely removing any and all terrorist groups including the "legitimately" elected terrorist organization Hamas at whatever cost to "innocent" "Palestinian" Arabs.
What, if any safeguards, do you believe should be put in place to protect the security and safety of Israel?
There must be a protected corridor between Gaza and the West Bank until both are annexed by Israel. Egypt and Jordan must agree to absorb any "Palestinian" Arabs that flee those areas as a result of the ensuing hostilities. The UN must draft a resolution agreed to by every member country that Israel has the right to do what she must in the above scenario.
I could keep going but you get the drift:
It ain't gonna happen in our lifetime and then some.
My husband and I watched a program last night about the Yom Kippur war. Who was the American president that sent supplies to the Israelis? It certainly wasn't Carter. His anti-Semitism of the past echoes the democrats of today. Please be careful when you vote. It scares me that the far liberal left will turn their backs on Israel. After all, they turned their backs on Lieberman.
I think Robert Avrech's article speaks for me.
I'm glad you enjoyed the silly doggie photo on my blog. I have to be silly now and again to keep my blood pressure normal!!!
I don’t think a state or any country should be control or govern by any certain group.
Here in Idaho we are heavily populate by LDS (Mormons) there been Mormon ran companies and some of the discriminate quite a bit.
Their was a big logging company south of me. Would ask anyone he hired if they were members of Mormon religion and if not they wouldn’t get hired.
Quite a few years ago our local job service was ran by Mormons and you would waste your time in their unless you were a Mormon.
Not going in to a long length story that the person who ran the job service got sent to jail for a long time and things changed.
One of the smaller saw mill was ran by a member of the Mormon and found out he hired a non Mormon and told him that he needs to join the church or be fired.
All these things happen better then 20 years ago.
Now my point. I think every religion has the right to practice it’s believe. But I believe that no religion has the right to be involved with state governments or making laws to only benefit their members only.
I don’t believe Baptist, Catholics, Jewish, Buddhist, Wican and etc religion should have their own state.
I only wish I had an answer to the ones who are radical and have no desire to live in peace with any neighbors who belongs to something else other then what they are.
I believe the majority people want to be a good neighbor.
Mark,
I can see and respect your points. It has been my experience, that no one needs any reason to lash out at the Jews. We have been targets for so many generations. Do you truly believe that the confirmation of statehood will work to make the world less sympathetic to groups like Hamas and Hizbollah outside the Arab world? We are seeing these events happen now, and public reaction, even the loss of taxes are not a true deterient. You are dealing with a group of people who hate the Jews.
I think the current situation is untenable. Allow them a State with all its responsibilities. Then they can either straighten out, or risk real war.
IF they could stop killing each other, and those around them, I'd be for it...
No, they certainly shouldn't have their own state. All that will do is make it much easier for them to import arms and weapons with which to kill Jews.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home