Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another

thescroll_header

One-State Pollution

Dani Dayan makes noise we’ll be hearing about all day

Print Email
(Wikipedia)

The New York Times is KILLING IT this week. Yesterday, it was a not-so-groundbreaking investigation into Sheldon Adelson’s plan to deliver Jews to the GOP in November. Today, it’s an op-ed by Dani Dayan, the head of the Yesha Council, about the need to embrace a one-state solution as reality. Dayan writes:

Giving up this land [the West Bank] in the name of a hallowed two-state solution would mean rewarding those who’ve historically sought to destroy Israel, a manifestly immoral outcome.

Of course, just because a policy is morally justified doesn’t mean it’s wise. However, our four-decade-long settlement endeavor is both. The insertion of an independent Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan would be a recipe for disaster.

Dayan rejects a Palestinian state by explaining that Islamic extremism that will take root in the West Bank if a Palestinian state emerges leaving to recapture the land all over again. He then cites the (inflated) estimated settler population of 350,000, including 160,000 outside the settlement blocs as reasons to put to rest the concept of the two-state solution. He even asks the international community for help! After all:

Today, security — the ultimate precondition for everything — prevails. Neither Jews nor Palestinians are threatened by en masse eviction; the economies are thriving; a new Palestinian city, Rawabi, is being built north of Ramallah; Jewish communities are growing; checkpoints are being removed; and tourists of all nationalities are again visiting Bethlehem and Shiloh.

Sure, for two lines he sighs about checkpoints and the squalor in the 64-year-old Palestinian refugee camps, but otherwise, things are great! Everyone is comfortable with this situation! The settlements “are part of the solution.”

The subtext here is that Israel, with Dayan’s plan in mind, will eventually cease to be a democracy. If Israel absorbs a Palestinian population, instead of just occupying it, Israel will have to give them rights as citizens. That means a vote. Because if Israel doesn’t grant the Palestinians rights, the international community–whose support Dayan so insanely courts– will rally together and make Israel a real pariah, a fate that not even the United States will be able to save it from, especially once American Jews have abandoned Israel (which they obviously would).

But Dayan is not concerned by this. His ideas are not only anti-Zionist and anarchic, they’re also beyond the borders of reality.

Israel’s Settlers Are Here to Stay
[NYT]

Print Email
Cool_Romeo says:

I thought there was a dispute as to the future projections on the number of Jews and Arabs between the river and the sea. Is it really so definitive?

Oh great. So the choice is between daily rockets on Tel-Aviv and world condemnation. I choose the condemnation.

paul delano says:

‘His ideas are not only anti-Zionist and anarchic, they’re also beyond the borders of reality.’

And your statement reflects a complete and total misunderstanding of Zionism and a tenous grasp of Reality and a more-than-likely vote for Obama.

ginzy1 says:

I don’t have the time for a full discussion of DD’s ideas & AC’s reaction but just a few comments:

For the record I am not a Dayan acolyte nor do I share his views on the “1-state solution”. However I do think that the reactions I’ve been reading to DD and others like Knesset Chairman Ruby Rivlin who advocate this position have been way over the top.

First of all, the 350,000 Israelis living in Judea & Samaria is generally seen as an accurate estimate.

Secondly, and most importantly, the large majority of those pushing for Israel to formally annex Judea & Samaria fully intend to grant permanent residency and optional citizenship to the Palestinians living there. Rivlin (very much the student of Jabotinsky) is particularly adamant about residency / citizenship for the Palestinians.

The model the advocates point to is that of the post-1967 Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem. The population there have the same blue ID cards as other Israelis and get the full range of Israeli medical, social, and welfare benefits including the child allowances and health coverage; they are free to move around anywhere in Israel (a rising number are quietly moving to western J’lem neighborhoods). At **THEIR** option, they can elect to become full citizens of Israel so that they can vote in national elections (they already have the right to vote in local Jerusalem elections — some even exercise that right). Since 1967 relatively few have become full citizens but during the past few years that number has been rising steadily as talk of partition has risen.

There probably would be one difference in terms of the policy regarding the Palestinians in Judea & Samaria, in that **INITIALLY** there would probably be a waiting period of about 5-7 years before they could apply for citizenship. After that, it’s each individual’s choice.

I personally am not a fan of the idea & reluctantly accept the idea of a Palestinian state. But it doesn’t mean that it’s necessary to demonize Dayan, Rivlin & others who advocate this position. BTW I believe that Dayan is correct in predicting that a Palestinian state will likely go the way of Egypt & Gaza & become Islamist & very hostile to Israel. Expect rockets to hit B-G Int’l.

And also expect as many Palestinians who can will move into those villages in Area C near settlement blocs so that they can become part of Israel. They are neither stupid nor naive.

hg

J’lem / Efrata

Lisa Liel says:

Wow. Adam, you are so incredibly detached from reality that it’s hard to know where to start.

A “two-state solution”, in the minds of the Arabs, is simply one major step towards getting rid of Israel entirely. The fact that they can say this over and over again and people like you continue to bury their heads in the sand goes beyond the pathetic, and approaches the pathological.

The basic issue here is this. You and those like you are faced with an untenable situation. You know (if you use your brains) that the Arabs will never stop their campaign to “liberate” all of what they consider Palestine, including Tel Aviv and Haifa and Beersheba. Which means that you know giving them Judea and Samaria and almost tripling the length of Israel’s eastern border, not to mention giving Israel a 9 kilometer “waist” would be virtual suicide. But at the same time, you know that the only alternative to that would be for Israel to annex Judea and Samaria. Which would give Israel only two alternatives if it is to remain a Jewish state. To deny the Arabs there political rights, which smacks of apartheid, or to encourage the vast majority to leave. And since you can’t imagine most of them leaving without a fight, you’re left with expulsion, which makes you think of Nazi deportations.

The prospect of kicking Arabs out or denying them rights is so inconceivable to you that you’re willing to squeeze your eyes shut and hope for the best. Hope that everything the Arabs have ever done, every way they’ve ever reacted to concessions, will somehow be different this time, if we can only placate them.

Placating the Arabs, at any cost, is superior, for you, to defeating them. Thankfully, a growing number of Jews don’t agree. Both in Israel and in the US. A growing number of Jews are casting off the Christian idea of “turn the other cheek” in favor of the Jewish idea of “One who comes to kill you, rise up and kill him.”

Most of the Arabs want to leave. Poll after poll (including those done by the Arabs themselves) confirms this. They merely lack the means. What you should be doing is helping to raise money to reward Arabs who leave. To buy tickets for them and give them grants to build new and healthier lives elsewhere. The idea that you’d endanger Israel’s existence out of cognitive dissonance without even trying this first does not speak well of you at all.

PhillipNagle says:

While I don’t support the one state solution, I see nothing sacred about the 1948 cease fire lines. The arabs had adequate time to make these borders, instead they recognized them as only a temporary expedient until they could drive the Jews into the sea. Hamas, which won the last election among the so called Palestinians, still holds thar view.

Reuven Dattner says:

i am also for a two state solution.but–i live in israel and so do my children and grand children and i do not know-and nobody does-if it is the right solution.i dont hold people who dont think like me in contempt.i can only add that reading mr chandlers little article made me want to change the title to” the pollution of journalism.”l am now ready to read about the ugly ways jews talk to each other.

ge co says:

Read what somebody who actually knows the subject has to say. As opposed to Chandler who can’t even get the correct Jewish population right in Judea and Samaria.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/11863#.UBF7UaPmUtQ

gemel says:

Here is the Palestinian attitude towards Israel in several direct statements which make it clear why the 2-state solution is far off:
PA official applauds decision to forgo ‘racist’ moment of silence for Munich victims

http://www.timesofisrael.com/pa-official-thanks-olympic-president-for-rejecting-moment-of-silence/

East Jerusalem concert nixed after claims of ‘normalisation’RAMALLAH, Palestinian Territories (AFP) Wed Jul 25 2012 16:06:22 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time)
AFP (http://s.tt/1j0oU)

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0712/palestinian_concert_canceled.php3

Saint_Etienne says:

Dear Lisa, I’m afraid you might be trapped in an illusion of your own. What makes you think the Arabs actually want to leave? Can you provide links or references to those polls you mentioned?

This is a ridiculous defense of a warped ideological position. And in using the term “pollution”, downright despicable. Like that Munayyer anti-Semitic piece over at Beinart’s Open Zion. isn’t there an editor here at The Tablet with a modicum of responsibility?

Why are the population figure inflated? Israel Census Bureau confirmed them. Dani is anti-Zionist? Maybe Chandler? What type of silly argument is this? Where did Moshe Sharett and family live in 1908 if not Ein-Sinya, down the road from Shiloh, just north of Bet-El? Jews didn’t live in Hebron, Shchem, Gaza for centuries before being ethnically-cleansed by Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s? Zionism didn’t mean setting up 4 Kibbutzim in Gush Etzion, one of them of HaShomer HaTzair? Another of Machanot HaOlim in Bet HaAravah? Zionism today, a la Chandler, means accepting Arab racism – Arabs & Jews can live in Israel but no Jew can live in Palestine or the territory-there-to-be-of? Why should Israel stop being a democracy? Don’t Arabs vote in Israel today? If Chandler believes the (false and incorrect) demographic demonology, why won’t Arabs (they won’t) outnumber we Jews inside pre-1967 bordered Israel? You can’t have it both ways – that demographic threats only work as regards Judea and Samaria.

Oh, by the way, what happened in Gaza after disengagement? Hamas (extremism) came to power, Fatah men were thrown off roofs with their hands tied, rockets rained down only on civilian targets and – all is fine and dandy? And Chandler wants us to take a chance with that in Judea & Samaria? Oiy vey. Another messianic peace ‘activist’ or a radical progressive liberal.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4260448,00.html

Polls have shown that the majority of Arabs in Jerusalem rather staying under Israeli authority even though they are not etitled vote cor Knessest, over being part of the PLO state. If you care so much for what the “Palestinians” want, you should hear them out instead of relaying on PLO functionaries.

Pam Green says:

What’s with the MAP? It’s not even dated. No wonder he doesn’t give full attribution.

Saint_Etienne says:

This is all very well – but it would be hardly a viable solution.

Nanush says:

As we all know, Zionism was defined, and the State of Israel is recreated daily, by members of the chattering class, running their fingers over keyboards in groovy northern Brooklyn.

You should be advocating for the Pals in Judea and Samaria to get their jordanian citizenship and they do not have to move or go anywhere, just like the Israeli jews who are not going anywhere. Pals do not need or want to have a vote in Israel and we should not even debate that, it will not happen and Judea and Samaria (west bank) is Israel and if you have a problem with that, tough, its a territorial dispute not the end of the world, chillax.

Lisa Liel says:

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=40802

Do the current security, political and economic circumstances urge you to

emigrate?

West Bank

27.8% Yes

72.0% No

0.2% No opinion/I do not know

Gaza Strip

53.4% Yes

44.8% No

1.8% No opinion/I do not know
And this is a poll taken by An-Najah. Polls where the Arabs answering don’t need to be afraid would probably give even higher numbers.

Why in God’s name would you nod help facilitate their emigration? When the fundamental problem is the conflict between two populations and a large percentage of one of them wants to leave, what possible reason could there be for not trying that first?

Saint_Etienne says:

First of all, thanks for getting back to me. Btw, the link doesn’t really work – it takes one to the IMRA home page, but I get the point anyway.

In short, I think you are reading waaaay too much into this poll. Its phrasing is rather ambivalent – probably intentionally so. To me it reads like a gauge of people’s exasperation with their situation, not as a revelation of their deeply-harboured desire. In other word, it’s a sort of confession under duress and doesn’t really count.

Or that’s at least the way ti would be perceived by a neutral observer. Which brings me to point out that a plan of “urged emigration”, such as you appear to advocate would need to enjoy a reasonable measure of international support in order to succeed (or, instead, a great deal of coercion – but that’s not what you had in mind, presumably). Do you really think such support will be forthcoming?

Another beef I have with your argument is the “trying that first” trope. In politics every step taken by an actor changes the scene and a “here comes nothing” measure that brings derision and obloquy on its enactor may greatly diminish the scope of other measure to be tried later. Therefore, the “trying that first” argument should not be used lightly, if at all. If you need a case in point, recall that this had been exactly one of the arguments in favour of Oslo.

Cheers

Saint_Etienne says:

You have a valid point.
But, you know, people might have thought Herzl to have been a chattering class type of fella back in his day too… :)

Saint_Etienne says:

What has Obama to do with it? Don’t we have enough of our own political troubles for you to drag Obama into it?

gorak says:

Israel can absorb a million Palestinians and still be a majority Jewish state. The bulk of Palestinians live in Gaza. International law cannot compel Israel to invade Gaza again, even though this is the extremely ironic demand of the leftists who know the west bank can be absorbed without too much trouble.

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.

One-State Pollution

Dani Dayan makes noise we’ll be hearing about all day

More on Tablet:

An Insider’s Guide to the Most Important Story on Earth

By Matti Friedman — A former AP correspondent explains how and why reporters get Israel so wrong, and why it matters