Toronto Escorts

BDS Can’t Single Out Israel - Israel is the One And Only Occupier of Palestinian Land

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) just released a new position paper.

BEYOND THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION: A NEW CANADIAN FOREIGN POLICY FOR THE MIDDLE EAST

CJPME ARGUES THAT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (MPS) AND OTHER CANADIAN OFFICIALS SHOULD NO LONGER PRIORITIZE THE GOAL OF A TWO-STATE SOLUTION, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
A. Many observers believe that a two-state solution is simply no longer possible

Decades of Israeli settlement expansion and the ongoing colonization of occupied Palestinian territory have created a situation in which it is not possible to carve out a viable, contiguous, sovereign Palestinian state. Israeli roads and settlements carve up the West Bank and leave Palestinians trapped inside small pockets of land, surrounded by militarized Israeli infrastructure. Palestinian, Israeli, and international human rights organizations often describe this situation as a “one state reality” or a regime of apartheid, in which Israel upholds the domination of one group over another throughout the territory it controls.[1]

This may be irreversible. Creating the necessary land base for a Palestinian state would require a major evacuation of Israeli settlements, including the settlement blocs, the Jordan Valley, and East Jerusalem. However, Israel’s trajectory has been the opposite; instead of disengagement, Israel continues to expand illegal settlements and has been considering measures to formally annex significant portions of the West Bank. There is no question that Israeli authorities intend to maintain permanent control over these territories. As argued by Yousef Munayyer in the New York Times, “the two-state solution is dead. Israel has killed it.”[2]

B. The Israeli government does not, and has never, supported a two-state solution

There is virtually no support for an actual two-state solution among Israel’s political class. Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett vowed in 2013 to “do everything in my power, forever, to fight against a Palestinian state being founded in the Land of Israel,”[3]while his predecessor and Israel’s longest serving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in 2015 that a Palestinian state would never be established on his watch.[4] Even former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who signed the Oslo Accords (which were ostensibly about transitioning into two-states), never supported full sovereignty for Palestinians, but promoted a Palestinian “entity which is less than a state.”[5]

While some Israeli political parties might claim to support a two-state solution, what this almost always means in practice is that they support the principle of “separation,” or the creation of a semi-autonomous Palestinian entity under permanent Israeli subjugation.[6]

C. A Bantustan is not a State

As mentioned above, the most common vision for a two-state solution as offered by Israeli politicians is one of an Israeli state surrounding a Palestinian “entity,” elsewhere referred to as a “state-minus,” or possibly a “demilitarized state.” Such an entity would hold a degree of self-autonomy, but without exercising control over many of the core functions of sovereignty. In this vision, whether of the right-wing Netanyahu or the centrist Yair Lapid, Israel would retain ultimate sovereign control and have the right to militarily invade the Palestinian entity at will.[7]

It should be clear that any “solution” which would deny a potential Palestinian state full sovereignty over its security, borders, or airspace, is not a state. Instead, such an entity has more in common with the nominally independent “Bantustans” which Apartheid South Africa attempted to establish in the 1970s and 80s. Just as the international community refused to recognize Bantustans in South Africa, any similar arrangement for the Palestinians should be categorically rejected as offensive and unacceptable.

D. Human rights cannot be delayed pending the outcome of possible future negotiations

Waiting for negotiations that may or may not result in a two-state solution has trapped Palestinians in an unacceptable status quo characterized by violence and dispossession. The “Peace Process” has not succeeded in protecting the rights and safety of Palestinians under occupation, nor has it slowed Israel’s ability to consolidate control over territory and change the facts on the ground; since the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, Israel has quadrupled the number of settlers in the West Bank alone.[8] At a more fundamental level, it is not acceptable to expect Palestinians to wait for future negotiations to have their human rights respected. Freedom is urgent and non-negotiable.

The emphasis on negotiations is itself problematic in the context of an occupation. The existing framework adopted by Canada approaches the issue as a conflict with two equal and aggrieved parties. This is completely divorced from the reality, as Israel holds deeply asymmetrical power over the Palestinians – not only is Israel an occupying power, but it has one of the world’s most advanced military forces, and it is continually seizing and settling Palestinian territory with the intent of maintaining permanent control. In the absence of an impartial third-party resolution mechanism, or sanctions which can hold a party accountable for violations of international law, a process of negotiations will fundamentally favour and embolden the side with the most power.

E. A one-state solution may be preferable to two-states, as a fairer and more just option for all peoples

In the alternative to a two-state solution, a single democratic state with equal rights which respects the individual and collective rights of Israelis and Palestinians may be a preferred solution. Such an arrangement has the potential to enhance the freedoms and aims of all parties: families would be united, movement across the territory would be free, holy sites would be shared. Rather than fragmentation, segregation, and exclusion, a greater Israeli-Palestinian society could be characterized by inclusion and partnership.[9]

A one-state solution would also address the problems of discrimination and injustice beyond the occupied territories, extending greater rights to Palestinians who have Israeli citizenship, and facilitate the right of return for refugees (without reference to demographic majorities), a key final status issue for peace in the region.

The primary objection that critics make against proposals for a single democratic state is that the state would lose its exclusively Jewish character. In making this argument, the alleged need to maintain a Jewish demographic majority – itself a deeply discriminatory priority – is used as a justification to prolong the denial of basic human rights to Palestinians. This line of thought perpetuates the notion that it would be undesirable, or even impossible, for Israelis and Palestinians to live together in peace and security as equals. It also suggests that one group’s rights are inherently more important than the others. Democracy, not demographics, should be the goal of our foreign policy.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) just released a new position paper.
So you openly support Western elitism over the views of the people involved. So good to see we've decolonized our ways of thinking.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Wow….14 messages without interruption in 30 minutes. That does not meet the definition of manic no matter what anyone says! It was, I am honoured to say, a master class in deflection, non sequiturs and bafflegab. I will be studying it and emulating wherever possible.
As opposed to your mentor who is here 23 hours a day?

And I see you have desperately run away from the duties of host nations according to the UN Convention on Refugees.
 

Zoolooo

Member
Nov 18, 2008
81
55
18
As opposed to your mentor who is here 23 hours a day?

And I see you have desperately run away from the duties of host nations according to the UN Convention on Refugees.
Oh boy…let’s see how many manic posts are coming tonight….one a minute?
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Impressive…4 posts in 4 minutes. And the quality shows.
Sure would be nice if you actually took the time to defend your views.

Why is it you think Arab host nations deserve no blame for denying rights to refugees and generations of their ancestors? Do you think Canada should embrace a similar policy towards refugees?
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
...

The UN convention says ...
... Refugees should be given the chance to assimilate. It also explicitly says that refugee status does not pass to children born elsewhere. Do you think these Arab host countries are wrong for refusing to follow the convention or do you think Canada is wrong for following the convention?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
So you openly support Western elitism over the views of the people involved. So good to see we've decolonized our ways of thinking.
Zionism is colonialism.
Apartheid is colonialism.
The settlers are colonialism.
The settlements are colonialism.

Moving forward and giving people of all races equal rights is moving towards decolonization.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
... Refugees should be given the chance to assimilate.
Yes, the Palestinian Refugees should be given the chance to return to their homes in Israel/Palestine.
In fact, Israel should have honoured the multiple UN resolutions calling for them to do just that.
Now Israel has to also assimilate their descendants, according to the UN.

Doesn't matter how long Israel waits, they are still there.

Yes. Apartheid has a specific definition that isn't met here.
If that's the best defence you and Israel can come up with, your trip to the Hague isn't going to be very enjoyable.
You really think we should listen to you over HRW and the UN?
That's just so sad.

Defending such colonial racism in this day and age?
Shocking.
 

Liminal

Well-known member
Mar 21, 2003
1,575
217
63
... Refugees should be given the chance to assimilate. It also explicitly says that refugee status does not pass to children born elsewhere. Do you think these Arab host countries are wrong for refusing to follow the convention or do you think Canada is wrong for following the convention?
Again Zooloo has you nailed. You churn out posts like they are French fries at a fast food joint. Lots of empty calories. As in this case…all claims, no sources.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
... Refugees should be given the chance to assimilate. It also explicitly says that refugee status does not pass to children born elsewhere.
How convenient for Israel. Throw the Palestinians out and wait 50 years.
 

Liminal

Well-known member
Mar 21, 2003
1,575
217
63
How convenient for Israel. Throw the Palestinians out and wait 50 years.
Lying is the lingua franca of zionists.

Is the Transfer of Refugee Status to Descendants Unique to UNRWA

“No. Under international law and the principle of family unity, the children of refugees and their descendants are also considered refugees until a durable solution is found. As stated by the United Nations, this principle applies to all refugees and both UNRWA and UNHCR have recognized descendants as refugees on this basis.”

 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Yes, the Palestinian Refugees should be given the chance to return to their homes in Israel/Palestine.
In fact, Israel should have honoured the multiple UN resolutions calling for them to do just that.
Now Israel has to also assimilate their descendants, according to the UN.
...
So you are going with defiance of the UN Convention on Refugees just so you can excuse Arab League states for their crimes against humanity.

And sorry to burst your uneducated bubble but the UN resolutions and Convention on Refugees says return when there is peace. They also don't say descendants of refugees have any rights in their ancestors land.

And of course, the fact that very few Palestinian refugees/descendants want to be Israeli doesn't impact the colonial solution you want to impose on them.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Again Zooloo has you nailed. You churn out posts like they are French fries at a fast food joint. Lots of empty calories. As in this case…all claims, no sources.
So you agree with him that Canada should stop allowing refugees to assimilate and instead follow the lead of Arab League countries?
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
How convenient for Israel. Throw the Palestinians out and wait 50 years.
Yes, waiting for peace. That's how things happen in wars.

But you're just another guy happy to excuse Arab states for keeping generations locked in camps dependant on mainly western charity.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts