Israel/Palestine peace ideas

[Variable]

I was playing this game demo called 'Peace Maker' a while back. It's describes itself as a simulation game for "people of all ages who are socially aware and... interested in meaningful content"

It was alright I guess. You play as either the Palestinian Authority (I guess before Hamas took over Gaza), or the Israelis. As you make decisions, you get approval ratings of different groups like: International, local, Jewish settlers, Hamas etc.

More than anything it just got me thinking about this stuff again. If I were in a decision making capacity over there, I'd aim for these goals with regards to the Israeli/Palestinian situation (leaving the Golan out of it for now).

-Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders. No settlers or security walls, water extraction etc. beyond them, and anything there now to be dismantled.

-East Jerusalem would be Palestinian, although key areas would be under continual third party observations (i.e. holy sites).

- No right of return.

- some kind of corridor (even a secure highway) between West Bank and Gaza.


So that's definitely from an Israeli perspective, but the ball is in their court. They don't face any serious threat from surrounding countries and cite rocket fire as their justification for continued military action. That's little more than a nuisance and right now there-are-off the shelf solutions, they could neutralize the vast majority of the dangerous ones if they really wanted to.

I think the biggest problem would be dealing with the settlers hands down. With the proportionally represented system they've got, it's impossible to get anything through without the far right agreeing to it.

Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on that?

[arabookworm]

I agree with what you said, except for the part about no right of return because that is a right that the UN says refugees are entitled to, so I see no reason why they should give it up.

[Variable]

hey! Someone responded to my thread!

The reason I put down no right of return is because it's almost a backdoor method of ending Israel. Asking a state to absorb a group that would almost double its size in one fell swoop would be a tall order for anyone. Never mind a group that is hostile to it. Even the most vocally critical hippy Israelis are opposed to right of return. They give the same answer, that it's simply impossible to do so.

To revise that, I'd say it's certainly possible, but not without major problems that would lead to more violence.

[Revert]

Hmm I agree wiht the Right of Return idea. Israel is populated with Secular "Jews" so striclly speaking they don't have the right to live there.

If you have a certian amount of "Jewish" heritage you can live in Israel, even if you are a Jew hating Nazi...which is happening amongst the Russians settling there.

I think the right to return should only have been allowed to those who felt the need to return Post WW2 and there should have been a cut off point.

Anyone else should have to apply for a Visa like the rest of the Non Jews. The 1970 ammendment was BS in my opinion too.

I agree with everything you said V.

EDIT: I think the Palistinians should be alowed to return to their ancestreal homes too. Its only fair. However how condusive this would be to peace is anyones guess.

[Kaminyu]

Variable said

I was playing this game demo called 'Peace Maker' a while back. It's describes itself as a simulation game for "people of all ages who are socially aware and... interested in meaningful content"

It was alright I guess. You play as either the Palestinian Authority (I guess before Hamas took over Gaza), or the Israelis. As you make decisions, you get approval ratings of different groups like: International, local, Jewish settlers, Hamas etc.

More than anything it just got me thinking about this stuff again. If I were in a decision making capacity over there, I'd aim for these goals with regards to the Israeli/Palestinian situation (leaving the Golan out of it for now).

-Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders. No settlers or security walls, water extraction etc. beyond them, and anything there now to be dismantled.

-East Jerusalem would be Palestinian, although key areas would be under continual third party observations (i.e. holy sites).

- No right of return.

- some kind of corridor (even a secure highway) between West Bank and Gaza.


So that's definitely from an Israeli perspective, but the ball is in their court. They don't face any serious threat from surrounding countries and cite rocket fire as their justification for continued military action. That's little more than a nuisance and right now there-are-off the shelf solutions, they could neutralize the vast majority of the dangerous ones if they really wanted to.

I think the biggest problem would be dealing with the settlers hands down. With the proportionally represented system they've got, it's impossible to get anything through without the far right agreeing to it.

Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on that?

There's actually a very simple, sane, logical and practical solution to the problem:

End the apartheid, and end the occupation. Give everyone living there equal rights and citizenship, and let them have homes, travel and live where ever they want to.

[Wolfn]

A Lock-In at the rec center. Pizza included.



A lock-in will solve anything

[Jamroll]

Hey Variable,

Sounds like an interesting game. I think I would agree with pretty much everything you've suggested, except right of return. I'm guessing most people on Islamica would have right of return on their list of must-have's.

I understand what you're saying about it effectively ending Israel, but that's not necessarily the case. If you're saying Israel, the apartheid state, as it stands now, then yes. But I think most rational people would agree or be persuaded that Israel in its current state can only exist as a viable state for so long. If instead we're talking about Israel, the people, the Jewish culture and tradition, then there's no reason why it should be removed. It is as much a part of the Middle East as are Muslims.

There may be initial difficulties, I'd be suprised if there wasn't after so much hostility, but ultimately, if the Israelis and Palestinians can live together side-by-side as equal citizens, they'll get used to each other, after a few decades, the frost will thaw.

[MossadConspiracy]

hello

what you came up with is very similar to the principles behind the camp david agreement that arafat rejected, as well as the Taba agreement that Israel walked away from after the second intifada began

the basic outlines for the final status are pretty much defined by now and the broad strokes are agreed upon by both leaderships. The problematic stuff is in the small details- which settlements are dismantled and which are annexed by Israel, which arab towns get annexed to Palestine, how many palestinian refugees get to come back to Israel, how many get to go to Palestine, how much money is given to the rest, the exact nature of Jerusalem's final status, etc.

if those documents along with the Arab League proposals and the roadmap are used as a jumping-off point, I'm sure a final treaty can be concluded very quickly. Unfortunately good-faith negotiations are unlikely. It is really up to the Israelis to decide whether peace will happen or not, eventually they will give in and realize they cant have their cake and eat it too, then these documents will be dug up and they'll give the Palestinians their state

Jamroll said

Hey Variable,

Sounds like an interesting game. I think I would agree with pretty much everything you've suggested, except right of return. I'm guessing most people on Islamica would have right of return on their list of must-have's.

I understand what you're saying about it effectively ending Israel, but that's not necessarily the case. If you're saying Israel, the apartheid state, as it stands now, then yes. But I think most rational people would agree or be persuaded that Israel in its current state can only exist as a viable state for so long. If instead we're talking about Israel, the people, the Jewish culture and tradition, then there's no reason why it should be removed. It is as much a part of the Middle East as are Muslims.

There may be initial difficulties, I'd be suprised if there wasn't after so much hostility, but ultimately, if the Israelis and Palestinians can live together side-by-side as equal citizens, they'll get used to each other, after a few decades, the frost will thaw.

salam

bro, putting aside the fact that this is impossible while a two state solution is possible right now, most palestinians dont want to be Israeli citizens or citizens in a binational state with Israeli jews. Theres a very strong nationalist sentiment among the Palestinians, these guys want to build a country for themselves. Thats what they're fighting for, not Israeli passports

ws

[Variable]

MossadConspiracy said

hello

what you came up with is very similar to the principles behind the camp david agreement that arafat rejected, as well as the Taba agreement that Israel walked away from after the second intifada began

Yeh I know... even Jimmy Carter.

The biggest sticking point on the Israeli side I think is settlers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Israeli system, the zionist right calls an election if anyone talks of closing settlements in the West Bank.

[Variable]

Jamroll said

Hey Variable,

I understand what you're saying about it effectively ending Israel, but that's not necessarily the case. If you're saying Israel, the apartheid state, as it stands now, then yes. But I think most rational people would agree or be persuaded that Israel in its current state can only exist as a viable state for so long.

If Israel pulled back to pre-67 borders, then it wouldn't be an apartheid state, and I think it'd exist as long as states do.

If instead we're talking about Israel, the people, the Jewish culture and tradition, then there's no reason why it should be removed. It is as much a part of the Middle East as are Muslims.

I'm talking about Israel as a state.

There may be initial difficulties, I'd be suprised if there wasn't after so much hostility, but ultimately, if the Israelis and Palestinians can live together side-by-side as equal citizens, they'll get used to each other, after a few decades, the frost will thaw.

Pursuing right of return is essentially pursuing the restoration of what's now Israel over to Arab control. That's what that means. And that's not going to happen without a big fight. So, in looking for a peaceful resolution to all that - is peace possible without right of return?

[Jamroll]

Variable said

If Israel pulled back to pre-67 borders, then it wouldn't be an apartheid state, and I think it'd exist as long as states do.

Actually, bro, I'm sure if we think about it, there's more to a state than just land. A state would need control of its own airspace, its own borders, free access to any territory that belongs to it, access to energy supplies and water. As far as I knew, under the kind of Camp David proposal you're suggesting, Israel would still ultimately be in control of these things, therefore the Palestinian state would be wholly dependent on Israel for basic supplies and freedoms.

A better solution would be all living together in one state, side-by-side, maybe kind of like how South Africa is now.

I'm talking about Israel as a state.

Ah I see. I don't think Israel can realistically continue for much longer, as a viable state as it is at the moment. For one, it's economy is in tatters. Also, it has no real security for its public. The only response it has is to attack civilian infrastructure, which doesn't do much for its public image. I think lasting for another 50-100 years would be a pretty good achievement for them.

Pursuing right of return is essentially pursuing the restoration of what's now Israel over to Arab control. That's what that means. And that's not going to happen without a big fight. So, in looking for a peaceful resolution to all that - is peace possible without right of return?

If they allow full control of airspace, borders, access to energy and water, then maybe some kind of deal could be worked out.

[Variable]

Jamroll said

Actually, bro, I'm sure if we think about it, there's more to a state than just land. A state would need control of its own airspace, its own borders, free access to any territory that belongs to it, access to energy supplies and water. As far as I knew, under the kind of Camp David proposal you're suggesting, Israel would still ultimately be in control of these things, therefore the Palestinian state would be wholly dependent on Israel for basic supplies and freedoms.

Well, in my idealistic sim, they'd have all that. I really meant that all Israeli activity would end beyond 1967 borders (including airspace).

Ah I see. I don't think Israel can realistically continue for much longer, as a viable state as it is at the moment. For one, it's economy is in tatters. Also, it has no real security for its public. The only response it has is to attack civilian infrastructure, which doesn't do much for its public image. I think lasting for another 50-100 years would be a pretty good achievement for them.

I'd disagree, Israel is there and it's there to stay for a long time. It's economy isn't so bad that it's about to implode. I think if it was in serious trouble the diaspora would come to its aid. As for security, it's actually not bad considering. Suicide bombers seem to be at bay. The main threat is from rocket attacks which are random at best. Actually that threat could be negated right now if Israel really wanted to... with available off-the-shelf technology. And no conceivable coalition of forces could take on Israel conventionally. Thus, the ball is in Israel's court - it's really up to them.

[MrZ]

pass the pipe

[Variable]

MuslimZ said

pass the pipe

That was kind of my other idea... hot box the whole region and give peace a chance.

[asma1234]

hold up people are we suggesting the equal share of the land of palestine to the jews! which it doesnt even have a equal share to in any way?