Israel - Hamas War X

[fionwe1987]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

 I think this is also equally impossible given the contradictory needs of Israelis and Palestinians. 

What contradictory needs, specifically? I see a lot of common needs, especially intensified this past month and a half. 

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Looking at this realisticly… do you believe a majority Muslim Arab State in Palestine would respect the right of Jews to emigrate to that new State?  That the Muslim Arab majority State would respect the religious practices of religious minorities in the newly created State? If yes, why?

Actually, if no, why not, is a better question.

It's reasonable to say such examples are currently rare. But I don't think you're claiming there's something fundamental to being Muslim and Arab that makes this impossible.

So why not? The answer certainly lies in the history of geopolitical violence in the region, but any peace process and solution (whether one state or two state) has to deal with those issues head on. 

I've asked this before, but wouldn't answering these questions about what would work for a future solution be best answered by way of plebiscite of the entire population of the region? 

I may be way off in my optimism, and such a process might reveal deep un-healable divisions in the populace, and not just in the extremest leaderships of both peoples, but then at least we'd have clear boundaries of what is plausible.

As it is, I think we're all taking the actions of leaders of the various players, seeing their complete failure, and ascribing to Israelis and Palestinians a total inability to exist in a future where both their rights are protected equally. 

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

 

 

44 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

What muslim majority countries are there out there that do this? Serious question. The only one I can think of that might apply is turkiye, and that's stretching things.

Indonesia springs to mind? The land with the largest Muslim population in the world?

I do want to know what specific criteria we're assessing this by here, though. And to then ask if we know of Christian or Jewish majority lands meet those criteria as well. 

44 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

They're not a monolith but they do as a vast majority support a religiously run country.

And that in turn is a result of the thinning out of moderate or modernizing voices who also happened to question colonial rule, or later, the oil-centered American geopolitics in the region, which further bolstered rule by religious authority. 

None of that says that the people are incapable of living in a secular democracy that enshrines the rights of minorities. 

6 minutes ago, Darryk said:

Israel and Palestine becoming one state is no more realistic than Pakistan and India becoming one state.

Gandhi wanted one state shared between Muslims and Hindus but they ignored him and founded two states. Then most of the Muslims in India got kicked out and most of the Hindus in Pakistan got kicked out. It was magnitudes more violent and horrific than what happened during the Israel Palestine split.

Needless to say, both countries still co-exist even though they hate each other. That shows a two-state solution can work even the two states hate each other. The problem is the Palestinians don't have a state yet so they have no reason to stop fighting. If they had their state they'd be invested in running a country and thus less incentive to go to war.

Its not nearly as simple as that. For one thing, Bangladesh, which was East Pakistan, separated from Pakistan by India geographically, also gained political independence, at no small cost to lives. 

And if you look at the history of partition, it is not about deep religions animosity on the ground driving a practical solution of partition. Even the nature of Partition was not understood by the very leaders doing it. There are letters showing Jinnah planned to keep his homes in Bombay and Delhi, and he definitely did want a secular Pakistan, not an Islamic state. 

If you look at the history of the subcontinent, I think it is proof that a two state solution was not needed, even if needed should have been implemented better, and once implemented has only led to war and ruin.

Not exactly something I want to wish on the Israelis and Palestinians in perpetuity.

Even if a two state solution is all we end up with, they better learn from the Subcontinent and not repeat the fuck ups, but evidence so far is that things are proceeding in alarmingly similar lines. 

[Kalbear]

Sorry @fionwe1987 - this Indonesia?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/24/religious-minorities-indonesia-face-discrimination

[Kalbear]

4 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Sorry @fionwe1987 - this Indonesia?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/24/religious-minorities-indonesia-face-discrimination

Or maybe this Indonesia?

https://www.hrw.org/report/2013/02/28/religions-name/abuses-against-religious-minorities-indonesia

[fionwe1987]

9 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Sorry @fionwe1987 - this Indonesia?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/24/religious-minorities-indonesia-face-discrimination

I can show you proof of religious discrimination in pretty much every Western state known. 

I have family in Indonesia who aren't Muslim, which is where my understanding comes from. This doesn't make it some kind of secular paradise. There have been regional religious tensions aplenty. But it is a mostly functioning secular democracy, and it has a very large Muslim population, the largest in the world. Seems fairly relevant to this discussion of whether Muslim majorities can live in a secular democracy. 

If we're now shifting goalposts to "secular multiethnic democracy with no religious intolerance", we're in make believe land, since I know no existing nation that fits that bill. 

[Darzin]

4 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I believe, with regret and sadness, that a “two State solution” is the least bad option for dealing with the question of Palestine/Israel.  

Why with sadness? A two state solution is best for everyone. I think current rhetoric from Fatah and the fact there are no Jews left in any Arab  countries and that pretty much every reasonable proposal has ended up there Sadly it doesn't seem like a two state solution is going to happen anytime soon.

In my opinion most Israelis are way to complacent with the current situation. They already have everything they want and the Palestinians outside of Gaza have been shunted off into inconvenient defanged little enclaves. Most Israeli's I've talked to online and in real life support indefinite occupation. They see the Palestinians as incapable of making peace and the withdrawal from Gaza as proof that any end to the occupation will just lead to endless terror attacks.

I personally think the best end to the conflict is for Israel to unilaterally create a Palestinian state, draw whatever border they want and recognize a state of Palestine with "temporary" borders. Both sides may not agree but both sides don't have to agree to have peace. See North and South Korea for example. 

[Ran]

Christians and Jews did "all right" in the Middle East... when they were the dhimmi, the explicitly second-class citizens. I don't think the Israelis are interested in that status.

2 minutes ago, Darzin said:

I personally think the best end to the conflict is for Israel to unilaterally create a Palestinian state, draw whatever border they want and recognize a state of Palestine with "temporary" borders.

The danger with this approach is the common accusation that these "states" would only be such on paper, but would really be "Bantustans", no difference to the scenario we have today. But otherwise, I agree, Israel should bite the bullet and do what's necessary to create one or two Palestinian states, and once they have statehood conflicts can be dealt with in the normal fashion between belligerent states. 

 

[Daeron the Daring]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

What muslim majority countries are there out there that do this? Serious question. The only one I can think of that might apply is turkiye, and that's stretching things.

Bosnia, Albania.

Lebanon, to some extent, altough the syrian refugee crisis had a heavy effect on the country (which resulted in the deteoriation of religious freedom of the christian population).

Now in particular, Bosnia is not a succes story, but it is important to note that the creation of a single state in principles would not be so different from how the modern-day Bosnia was created. Ethnic and religious lines couldn't simply be drawn for obvious reasons, and despite the recent Yugoslaw wars (which had some real shit happen), the consensus of the arbitrators was to draw those lines you see on the maps, making the country a muslim majority one. The three main ethnic groups all hate the other two, and yet it's a 'functioning' state.  That we cannot apply the same principles in case of this situation rather seems driven by interest to me.

 

Edited November 13, 2023 by Daeron the Daring

[Altherion]

The hard part of any solution is getting the two sides to stop hating each other so much. While there exist multi-ethnic states and federated states and, as long as one is willing to ignore minor religious persecution, one might even be able to find one such with Muslim majority... but none of these is composed of two groups so antagonistic to each other. Similarly, while a two state solution is theoretically possible, it's pretty clear that the very first priority of the newly created Palestinian state would be to arm as heavily as possible and from that point on it would only be a matter of time before they were at each other's throats again.

It's not at all clear how to get them to tolerate each other though -- and it's gotten much harder after the last few weeks.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Just now, Daeron the Daring said:

Bosnia, Albania.

Lebanon, to some extent, altough the syrian refugee crisis had a heavy effect on the country (which resulted in the deteoriation of religious freedom of the christian population.

Now in particular, Bosnia is not a succes story, but it is important to note that the creation of a single state in principles would not be so different from how the modern-day Bosnia was created. Ethnic and religious lines couldn't simply be drawn for obvious reasons, and despite the recent Yugoslaw wars (which had some real shit happen), the consensus of the arbitrators was to draw those lines you see on the maps, making the country a muslim majority one. The three main ethnic groups all hate the other two, and yet it's a 'functioning' state.  That we cannot apply the same principles in case of this situation rather seems driven by interest to me.

 

Are Bosnia and Albania in the middle-east?  Are they in Asia.

[Kalbear]

6 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

I can show you proof of religious discrimination in pretty much every Western state known. 

I have family in Indonesia who aren't Muslim, which is where my understanding comes from. This doesn't make it some kind of secular paradise. There have been regional religious tensions aplenty. But it is a mostly functioning secular democracy, and it has a very large Muslim population, the largest in the world. Seems fairly relevant to this discussion of whether Muslim majorities can live in a secular democracy. 

If we're now shifting goalposts to "secular multiethnic democracy with no religious intolerance", we're in make believe land, since I know no existing nation that fits that bill. 

Actual killings and burnings of villages and people are a bit more than intolerance. And that's not getting into the sexism or the actual outlawing of other religions other than the big 6 or all sorts of other things.

It really isn't moving the goalposts. If that is your example it is an excellent example of what Israelis would fear living in such a country - where the constitution forbids religious bias but the practice ignores that completely except when it applies to muslims.

[Darzin]

3 minutes ago, Ran said:

The danger with this approach is the common accusation that these "states" would only be such on paper, but would really be "Bantustans", no difference to the scenario we have today. But otherwise, I agree, Israel should bite the bullet and do what's necessary to create one or two Palestinian states, and once they have statehood conflicts can be dealt with in the normal fashion between belligerent states. 

 

Well it would have to be a somewhat viable state not just the little enclaves that are ruled by the Palestinian Authority now. Something like the offer to Arafat would be more than a Bantustan.

Edited November 13, 2023 by Darzin

[Daeron the Daring]

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Are Bosnia and Albania in the middle-east?  Are they in Asia.

Is Israel your typical Middle-Eastern country?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Is Israel your typical Middle-Eastern country?

Are the nations surrounding Israel typically Middle-Eastern countries?

[Daeron the Daring]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Are the nations surrounding Israel typically Middle-Eastern countries?

Are the countries surrounding Bosnia/Albania typical european countries?

[Fragile Bird]

I’m a bit confused about the reference to Lebanon as a tolerant example. Lebanon has never recognized Israel. Also, the reference to Syria. Syria has never recognized Israel. Like Iraq.

Also. Indonesia doesn’t recognize Israel. According to Wikipedia, though, even though they have no formal diplomatic ties, they maintain quiet trade, tourism and security contacts.

[Kalbear]

6 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Bosnia, Albania.

Bosnia is not a Muslim majority country though they're very close. Albania isn't either. In both countries Muslims are the largest proportion but they are still not a majority.

6 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Lebanon, to some extent, altough the syrian refugee crisis had a heavy effect on the country (which resulted in the deteoriation of religious freedom of the christian population.

Lebanon is another excellent example of precisely what Israelis would fear - that an increasingly conservative muslim population would do more and more persecution. 

 

 

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Are the countries surrounding Bosnia/Albania typical european countries?

No, they're way too hilly

[Darzin]

1 minute ago, Fragile Bird said:

I’m a bit confused about the reference to Lebanon as a tolerant example. Lebanon has never recognized Israel. Also, the reference to Syria. Syria has never recognized Israel. Like Iraq.

Also. Indonesia doesn’t recognize Israel. According to Wikipedia, though, even though they have no formal diplomatic ties, they maintain quiet trade, tourism and security contacts.

Scott asked if those countries tolerate minorities. In Syria minorities are completely integrated and tolerated including Christians. But Jews and Israel aren't.  

[Fragile Bird]

6 minutes ago, Darzin said:

Scott asked if those countries tolerate minorities. In Syria minorities are completely integrated and tolerated including Christians. But Jews and Israel aren't.  

Uh, I hate to point this out but as with other countries in the Middle East, Christians in Syria are a disappearing population. Ten years ago they were 10% of the population, 1.5 M people. Now it’s less than 300,000, less than 2%. I doubt there will be any left in another 10 years.

[Daeron the Daring]

17 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Bosnia is not a Muslim majority country though they're very close.

I stand corrected in that I tought they are somewhere between 53-55% muslim when it comes to religious composition. 51%, but still a majority. An important factor is that the remaining minorities are divided into two large groups: croats and serbs, between who exist little to no political cooperation, so bosniaks' 'lead' is made a little more significant because of that.

17 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Albania isn't either. In both countries Muslims are the largest proportion but they are still not a majority.

They are, in fact, a majority, not just a plurality.

17 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Lebanon is another excellent example of precisely what Israelis would fear - that an increasingly conservative muslim population would do more and more persecution.

It's rough for a country the size of Lebanon to handle so many refugees. Even much larger countries are afraid of similar numbers of refugees. But I do think palestinians are the responsibility of Israel. If the price of an Israeli state is what happened and is happening to the palestinians, then they might not deserve it in its current state.

Edited November 13, 2023 by Daeron the Daring