Olmert ran for election on a promise to try to set the permanent borders of Israel by finishing the separation barrier between Israel and the Palestinians and by pulling out Israeli settlers — as many as 70,000 — who live in the West Bank beyond the barrier.
Another 175,000 Israelis, plus another 200,000 in East Jerusalem, live beyond the 1967 boundaries. But Mr. Olmert says Israel intends to keep those large settlement blocs.
Israel is moving to consolidate substantial land beyond the 1967 borders, with Bush cheering on from the sidelines. Is this the country Paul says isn't a colonizer, because it doesn't seek to expand its territory? If Israel doesn't want to be seen as a colonizer, then it should disband its colonies -- all of them -- beyond the 1967 borders.
5 comments:
Nadir: This looks like just two small portions of land already occupied by Isrealies, and very small compared to all the land that Isreal grabbed in response to various invasions. Given that officials in nieghboring countries and territories are explicitly devoted to eradicating Isreal -- and regularly over the year realize these views by overtly or covertly supporting terror strikes within Isreal's borders -- claiming these lands as defensive buffers seems reasonable.
Compared to the humanitarian outrages that dominate official state policies and practices of all neighborhing lands, the flaws of Isreal seem like they should logically fall to the bottom of everyone's list of concerns.
Isreal abandoning these parcels of land to domination by tyrants will do nothing to improve the lot of muslims in those and surrounding areas. Muslims in Isreal are already the freest and most prosperous and secure in the region, by a long shot. I believe that the time for focusing on Isreal's anti-democratic domestic policies, and military foriegn policies, will come when surrounding nations elevate their own conduct to the regional (albeit imperfect) standard set by Isreal, both for realizing domestic liberties and respecting external sovernties.
Why are you complaining to me? Tom posted this note.
But since you did...
Israel's actions destabalize the entire region. Your contention that Palestinians who live in Israel are freer as second-class citizens than other Muslims are as majorities in Islamic societies that they have chosen (democratically in some cases) is ridiculous.
Why do you hold Israel to a lower standard than its neighbors?? They are the ones who have the bomb. They are the ones whose racist policies are creating much of the turmoil in the Middle East.
Would your comments be the same if Israel wasn't a European nation?
Nadir: I agree that Isreal's population is dominated by Europeans, that these people do not descend genetically from the tribes of Moses (who were non-white), and that zionism is a form of racism. My view of Isreal would differ not one iota if its dominant population were instead non-white.
I hold Isreal to the same standard that I hold others in the region (and all nations in the world): the universal standard of liberal constitutional republican democracy checked by individual liberties. By this standard, Isreal falls short in my estimation, earning from me perhaps a rating of A-, or perhaps a B+, and distinguishing itself only in comparassion to the other nations in its vacinity.
It is a fact that muslim Arab citizens of Isreal have the highest average income, wealth, and education of any muslims outside of Europe, the US, and Canada; they also have more voting rights and individual liberties. These are varifiable facts, "rediculous" as they may be. And the racist policies of Isreal are indeed meager compared to the racist policies all the other nations in that region.
Isreal's racist and other anti-democratic policies to some great extent derive directly from the external racist and anti-democratic pressures placed upon it by these neighboring nations and peoples, devoted as they are to extinguishing Isreal. The best hope for eliminating these objectionable Isreali policies is for the promoters of these pressures to cease them, and permit Isrealis to evolve their nation in security.
Meanwhile, the best hope for stability and prosperity in these other nations has nothing to do with Isreal, but rather hinges completely on the choices of these people to behave productively and sensible, to devote their energies to developing sensible governments which derive their powers "from the people" in accordance with a constitution that gurantees individuals universal, inalienable liberties.
What is the reason those societies are devoted to extinguishing Israel, Paul?
That's the reason Tom posted this article in the first place, and is the root of much of the conflict in the region. It is not about whether Israel's racist theocracy offers greater opportunity to Arab Muslims.
The reason that those socieites have devoted themselves to estinguishing Isreal? We can only surmise. It appears to me that the people in these countries have made the poor choice to blame their misfortunes illogically on a foriegn boogie man rather than to perform the harder work of building their own sensible societies.
I read the article posted by Tom, and I stand behind my reaction to it. Isreal does not constitute a "religious theocracy". Its government is much closer to qualifying as a republican democracy premised on a liberal constitution. In judging all nations in the area, its is further than any other from that of a religious theocracy, and closer than any other to that of a democracy. I consider it absolutely germane to this discussion to recongnize that muslims and arabs within isreal are the freest and most prosperous in the region, and that the anti-democratic aspects of isreal's govt almost entirely manifest as defensive measures in response to the devotion of the neighboring nations to its destruction.
All of these facts point to a clear best plan of operation for any non-isreali muslim / arab in the region who seeks to increase the freedom and prosperity of "the people" in his or her own country: fix your own house, to equal or surpass the regional standard set by isreal for personal liberties (including religious toleration) and democratic. I am confident that as these other nations improve themselves in elevating to isreal's regional standard, that isreal would itself improve in becoming even more democratic.
There is only one flaw with my proposed plan: it is harder to improve your own guitar playing than it is to whine and complain that you cannot impove until Nadir improves from his own level to that of Jimi Hendrix. How can you tell me that I need to practice 4 hours a day when Nadir can't even play the star spangled banner behind his back... with his teeth?
Post a Comment