But Israeli Arabs, including the most successfully integrated ones, say a new identity must be found for the country’s long-term survival.
“I am not a Jew,” protested Eman Kassem-Sliman, an Arab radio journalist with impeccable Hebrew, whose children attend a predominantly Jewish school in Jerusalem. “How can I belong to a Jewish state? If they define this as a Jewish state, they deny that I am here.”
Well, for one, there are other options other than "belonging". Like joining a Pal. terror group and trying to destory Israel but since that's been tried for over 80 years now, you'd think someone like Eman would come up with a better idea.
And a better idea would be to make a choice: "Palestinian nationalism" is to be acquired and realized in Jordan. That's the closest. The other option is that once peace is achieved, there's always cultural and educational autonomy, like the Begin idea, but unlike his suggestion, first comes a period of peace, economic intergation, paying full taxes, volunteering for National Service, et al.
The new identity is just another way of watering down the Jewish character of the state. Sorry, that's just not on. Arabs have almost two dozen states in the Middle East to fulfill their nationalism and must define their states as Islamic. So, Israel can't be one Jewish state?
No one years ago had problems with the idea of a "Jewish homeland", meaning one for the Jews where Jews enjoy the primacy in all fiedls and endeavors. Herzl wrote about it, Balfour declared it, the League of Nations reconzied it, the United Nations established it. But the Arabs who wandered into Judea and Samaria and conquered it and then invited friends and relatives over can't seem to acknowledge it.
Posts
1 comment:
You are so wrong on so many points here I have hard time knowing where to start!
"Well, for one, there are other options other than "belonging". Like joining a Pal. terror group and trying to destory Israel but since that's been tried for over 80 years now, you'd think someone like Eman would come up with a better idea."
This is just disgusting, Yisrael: you imply that the person in question is a terrorist. Do you know this person? How would you feel if somebody talked to you in this manner? Do you allow yourself this hate-speech because he is an Arab, and, as you imply in other places, all of them are terrorists anyway? What do you call a "terrorist", then?
"And a better idea would be to make a choice: "Palestinian nationalism" is to be acquired and realized in Jordan. "
Who are you exactly to decide for the Jordanians and the Palestinians these things? Tomorrow someone will come and say that Jewish nationalism is to be acquired and realized in the United States - why, they have lots of Jews with so much power there! Will you like it? Will the Americans like it?
Besides, as Uri Avnery confincingly argues:
"The Jordanian Option is a euphemism. Its real name is "Anti-Palestinian Option". That's what it's all about. Everything else is unimportant. THAT MAY explain the curious fact that since the 1967 war, no effort has been made to realize this "option". The High Priests of the Jordanian Option, who preached it from every hilltop, did not lift a finger to bring it about. On the contrary, they did everything possible to prevent its realization.”
Next you continue:
"The other option is that once peace is achieved, there's always cultural and educational autonomy, like the Begin idea, but unlike his suggestion, first comes a period of peace, economic intergation, paying full taxes, volunteering for National Service, et al. "
Arrogant and sneaky: “please, first humiliate yourself into going into some sort of "trial period", then we'll see if we'll give you a bone from our table.” This demeaning attitude to other human beings is immoral and outrageous. Instead, the Arabs should be made full citizens of Israel. A democratic state can only be a state of all its citizens. If that means that if and when the Arabs outnumber the Jews it stops being "Jewish" (whatever is meant by it), then guess what, tough luck. Otherwise it cannot be "democratic" (from "demo" - people, "kratia" - rule - "rule of the people", not of a certain group of people).
A lot of Israeli leftists, by the way, are not really pro-Palestinian, but rather pragmatically think that, in the now famous Olmert’s words, without two states for two people the state of Israel if “finished”. I don't have a problem with a binational state per se except that I worry it won’t be a happy idyll: look, if even in Belgium they are talking about the imminent split, what to talk about Jews and Arabs...
”The new identity is just another way of watering down the Jewish character of the state.”
No, it is about demanding equal rights and representation. Actually, from my encounters with Israeli Arabs I am a bit surprised how loyal most of them are to the state. Some news truly astound me: like this one, for example. I am surprised they’ll do it in a country that openly discriminates against them, oppresses their brethren in the territories, where MKs allow themselves racist rants about “fifth columns”, there the hymn doesn’t mention them – the indigenous people of the land, etc.
Sorry, that's just not on. Arabs have almost two dozen states in the Middle East to fulfill their nationalism and must define their states as Islamic. So, Israel can't be one Jewish state?
This is like stealing (an analogy I obviously like, you might have noticed) and then saying: “but he had a lot of money anyway, why cannot I have some of it?” No, Yisrael, if you base your presence in Eretz Israel on dispossession and disenfranchising of other people, then you cannot have it, and like a robber you go to jail (metaphorically). Earn it, give all your citizens equal rights, stop oppressing and killing and denying opportunities to the Palestinians in the WB and Gaza – then the State of Israel will be great and people will be happy to live in it (you might even get your military parade).“Jewish character” – what the hell is that? I don’t see racial discrimination and oppression as “Jewish”!
”No one years ago had problems with the idea of a "Jewish homeland", meaning one for the Jews where Jews enjoy the primacy in all fiedls and endeavors. Herzl wrote about it, Balfour declared it, the League of Nations reconzied it, the United Nations established it.
A lot of people years ago did not have problems with slavery and colonialism either, does this make those legitimate and moral? Why are Balfour and Hertzl suddenly the paragons of humanity and morality? Why do you accept some UN resolutions and ignore and trample others?
And stop beating about the bush - what you mean by “primacy” is just supremacy. How pathetic is that we, Jews, who suffered so much from racism are embracing it now…
”But the Arabs who wandered into Judea and Samaria and conquered it and then invited friends and relatives over can't seem to acknowledge it.”
Funny, let’s see:"American born, I and my family moved to Israel in 1970." Such demagoguery, Yisrael, sorry to say that. Your views of morality are self-serving and have nothing to do with reality. Your ideology is a much greater threat to the State of Israel than Hamas, Hizballah and Iran together.
Post a Comment