It Should Be Formulated Differently

Yoram Ettinger has a very good piece, "Does freeze deal make sense?", over at YnetNews where he writes on The complex nature of Jewish construction in the communities:-

If Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria prejudges the outcome of negotiation, wouldn't Palestinian construction in Judea and Samaria have the same effect?!

If the uprooting of Jewish communities advances peace, why would the uprooting of Arab communities undermine peace?! The call for uprooting Arabs is immoral; Isn't the uprooting of Jews just as immoral?!

If the 300,000 Jews, among 1.5MN Arabs, in Judea and Samaria constitute an obstacle to peace, how would one define the 1.5MN Arabs, among 6MN Jews, within pre-1967 Israel?!

If Jewish settlements/communities in Judea and Samaria (est. 1967) constitute the obstacle to peace, why was the PLO established in 1964?! Why did anti-Jewish Palestinian terrorism flare up during the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s?!

Why did the Arab-Israel wars erupt in1948/9, 1956 and 1967? Why did an unprecedented Palestinian terrorism surge following the 1993 Oslo Accord and the 2005 uprooting of 25 Jewish communities in Gaza and Northern Samaria?!

Past freezes, slowdowns and dismantling of Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria intensified pressure and exacerbated terrorism – what would be the impact of another -freeze?!

But he errs.

In the international context, to compare Jews in Judea & Samaria and rights and restriction with the Arabs of the same territory is a mistake. First of all, as wrong as it is - and it must be challenged in another manner - most of the world accept the idea that there is a separate and distinct nation called "Palestinians" and they had a country called "Palestine" which they "lost" to the Jews, quite unfairly. Moreover, the Jews really aren't a nation and shouldn't have national claims on a territory but simply realize that due to antisemitism and the Holocaust, maybe they be allowed to live in the 1947 lines or better, as a minority within the future-to-be-established state of Palestine.

Many Jews and non-Jewish Zionist simply cannot fathom the full extent of the idiocy and meanness and animosity with which Jews are treated when they seek to assert national identity forms. Some may wish to ignore that situation, make fun of it, respond in irrational forms, but that is the situation.

But be that as it may, I wish to suggest another formulation in Ettinger's imagery. He writes:

If Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria prejudges the outcome of negotiation, wouldn't Palestinian construction in Judea and Samaria have the same effect?!

That should be formulated:-

If Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria prejudges the outcome of negotiation, wouldn't Arab construction in the state of Israel have the same effect?!

Notice the difference? Ettinger does this but only in his third paragraph.

I have suggested that Arab residential locations within Israel be referred to as "Arab settlements". That will establish the more correct balance between the competing narratives and claims.

If persons demand a total removal of Jews from Yesha and the dismantlement of their homes there, then that framework must apply equally to the Arab population of Israel. If there is proposed a transfer, it works both ways and for both population groupings.

^