The other reading is that the man really has this latter understanding of the conflict -- that Jerusalem needs to be the eternal, undivided capitol of the state of Israel, for example. If this is the line then I don't think we are heading in a constructive way. If he is adopting the much more pro-Israeli reading, I don't really know whether there is a substantive difference between him and McCain.
Both of them are driven by election considerations and tactics and sensitivities especially in terms of the Jewish vote and all this stuff... But whether McCain is really committed to ... a much more constructive reading of the conflict that America needs to be much more engaged and much more honest as well as driven by issues of fairness ... I doubt that is really on the agenda for John McCain.
Q: You have spoken about the possibility, even the plausibility, of a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Could you elaborate on that?
The Palestinian national project wanted the one-state solution from the very beginning. The Palestinians were saying, "This is Palestine, Israel is an occupying power, Zionism is a colonizing movement. We need to put an end to the occupation but we are open and keen to having Jewish Palestinians (as a part of a single state). They would be as Christians and Muslims." They were motivated by the idea of a secular, democratic state.
That was something that Fatah and others adopted until the late 1970s. Now it it's only in the late 1970s that voices inside Fatah said, "Listen, we probably have to take a different view and take a look at facts on the ground and the realities," and then they started working towards a two-state solution.
Here the Palestinians say, "Listen, we have given up 70 to 80 percent of historic Palestine. Now, we are willing to offer the state of Israel and the Zionist movement that we want only 22 percent of historical Palestine -- which is Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem." This has been the only game in town since 1988.
Now whether we have achieved any significant progress on the two-state solution, the answer is absolutely no. The opposite, in fact. I think we are distancing ourselves by the day from a workable, achievable two-state solution.
Even earlier, during the 1940s, when Brit Shalom (an early 20th century Israeli political group committed to coexistence between Jews and Arabs), and people like Judah Magnus (a prominent Israeli intellectual and the first Chancellor of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem), proposed sharing the land with the Palestinians.
They weren't necessarily motivated by issues of equality and all of this stuff but they said, "We certainly cannot ignore the existence of a nation here." So the roots and origins of the bi-national or the one-state solution are not only to be found in the Palestinian national movement but also in the Zionist movement.
Q: So why does the one-state solution stand out to you as the most viable way to end the conflict?
This is extremely important. Palestinians are not only after a workable, sustainable, and viable Palestinian state. This is not what we want. Palestinians are after a sustainable and viable Palestinian state that secures and answers their national right -- that brings them emancipation, national determination, the return of their lands, the 1967 borders, and a solution to the refugee problem including the honoring of the right of return.
If we look at what is happening on the ground, and we look in terms of coming to terms with reconciliation and historical injustice, I think we remain with very few options to come to terms with these historical and empirical de facto things on the ground.
We will come to realize that the one-state solution in the form of a bi-national state where the bi-national state is securing and honoring the collective rights of the Jewish Israelis and the collective rights of the Palestinian Arabs and guaranteeing universal citizenship rights to everyone seems to be the most appealing and desirable solution.
Continue Reading: « Previous123
Leave a comment 4 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
I fully agre wot tje one state solution for all. the twp state solution will not work; it is a temporary myth.
Reply to this Top
Let's go one state solution!
Reply to this Top
There is already a second state. It's called Jordan.
Reply to this Top
The one state solution sounds the best to me. Look at the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. Separation was not going to work, it won't work here. By separating these two populations with fences and checkpoints just makes the problem worse. Bi-national states have worked, look at the U.S., it has its problems but for all intentions and purposes it is a multinational state. It can be done.
Reply to this Top