Navigation:
Reporting on the Middle East, Science, and Education for October 25, 2009 - ז' חשון תש"ע
Pages
Archives
Toward a better future through tolerance and mutualism
Sponsored By:
By Israel Zwick, CN Publications, October 25, 2009
Since the signing of the Oslo Agreement in September 1993, the international mantra for peace in the Middle East has been “two-states for two peoples; the two-state solution is the only solution.” Unfortunately, the last 16 years has brought only more death and destruction with scant progress towards a resolution of the conflict. Now some of the original proponents of the two-state solution are saying that perhaps it isn’t the most practical solution after all. From simply an administrative, economic, and pragmatic perspective, it doesn’t seem to be a practical solution. In this era of globalization, pluralism, and diversity, establishing two microstates in an area of 28,000 sq. km. appears to be an anachronism. There is an increasing realization that the establishment of another Arab Muslim state on Israel’s border will only create more problems, not solve them. It will reduce economic viability and create conflicts over resources.
While initially this understanding seems encouraging, the alternative proposal is even more ominous. There have been a significant number of proposals from both the Arab and Israeli peace groups that advocate a one-state solution, meaning that Israel should be replaced by a binational Arab and Jewish state. It sounds good: Jews and Arabs will live together in peace with equal rights for all. It’s easy to do, they say. We already have one airport named Ben Gurion, so we’ll build another airport and name it Yasser Arafat Airport. Who really needs all those streets named “Weizmann” and “Herzl?” It’s too confusing. We’ll just rename some of them “Nasser” and “Abdullah.” We’ll just add a red crescent to the flag, add a few Muslim holidays to the calendar, modify the national anthem a bit, and poof, there you have it. Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity for all. Peace, harmony, and tranquility will abound.
The only problem with this scenario is that there is no evidence at all to suggest that it would bring peace. On the contrary, a simple search in Google, Yahoo, or Bing, for “Muslim religious conflict” reveals that every country with a large Muslim population has had violent religious conflicts. Even Saudi Arabia, which does not tolerate any other religion and is the only country in the world without a church, has had religious unrest. Now the Muslims are exporting religious unrest to several countries in Europe and the Americas. The belief that Muslims and Jews will be able to share one small state in peaceful coexistence has no basis in historical reality. If anyone doubts that, they need only to evaluate three incidents that occurred recently. When Israel wanted to build a new ramp leading to the Mughrabi Gate, Arabs complained that it would endanger the stability of the Al-Aksa mosque and created an international incident. When a group of American Jews wanted to build a Museum of Tolerance over an old parking lot in Jerusalem, the Arabs suddenly decided that the old Muslim cemetery buried underneath was sacred ground and initiated a prolonged, costly legal battle. Just last summer, when some Jews moved into the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of Jerusalem, which is a short walk from the Jewish neighborhoods of Maalot Dafna and Arzei Habirah, the Arabs complained of “ethnic cleansing” and “Judaicizing Jerusalem.” International protests continued for weeks.
It should obvious then that the chances of Jews and Muslims sharing one state of 28,000 sq. km in harmonious coexistence are practically nil. So if not two-states and not one-state, then what’s left? Of course, the final status solution, which everyone is eager to achieve, won’t come for many years until Arabs and Jews can demonstrate convincingly that they can accept each other and cooperate on vital issues of mutual concern. Until then, the best we can hope for is some modification of the status quo. The Arabs living within the 1947 borders of the British Palestine Mandate can establish an autonomous civil government which will enable them to attend to their own educational, cultural, and judicial matters, while the Israeli government controls security and international travel. The Arabs would have voting rights in their own government and some representation in the Israeli government. A similar arrangement exists between the United States and Puerto Rico, which has been under American “occupation” for over 100 years.
The most serious argument against this type of arrangement is that it would lead to an “apartheid state” in which the Arabs do not have the same rights as the majority Jewish population. This is a realistic concern, which everyone wants to avoid, but it doesn’t have to be a sine qua non. First it must be understood and accepted that Jews form a distinct ethnic group culturally different from any other in the world. They have been persecuted, tormented and dispersed throughout their history. As such, the Jews are entitled to have their own little state in their ancestral homeland to practice their culture and religion. The Palestinian Arabs share the same culture, language, and religion as the 21 states of the Arab League. That does not mean that the Arabs living in Israel should suffer from discrimination and mistreatment. They are an important demographic component and should remain so. They are businessmen, shopkeepers, craftsmen, construction workers, healthcare workers, and even good neighbors. As long as they have equal personal rights to justice, housing, education, health care, and employment, then Israel cannot be considered to be an apartheid state. Until recently, Africans, Asians, and Latinos living in the United States did not have access to many of the jobs that were available only to White Protestants. Yet no one accused the United States of being an apartheid state. Every country has minority groups that don’t always have the same advantages as the majority culture. Jews understand that very well since they have lived as minority groups in over 100 countries for over 2000 years. Even where Jews suffered from discrimination, they never promoted violence or complained about living in an apartheid state.
Peace won’t come by eliminating the Jewish state or dividing it into separate microstates. That would only lead to more religious conflict. Peace will come when there is international acceptance that the Jews are entitled to their own little state where they can be the dominant culture. Arab Muslims are the dominant culture in 21 countries. If they choose to live in Israel, they are welcome to do so as a peaceful minority with equal personal rights, but not national rights. Israelis do not want to dominate Arabs or control their civil affairs, but they have a right to have a state that maintains a Jewish identity.
