Goldberg comes out against Bennett’s Plan and Glick’s/Wise’s Plan for reasons he states.He recommends instead that Israel “terminate all aid whatsoever not only to the Palestinian Authority, but also to the Palestinian Arab population.” and “To ameliorate the consequences of these measures, Israel can offer generous financial incentives to individual Palestinian Arab families (and Israeli Arab families) who elect to emigrate”. This is closer to Sherman’s plan. But I don’t see the Israel High Court approving such a deal for Israeli Arabs as it would discriminate against Israeli Jews who would like to to receive the same deal. Having said that, I do believe in the combination of both tightening the screws and offering incentives. Also I still believe we should first annex most of Area C and some of B so that we end up with a more practical border. Ted Belman
By Steve Goldberg, INN
George Orwell: “To survive it is often necessary to fight and to fight you have to dirty yourself.”
Certainly there is no moral principle that requires Israel to coddle people who yearn for its destruction and who celebrate the murder of Jews.
Although it was not his intent, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has done Israel an enormous favor. Specifically, by obsessively pursuing the “peace process” to its unavoidable dead end, Kerry has demonstrated that the two-state solution is, and has always been, a mirage
For 90 years the international community’s best and brightest, far more capable than Kerry, have attempted to craft a territorial compromise to allow a Jewish state and Arab state to divide the land allocated to the Jews by the League of Nations in its Mandate for Palestine. The results have always been the same: violent Arab rejection of any formula that would allow a Jewish state to exist in any borders.
The reason, of course, is that the heart of the problem is not a territorial dispute. Instead, it is religious and existential. The Arab world considers all of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea to be holy Muslim land, and it would violate Islamic law to allow an infidel Jewish state to exist in any portion of it, no matter how small.
History teaches that this is a zero-sum game. There will be either a Jewish state or another Arab state on the land; there will not be both. Kerry’s desperate, pathetic failure is just further proof of this reality.
With this undeniable truth in mind, what can Israel do to assure that it will be the prevailing party in this life-or-death conflict? One alternative to the two-state solution, propose by Naftali Bennett, calls for Israel to annex Area C, which would incorporate the most heavily populated Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria into the borders of Israel and the fewest Palestinian Arabs.
Although this has the practical appeal of being a significant first step, and would effectively prevent the creation of a Palestinian state, this proposal creates a myriad of practical problems, including the defense of a byzantine border and developing a workable relationship with the areas outside of the newly created borders. Further, this half-measure will provoke the opprobrium of the international community as surely as the annexation of all of Judea and Samaria but without the territorial benefit.
Another alternative is to annex all of Judea and Samaria and to offer citizenship to all the Palestinian Arabs who reside there. This would provide Israel with greater geographic depth and appear to moot the accusation that Israel is an apartheid state that is denying equal rights to the Palestinian Arabs. It is premised on the notion that the demographic time bomb is overstated and that Israel can successfully absorb more than 1.6 million Arabs without saddling itself with a crushing economic burden and losing its Jewish and democratic character.
That premise, however, is rooted more in wishful thinking than in historical evidence. Even if adding the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria to Israel’s citizenry means that “only” 33% of Israel’s population is Arab, such a sizable minority of hostile citizens will likely create problems that will cripple the Jewish state. The Arab war on Israel will take on a new aspect, i.e., a civil war inside Israel itself. Further, even a relatively small voting bloc of Jewish leftists, when added to the 33% hostile Arab vote, can wreak havoc with Israel’s electoral system.
So again the same nagging question: what can be done?
The answer is to react strategically and proportionately to the political escalation being orchestrated by the Palestinian Authority. If Mahmoud Abbas and his cohorts demand Palestinian independence, the Israelis can give it to them–in spades. Israel can immediately terminate all aid whatsoever not only to the Palestinian Authority, but also to the Palestinian Arab population. That would mean no money, no electricity, no water, no food, no medicine, no patronizing of Palestinian Arab business and no employment of Palestinian Arabs. Let the newly declared Palestinian state provide for its people.
To ameliorate the consequences of these measures, Israel can offer generous financial incentives to individual Palestinian Arab families (and Israeli Arab families) who elect to emigrate. A healthy cash position will make a Palestinian Arab family a welcome addition to another Muslim state. This humanitarian alternative will provide a powerful answer to the howls of outrage that might otherwise come from the international community as a result of Israel’s actions.
The Palestinian Arabs will have a viable option to live in peace and prosperity, just not in the homeland of the hated Jews.
For those who doubt the fairness of responding to the unilateral actions of the Palestinian Authority in such a decisive manner, this one question should serve as a cure. If the tables were turned, how would the Arabs treat the Jewish minority among them?
We know the answer to that question. The Arabs provided it when they massacred the Jews in Jerusalem in 1920, in Jaffa in 1921 and in Hevron in 1929. The Arab world threatened to annihilate the jews before the Six Day War of 1967, and Hamas proudly declares its genocidal intentions towards the Jews in its charter.
As for the “moderate” Palestinian Authority, its continuing hero-worship of vile terrorists who murder Jews demonstrates convincingly how it would treat a vulnerable Jewish minority. Indeed, Abbas has made clear that any Palestinian state would be judenrein and all Jews living in Judea and Samaria would be ethnically cleansed. To the extent the international community would tolerate forcibly expelling Jews from their homes in a Palestinian state, it has no standing to criticize Israel for taking actions to convince Palestinian Arabs to emigrate voluntarily.
Transfer is not a fascist plan. Winston Churchill advocated it, and the Allies implemented it after World War II, when they sliced off part of Germany, allocated it to Poland, and forcibly expelled millions of Germans west of the Oder-Neisse line. Turkey and Greece also exchanged populations. Transfer has eliminated or greatly reduced violence between hostile ethnic groups in the past, and it will do so if Israel adopts such a policy with regard to the Arabs within its borders. Certainly there is no moral principle that requires Israel to coddle people who yearn for its destruction and who celebrate the murder of Jews.
Implementing such a policy is not easy. Severing ties with the Palestinian Arabs will cause hardship and will be condemned by sanctimonious anti-Semites around the world. Nevertheless, it is a powerful and non-violent response to the increasingly aggressive actions of the Palestinian Authority. It will provide the Palestinian Arab families with a humanitarian option of relocating in relative prosperity. Transfer has historical precedents, reduces bloodshed and is much more humane than the measures to which the Jews have been subjected when left to the tender mercies of the Arabs.
Encouraging voluntary transfer will be messy, but for Israel to survive, it has to fight, which means getting its hands dirty. Dirty hands are nothing compared to the bloody hands of Israel’s enemies.
Att’y Steven M. Goldberg is a member of the Executive Board of the World Likud, member of Ariel University’s International Board of Governors and Vice President of Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, Los Angeles. He practices law in Los Angeles.
@ CuriousAmerican:
American, you seem to know your way around the Internet.
May I recommend you do a little historical research as to what was done by OTHER nations….
Tally it up.
Find what was the common denominator to these ‘solutions’ and how much say, did the vanquished actually have in the matter…
Reread ted’s reply…
And of course if all else fails… reread my reply and suggestion to you (on another thread)
🙂
I am glad someone thinks so. Mine is not a popular opinion here.
Seven reasons.
1) South America could use the money.
2) The addition of 1.5 Million young Palestinians into South America would be less than 1/2 of 1% of the population. They would be statistically insignificant. Only the cash they bring would matter.
3) South America is famous for Tango in the streets and in kindergarten. Samba (semi-naked) on TV. Lots of wine. Gender mixing. Sharia would not last long.
4) If the Arabs were not seduced, they would be converted by Evangelicals who are growing exponentially in South America.
5) Finally, Arabs are elites in South America.
6) 25 Million Arabs in South America today. Almost all are Christian, yet 10% arrived as Muslim a century ago.
6) South America has open immigration laws.
It can be a solution.
CuriousAmerican Said:
If feiglin wants to pay them let him pay it our of his own pocket.
I used to have a lot more respect for him than lately when he is beginning to spout populist demagoguery. Apparently Bennett has stolen his thunder and much of his political support. Other Likud MK’s are even more militant than he is today….
My plan begins with Israeli Arab citizens, They must first be stripped of citizenship. Establish legal framework where any Israeli Arab publicly declaring that they are Palestinian will be stripped of citizenship. Any Arab flying or displaying a Pali flag will be stripped of citizenship. Any Israeli Arab caught harboring an illegal Arab infiltrator will be stripped of citizenship and deported etc.
@ yamit82:
Note the estimate of 60000 infiltaters could be 12,000 or 20,000 They don’t know.
@ bernard ross:
Israel security services advised a couple of months ago that inspite of the security fence IDF: 80,000 Illegal Palestinians in Israel and 6,000 More Each Month
There is theory and there is reality. When it comes to annexation and Arabs I deal in facts and reality. The truth is Israelis from the top down are fuck-ups and not to be counted on or trusted to carry out any policy according to plan. After spending Billions of dollars on a fence, there are more holes in the fence than swiss cheeze, not manned or maintained and not completed in several sections. Terrorists and non terrorists infiltrate it daily. It has reduced auto theft which is a positive but not deterred massive Pali illegal immigration or terrorists.
For every Arab you absorb in time they will multiply both by birth and through illegal infiltration. Time to wake up and smell the coffee….. If you are ignorant of the realities on the ground go to those who know before making pie in the sky plans nobody will adopt or implement…..
Find a reason and a way to get rid of all of them and everything else will fall into place. Start a war if necessary and if we drive all of them out then it could justify negative costs. The choices will always come down to either drive them out and take the PR hit or be forced to kill them later and in the process lose many of our own…. Transfer is the most humane and Jewish solution. Paymet???? I wouldn’t bepolite about the demand and wouldn’t ask them. I would give them a little time to prepare then force them out. It’s time to put our Merkava’s to some productive use.
Its interesting to see that Israel only considers diplomatic solutions and stability when the best scenario is proven to be that chaos reign in the land of the enemies. Why cant Israel think out of the box and envision Machievellian solutions which will put the enemies in chaos and forget diplomacy. A million sunni pals to Lebanon, starting with the PLO and militias and let them fight it out with hezbullah. The worst that can happen is that they get together with hezbullah and they can be killed together outside Israel. I will bet on them fighting the shias for control of lebanon. Either way its win win. Forget paying to leave; busses across the border is easier and quicker. Start with the male militias etc and there will be less outcry. I am longing to see that drama.
It is interesting to watch all these attempts to figure out what the pals would accept and what their concerns are. This is the biggest scam in history. The pals, along with their EU allies, have got the jews to woo the losers in the war as if it is to any advantage whatsoever to negotiate an agreement with the pals. The only a agreement that makes sense in this scenario is a dictated solution by the winner.
as for the pals?
frankly my dear…………
Ted Belman Said:
(this statement should be Israel’s policy)
CuriousAmerican Said:
a strange statement. No further understanding need be acquired. I t is clear that you either bow to arab demands or refuse them and act accordingly. I would not be surprised if you gave Israelis 500k to leave that they would choose to leave, same for many people everywhere. I have told you repeatedly that even with offered compensation, which should not be paid by Jews on principle, the arabs will not leave voluntarily unless it comes from the other arabs or with the blessings of the other arabs. They will be afraid of being killed. therefore, the program of compensation must come from the arabs and euros with the UN redistributing its UNRWA to the goal of relocation. the rest is pipe dreams. Resettlement will come AFTER the pals are outside of Israel and they are a burden to the neighbors. There is no incentive for anyone to solve this problem in Israels lap and the only incentive will be when they land in the neighbors laps. Start with the PLO and PA, all militias all criminals, undesirables. Busses to lebanon, syria or gaza all of whom borders are controlled by Israel and all of whom cannot do anything about it or whine. another couple of million refugees in lebanon will give lebanon to the sunnis and they will be in war with hezbullah. Same with Syria. Therefore, dumping them in lebanon or syria is the best move. Best is lebanon because 2 million extra sunnis will create a bloodbath with hezbullah over control of Lebanon. If Israel were smart they would take advantage of this opportunity to put their neighbors in more chaos. Israel has the power to be the cat among the pigeons in the ME but has not recognized this power and instead listen to those who wish to keep the jews as compliant victims, like you. I am for a new paradigm of a powerful Israel who uses its military power for gain and lets their enemies assume the role of begging for peace.
The spectre that you keep drawing is that the Israelis are in a bad position and must bow to the loser to have peace. Peace will break out when the jackboot is mercilessly applied to the neck of the pals. The more I hear of all these solutions the more it seems like the victor has been fooled into being a victim and believing he has no power. The only limitation is the willingness to use force without mercy and this will occur when the Jews finally take no more crap. More Jews must die at the hands of the pals until they wake up. Israel must assume the role of being the one who scares the hell out of everybody: just imagine the wonderful picture of a million pals being dropped off in lebanon and syria. What will everyone do? There will be no time to whine to Israel, the chaos will require their attention.
You always attempt to focus the Jews attentions here on the narratives and concerns of the arabs,
But as……
Ted Belman Said:
Perhaps your vision would be more welcome at palpundit.com
there are many aspects to the post annexation status of the arabs now living in judea (and samaria).
1. policy must be implemented with respect to who, how and when is the citizenship option made available.
citizenship will not be granted en mass.
the key element is that citizenship is a privilege which must be earned. steven goldberg can be the minister of immigration and will decide who, how and when.
if the annexation takes place over time, such as pursuant to Bennett’s proposal to annex area C ASAP (with fewer than 75,000 Arabs) it will be easier to phase in whatever strategy one would like to implement.
in my original 2003 detailed proposal i wrote with respect to status of arab residents of yehuda and shomron-
http://www.onestateplan.com/
http://www.onestateplan.com/background.html
ISRAELI CITIZENSHIP
It is essential that the process and strategy of offering Israeli citizenship to West Bank Arabs be very carefully planned, including its timing and demographic, geographic, historical and social factors. Citizenship will include all the benefits currently available to all citizens of Israel including: health care, education, welfare, economic incentives, employment, social safety nets, voting rights and others. The responsibilities of citizenship will include a public oath of loyalty to the State of Israel. The procedures and the details of the citizenship offer will be determined as an internal matter by the State of Israel. Each country determines its own citizenship rules and there are many models ranging from extremes like Switzerland where citizenship is often not granted for several generations, and the extremely restrictive standards set by Islamic States to the more liberal standards applied by other countries. Since the process will be phased in over time, the possibility to adjust the procedures appropriately will be available as circumstances require.
The key element is clear. The question of how to deal with the West Bank population will be converted to an internal Israeli matter and not the subject of global concern of “do-gooders” protecting an “occupied” population. From a humanitarian perspective, social services available to the West Bank population will meet the highest global standards.
West Bank Arabs who do not wish to accept Israeli citizenship will have the following choices:
1. swear a public oath of loyalty to the State of Israel and remain as non-citizen residents with limited rights.
2. those who do not commit to abide by the laws of Israel, must leave for Gaza, Jordan or to other Arab countries. 900,000 Jews left those countries since 1948 (often with only the shirts on their backs). Israel cannot and should not tolerate persons who will not commit to abide by its laws.
As the irreversible nature of Annexation is made clear to West Bank residents, persons with vested interests in land, businesses, homes and families will probably seek Israeli citizenship instead of facing the consequences of lesser rights or expulsion. Those with little or no vested interest will have to make a decision to accept the above choices or the following option. The active participation of Israel and other countries to provide a one-time subsidy of $5,000 per person who decides to live elsewhere will be made available. This sum is well within the budgets currently available for short term solutions or fixes currently being pursued. For example, the anti-terrorist barrier at a estimated cost of $1.5 billion equals the cost of payments to 300,000 men, women and children. A “refugee” family of ten would receive $50,000. A possibly irresistible offer! This offer is only sensible as part of the broader framework proposed herein.
It is reasonable to presume that given the choice of Israeli citizenship, many West Bank Arabs will choose life, peace and the pursuit of happiness that citizenship provides. In the current environment, with no alternatives other than those offered by brutal and violent organizations including the PA, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, Tanzim etc., it is not surprising that West Bank Arabs appear to support violence and terror.
The details of Annexation and implementation of the citizenship plan must be carefully designed to assuage these and other concerns. Issues to consider include:
i. The rights to Israeli citizenship, including voting, would be phased-in up to a period of 15 to 20 years.
ii. Citizenship rights would be phased-in with appropriate guidelines and qualifications including age, place of birth, place of birth of parents or grandparents, education, employment, criminal record, health record, village or city of residency and other metrics or standards.
2. jews do not vote as a bloc and clearly arabs do not vote as a bloc either (look at the current divided arab political parties.) nonetheless, if arabs are all given citizenship, and all vote, and elect 1/3rd of the knesset votes, and vote as a bloc and join with meretz and whatever, it is important to note that israel needs a constitution. and the constitution will require super majorities such as in the USA to make amendments.
it has become even more clear in the past 3 years (arab spring and israel’s ongoing and expanding success) that the vast majority of west bank Arabs would prefer an Israeli blue id card (without knesset vote but voting for regional elections and other attendant benefits) to anything that the PA would offer.
@ Steve Goldberg: A plan must actually be a plan (e.g. goal, obstacles, how obstacles are to be overcome, finances required, how to obtain financing, plan implementation in stages on the way to obtaining the goal). This needs to be similar in how one successfully implements a franchise plan (one location at a time) and learns from their mistakes as they go along and expand to other areas.
This plan when written needs to be sold to an Israeli cabinet member or party leader to have them endorse it as part of their political platform.
If this is or something similar is not done it will remain a discussion idea in pro Israel blogs and news sites from time to time.
CuriousAmerican Said:
You made a reasonable suggestion. However, what incentives are there for South Americans to receive millions of Palestinian Arabs as they have more info about them now than before?
Who needs potential terrorists (not all of them are) in their own countries? How confident are you about your suggestion? What reliable info do you have for South Americans to accept them?
CuriousAmerican Said:
Thanks for your kind words. I donot know him like you do.
Lawyers are fellow human beings (who have emotions) who could make mistakes when dealing with something they are passionate about. You could be an exception!!!!! 🙂
If one wants to effect peace with a minimum of violence, some understanding (Not agreement, but understanding) has to be acquired.
I agree that Israel has paramount security concerns; but that does not prevent me from understanding why Arabs would be upset with the restrictions those security concerns require.
I did not ask Israel to give up her needed security.
But since I understand that Arabs will not accept the truncated autonomy, I came to the conclusion that compensated relocation is the only solution.
My understanding of the Arab mindset did not lead me to agreement with him; but lead me to a realization of what is possible and what is not.
I ended up with compenstated relocation.
CuriousAmerican Said:
and a long litany followed.
may i recommend you read again ted’s reply to your passionate plea…
Ted Belman Said:
🙂
Dr. Sherman has shown that 44% of PA Youth would leave RIGHT NOW, if given the money.
You can pay almost half of the youth to leave right now. That would truly be voluntary.
Get MK Feiglin on board; he has already started to advocate for it.
If not the Muslim world, South America has 25 Million Arabs. The Latins assimilated the Arabs well – and the Muslims among them even converted. South America is in the Midst of an Evangelical Christian revival where tens of millions have left Catholicism for a pro-Israel Christian Evangagelicalism. Any Muslims who went to South America would be swept up.
At least half of it can.
Very little! Once half the youth leave, panic will set in; and the rest will line up to leave.
Dr. Sherman is a very good start. He is not the only one.
The sticking point will be the cost.
Thanks!
Moshe Feiglin has suggested this.
The upshot is that Some have proposed it. Feiglin’s offer is actually per family, not per person.
However, the principle remains.
All of the comments have merit because it seems that most agree that transfer is the only viable option. There are two trenchant questions: (1) by what method should the Arabs be induced to leave, and (2) how to make the option of transfer part of the public discourse. As for the question of method, everyone raises good points. Who will take the Arabs? Can it be accomplished purely by incentives? Will force ultimately be necessary? What is the right combination of carrots and sticks? I don’t know the answer to these very serious questions, but they deserve to be studied and debated publicly. Martin Sherman has put the concept of transfer into the public discourse and deserves great credit for it. Others must be encouraged to do the same. Israel’s political leaders should be pressed to consider the issue. We are a long time away from transfer being a realistic possibility, but it is time to start the discussion. My guess is a significant minority of the Israeli public would rally around a leader who advocates transfer, and that that significant minority could become a majority if there is substantial public airing of the possibility.
Who in a position of political power in Israel is supporting a program (if even in theory) of encouraging Arabs to leave voluntarily? So is this an actual remote possibility? This seems like wishful thinking to me not a real likelihood.
I am not against the Arabs leaving but I just think this is not reality in today’s world.
CuriousAmerican Said:
What water development???
There is no sufficient water sources indigenous to the Gaza strip sufficient and potable enough for the needs of Gaza.
They use a tremendous amt of water for their own agriculture.
They have no deep water port and Israel is not obliged even if we would stand aside and allow them to build one to allow any supplies and equipment for building one through Israel.
Most of the water aquifers Gaza uses has it’s sources within Israel and why should we allow them to take our water and deplete and pollute our own water sources? Israel does not owe the enemies and murderers of Israelis a thing except the grave, every man woman and child.
Unlike any of the readers and commenters on Israpundit I have lived among them for close to 12 years. I know them intimately and up close. I know the land of Gaza which is only a northern extension of what was once Yamit.
Gaza is not a country and not recognized as such by any country in the world. Even the PA does not recognize them as such.
Without Israel’s economic help they would have collapsed years ago. The exist solely upon the largess of other nations. We don’t need to import their agriculture produce they can sell it to Egypt which has closed their borders with Gaza. Why should Israel have a greater obligation to Gaza than Egypt??
Most of the indigenous population of Gaza are Egyptians. Arafat was Egyptian. CuriousAmerican Said:
It’s the worst and most idiotic of all suggestions. The idea should not be just to reduce the Arab population from Gaza and Y&S but to remove them all. Leaving a sizable population behind will render the suggestion of payment not only ineffective to achieving the aims of depopulation it will have the reverse effect and set precedents that will potentially have adverse consequences in the future. Leaving a sizeable Arab population in place can be reconstituted in a generation or two or three. In the end we would have gained nothing and lost a lot of money for nothing.
Forcing them out is the best way and payment should only be for assessable property they would be leaving behind but if they resist leaving they should still be forced out but with no payment that is if they are still breathing.
Payment should be only based on an all or nothing condition. All must leave
Payment does not address the most critical problem Israel faces with the Arabs and that of Arabs holding Israeli citizenship and permanent resident status. We cannot abide 20% enemy 5th column among us who are also a drain on our economy and natural resources. They are our biggest danger and long term security threat. They are also a magnet for illegal West Bank Arabs crossing the border illegally and assimilating among local Israeli Arabs. The IDF/Shabak estimates some 35,000 such illegals per month. Many marry Arab women and get the welfare payments we pay to Arab Israeli women, later claiming status of family unification and receive Israeli citizenship.
Conclusion: There can be no Arabs between the Jordan and the Med and that includes Gaza. Once such an idea becomes official policy even if publicly unstated the methods and time lines can be decided as to how best to effect the policy.
Until there is a unified agreement and understanding at the policy level we are all blowing smoke and hot air.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Who gives a shit.
We all: (You, Stephen Goldberg, and myself AND even Martin Sherman) all agree that paying them to leave is the best method.
I think Israel’s security prevents the Israelis from making generous offers. So I do NOT condemn Israel for its offer; but at the same time, I can understand why an Arab might get upset that:
1) Israel will not give them a border with Jordan
2) Israel will still control water, and broadcast rights
3) Israel will still control who gets to enter in and leave
4) Israel will still control customs]
5) Israel will leave PA areas broken up and non-contiguous.
6) Israel will control residency
I absolutely understand why Israel has to do this; for her own safety. But even so, it is still not generous offer, and should not be portrayed as such. It is at best a very limited autonomy.
Israel has total control over the PA so that it can shut everything down at will.
This is necessary for Israel’s security, but it is NOT independence by any long stretch. It is NOT a two-state solution which is being offered, even if Netanyahu calls it generous.
No one would want to live under those conditions.
I am probably never going to see it totally the way you do; but we do agree roughly on the answer, if not the problem.
Pay the Arabs to leave.
Why ruffle more feathers?
@ CuriousAmerican:Neither Goldberg nor I recommended “coercion”. He said stop giving them aid. I said to stop doing more than we are required to do. This is not coercion.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Israel only blockades military significant imports. Everything else goes through after inspection. Israel does not have an obligation to sell them anything or to treat them in her hospitals which she does.
What obligations do you think we have.
Agreed. Arab, and possibly all Muslim countries will refuse them. This is why I suggested South America.
I was saying this two years ago on this board and getting hammered for it. My figure are bit higher than yours, but not by much.
This is why I recommend South America. A young couple coming in with $200,000 would be welcome. South America has a history of assimilating – and converting – Muslims.
On this I agree.
My point is: Israel has cut off sea access to Gaza, and border crossings to Jordan from Judea and Samaria. Israel controls water development. Yes! for security.
But one cannot blame them for lack of water development if Israel forbade them to develop it. If Israel will not allow water development it takes on the responsiblity of providing water.
Since Israeli security regulations hamper trade – albeit understandably – it does place some obligations on Israel.
I agree paying them to leave is the absolute best idea.
But if coercion is used, then it is not voluntarily.
Fortunately, right now according to Martin Sherman, 44% would leave right now.
No matter how satisfying cracking down would be, it might backfire. If about half are willing to leave right now, then pay them to leave.
Once half of the kids leave, the other half will panic and follow.
There is no need for coercion, right now.
But if coercion is used, do not call it “voluntary.”
It may be necessary, but it is not “voluntary.”
A number of you have raised the question of “voluntary” and complained as if Israel had a duty to support the Arabs as they do even for humanitarian purposes. I say Israel goes way beyond their duty both in Gaza and J&S. Does anyone think that they have a duty to lift the blockade or to make the concessions to it like medicine and concrete. A tremendous number of trucks enter every day to supply stuff. Do we have a duty to do so.
As for J&S, we have agreed to observe the humanitarian provision of the Fourth Geneva Convention. We go way beyond that. We sell them electricity on credit and give them work permits etc. Are we not entitled to stop going beyond our obligations?
Goldberg says they will go to Arab countries. I think not. But many countries would accept Arab immigration especially considering that each family would come with a nest egg, courtesy of Israel, of $200,000.
The key here is not to work at cross purposes. If we want them to leave, we shouldn’t be, at the same time, encouraging them to stay.
This is why I suggest South America, which has a history of taking in Arabs and assimilating them.
The primary change is to narrow the center column so that it is easy to read. Presently it is much to wide at least on my 18″ screen. I have asked for a maximum width or 6 inches. Together with the outside columns this would total 10 inches.
Some devices would be even smaller than that so the programming has to take that into account.
It should be finished by lunch. After that please send me an email telling me what your browser is and what device you are using and what you see on your screen.
CuriousAmerican Said:
It seems, he believes that many Arabs could leave without coercion given incentives to do so. Even if some may voluntarily leave without coercion, it is very doubtful for any country to receive them. That makes it very difficult.
Well that would be you.
The adjective “best” is rarely applied to me.
He is a lawyer. He knows what words mean. He is using “voluntary” to soften an ugly reality. Maybe necessary, ugly nonetheless.
The thing is: If the money were offered, before any sanctions were applied, then 44% of young Arabs in Judea and Samaria would leave right now – (according to a poll by Bir Zeit). That truly would be voluntary.
However, you have a charitable soul; and seem like a good guy.
On this board, it is rare for anyone to use “best” when referring to me.
🙂
CuriousAmerican Said:
I do not think he paid serious attention to its meaning. Sometimes, emotion gets the best of us.
Right now, 44% of all Arab youth would leave if paid.
If they left, the others would go as well.
There would be no need to get coercive, as this author suggests. No need to bring world condemnation on Israel. Paying the Arabs to leave before coercion is brought to bear would do a world of good, and avoid a lot of trouble.
But if coercion is used, then do not call it voluntary.
He is right about that. The Jews were only 33% of Palestine in 1947. Israel cannot safely absorb a hostile population to 33%. Pay the Arabs to leave.
The Left and the anti-Zionist Satmyr would align with the Palestinians.
Pay the Arabs to leave.
Wow! When I say this, I am slammed.
Go figure!
Payment to leave is the only option.
It would be best to move them to a Muslim state, but I doubt any will accept them. That is why I recommend South America.
Take it easy on Ted.
As someone who designs websites, it is often difficult to make minor changes. If you make one change here, then often it changes everywhere. It is tricky to find the right code for one specific area.
He has not thought that far ahead.
Why is he calling it “voluntary” though?
That is a contradiction in terms. Were it really voluntary, it would not be messy. The only thing that would make it messy is if it were involuntary.
Transfer may not be fascist, but it is not voluntary, either.
Population transfer/ethnic cleansing may not be the worst of all evils, but you cannot call it voluntary.
If you do cleanse them … then admit it. Call it “necessary” NOT “voluntary.”
“voluntary” is double-speak.
They would respond … Give us open borders to the Mediterranean, and to Jordan, and we will take care of our people. They will say, “It is you who made them dependent, and now condemn them for the dependency that Israel forced on them.”
LOOK! If TRANSFER – which is NOT voluntary – Let’s be honest and call it what it is: ETHNIC CLEANSING – is in mind, then be honest.
It is not voluntary if you make their living a living hell.
The Arab countries will refuse to take them in. So I cannot see how you can implement this.
What is being considered is driving the Arabs out by coercion. Fine, then admit it as necessary, and stop with the “voluntary” silliness.
It sounds like the author is trying to convince himself. No one else will understand it as “voluntary.” The use of the “voluntary” term seems to be a salve to quiet a conscience or indemnify against litigation.
If you want to do it, then do it; but do not relabel it.
It is a good and reasonable proposal. How about if all Arab countries refuse to receive a Palestinian Arab in their countries?
Bennett’s plan annex Area C and what Israel needs of B for security, etc.
The PA should be dissolved and Kedar’s plan could be implemented for the Arab cities in Judah and Samaria:
@ Ted Belman:
So glad everything is returning to better than normal.
These proposals are more good news out of Israel.
At this point, it doesn’t even matter what proposals the Israelis put up as alternatives to the two-state solution. The two-state solution is dead. The fact that Israelis put up alternatives at all is simple concrete proof that it is the Jews of Israel that are the only ones seeking peace with their neighbors and that these are not supplications, but offerings from a position of strength and moral fortitude.
The Jewish state of Israel is a positive moral, political and economic force in the region. Not only does it deserve to be left alone, but it deserves international support that the fake Palestinian Nationalist do not.
@ Ted Belman:
Thanks, Ted. That will be a great help. What is included in “then some”?
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
@ ArnoldHarris:I already asked for that and then some. Should be finished on Thursday.
Ted, when you are finished fixing Israpundit, I sincerely hope your website programmer will arrange the comment columns so the text appears flush left in the allotted space and not centered. That would be exactly like every other comments section of every other blogsite I have seen over many years.
The absence of that feature causes this site to look amateurish and renders comments difficult to read..
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Israel must first annex all of Area C, which comprises about 62% of the administered territories under Israeli control since June 1967, and enough of Area B to assure problem-free territorial access to all parts of the country from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.
As soon as that is accomplished, Israel begin negotiating local autonomy arrangements with the leaderships of the urban Arab clans (hamulas) who wield at least behind-the-scenes power in their large cities: Jenin, Tulkarem, Nablus, Kalkilya, Ramallah, Jericho and Hevron. The kinds of relationships that will benefit the local Arab leaderships as well as Israel and the Jewish nation are understandings that will empower the local hamulas to keep the peace with the Jews of Israel and in return, profit from the proximity of the large Jewish market for goods and services. I think it is self-evident that few such groups of the type represented by those urban Arab clan leadership families would be able to resist the temptation of having such powers tossed in their laps. When — not if — such arrangements are put in place, the Arabs themselves will have good reason to dissolve Fatah and the gang of crooks that feed themselves from its existence.
I have not mentioned Israeli citizenship for any more Arabs, because that simply is not feasible and ultimately could prove dangerous for the safety of the Jewish state. No Jews have equal citizenship or other personal status in any Arab or other Moslem society that I know of, and that is precisely the way citizenship should be arranged in the Jewish state.
The time is long overdue for Israel and the Jewish nation to recognize that “Jewish state” and “democratic state” are utterly incompatible concepts.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Ted,
the social help should be given by Jewish organizations not by the government. This way Arabs will get nothing, and move out.
Right now Jews are paying Arabs to breed through their taxes.