this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
227 points (94.5% liked)

World News

39110 readers
2578 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, it is the Fatah line as well. If it were feasible, I would also support it. However, Israeli created "facts on the ground" say it isn't. It is impossible to extract the entrenched colonists from the West Bank and it is impossible for Israel to accept a sovereign Palestine that is anything more than a Bantustan. Worse, it might just mean that Israel will have not one but two Gazas on its doorstep. It's a recipe for more death and destruction.

The 2SS was reasonable 30 years ago. That time has very sadly passed. Just like the Palestinians lost their chance in '48, so did the Israelis lose their chance at Camp David in 2000. The current mess is a knot that can only be solved by a single state solution. And if that is the case, and we agree that either side "cleansing" the other is completely unacceptable, then universal equality from the river to the sea, a democratic country, is the only game left.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The current mess is a knot that can only be solved by a single state solution. And if that is the case, and we agree that either side “cleansing” the other is completely unacceptable, then universal equality from the river to the sea, a democratic country, is the only game left.

We disagree on whether a two state solution is possible but do agree that either side committing genocide on the other is unacceptable.

I disagree that a single state solution is possible, even if we named it Peaceland because the same conflict you say prevents the two state solution will still exist and the conflict will continue within the single state. Forcing two opposing cultures into a single state against their will is how we get ethnic cleansing, aka genocide.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

We obviously also disagree on what causes the conflict. I don't see it as a clash between opposing cultures, which by definition is irreconcilable. It is a clash over land, over sovereignty, over rights, over resources. These can of course be resolved and have been resolved even at least tentatively in many countries in the region. With justice can come peace.

If Serbs and Muslims can coexist in Bosnia, if Macedonians and Albanians can coexist in North Macedonia, if Protestants and Catholics can coexist in Northern Ireland, if Flemings and Waloons can coexist in Belgium, if the various denominations can coexist in Lebanon, if English and French can coexist in Quebec, then Israelis and Palestinians can work it out as well. Note that the above examples are at a varying degree of peace and harmony, from not very much to quite a lot. But none of them are genocidal cases. In fact, a couple are societies that coexist after a genocide took place (Bosnia, Ireland).

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

If Serbs and Muslims can coexist in Bosnia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_genocide

Forcing them to live together would be creating the same conditions that led to the genocide! Do you think they will just skip past the genocide this time?

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You bringing up the Bosnian Genocide reinforces my point rather than undercut it.

The Bosnian genocide happened, just like the Nakba did (or arguably still is) and still after it happened, the Bosnia and Herzegovina of today exists. In Bosnia today Serbs and Muslims coexist, even if Serbs massacred the Muslims in the past. Same for Israelis and Palestinians: the Bosnia of today is a case study of what an Israel/Palestine of tomorrow might look like.

That's exactly why I mentioned Bosnia and Ireland in the first place.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We could also learn something from that and the other genocides and not force the conflict to escalate in the hope that the future survivors work things out.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I really don't understand how ending apartheid is an escalation from where we are now. It's precisely the opposite: de-escalation and peace.

We are living the genocide moment, right now, and we have been living it for several decades. This is about ending this genocidal status quo. What the fuck are you talking about?