One-state strategy would destroy Israel
By Letter to the Editor on March 27, 2020.
Re: Gwynne Dyer: “Bibi, Benny, Ruvi and Israel’s future” (March 14 Herald, Page A6)
While there’s a virtual consensus for a two-state solution to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Dyer’s advocating for the “one-state solution” is being insidiously sold in the language of peace.
So why then is the one-state or bi-national solution unacceptable? At its most basic level, the one-state solution denies the right of Jews to self-determination in their historical homeland and calls into question the very legitimacy of Israel as a state. A bi-national state would have the same consequence as the “right of return” – the negation of Israel as a Jewish state. Palestinians, by virtue of a higher birthrate, would turn Jews into a minority before voting in favour of another Muslim Arab state in place of Israel.
The one-state solution is therefore a thinly veiled strategy for destroying the state of Israel and questioning its very right to exist.
That doesn’t seem like a solution to me.
Mike Fegelman
Executive Director, HonestReporting Canada
Toronto
10-9
[…] March 27, 2020 Kimberly Rogers-Brown ISRAEL, Israeli Peace Talks Leave a comment Link to original article […]
the usual blah blah blah of the self serving. the letter is imbued with racist, self promoting, egotistical, fear/hate mongering nastiness. honest reporting?! get real.
1) the land is only a historical right based on self serving writings. there are other writings and historical evidences that suggest the land belongs to others.
2) the most recent previous owners of the land were palestinians. the disregard not only for their longstanding presence there at the time, but also over the millennia, remains an affront to decency and humanity.
3) that some jewish peoples still choose to deny full citizenship, love and respect to non-jewish people is rather disgusting and racist, is it not? should the rest of the word not welcome jewish peoples as full citizens, and with due love and respect as all human beings should be afforded?
4) the effect of point 3 on palestinians has been a horror show. do terms like hate crimes, crimes against humanity, apartheid ring a bell?
5) some jewish peoples would rather kill and die than love and share – kind of sick, really.
6) how about we all grow up, reach out, love a lot more, and stop buying into lies, rhetoric, and the spin doctors that promote hate and greed and racism. why is it so hard to share? for shame.
No one owns land to any legitimate degree. Land is only “owned” until someone stronger takes it from you.
Colonizing and conquering has occurred since day 1 and will continue to occur. You would be hard pressed to find any society that hasn’t been conquered and their lands taken. It will happen to us as well. As such, the “I was here first” argument, is only relevant among kids in a playground. That’s where the real hammer comes down! lol
“At its most basic level, Israel is a state that denies the right of Palestinians to self-determination in their historical homeland and calls into question the very legitimacy of Palestine as a state.”
Palestinians have been under occupation since Israel was created from their lands.
They had a free and fair election in 2006 but the “wrong” party was elected so the world, led by Stephen Harper, thumped their chests and declared the election invalid.
It’s rightly said by Dyer that Israel can be a democracy or it can be a Jewish State.
Given the power Netanyahu has simply taken, despite being indicted for alleged corruption – it’s clear what Israel has chosen.
“HonestReporting Canada” is yet another thuggish outreach from Israel to silence contrary voices.
Again – the choice (was) democracy or a Jewish state and you have chosen.
Sit down Israel; you’re embarrassing yourself and those of us who once supported you.