The Israeli Solution

cg

[Caroline Glick will be speaking about her new book, The Israeli Solution, to the Wednesday Morning Club in Los Angeles on March 25, 2014.  For more info, click here.]

Reprinted from The American Thinker.

To Caroline Glick, senior contributing editor at the Jerusalem Post, the concept of a “two-state solution,” carving an invented state of Palestine from the tiny body of Israel and hopefully expecting the two resulting entities to live in harmony is, at best, a “chimera.”  Worse, it is a “humiliating, dangerous nightmare”; and worst of all, it spells the end of Israel.

What Glick proposes in her provocative new book, The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, (available March 4) is to brush away the web of mischief, ignorance, deceit and hatred that surrounds the “peace plan,” and with newfound clarity, get rid of the misbegotten thing entirely.  In its place, she proposes a one-state plan, the one state being Israel.

In Glick’s own words:

The Israeli one-state plan entails the application of Israeli law– and through it, Israeli sovereignty– over the west bank of the Jordan River: the area that, from biblical times through the 1950s, was known to the world as Judea and Samaria.  In Israel, Judea and Samaria remain the terms used to refer to the territory….

Judea and Samaria are the terms she uses throughout.  Israel having withdrawn from Gaza in 2005, Glick does not include Gaza in her plan, nor does she believe, for legal and strategic reasons, that it should be reabsorbed into Israel.  Her one-state solution, the application of Israeli law and sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, which is “based on actual Israeli rights rather than fictitious Israeli culpability,”

would liberate Israel to craft coherent strategies for contending with the…evolving regional threat and the international assault on its right to exist….Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria will increase the security of all.   It will transform the region from one governed alternatively by a military government and a terrorist kleptocracy into one governed by a unified, liberal rule of law.

The sine qua non of her plan, of course, is the understanding that the Jewish people are the indigenous Palestinians, not “colonial usurpers” or “occupying powers.”  “At no time,” she reminds us, “have there been no Jews in the Land of Israel.”  She gives us census figures from the Roman holocaust of the first century CE and the subsequent Bar Kochba rebellion up to the 19th century “dawn of modern Zionism,” when Jews again were the majority in Jerusalem.  And she touches on some of the archeological finds that suggest a significant Jewish presence as early as 1050 BCE.   Considering that the Palestinians have been trying to erase all vestiges of Jewish presence in Israel,

[T]he reconstitution of the Jewish state in the Land of Israel is an unprecedented historic accomplishment.  No other indigenous people has preserved its national identity for so long and against such great odds, only to repatriate itself to its historic homeland….

But Glick stresses that her one-state plan is not intended as punishment of the Palestinians.  On the contrary, she repeatedly demonstrates that Israeli rule has always been and will continue to be of great benefit to the Palestinians.  After the Israeli victory in the Six-Day War of 1967, for instance, Israel’s recapture of Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria was, for the Palestinian Arabs, “an economic and civil rights boon.” The entire population of 65,000 “lined up to receive Israeli identification cards that granted them permanent residency status in Israel.” Among the positive results of “Israel’s benign rule,” she cites impressive statistics on improved Arab living standards, employment, GDP, literacy, schools and universities, life expectancy (48 in 1967, 72 in 2000), infant mortality, clinics, sewage, electricity and health insurance.  Equally important,

[U]nder Israeli rule, the Palestinians of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza exercised political freedoms that were nonexistent in the rest of the Arab world.  These included freedom of association, freedom of the press, enfranchisement of women, and the ability to seek the protection of the Israeli court system.

Keep in mind that during the illegal Jordanian occupation of Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem from 1949 to 1967, not only were Jews prohibited from buying land, but any Arab accused of selling land to Jews faced the death penalty, and in many cases, still may.

Moving us to the present impasse requires Glick, of course, to provide a look at the historical background and context.  In her necessarily condensed summary, Glick draws an inexorable line from European anti-Semitism through the treacheries of the British, with their Peel Commission and infamous White Paper, and the murderous antics of their Nazi sidekick Haj Amin El-Husseini, inventor of the Palestinians.  Then come the spawn of El-Husseini, Arafat and now Abbas.  There was the insanity of the Oslo Accords, which led in turn to the American “bipartisan pipe dream,” currently embodied in the tragicomic farce that is John Kerry.

This is a history of heroes, villains and dupes, including numerous Israelis.  But when it comes to American involvement, no one escapes whipping.  In the face of continuous and open Palestinian calls for the complete destruction of the Jewish state, American administrations from Nixon’s to Obama’s have committed themselves to some version of a plan to establish a Palestinian state on all or most of the land won by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War.

The story of American pro-Palestinianism does not make for pleasant reading.  It is difficult to be reminded of the slippery words of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama; to confront again the loony obsession with Israel while the entire world is ablaze; to have to face, as Glick forces us to do, that were it not for America’s feckless policy, the PLO would probably have self-destructed.  To add to the irony, the Arab world would not have cared: Witness King Hussein of Jordan’s 1970 slaughter of thousands of Palestinians.  Or recall that in 1982, when Israel forced the PLO out of Lebanon, “no Arab regime offered to host them.  It took U.S.  pressure to persuade Tunisia to accept them.  It would seem, says Glick, that the “wider Arab world’s assessment of Arafat was voiced by Jordan’s King Hussein, who reportedly remarked, ‘Arafat never came to a bridge that he didn’t double-cross.’”  But successive American administrations were snookered.

One significant result of this misguided policy is that it “has affected America’s ability to assess Israel’s strategic importance to U.S.  national security; to understand the motivations and interests of Israel’s Arab neighbors; and to comprehend how those motivations and interests affect those of the United States.”  Worse yet, it has damaged American standing in the Arab world.  And perhaps most damaging, the United States has failed to learn from Israeli experience: “Israel’s experience in Lebanon was a textbook case for how events would likely unfold for the United States and its British allies in Iraq.” If only we’d paid attention.

Glick, then, provides three options open to Israel:

1.  Reassert the military government as the sole governing body [in Judea and Samaria].  This response, she says, is not tenable over the long term.  The Palestinians definitely live better under Israel’s military government than they did under any previous government.  However, “both Arabs and Jews have the right to expect to be governed by a democratic, civilian government.”

2.  Maintain the current dual governance by the [Israeli] military government and the Palestinian Authority.  If this were possible, she says, “the two-state paradigm would also be viable — and indeed, a Palestinian state would have been established fifteen years ago.”  But once again, the Palestinian hierarchy is completely opposed to peaceful co-existence with the Jewish state, period.

3.  Incorporate Judea and Samaria into sovereign Israel.  This, of course, is Glick’s proposal, and, she stresses, for many strategic reasons, the sooner the better.  As she describes the plan,

Applying Israeli law to the areas would end the authoritarian repression that the Palestinians suffer under the rule of the Palestinian Authority.   As permanent residents of Israel, with the option of applying for Israeli citizenship, the Palestinians would find themselves living in a liberal democracy where their individual rights are protected.

Contingent on security concerns—applied on individual rather than on a communal basis—Palestinians will have the right to travel and live anywhere they wish within Israeli territory.  Similarly, Israeli Jews will also be allowed to live anywhere they wish.  All prohibitions on property and land sales to Jews will be abrogated.

From the outset, as permanent residents of Israel, Palestinians will have the right to elect their local governments.  Those that receive Israeli citizenship…will also be allowed to vote in national elections for the Knesset.  The Israeli education system will be open to them.  The Israeli economy will be open to them.

Washington will have to “acknowledge that the two-state paradigm has been a disastrous failure,” but it will be able finally to cease its funding of the Palestinian Authority.  The Israeli military government will be dissolved, and the PA will no longer be the Palestinians’ representative.

Glick sees one immediate problem: “the sudden influx of a large, unassimilated Arab population,” but she sees it as a potential burden on Israel’s welfare services, not as a demographic “time bomb,” as is often feared.  She whacks this straw man, noting that “the actual population data — together with current population growth trends for Israel and the Palestinians — make clear that there is no Palestinian demographic time bomb.  In fact, demography is one of Israel’s greatest advantages.”

To be sure, there are many potential problems, and perhaps the least persuasive section of the book attempts to deal with some of the “likely responses,” which are, after all, unknowable.  But Glick is nothing if not intrepid, and we, fingers crossed, follow her arguments.

The Palestinians, for example:

The Palestinians have two means of responding to an Israeli decision to apply Israeli law to Judea and Samaria: terrorism and diplomatic warfare.   But these are, of course, the same means available to them today…and the Palestinians are already operating at full capacity or near-full capacity in both spheres.   As a result, it is difficult to imagine how the Palestinians could respond more forcefully to an Israeli one-state plan than they are already behaving on a daily basis.

Of course, terrorism would still be a possibility, and even a “massacre.” But, she coolly asserts, “Such an attack would likely be a one-time deal,” and Israel, which experienced a “sustained campaign of mass terrorism” from September 2000 to April 2002, will not suffer another such.

Another threat that cannot be ignored is that the Palestinians “might call for an international boycott of Israel.”  But the attractiveness of Israel’s economy minimizes the effectiveness of that option.  “In Britain, for instance, hatred for Israel is galloping, yet bilateral trade between Israel and Britain is booming and growing, with the trade balance in Israel’s favor.”

What about Egypt? It is far from clear, says Glick, that Egypt “has the logistical capacity to move its U.S.- made M1A1 Abrams tanks across the Sinai to engage Israeli forces, and to replenish its forces with spare parts, food, and reinforcements.   Egypt is, in fact, impoverished.”

And Jordan? “[T]he Hashemite regime’s likely, indeed all-but-certain response to an Israeli decision to apply its laws to Judea and Samaria will be to publicly condemn the move and privately celebrate it.” It is also far from certain how long the Hashemites will be in power.

Then, of course, there is Syria, “deeply dangerous for Israel and for the wider region.” But under the awful circumstances of today’s Syria, “Assad would have little capacity to respond.” Hezb’allah is the wild card: Now tied down in Syria, it is weaker at home.  Should Iran emerge as a nuclear power, Hezb’allah would be freer to concentrate on Israel.  Thus, she repeats, “Israel would be well advised” to make its move before that happens.

Her predictions about Europe are the most convincing.  A pacifist, de-militarized, toothless giant, Europe, she feels, poses absolutely no military threat.   Its only coherent foreign policy, she says, is its hatred for Israel.  Then too, “EU member state governments aggressively compete with each other in courting Israeli internet, biomedical, agri-tech, and other high-tech companies to partner with their countries.” And for Israel’s part, with its newfound Asian partners rapidly expanding trade with Israel, it may in the end need Europe less than Europe needs Israel.

Finally and most importantly, Glick turns back to America, for whom she frankly admits she is writing this book:

[T]he Israeli one-state plan will liberate Americans from the stranglehold of the two-state solution’s mythology.   For the first time in a generation, American foreign policy hands, politicians, and regular citizens will be able to see the Arab and Islamic worlds for what they are, and not view them through the distorting, mendacious lens of a policy paradigm that falsely places the blame for all their failings and problems on Israel.

In other words, the United States will regain something it seems to have lost: the truth.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • farry king

    Solution? What solution?

    Permant residents without citizenship? What’s that supposed to be? Colonialism goes Apardheid?

    Judea and Samaria come with a 2,5 million strong Arab population. That’s the deal. Take it or leave it. But please stop pretending there can be some form of administrative loophole to keep the Arab population permanantly out of political decision making. Annexation will result in an El Knesset.

    The great majority of those involved

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Israel doesn’t have an Arab problem, as many Jews, Christians, and Druze are also Arabs too. Israel has an Islamic jihad problem, and Muslims of all stripes and configurations never ever assimilate and integrate in infidel society because to do so is blasphemous and blasphemy is an automatic death sentence in Islam.

      The absorption of Judea and Samaria’s Muslim population, along with Israel’s already approximately 20 percent Muslim population, would soon spell the doom for Israel. Sorry, but Ms Glick’s proposed solution is really a recipe for doom.

      • chuckie2u

        I dare say the more secular oriented Muslims would look forward to a better life style than the constant turmoil and war mongering .

        • Hass

          The secular ones are a tiny minority.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Secular Muslims are apostates and apostasy in Islam garners an automatic death sentence. Thus, they have to do it with the utmost secrecy or escape to the infidel world where because of mass Muslim infiltration, they still have to be very discreet.

          • Freedom Call

            But the muslim world is coming with them.
            The UK is practically under sharia law now.

          • Freedom Call

            They exist – they are just scared/indifferent (one can argue that both stem from each other since opposing the mainstream theology is at best invitation for torture and shunning and at worst death) of doing anything.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          I dare say the more secular oriented Muslims would look forward to a better life style than the constant turmoil and war mongering .

          More secular oriented Muslims are ex Muslims, i.e., blasphemous apostates, and blasphemous apostates per the texts and tenets of Islam are condemned to execution. Apparently, you were naive and gullible enough to believe GWB when he advertently or inadvertently proclaimed Islam to be a so-called “religion of peace”. Nothing could have been further from the truth! Not only that, but you also believe that Muslims value the same thing we do, which is incredibly naive and utterly absurd.

          • chuckie2u

            You make too many assumptions. I am well aware of the political elites and their misinformation.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            I’m not assuming. You are an ignoramus. How I know? It’s obvious.

        • Drakken

          Well keep them out of the west, and if your sympathize and empathize with the muslim savages so much, go live with them.

        • SCREW SOCIALISM

          Secular oriented Muslims? Like Salman Rushdie – who still fears that fellow Muslims out to murder him because a pig called khomeni didn’t like a book Rushdie wrote.

      • ahad_ha_amoratsim

        There are no Arab Jews. There are Jews who live in or came from Arab lands. There are Arabs who converted to Judaism. But if they are Jews, then by definition they are not Arabs. The lie that Jews are a faith community and not an ethnic group (albeit one that people can join by way of conversion) is a standard canard of Arab propagandists.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          You are correct and I know better. i was just trying to stress the fact that what is happening in Israel has nothing to do with Arabs, but with Muslims instead. For instance, the Iranians are Persians and not Arabs, yet they are Israel’s arch enemy. Muslims of all stripes and configurations hate Israel with a passion.

          • Martel

            Most of the European and American left hates Israel with a passion too.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            And Muslims are expert at exploiting their ignorance!

    • Gee

      They are JORDANIAN citizens – why should Israel give them citizenship when they have had such since 1950? Oh by the way – you can subtract 1 million from the number – they do not exist

    • Drakken

      We should bring back colonialism, it kept the Islamic savages in check, look at them now, running amok everywhere and useful idiot leftarded sympathizers like you can’t help your own suicidal tendencies by embracing that which will kill you. No more muslims, no more problems, if you love those effing savages so much, go live with them.

  • Bamaguje

    “…in 1982 when Israel forced the PLO out of Lebanon, no Arab regime offered to host them. It took U.S. pressure to persuade Tunisia to accept them” – Caroline Glick.

    America keeps getting it wrong on Muslims:

    - She supported Afghan Jihadis against USSR who later metamorphosed into Taliban and Al-Qaeda resulting in 9/11.

    - She ousted Saddam leading to the enthronement of pro-Iran Shias in Baghdad, interminable Shia-vs-Sunni sectarian violence, and increased persecution and violence against Christians.

    - She ousted the secular Gaddafi to enthrone Al-Qaeda linked Islamists who later killed U.S. ambassador in Benghazi. Libya is now tottering towards anarchy as the various anti-Gaddafi militias that were armed by NATO, run amok the North African country, refusing to disarm.

    • Raymond_in_DC

      She (the US) also insisted that Hamas be allowed to run in the Palestinian Authority’s parliamentary elections in 2005. Hamas won. The next year elements of Hamas captured IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, sparking the 2006 war. The year after that Hamas took over Gaza. Apparently the US no longer cares about elections, as Israel is expected to negotiate with the head of the PA (Abbas) now into the tenth year of his four year term.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    As long as Islam exists as a force in the world there will always be jihad (holy war) between Muslims and infidels, as the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is the subjugation of all religions and all infidels, i.e., the world, into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia to ultimately make Islam supreme throughout the world.

    Thus, Israel’s jihad problem is actually the non-Islamic infidel world’s jihad problem, as Israel cannot solve their jihad problem alone by themselves via a one state solution, a two state solution, a three state solution, a four state solution, or any number of state solutions.

    Indeed, to solve Israel’s jihad problem will take a comprehensive infidel world solution, and the first step in the process is the banning and reversing of mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, followed by rendering the Islamic totalitarian world into total and abject poverty, and then by totally isolating it until such time as Islam as a force becomes abandoned and discredited among its former adherents.

    Because of Islamic societies totalitarian nature, it is incapable of producing anything of value on its own and as a result Islam will eventually cease to exist among its adherents in a matter of time, and total abject poverty will accelerate the process. The only other viable solution involves the total annihilation of every Muslim in the world, which would be extremely violent, bloody, and uncivilized.

    Think about it, how will solving Israel’s jihad problem also solve India’s jihad problem, Thailand’s jihad problem, Chechnya’s jihad problem, China’s jihad problem, Nigeria’s jihad problem, Somalia’s jihad problem, Kenya’s jihad problem, the Philippines jihad problem, Europe, New Zealand, Australia, and America’s jihad problem, and on and on ad nauseum.

    If a religion not only condemns to hellfire and damnation all those that apostatize from it and also condemns them to be executed, is that a religion or a cult? If a religion not only condemns to hellfire and damnation all those that don’t follow its tenets and also condemns them to be executed, is that a religion or a cult? If a religion not only condemns to hellfire and damnation all those that talk bad about it or speaks out against it to hellfire and damnation and also condemns them to be executed, is that a religion or a cult? If a religion makes waging jihad (holy war) on its behalf incumbent upon all adherents to make it supreme throughout the world, is that a religion or a cult?

    Think about it because I just described some but not all of the basic tenets of Islam. You be the judge, is Islam under those circumstances automatically protected under the first amendment of the constitution of the USA and if so, why?

    Again, there is only one comprehensive solution to the infidel world’s jihad problem, as I’m afraid that Islam is not the so-called “religion of peace” the infidel world pretends it to be.

    • Nodrog

      Yes, Islam will go down as the most evil deception, the most evil ideology in history. In all sorts of ways it must be forced into irreversible decline. But the utmost compassion must be extended to all Muslims who deserve it. They have been and are the victims of the Perfect Narcissistic Psychopath. All imams and mullahs walk around as though they are carbon copies of that hideous Mr. Perfect.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        But the utmost compassion must be extended to all Muslims who deserve it.

        I agree with your post in general but disagree with the above sentiment. There are no Muslims who deserve it, only people living in Islamic society who secretly (because apostasy in Islam is an automatic death sentence) don’t believe or adhere to the tenets of Islam, and that would make such people secret non-Muslims as opposed to Muslims

      • Drakken

        Showing compassion to a muslim is like showing compassion to a rabid dog. You need to put the rabid animal down to keep everyone safe. The only thing a muslim respects and understands is the mailed fist, give it to them in spades otherwise they will kill you. You are not going to fix the arabs that have been inbreeding for a thousand years, period.

  • Hass

    Fat chance of that working.

    • Nodrog

      To the contrary mate, Fat chance that it will!! Caroline is one smart woman and you are one smart moron.

      • Hass

        Wow classy.

        • Freedom Call

          The left has lost it’s charm ever since the communist revolution.

      • Drakken

        Her idea that you can incorporate a bunch of savage muslims into your nation is suicide and it will never work, no muslims and no more problem.

        • Freedom Call

          Indeed it is like saying amnesty is somehow good for america.

      • Guess

        Actually only a moron would think a one State viable.

      • Beydety

        Go ahead and commit mass suicide.

        Stupid Libtard

  • Long Ben

    Israel possessing Judea and Samaria and much much more is foretold in Old Testament prophesy. Consider Josephs’ Birthright, as prophesied over Ephraim and Manasseh by Jacob/Israel at the end of his days on Earth.

  • Walter Sieruk

    The UN along with Obama wants to such a terrible thing as to divide the land of the State of Israel. This is a bad idea for it would create ” House divided against itself that would not be able stand.”or as Jesus and then much later Lincoln would put it “a house divided against itself will not stand….” After all, the State of Israel is only about the size in the state of New Jersey. So the idea of cutting up such a small country into two is an unrealistic and awful idea. Furthermore, it’s important not to sound like an extremist of any kind. so first off it needs to be stated that Obama is not the coming Anti- Christ who is predicted to come into the world that the Bible warns about. Nevertheless it still may be that Obama does seem have some of the spirit of the coming Anti-Christ because,as the Bible teaches, one of the evil things that the Anti-Christ will do in Israel is to “divide the land…” Daniel 11:39. This is something to think about.

  • Danny

    I am a great admirer of Caroline Glick, but from what I know of this plan, I don’t think it could possibly work. In fact, I think the results would likely be catastrophic. What would happen if Israel took down that security wall, and announced to all the Arabs living in Judea and Samaria “This is all a part of Israel now, and all of you can become Israelis if you want to”? It is likely that all of those Arabs would sequester themselves in those areas, still refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and still seek its destruction. Only this time, there would be no security wall keeping the terrorists out of Israel. There would be another intifadah, another wave of suicide bombing attacks, and nothing to stop them. Even worse, some of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria would would move into key strategic areas, where their terrorist attacks would cause more damage. Glick’s plan would be a good one if it took into consideration all of these facts, and included one last step in the plan: Once Israel annexes the territories, they should let some Arabs stay if they meet security requirements and pose no risk to Israel. However, the majority of Arabs living in these areas would have to be expelled to Jordon, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt. Historically, any time a country has gained territory (like Poland did at the end of WWII), forced expulsions have always followed. In the case of Poland, after the war, they forced out the ethnic Germans who had lived in those areas for centuries. I know it’s not a nice thing to do, but it is necessary, otherwise there will be much bloodshed. When the newest manifestation of Israel was formed in 1948, they took in 800,000 Jews who were immediately expelled from Arab countries. Now Israel should follow up that move by annexing Judea, Samaria, and yes Gaza and expel the Arabs who live there. All the while, Israel should make it clear to Egypt, that if some new Egyptian government comes along who wants to renege on Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel, Israel will annex the Sinai as well. Politically, Israel will be vilified and ostracized temporarily. So what else is new? However, once the “Palestinians” are living in Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt for a short while, the world will very quickly lose interest in what happens to these people. No one would have cared at all about the “Palestinians” in the first place, except being a passionate advocate for those people gave people a much appreciated excuse and a disguise that allowed them to be anti-Semitic. Once Palestine is no longer Israel’s problem, all the so-called supporters for Palestinians will disappear overnight, and they will have to find different ways to express their anti-Semitism. Glick’s plan starts off in the right direction, but then it misses the most important part. Borders do not change the way people think. Whether the Palestinians are living in “the West Bank” or whether they live in Israel proper, their desire to murder every last Jew will continue just the same. All Glick’s plan will do is make it easier for these particular Arabs to live out their lives’ ambition.

    • Geoffrey_Britain

      You have the right of it.
      Glick, who I also admire is seeking an unworkable compromise. I suspect she knows that as long as ‘Muslims hate the Jews more than they love their children’ there will be no peace. Given that reality, the only effective path for Israel is annexation of both Gaza and the West Bank and then mandatory expulsion of ALL Muslims from Israel.

      Unfortunately, that’s a political non-starter both internally and unacceptable to the US, whom Israel believes is essential to their survival.

      Until the dynamics change, both in Israel’s mind-set and externally, most likely either as the result of an only partially successful nuclear attack upon Israel or…Obama succeeding in cutting off all American aid, nothing will change otherwise.

      • Drakken

        I think you would be amazed at how circumstances and events could make it happen, and to h*ll with what the bloody so called international community has to say.

        • Freedom Call

          Amen.

      • Freedom Call

        Yes sadly Israel’s survival requires severance from america and adapting to a world dominated by russia-china.

  • Freedom Call

    No no no.
    This is suicide considering israeli arabs while keen to take advantage of every amenity israel offers – want to nullify it’s jewish state status.

    The jerusalem post is a leftist rag and the israeli left is living a pipe dream in which somehow the conflict will be magically resolved if israel commits political suicide. (the israeli left hasn’t managed to form a coalition in almost 2 decades more or less – which goes to show just how few israelis believe them).

    My solution? 2 states – Israel and Jordan!
    It falls on the mandate lines circa 1920 and jordan is defacto palestinian (like “palestine” jordan has no definitive and distinct culture being a mish-mash of arab muslims from across the middle east).

  • Judahlevi

    First, the Jerusalem Post is NOT a “leftist rag”, that is Haaretz. Let’s not confuse anyone.

    Second, there is no political way you can get all of Israel’s (or Judea’s and Samaria’s) arabs to move to Jordan. This is not an option.

    Third, having arabs in a ‘sovereign state’ in Judea and Samaria is worse than having them in Israel where they can be controlled. If you believe that incorporating Judea and Samaria into Israel is bad, the alternative is worse.

    As for those who call for the destruction of all Muslims in Israel and elsewhere, this is just ridiculous. Yes, we have to oppose their will with our own, but we are not going to commit genocide against any people.

    • Freedom Call

      I read the post just fine and while they are more civilized about it – they do promote the same ideas.

      That aside – a sovereign state in judea and samaria is pretty much the same as the one state solution because there’s no arab consensus on ending the conflict which is just surrendering territory for no reason as per gaza. (also granting them actual full-fledged state status means terror attacks on every corner of israel from the “palestinian state” without the IDF being able to freely and rightfully neutralize them)

      Who spoke of the destruction of every muslim in israel? you seem to have confused population transfers and genocide.

      Population transfers have been practiced by the west as well as part of the post-ww2 re-arrangement of europe to prevent ethnic minorities from being used as a casus belli (as per the ukraine now and czechoslovakia in 1938).

      Guess what? they work – Poland , Germany , Etc (as compared to yugoslavia who by sheer virtue of josef tito managed to stay multi-ethnical until he died at which point a bloody and mutual ethnic war commenced).

      Is it ugly still? yes but i’ll be damned if my children die for political appeasement. the arabs have had their chance at autonomy and peace over and over again – either you draw the line where you have the upperhand or set yourself up for a very bloody war in the future.

      As long as islam is the dominant force in the region there will be no peace – at best a cold stalemate which is far preferable to the disasterous wishful thinking you are promoting.

      • Judahlevi

        My post was not in direct reply to yours and responds to several comments.

        I would agree that arabs are the problem whether or not they have a sovereign state in Judea and Samaria or are incorporated. My argument (actually Glick’s) was that by incorporation into Israel, Israel has more control (Israeli law applies) than dealing with a Palestinian state – which will be protected by other arab nations and the UN.

        Get the UN out of Israel.

        • justquitnow

          Yeah because the UN had absolutely nothing to do with the state of Israel being created in the first place. The jews just willed it into existences all by themselves….why can’t the goys just leave them alone?

          • Judahlevi

            You are absolutely right. The UN had “nothing” to do with the creation of the state of Israel. That honor was due to people much more competent than the UN and the brave men and women who fought and died to protect it.

            That the UN subsequently endorsed it had little value then, and none today.

          • Freedom Call

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_General_Assembly_Resolution_181

            It was only a vote or are you giving any sort of power to the UN of all organisations?

            Try harder next time.

          • Drakken

            Because those goddamn muslims you empathize and sympathize so much for, keep waging wars they lose. If you love those inbred savages so much, go live with them.

        • Freedom Call

          Apologies then if i seemed overly anatgonistic then but israeli citizenship to those who would desire it’s downfall is akin to the amnesty situation (or worse because the mexcians might end being honorable americans – very small chance of that but not zero).

    • Guess

      You do know that if those savages had Israels might you wouldn’t even be typing this comment don’t you?

      These baby F*ckers couldn’t care less about their own children and all strive to die killing a jew.

    • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

      Certainly putting Judea and Samaria under Israeli law is a huge step forward. I think people have a problem with the “solution” concept. Trying to solve, once and for all, the Arab anti-Jewish hostility can’t be addressed by Israel or us. But alleviating the economic and political repression of the PLO-controlled government is doable as is maintaining Israel’s security. Why not take that giant step forward? As you point out, the alternatives are worse.

    • Drakken

      The muslims one way or another are going to force you to a decision of extremes. The muslims have zero compunction about eliminating every Jew in Israel, so please by all means take your high moral ground until the muslims bury you in it.

      • Judahlevi

        It is not “moral” high ground, in fact, it is moral low ground. It doesn’t take much moral training to recognize that genocide is not the answer. Of all people, Jews recognize this most of all. I appreciate your concern for Israel.

        • Drakken

          I just do not understand you Jews who want to commit suicide in the face of Islamic aggression, the muslims have zero problems with eliminating every Jew in the Levant and are now forcing the Jews out of Europe, and you think that by taking a unsustainable stance against these beasts that you will survive? You might have a moral or ethical problem with dealing with the muslims in their own bloody coin, but I certainly don’t.

  • American1969

    I’m not certain thee will ever be a solution to the Arab/Israeli conflict. These people have been fighting with each other for thousands of years.

    • Drakken

      Sure there is a solution, no more muslims, no more problems.

    • Gee

      Actually it is a Muslim/Infidel conflict – and it has only been going on for 1,400 years

  • nopeacenow

    What happens to the 5 million Palestinian refugees who are supposed to be able to return to the new Palestinian state if there is no Palestinian state to return to?

    • Freedom Call

      The number has been bloated by the UN giving eternal refugee status to the palestinians. (Alongside with an unreasonable devotion of resources and man power when compared to every other refugee group on the planet)

      No other ethnicity/group of people in the world has ever been given such… they all lose their refugee status within a generation or two.

      They can all be assimiliated into an arab muslim nation since they are effectively arab muslims. (but these nations choose not to because hatred is a good distraction for an incompetant dictator and the UN pays the host nation for each refugee camp effectively ensuring they desire to keep the camps).

      • nopeacenow

        What you say is true but those “refugees” aren’t going to go away. How does Caroline Glick propose to deal with them in her one state solution?

        • Gee

          The Arabs have 99.93% of the Middle East – am sure that they plenty of room

          • nopeacenow

            It is still less than 100%. They wont be satisfied with less.

  • Guess

    Israel should take back Judea and Samaria and even that sh*t hole Gaza, expel those terrorist (Arabs) back to where they came from, meaning, Jordan and Egypt. And let their fellow paedophile worshippers take them back.

    The world of Libtards would be frothing at their mouths, but they’ll eventually forget about it, since the Paleswines are only a platform for their deep hatred of the Jews. Paleswine support would end very quickly as a matter in fact.

    It’s time for every single Jew (100%) to stick together for once.
    As the great Yizhak Rabin once said. Enough of blood and tears.

    • Freedom Call

      Rabin (RIP – even if i disagree with him he was a great warrior and the dead deserve our respect regardless) actually orchestrated the disaster known as the oslo accords so there is some irony in your statement.

      The Jordan-Israel solution will only come to be when the arabs try and invade again imo for it would be final nail in the coffin of coexistance. It would remove any doubt that there can be any peace in the form of western style diplomatic discourse (which is truely the more civilized thing to do it. Alas one can no more broker true peace with a muslim than he can with a hungry tiger – you can throw them both appeasements but in the end they will try to kill you).

      Until then i’m perfectly content with the status quo.. they have enough launch pads padded by hospitals and kindergartens on almost every border israel has. We don’t need to add any more.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Israel should take back Judea and Samaria and even that sh*t hole Gaza, expel those terrorist (Arabs) back to where they came from, meaning, Jordan and Egypt.

      Israel doesn’t have an Arab problem. It has a Muslim problem and Muslims wage both violent and non-violent jihad (holy war) against infidels as opposed to being non-Muslim Arab terrorists to ultimately make Islam supreme. Indeed, the entire notion that Israel stole land is complete and utter hogwash, as that is just a smokescreen for the Islamic world so that through their proxies, the so-called Palestinians, can wage jihad against Israel perpetually to ultimately render Israel into Islamic totalitarianism and the Israeli infidels into harsh and degrading dhimmitude. Indeed, there isn’t anything different whatsoever between the jihad being waged against Israel and the many other jihads also being waged around the world, such as the jihad being waged against the Indians in India by the Pakistanis. It’s time for everyone to stop blaming everyone but the true culprits.

  • T800

    I see a problem;
    Once Israel establishes Israeli law over Judea and Samaria,order and the rule of law is established,those Arabs-muslims would no longer be sending their young men and women to die in battle. Under true peace,they would return to their having children that will NOT be sent to die in combat. They could afford to be even more prolific. IOW,their negative population growth rate will reverse itself. Then it becomes possible for “Israeli” muslims to gain a voting majority and vote away the Jewish state,beginning by voting in as many muslims as possible to the Israeli government. Now,it IS possible they will recognize the benefits of living under Israeli law,but I suspect they would “kill the goose that lays the golden eggs” to be rid of Israel and “regain” muslim rule of the whole Mandate. The “Palestinians” haven’t be very smart in their choices so far.
    so how does Caroline G. propose to avoid this?

  • Loretta Reid

    Thanks for your great information, the contents are quiet interesting.I will be waiting for your next post.
    Environmental safety equipment townsville