Last edited Sat Dec 31, 2016, 03:35 PM - Edit history (1)
The article explains why the two state solution is key to anyone who believes that Israel should exist as a Jewish majority state and a democratic one. http://www.salon.com/2016/12/30/kerry-vs-netanyahu-for-a-liberal-zionist-the-death-of-the-two-state-solution-is-deeply-painful/ (I have not seen anything from this author before)
It makes the connect that Netanyahu was part of the wave of nationalists winning office - and explains why that is the end of the liberal Zionism 2 state solution.
His characterization of Kerry here rings true:
"John Kerry’s speech on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on Wednesday was remarkable for many reasons – the unusually sharp tone towards Israel, the almost naked pleading from the stentorian secretary of state for someone, anyone connected to the two warring parties to finally come to their senses and negotiate a solution in good faith.
But most of all it was a remarkable speech for the sense it left that time has finally run out on hewing to the old paradigms through which so much international diplomacy is conducted — not just in the Middle East but everywhere — long after facts on the ground have changed enough to make them irrelevant.
In short, it feels as if the Rubicon has been crossed.
<snip>
Kerry’s speech on Wednesday, along with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s public attempts to undermine the Obama administration over the years and his alignment with Donald Trump and his nationalism, should have brought home the reality for even the most naïve of us that the two-state solution – Israel existing side-by-side with a demilitarized Palestine – is dead.
Beyond the politics of AIPAC, Republicans, Democrats, Trump, Netanyahu ..... this really explains why there was such a reaction. Kerry mentioned that friends tell each other hard truths -- and he did. It is easy to see this as simply refuting Netanyahu's tweet that friends do not take friends to the Security Council. Here, though -- he is telling truths not just to Netanyahu, but to far closer friends of Kerry. Most American Jews are liberal Zionists, who will answer quickly that they support a two state solution. This is likely true of most liberals who support Israel.
Oddly, this speech at the end of his time in a job he clearly loved and did an amazing job in, he is full circle with where he entered the public sphere. He is passionately, courageously, telling hard truths. I would bet that his explanation for doing so would be very similar to 1971 - his conscience is pushing him to do so. In addition, Kerry has for more than a decade spoken of there being a narrow window for a two state solution -- and he, in whatever capacity he was in, has long made a very strong case for that being the way to peace. Here - as this article spells out, the two state solution is likely dead, but this is the strongest case that I think anyone has made for the players themselves to stop, think and reconsider and find a way back. (A top foreign policy writer in Haaretz, who self identifies as a liberal Zionist called the speech a superbly liberal Zionist, pro Israel speech -
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.761927 )
That I think is why Netanyahu erupted. The fiction that a two state solution was his goal was a valuable cover for the direction he actually was leading the country in. As the article depressingly states, with the wave of nationalism, Netanyahu is not likely to have forces making him not create the Greater Israel that the right wing of his cabinet demand. Expect more people to speak of Judea and Sumaria - rather than the West Bank - as if the 3000 year old designations prove that the Palestinians should have no claims.
= new reply since forum marked as read