In an interview with the New York Times over the weekend, US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman declared that Israel has a “right” to annex some, although like “not all” of the occupied West Bank.
It has long been the position of the international community that
territory Israel occupied militarily is just that, occupied territory,
and cannot just be unilaterally annexed. President Trump, however,
already endorsed Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights, and this
seems to be a green light for Israel to start consolidating parts of the
West Bank.
Annexations in the West Bank have long been a position of settler
movements, and this led Palestinian officials to criticize Friedman’s
comments, saying the US is taking the position of extremist settlers now.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had already indicated that if
reelected he’d move ahead toward annexations in the West Bank. Despite
him openly discussing that, the US denies any discussions have taken place on annexations.
Though Friedman did not indicate how much he thinks they can take,
Israel has already annexed parts of the West Bank, so far just by
expanding the borders of Jerusalem deep into West Bank territory and
declaring that all part of the “eternal” capital.
Though annexation of the Golan Heights was comparatively simple for
Israel as a practical matter, with the Syrians largely chased out at the
time of the occupation, the West Bank potentially is more problematic,
because of all the Palestinians living there.
Though the intention of annexation is to ensure that the Palestinians
can’t get their own state, Israel may have to figure out some way to
annex the land while still keeping the people who live in the land
dispossessed. While Israel has historically been comfortable with having
an Arab minority with few rights and no political power, actually
absorbing the Palestinians along with Palestine would give those Arabs
substantial voting power, and clearly would not be endorsed by the same
far-right factions that want to keep the land.
A dilemma like that calls for “A Final Solution”.
Don’t worry, Richard, this is all part of the “deal of the century” that Bibi and his little buddy Jared have worked out. They’re giving us clues as to what the “final solution” will eventually entail: the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by whatever means necessary.
Remember, we had our Manifest Destiny era, too. Maybe Native Americans will have some pointers for the Palestinians on how to deal with this illegal occupation in the long term. My guess is that waiting them out until they destroy themselves will be part of their advice. I give Israel a few more years, far less than the Crusader states had back in the Middle Ages. The way we’re going, I give us about the same.
I’m astonished that our moderator has let you get away with that.
Personally, I don’t agree, but also, I don’t object — of all speech that deserves protection, “hate speech” is near the top of my list. The essence of freedom of speech is not ***YOUR*** freedom to say what ***YOU*** want, but rather the freedom of the other guy to say sh*t that makes your head explode. Hell, no one objects when you praise pizza and pretty girls, it’s praising Russian interference in our sacred electoral rituals or flaunting one’s bigotry that needs protection.
Nor have I “notified the authorities”, but holy crap, whether you were referring to the Palestinians or the Israelis, that’s about the pinnacle of hate speech.
Or did I misunderstand?
“I’m astonished that our moderator has let you get away with that.”
Then you haven’t been paying attention.
yomama,
I am not engaging in “hate speech” – just telling it like it is. If you don’t think that right-wing Israelis won’t find themselves at genocide’s “magic'”door, then you have been asleep. When you accept theft of others’ property, when you ignore destruction of others’ occupation or way of life; or when you encourage total ignorance of others’ history – well then you are mentally prepared to commit genocide. And that Buddy, is where today’s Israelis are at. How else do you expect the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to be eventually resolved?.
It is to Antiwar’s credit that they allow people like me to predict how such matters will end – and let the bullshit “happy talk” be consigned official pablum sites. Why, yomama, are you following Antiwar, when you so deeply crave “happy horseshit” ? Perhaps, Fox News or MSNBC is more your cup of tea?
You misunderstood. You and I are almost entirely in agreement, so let’s just move on.
I actually respect the honesty of the settler position. In all but recognition, Israel has annexed a lot of land somehow viewed by many as outside its territory. Yet they don’t apply Israeli law or recognize the people living there as citizens. Does Israel not rule these lands and is Israel not a democracy? Israel does, and is not.
To paraphrase the orange nimrod – when he looked into reforming healthcare:
“Who knew that peace in the Middle East was so complicated?”
Thank God he got a real expert in on the matter, his son-in-law, the investment banker.
Really, Mork? DJT’s son-in-law has NO clue when it comes to negotiating peace in the Middle East whatsoever. He may be good as an investment banker; but when it comes to peace negotiations in the ME, he’s an absolute dunce. Saudi Arabia’s current leader – Mohammad Bin Salman – has little Jared right in his pocket
It’s been the end-game/strategy all along, and all the bs about a two-State solution and a peace plan were just enablers to further enhance the ultimate “final solution” to where we are today.