The One-State Solution
Sean Mullan
Issue date: 9/26/03 Section: Opinions
- Page 1 of 3 next >
"Rather than create the outlines of a two-state solution, this wall will kill that idea for Palestinians, and drive them, over time, to demand instead a one-state solution - where they and the Jews would have equal rights in one state. And since by 2010 there will be more Palestinian Arabs than Jews living in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza combined, this transformation of the Palestinian cause will be very problematic for Israel."
- Thomas Friedman 1
The oldest active conflict in the Middle East, the struggle between the Israelis and the Palestinians, is no closer to a fair resolution then it was when it began with the Zionist struggle to established a Jewish homeland. Israel today is based upon the racial superiority of its Jewish citizens, with the Arabs within its borders facing systematic discrimination. In the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Palestinian Arabs are forced to wander through a maze of checkpoints and are being fenced into squalid cities. The polarization of both sides, following the dissolution of the Olso Accords, the beginning of the Second Intifada, and the election of the right-wing Likud government under Ariel Sharon, has made the negotiation of a two-state solution nearly impossible. Although the Labor party has called for a unilateral withdrawal, the possibility of this is becoming increasingly unlikely as the walls in the West Bank are nearing completion at the cost of billions of dollars. This leaves one solution, which is the most humane and probably the most difficult for Zionists to accept, the creation of a secular state under "the principle of one man, one vote."1
Israel, which officially came into being in 1948, was established as a state "exclusively for Jews."2 The idea of a state being designed along ethnic lines, despite the existence of natives upon the land, such as Israel was, would be unacceptable today. In order to establish their state, the Zionists were required to force over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes and into refugee camps in places ranging from the Gaza Strip to Syria. In modern terminology, this would be classified as ethnic cleansing. Many of these Palestinians wish to return to their homes, but are refused entry to Israel. The question of the 'right of return' deserves more consideration when the freedom of any Jew to move to the state of Israel is put next to the prohibition upon Arab repatriation. The hypocrisy of this cannot rightly be ignored. However, if the Israeli Jews wish to keep Israel Jewish, it must continue to shun these Arabs. Even more startling to Israeli Jews, though, is the rapid increase of the Arab population that had remained in Israel. Realistically, keeping Israel Jewish is not possible and will ultimately call for either another round of ethnic cleansing, the establishment of an Apartheid-like state, or the acceptance of the one state solution.
- Thomas Friedman 1
The oldest active conflict in the Middle East, the struggle between the Israelis and the Palestinians, is no closer to a fair resolution then it was when it began with the Zionist struggle to established a Jewish homeland. Israel today is based upon the racial superiority of its Jewish citizens, with the Arabs within its borders facing systematic discrimination. In the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Palestinian Arabs are forced to wander through a maze of checkpoints and are being fenced into squalid cities. The polarization of both sides, following the dissolution of the Olso Accords, the beginning of the Second Intifada, and the election of the right-wing Likud government under Ariel Sharon, has made the negotiation of a two-state solution nearly impossible. Although the Labor party has called for a unilateral withdrawal, the possibility of this is becoming increasingly unlikely as the walls in the West Bank are nearing completion at the cost of billions of dollars. This leaves one solution, which is the most humane and probably the most difficult for Zionists to accept, the creation of a secular state under "the principle of one man, one vote."1
Israel, which officially came into being in 1948, was established as a state "exclusively for Jews."2 The idea of a state being designed along ethnic lines, despite the existence of natives upon the land, such as Israel was, would be unacceptable today. In order to establish their state, the Zionists were required to force over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes and into refugee camps in places ranging from the Gaza Strip to Syria. In modern terminology, this would be classified as ethnic cleansing. Many of these Palestinians wish to return to their homes, but are refused entry to Israel. The question of the 'right of return' deserves more consideration when the freedom of any Jew to move to the state of Israel is put next to the prohibition upon Arab repatriation. The hypocrisy of this cannot rightly be ignored. However, if the Israeli Jews wish to keep Israel Jewish, it must continue to shun these Arabs. Even more startling to Israeli Jews, though, is the rapid increase of the Arab population that had remained in Israel. Realistically, keeping Israel Jewish is not possible and will ultimately call for either another round of ethnic cleansing, the establishment of an Apartheid-like state, or the acceptance of the one state solution.
Be the first to comment on this story