Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Palestinian Authority Sees Flashy Trains And Looses Sight Of The Big Picture
Interesting story this.
It seems the RAND corp, universally famous for putting the count into bodycount for their contributions to the history of the world, especially the Cold War , have given the Palestinian Authority a vision of the future of Palestine.
Lots of lovely trains, shiny airports, development and jobs it seems.
I believe its a case of showing you the Lexus and cutting down the Olive tree. I'd love to be proved wrong
It seems the RAND corp, universally famous for putting the count into bodycount for their contributions to the history of the world, especially the Cold War , have given the Palestinian Authority a vision of the future of Palestine.
Lots of lovely trains, shiny airports, development and jobs it seems.
I believe its a case of showing you the Lexus and cutting down the Olive tree. I'd love to be proved wrong
Comments:
<< Home
Yo, LFM:
Followed you to your blog from MWU!
Funny to see this story posted here. I heard about it from Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolition. He was speaking favorably of the idea.
He argued 1) two-state is dead b/c the Palestinian state wouldn't be viable; 2) one, bi-national democratic state was his ideal but not possible b/c of opinion on both sides, but mostly b/c of Israelis, so 3) he argued for some kind of Levantine federation including Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria.
Followed you to your blog from MWU!
Funny to see this story posted here. I heard about it from Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolition. He was speaking favorably of the idea.
He argued 1) two-state is dead b/c the Palestinian state wouldn't be viable; 2) one, bi-national democratic state was his ideal but not possible b/c of opinion on both sides, but mostly b/c of Israelis, so 3) he argued for some kind of Levantine federation including Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria.
# posted by 
: 12:29 am
: 12:29 am
Mr Shaefer. ...would love an email addy for you to continue the convo..
anyhow:
From the article I think its a very convenient baloon to send up just before the meeting with Dubya.
I actually do love the idea in its bold visioniering simplicity.
The problem I have with it is that its a very RAND way of approaching the situation. It doesn't eeven hint at the road along which eventually this will happen.
Personally, I think there is just too much blood and mortar in the works for it to be viable.
Now I am a pro-palestinian dude but I do see the benifits of a one-state solution.
Your frind is right about the levels of acceptance on the Palestinian and Israeli side.
But I think the intransignece fgoes back to the actual ideals present at the formation of the Israeli state.
Isreal has never reconciled its secularist foundation with its religious core. Israel is a state born out of th ecolonial need for space as a result its whole reason for existing in its current form is to be a homeland for the jewish people.
Israel vcan barely tolerate people who question the validity of the occupations after 1967 , i think asking the polity to consider absorbing the palestinian people into it is asking too much.
It would aslo mean that , given the demographics of the Israeli/Palestinian populations , the number of Palestinian would out wieght the number of Iraeli and thus it could no longer be called a Jewish state.
That propect alone has the far far far right calling for an expulsion of the Arb population of Isael and the occupied territories. It is also the reason that the moderate right want to push the process to the end, make their borders hard.
on your point 3)
We had a fedration , it was called Islamic Rule where all these territories existed quit happily under one ruler. Ok, so it weren't democracy but a cogent politcal entity it was.
Now I don't think its possible. Too much blood and morter - the resulting jigsaw would make the Balkans seem like a bit of a friendly punchup between mates.
Post a Comment
anyhow:
From the article I think its a very convenient baloon to send up just before the meeting with Dubya.
I actually do love the idea in its bold visioniering simplicity.
The problem I have with it is that its a very RAND way of approaching the situation. It doesn't eeven hint at the road along which eventually this will happen.
Personally, I think there is just too much blood and mortar in the works for it to be viable.
Now I am a pro-palestinian dude but I do see the benifits of a one-state solution.
Your frind is right about the levels of acceptance on the Palestinian and Israeli side.
But I think the intransignece fgoes back to the actual ideals present at the formation of the Israeli state.
Isreal has never reconciled its secularist foundation with its religious core. Israel is a state born out of th ecolonial need for space as a result its whole reason for existing in its current form is to be a homeland for the jewish people.
Israel vcan barely tolerate people who question the validity of the occupations after 1967 , i think asking the polity to consider absorbing the palestinian people into it is asking too much.
It would aslo mean that , given the demographics of the Israeli/Palestinian populations , the number of Palestinian would out wieght the number of Iraeli and thus it could no longer be called a Jewish state.
That propect alone has the far far far right calling for an expulsion of the Arb population of Isael and the occupied territories. It is also the reason that the moderate right want to push the process to the end, make their borders hard.
on your point 3)
We had a fedration , it was called Islamic Rule where all these territories existed quit happily under one ruler. Ok, so it weren't democracy but a cogent politcal entity it was.
Now I don't think its possible. Too much blood and morter - the resulting jigsaw would make the Balkans seem like a bit of a friendly punchup between mates.
<< Home
