article link
With President Trump's declaration last month that Israel should make Jerusalem into Israel's capital city, the solution with Israel and Palestine forming two separate states becomes more difficult. More Jews and Arabs are now discussing the one state solution, but whether it can be done with Palestinians gaining citizenship and equal rights still remains doubtful. the conflict between Jews and Palestinians dates back to the formation of Israel as a state in 1948, which Palestinian leaders have never recognized. A variety of conflicts between the two sides took place in the second half of the 20th century and they still have not reached a peace agreement.
Discussion Questions:
1. If the two sides agree to a one state solution, what should be the terms of the agreement?
2. Should Jerusalem in fact be Israel's capital city or should it be kept under international governance?
3. Do you support the one state solution (where Jews and Palestinians live side by side) or the two state solution with a separate Israel and Palestine? Why?
If the two sides do agree to a one state solution (merging Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip into one big country), the terms of the agreement should that the Palestinians should not be forced out of the country or be denied their right to vote, as most would agree that to be a human rights violation. Although most surveys suggests that Israelis and Palestinians do prefer a two-state solution, their inability to compromise causes many to believe that a one-state solution would be better off for them as a whole. However, this proves to be a challenge: since Arab Muslims would outnumber the Jews, Israel will cease to be recognized as a Jewish state. I support the one-state solution because I believe that Jews and Palestinians will be better off sharing their homeland and accept each other without creating conflicts. Learning to live peacefully together will definitely improve their relationships with each other. It will definitely be difficult at first, as new things often take time to adjust and adapt to, but I trust that making compromises that appeal to both sides is the key to a one-state solution.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/01/poll-israelis-palestinians-state/4279013/
https://www.vox.com/cards/israel-palestine/two-state-one-state
I agree with Charlotte that if the sides agree to merge into one state, Palestinians should be able to vote and have equal rights as Israelis. They should not discriminate each other and should make decisions together. However I don't support the one state solution because the Jews and Arabs have different views and the merging will cause conflict. The New York Times says that a one state solution "for the Israelis, absorbing three million West Bank Palestinians means either giving up on democracy or accepting the end of the Jewish state." Israel was established 1948 as a home to Jews and keeping the states separate allows the Palestinians and Jews to go their own way. Peace should not be made by forcing the two states to live together. Also, I don't think Trump should be the one to decide if Jerusalem should be the capital of Israel. Jerusalem is important to all three religions as it is considered the "holy city" to Jews, Muslims, and Christians so they should all have equal access to it.
ReplyDeleteWhile a one state solution may be considered as ideal, I believe that the two should be separated on account of their cultural differences and the possible domination of Jewish, depleting Israel's Jewish identity as a state. Israel and Palestine have had close personal "disputes" ending with violence (such as the terrorist attack in 2017 in which Palestinians brutally killed 20 Israelis http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Terrorists-killed-20-Israelis-in-2017-533008), only raising tensions between the two. In addition, it is has been harder to resolve their conflict due to the so-called mediator, the USA, led by President Donald Trump. His obvious favor to Israel by stating he would make Jerusalem its capital (https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-terror-attacks-tripled-after-trumps-jerusalem-recognition) only makes it more difficult to conclude their peace agreements, which have been going on for decades.
ReplyDeleteCharlotte's topics of compromise and civil equality between Palestinians and Israelis are definitely how a one state solution should ideally be implemented between Palestine and Israel. However, I agree more with Stacey and Janet on the opinion that it should not be implemented at all, as the conditions between the two peoples are not fit for an ideal solution. To expand on what the two have already stated, the issue is not only cultural difference, but an already violent and bloody history that runs deep in the minds of those involved. I have heard anecdotal evidence of a man (a business associate of my father's, engineer, Caucasian for context) who had visited a Palestinian sect of Jerusalem in the early 2000s, the tension was palpable then and has not lifted in the slightest. He recounted his local Israeli agent suggesting he arm himself with a baseball bat (as guns were not allowed). "You look and speak too much like the men who took their home," the agent had said. "If they look at us for more than three seconds, go for your bat." A union of compromise and equality cannot be forged in hatred like that, born of suffering and outrage. This hatred has sparked suicide bombings and civilian/police confrontations in the not-so-distant past (1), as Stacey mentioned, proving cohabitation of the two groups, at least while the memory of their violent history is still this fresh, is hazardous to all involved. For the sake of both the Israelis and Palestinians, as both have valid positions and motives, a one state solution should be off the table until some of this tension dies.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/05/world/middleeast/jerusalem-history-peace-deal.html
Although I do think the "one state solution" would be ideal, I support the two state solution with a separate Israel and Palestine much more. Most sources do say that both Israelis and Palestinians want a two-state solution due to the obstruct peace on both sides. I feel as they should stay in separate states because it most likely will cause mayhem, destructiveness, and eventually leading to their own downfall. I agree with Janet that President Trump should not have anything to do with this and I also agree that they should not be forced to live with each other, especially when they have disagreements. Safety of both Palestinians and Israelis should be the main priority in this situation, therefore that a one state solution would not work due to the high afflictions between them.
ReplyDeleteI do not think the "one state solution" would be beneficial. Even though Israelis and Palestinians living side by side may promote a sense of brotherhood between the two, it would likely spark a civil war. As it is, Israelis and Palestinians do not have equal rights, and if the two nations merged, conflict would arise. In addition, the single state would be slow to make any sort of advancements, because of the different rights the Israelis and Palestinians do or do not have. There would likely be many disputes about certain laws, and it would be extremely difficult to make any decisions. In addition to that, The two nations have been at each other's throats for decades, fighting over land. I also do not think the U.S. president has any say in this, and it should be the decision of the Israelis and Palestinians, not ours. If for some reason the Israelis and Palestinians decide to coexist, both should agree to keep the peace and defend each other in times of need.
ReplyDeleteSources: https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/10/weeks-of-violence-between-israelis-and-palestinians/411559/
https://www.vox.com/cards/israel-palestine/intro
If merging the two nations is successful, laws should be passed to give Palestinians the same rights as Jews. However, this would not completely prevent discrimination between Jews and Palestinians. They would still resent each other and fighting would still continue. This is because Jews and Palestinians have fundamentally different views and religious beliefs, so unifying the two nations would not ease their tension. The only way to satisfy everyone is to keep Israel and Palestine separate.
ReplyDeleteBecause Jerusalem has a mixed population of Christians, Jews, and Muslim people, it should be made into an international city. Giving Jerusalem to Israel would satisfy Israelis, but Palestinians would be angry and would surely respond violently. Also, if Jerusalem becomes an international city, the presence of international forces in Jerusalem can help maintain security in the area and intervene if a conflict arises. If something is to be done with Jerusalem, both Israel and Palestine should both have a say in the decision. Like any other country, they have the right to self-determination and can’t be forced to do anything by foreign powers.
Jerusalem should not be made the capital of Israel. Even with only President Trump's announcement that he would recognize it as such, even more tensions between Palestinians and Arabs emerged. This has already led to over 17 deaths (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42654826) and could possibly lead to even more harmful and deadly events. The fact that the United Nations has soundly rejected this move (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42446027) shows that this decision is extremely controversial.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, Jerusalem is a city that Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike lay claim to. It is a holy site for all three religions. While making it the capital of Israel would please Jews, this decision would be unfair to both other religions, especially the Palestinian Muslims who have long since been in conflict with the Israeli people (http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/09/world/israel-reinforces-troops-in-occupied-territories.html). By ensuring that Jerusalem is an international city, it will allow people of all different religions to visit an important site in an unbiased fashion.
I honestly believe that a two state solution will be more beneficial to both parties. When each group of people are aloud to govern themselves then are able to focus on the issues that are important to the people of the region. As long as the borders are divided up in a way where the least amount of people are displaced, then the two states should be able to coexist. With Jerusalem as a negotiate land, I think it's only fair for the city to remain neutral so it is free for all parties to visit. This way there isn't any more fighting over a city that everyone can share.
ReplyDelete