The so called international community has often very negatively focused on local construction in indigenous Israeli communities of Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria in the very heartland of the indigenous land of Israel. It is yes very legitimate to disagree about political matters including this controversial question – however whether you live in Israel or elsewhere in the world – ignorance and prejudice are specifically not legitimate.
It has very often been vocally claimed that disputed indigenous Israeli communities are intrinsic obstacles to partition. However this is based upon the propaganda fallacy that the 1949-67 Israeli-Jordanian former armistice lines with some variations are the only possible basis for partition. It is also further claimed that the disputed indigenous Israeli communities are developed in order to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. This is absurd since there are much better options for drawing new borders and there is furthermore really no need whatsoever to create one more independent state as Palestinian regions in both Israel and the territories could in principle very well be annexed by and geographically connected with Jordan as part of a permanent status agreement with Israel.
Palestinian grievances against Israel are primarily founded in 1) highly politicized Anti-Jewish narratives of Islam and 2) in bitterness over historical consequences of serially declared and attempted genocide against the Jewish people in which the Palestinian movement has been and remains fully involved and complicit in. Not only did the Palestinian leadership actively collaborate with Nazi Germany in perpetrating the Holocaust, but they have consistently participated in serially officially declared, yet ultimately defeated attempts at perpetrating a Second Holocaust. The respective propaganda machines of Fatah and Hamas thus notably still unashamedly deploy Anti-Jewish genocidal rhetoric as a matter of media routine.
The consequences of the officially declared and attempted, yet failed Arabist genocide against the Jewish people during Israel’s War of Independence in 1947-49 also historically entailed loss of property for Palestinians. Although such historical bitterness is somewhat understandable yet there are no overt signs of regret among Palestinian over historical participation not only in the perpetration of the Holocaust through the Palestinian leadership’s collaboration with Nazi Germany, planning the establishment of Nazi concentration camps in the holy land, living in Berlin during WW2, carrying out official Nazi propaganda broadcasts in Arabic and politically making sure that Jewish refugees from Nazi Europe could not escape to the land of Israel but also in the serially officially declared, yet also serially defeated attempted Arabist/Islamist genocide against the Jewish people throughout the history of armed aggression against Israel by its neighbors in which the Palestinian movement have always enthusiastically participated.
3. Two-state solution vs. One-state solution
A two-state solution could be achieved through Israeli-Jordanian optimal partition of the land of Israel west of the River Jordan between two peoples. A Jewish one-state solution could be achieved by welcoming Palestinian endogamous communities back to Judaism & Samaritanism as most Palestinian clans are not only endogamous but also of entirely Jewish ancestry in being descended from Jews, Judeo-Christians and Samaritans who were historically involuntarily Islamized.
A Jewish one-state solution therefore requires an extensive welcoming human infrastructure whereby Palestinian communities would be warmly welcomed back into Judaism and Samaritanism through a process of communal education. Each local Muslim Palestinian community should surely be given a voice as to whether they themselves would prefer to return to Judaism/Samaritanism and thus to the Jewish and Samaritan peoples respectively or rather become geographically connected with and annexed by Jordan. The existence of dynamically flourishing and successfully growing indigenous Israeli communities in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria only make the option of return to Judaism & Samaritanism and thus to the Jewish and Samaritan peoples even more attractive to local Palestinian endogamous communities of Jewish or Samaritan ancestry.
It has been argued that development and demographic growth in indigenous Israeli communities are contrary to dialogue and mutual understanding. Whether in a two-state solution of optimal partition between two peoples or in a Jewish one-state solution; indigenous Israeli communities are rather part of the solution than the problem. Why really should such important actors in the Israeli-Palestinian situation as the leaders of disputed indigenous Israeli communities not be engaged in dialogue by diplomats?
Demographic growth in existing indigenous Israeli communities only reinforce the ultimate partition map including Israeli annexation of indigenous Israeli communities and parallel coordinated Jordanian annexation of Palestinian regions not only in Judea and Samaria but also inside Israel under a two-state solution. Residents of disputed indigenous Israeli communities can also play a vitally important role in welcoming local Palestinian communities back to Judaism and the Jewish people.
5. Legal vs. Illegal
The “legal” argument against disputed indigenous Israeli communities is that they should be considered illegal as a matter of universal principle despite their very apparent legality according to international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention and the UN charter. Jews are indigenous to the land and no amount of prejudicial criminalization of an indigenous people removes its indigenous status in its indigenous land. The indigenous Jewish prerogative to in principle settle in all parts of the Western land of Israel was not removed by the restoration of Jewish independence in 1948 or for that matter by the 1949 Israeli-Jordanian armistice agreement which explicitly specified that those lines should not prejudice any permanent status arrangement. Also, while in force, those very temporary lines were never internationally recognized as international borders.
European Christianity has historically claimed to have supplanted Judaism while also suggesting that converting Jews from Judaism to Christianity is central to Christian salvation history. As Christianity emerged from within Roman-era Judaism; many first century Christians were Jewish and what later developed into what is now known as Christianity was originally not a different religion but merely a sect within Judaism. Medieval Europe thus variously believed that Jews should be either convinced or coerced to convert to European dystopian eschatological doctrines which in practice – while being couched in grandiose eschatological rhetoric – entailed the demise of the Jewish people.
Those dystopian eschatological ideas of imperialist versions of Christian metaphysics still strongly influence many culturally Christian Western representatives whether secular or religious who for decades have wrongly and often arrogantly presumed that they could – and indeed should bring salvation to variously the entire region or the entire world by converting the Jews to abjectly failed European eschatological doctrines with in practice highly dystopian outcomes. In fact, those often arrogant Westerners have generally neither envisioned & understood the borders of optimal partition between the two peoples under a two-state solution nor the return to Judaism and Samaritanism of Palestinian endogamous communities as part of a Jewish one-state solution.
Neither hostility against the sovereign Jewish nation and disputed indigenous Israeli communities nor preaching to the Jews will bring peace despite fervently held dystopian, megalomaniacal eschatological beliefs in this regard. The respective geographic parameters for an Israeli-Jordanian two-state solution and a Jewish one-state solution are clear and available for governments that wish to know. Yes, barely secularized Christian metaphysics may cover up for ignorance but ignorance does not bring peace. Also, disseminating discriminatory arguments against and/or lies about Jews have obviously never made the world safer, happier or more peaceful for anyone.
7. Palestinian statehood
But what’s wrong with a Palestinian state alongside Israel? The Palestinian narrative is such that it would be considered high treason in Palestinian society not to continue the political project to minoritize and exterminate the Jewish people. Also this purported panacea of Palestinian statehood solves none of the permanent status issues. But could not a Palestinian state rather be peaceful? Yes it could but this would first require responsibly successful liberalization and democratization as well as comprehensive de-radicalization of Palestinian society.
Indeed, Palestinian society would need to confront its own demons; its pervasive genocidal agenda, its pervasive genocidal public discourse and its pervasive socially accepted racism against Jews despite most Palestinian endogamous communities being of either entirely Jewish ancestry or entirely Samaritan ancestry. There would indeed have to be a comprehensive shift of paradigm in Palestinian public discourse. Only then could Palestinian leaders potentially become ready to sign end of claims, end of conflict, optimal partition and genuine sincerely meant recognition of Jewish statehood alongside Palestinian statehood.
8. Status Quo
The Israeli-Palestinian status quo is geographically no less stable than the status quo in Cyprus. Speaking nonsense won’t however bring lasting peace and engaging in counterproductive illusions will not improve anything for anyone. Palestinian statehood alongside Jewish statehood would have to be based on the exact same map of ultimate optimal partition as would Israeli-Jordanian optimal partition, meaning East-West Israeli contiguity & North-South Palestinian contiguity in Jerusalem, Samaria and the Galilee as well as reversely North-South Israeli contiguity & East-West Palestinian contiguity in southern Judea and the Negev. This means mutual territorial contiguity through territorial intersections of horizontally intersecting tunnels at different levels inside hills. This futuristic partition map is specifically devised so as to ensure military strategic depth for Israeli metropolitan regions under any future military scenario.
9. Reaching Permanent Status
The optimal solution is a Jewish one-state solution whereby endogamous Palestinian communities are welcomed back to the Jewish and Samaritan peoples in thus being genuinely and successfully returned to Judaism and Samaritanism respectively. However, achieving this would preferably yet not necessarily entail the nominal cooperation of the Haredi (strictly Orthodox) community in Israel and the Diaspora which has a vested social communal interest in making conversion to Judaism relatively more inaccessible so as to prevent assimilation in their own Diaspora communities as those communities are based upon strict orthopraxy which they therefore also expect from new converts.
However, this is not about conversion to Judaism but rather reversion to Judaism and reversion to Samaritanism respectively as most Palestinian endogamous communities are of either entirely Jewish ancestry or entirely Samaritan ancestry. This is thus different from the perspective of Jewish religious law as this is about reversion rather than conversion. The Haredi community in Israel and the Diaspora is thus another important potential interlocutor that could and should indeed be constructively engaged on the road to peace towards a Jewish one-state solution.
10. Obstacles to Peace
Any genuinely peaceful and lasting resolution of the conflict requires a profound change in Palestinian public discourse whereby Palestinian society must begin to critically examine its own history. This relates 1) to their Jewish ancestry and historically involuntary conversion by Muslim religious imperialism, 2) the Palestinian leadership’s close collaboration with Nazi Germany in perpetrating the Holocaust including planning to establish Nazi concentration camps in the holy land, living in Nazi Berlin during WW2, carrying out official Nazi propaganda broadcasting in Arabic during WW2 and politically preventing the saving of millions of Jews from Nazi genocide by preventing Jewish immigration to the land of Israel as well as 3) the Palestinian modern history in serially participating in declared, yet defeated attempts at perpetrating a Second Holocaust and then paying the price for this incalculable sin.
Palestinian society must begin to acknowledge this very tragic pattern of theirs and stop retroactively erasing their own Jewish history and their own agency in their contemporary and historical conflict with the Jewish people and liberal-democratic indigenous Israel. There are no quickie shortcut solutions to peace which requires no less than a revolution in Palestinian public discourse, indeed shift of public paradigm in politics, media, religion and academia. This necessitates an open society which in turn requires comprehensive and responsibly successful liberalization and democratization of Palestinian society and this is something that importantly also requires zero-tolerance towards all forms of the modern totalitarian political ideology of Islamism.
Conventional approaches to resolving this conflict has been focused on reconciling two different historical narratives. Yet while narrating history is always structured by perspective this fact should not be construed as justifying deliberate falsehoods such as denying the Holocaust as Holocaust denial is indeed rampant in Palestinian society and is an important part of the Palestinian narrative. A Jewish one-state solution requires one reasonably unified historical narrative while a two-state solution at least requires Palestinians to acknowledge 1) Palestinian complicity in the Holocaust and 2) Palestinian complicity in repeatedly declared yet defeated attempts at perpetrating a Second Holocaust. As Israeli society has already long since closely and critically examined the Israeli narrative so must Palestinian society therefore likewise closely and critically examine the Palestinian narrative.
Westerns powers tend to regard themselves as representing a dialectic synthesis between what is the Israeli indigenous thesis versus the Palestinian Arabist/Islamist neo-imperialist anti-thesis in Palestinians negating their own Jewish history and complicity in Anti-Jewish genocidal programs. However the problem with this very Western approach is the assumption that those Westerners themselves have since decades already accurately predicted the ultimate resolution of the conflict. That is very wrong since this is intrinsically based upon ignorance about the very rational Israeli geostrategic objectives in very substantially investing in the development of the flourishing indigenous Israeli community restoration project in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria.
This Western narrative has traditionally and very wrongly presumed that the purpose of this indigenous Israeli restoration project is meant to prevent partition when in fact the real underlying purpose is indeed to ultimately facilitate optimal partition between two peoples once indeed there is a genuine Palestinian partner for real, optimal partition between two peoples. The Oslo map was thus in practice devised by Israel as an intermediary stage towards the goal of ultimate optimal partition which entails a political map of the land very different from the Oslo map.
12. Psychology of Genocide
International support for the Zionist movement was historically much greater after WW1 than after WW2, yet the memory of the Holocaust is something that simply affirms the absolute ethical necessity of liberal-democratic, sovereign-indigenous and multicultural-multiethnic Jewish statehood in the land of Israel, yet indigenous territorial self-determination remains the sole basis of Israeli statehood. Genocide prevention is at the very core of Israeli policy making in every field, including in the indigenous Israeli community restoration project in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria. And yes the historical experience of the Holocaust has rightly and certainly wisely so defined genocide prevention as part of the very core of the Israeli national interest.
Yet, there is a tragic phenomenon in Human mass psychology of ignoring genocide when genocide is still at the stage of threat, declaration, agitation, plan and preparation. The more realistic and more imminent genocide becomes, the more is it usually ignored. As the Iranian genocidal nuclear weapons program came closer to its goal of attaining capacity to produce nuclear weapons, many Westerners began to ignore the overtly genocidal intentions of the Iranian regime rather than continuing to affirm the absolute necessity of determined and credible dismantlement of this very genocidal nuclear weapons program.
Thus, President Barack Obama has claimed that a genocidal anti-Semite such as Iran’s dictator Ali Khamenei can be expected to act rationally in the interest of Iranian regime preservation. Yet, neither genocide nor antisemitism is rational and this is one essential lesson of the Holocaust that president Obama is now ignoring. The reality is rather that the Iranian nuclear weapons program is entirely irrational from a purely rational perspective of Iranian regime preservation as Israel eliminating Iran’s genocidal nuclear weapons program will most likely bring about the complete collapse of the Iranian regime itself by the peoples of Iran. In fact, really bad agreements lead to war and not to peace. It is not at all clear at the time of writing whether indeed enough Democrats in the US Congress will ultimately follow their conscience and vote against the disastrous nuclear deal with Iran in order so as to disable President Obama from using his veto power to prevent Congress from rejecting this disastrously bad agreement that severely harms American national interests and endangers America indeed.
Restored indigenous Israeli communities of Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria are continually developed with the twin objective of both 1) genocide prevention and 2) ultimately achieving optimal partition. Since achieving defensible borders is all about genocide prevention, not just in ten years but in a hundred years and in a thousand years; many Westerners have therefore preferred to demonize the indigenous Israeli restoration project in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria such as aggressively accusing Jews of living in the wrong country as is typically claimed in early modern racist Anti-Semitism. The assumption that Jews cannot live in a Palestinian state is however based upon the correct understanding that this would lead to attempted genocide against the Jews living there. So how can a hypothetical future state with a pervasive genocidal narrative not be expected to pursue precisely that genocidal agenda with all means available unless is has first refuted and sincerely abandoned that very genocidal agenda?
13. Bad Agreements
The lesson from the 1938 Hitler-Chamberlain Munich agreement which paved the way for the Holocaust is indeed that really bad international agreements lead to war. However, genocide prevention is at the very core of the strategic articulation of the Israeli national interest despite the fact that much of the world as usual ignores sincerely meant threats, designs and plans for genocide against the Jewish state. The genocide-enabling human mindset is of course the reason why the United States intervened one day too late in order to prevent the genocide against the Crypto-Jewish Yezidi community in August 2014.
However, Israel can certainly not afford to act too late in terms of genocide prevention with respect to genocidal threats against the Jewish state. In fact, Israel should itself have preemptively bombed Daesh from the air and even as of need landed ground forces in order to protect the Yezidis from genocide considering the relative military incompetence of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) of Iraqi Kurdistan.
Western leaders who for whatever personal reasons sincerely and fervently wish to become part of the eventual resolution rather than the problem itself with regard to the Palestinian issue need to understand and acknowledge that genocide prevention is legitimately and completely rationally at the very core of all Israeli policy making in national security including with respect to the absolutely necessary continued legitimate and fully legal development of the indigenous Israeli communities of Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria which each day only brings peace closer.
Negotiations are surely necessary and important, however there are no signs whatsoever that the current 2014-2015 freeze on authorizing new indigenous Israeli construction in disputed regions that for most of the time has been in force for many months already is making the Fatah regime even the slightest interested in permanent status negotiations with Israel. The historical fact is that the Ramallah-based Fatah regime has for most of its existence simply refused to engage in permanent status negotiations and when it felt diplomatically compelled to nominally participate in such a framework they never engaged in any real substantive negotiations on permanent status.
The West therefore needs to acknowledge that their usually quite condescending attitude towards disputed indigenous Israeli communities was wrong all along and although this attitude was surely not maliciously intended, this has rather posed a significant obstacle to peace in locking the diplomatic framework into patently false preconceptions about both 1) the future partition map and 2) the utter lack of readiness of the Fatah regime to leave its overtly genocidal agenda in favor of a new paradigm of peaceful partition between two peoples. Those Western expectations have always been unrealistic and so any permanent peaceful resolution requires not only responsibly successful liberalization and democratization but also crucially comprehensive de-radicalization of Palestinian society which needs to develop a far more honest and self-critical approach towards its own past in order to substantially improve its own future.
15. New Policy for peace
The international community needs to internalize that disputed indigenous Israeli communities in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria are an important element of mutually achieving optimal partition between two peoples not only in Judea and Samaria but also inside Israel. The obsession over the wrong map with regard to achieving a truly peaceful future is a very serious mistake that hinders progress in conflict resolution.
The best solution would surely be a Jewish one-state solution as that would truly be a win-win solution for all. Therefore efforts by the international community very much need to focus on jumpstarting and then responsibly accelerating profound transformational processes of shift of paradigm in Palestinian society that will serve to enable and facilitate not only a Jewish one-state solution but also optimal partition between two peoples as the reserve alternative to a Jewish one-state solution.
The international community can really do much to promote such transformational processes of shift of paradigm in Palestinian society. Many countries can therefore play a most constructive role indeed in this vital shift of paradigm in focusing on vital internal Palestinian transformation away from what in terms of optimal partition between two peoples is extremely helpful, yet very much misunderstood indigenous Israeli construction that is actually very much pro-peace in strategic terms. Also, the international community in general and friends of Israel in particular would be especially well advised to learn to avoid rhetoric that plays into de-legitimization of Jewish existence and hence fuels unhelpful Israeli-Palestinian polarization and therefore conflict perpetuation.