Rachel Shabi has “fresh hope” that the Jewish state may cease to exist

Perhaps someone needs to remind Rachel Shabi, and ‘Comment is Free’ editors, that the Peel Commission has adjourned, the Jewish nation is a wonderful reality, and the state’s radical bi-national reconstitution will never, ever be countenanced by its citizens.

Shabi’s Oct. 23 piece, ‘The death of the Israel-Palestine two-state solution brings fresh hope‘, pronounces the two-state principle dead, a victim, she claims, of the impossibility of removing “half a million Jewish settlers and infrastructure from the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.”

However, this line of argument is absurd, as it implies that nothing other than the evacuation of 100% of Israelis from the territories would achieve a two-state solution.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s proposal in 2008 would have given the Palestinians an independent, contiguous state, with 94% of the West Bank (plus land swaps in pre-1967 Israel to make up for the 6% of the WB which would remain in Israel’s control), 100% of Gaza, and a capital in East Jerusalem. Tens of thousands of Jews would have been uprooted.

Yet, Olmert’s peace plan, the details of which have been confirmed by U.S. leaders active in the talks, were rejected by Mahmoud Abbas, who walked away from the deal – just as Yasser Arafat did in response to Ehud Barak’s offer of statehood in 2000.

Here’s a map representing the proposed deal.

As former U.S. Secretary of State Condi Rice wrote in her autobiography:

“Although Palestinian negotiators spoke publicly about compromise on refugees privately they spoke of the “right of return” as a matter of individual choice that would have to be extended to each of over seven million people and with Palestinians retaining the open-ended right to try to negotiate additional “returns” beyond any number initially agreed upon in a peace treaty.

Abbas was simply unprepared to accept any offer that did not allow for the “right of return.” [emphasis added]

The Palestinians’ trickery on what they were actually willing to accept concerning the “refugees” completely fooled the Guardian in their contextualization of the ‘Palestine Papers’ in 2011.

Further, their maximalist, unlimited demand for a so-called “right of return” (for Palestinians refugees from 1948 and millions of their descendants) by Palestinian leaders  is perhaps the greatest indication that their “two-state” support is merely a chimera – that Palestinian leadership have never reconciled themselves to the continued existence of a Jewish state.  

A “right of return” for “7 million Palestinians”, back to places in Israel where the overwhelming majority have actually never lived, necessarily negates Israel’s continued existence as a state for the Jewish people.  

In her CiF piece, Shabi writes:

“…a new generation of Palestinian activists, in part inspired by the Arab uprisings in the region, are bypassing territorial demands to focus on civil rights and freedoms.

Shared-space [binational] alternatives have grassroots momentum, but no leadership support. “

Of course, the term “grassroots momentum” is one of those intentionally blurry words meant, in this case, to avoid having to acknowledge that, the overwhelming majority of Jewish Israelis would fiercely reject a bi-national solution. (Per a recent poll by the Israel Democracy Institute, 86% of Israeli Jews reject such a plan.)

Those who advocate for a one-state solution are either parroting the narrative of Palestinian rejectionists, or are indifferent to the fact that any attempt to impose a one-state “solution” would be met by fierce Jewish resistance, inspired by the historical lessons Jews have painfully learned on the political necessity and ethical imperative of Jewish sovereignty.

Such Utopian dreams represent a recipe for endless war – and certainly nothing resembling peace. 

The Jewish state has been re-established in our historic homeland, and those wishing to undo 1948 should get over it.  

Their malign fantasies are not going to be realized.

31 replies »

  1. The Jewish state will outlive Rachel Shabi.

    By the way, where does the Guardian find nonentities like her? Do they write in or what?

    • Andy I’m sure you have heard of the old phrase;
      “Birds of a feather flock together”

      The last thing ‘The Guardian’ wants is a good journalist, they would show up how useless their current crop of clowns are.
      Can you imagine the effect on the hardline ‘Guardian Groupies’ (some of whom post here) having their pre-set agendas and prejudices challenged with facts and reality? Oh dear the increased workload for therapists would be tremendous.

    • It wouldn’t be so bad if the G. published more articles representing more reasonable POVs.
      OK, it’s – nominally – left-wing, so the range of material would naturally reflect that. The thing is: I don’t see how this binational nonsense is left-wing in the first place.

      • “I don’t see how this binational nonsense is left-wing in the first place.”

        I’ll try to explain. It’s a euphemism for “let the arabs take it over.”

      • “Rachel Shabi is a journalist writing for the Guardian.
        You’re not.

        I love your comedic side.

  2. Individuals such as Rachel Shabi simply don’t understand one important fact, the most important I would say. Now that the Jewish people have sovereignty over the land of Israel, nothing that anyone can say or do will alter that fact. The Jews will not give up the land of Israel, even when threatened with death – as we have already seen. Period. There may be room for compromise about many issues, but not about this fundamental one.

    So, go ahead Jew haters of the world, say anything, do anything. It will not change a thing. Israel will continue to exist as the Jewish state long after the Guardian has folded and is nothing but a bad memory.

    • Considering the number of Israelis how have double nationality, how can you be sure that they will not simply move out if things get out of control?

  3. I find the most bizarre aspect of the ideas of people like Shabi is that they apparently seriously (if the word can be applied in her case) think this one state “solution” is realistic, but indignantly reject out of hand the far more rational and realistic idea of creating one state out of the WB and Jordan between people of similar culture and strong family ties.

    I think it may be because they believe every Arab on the WB is really a refugee from 1948 waiting to use their key to open the door to their old house in Kfar Saba or Ra’anana.

    Cue indignant response from Pretzel, for example.

    • The one-state solution is the stuff of settlers’ dream. They are the ones who have made a two-state solution nearly impossible because of their illegal settlements, spread all over the Palestinian territory.

      Settlers want the land of the Palestinian territory to be integrated into Israel, and for this they have no choice but to integrate nearly four million Palestinians into Israel as well.

      The settlers’ dream? A bi-national state with a Palestinian majority,

      • Nat,
        The only thing standing in the way of a two-state solution is the Palestinians unwillingness. That’s been true for 60 odd years. Still the same, everything is still the same.
        The only thing that changes are the bogus excuses they make and the excuses made on their behalf.

  4. Hang on a moment. Shabi got one thing right. The weariness with arguing about territory IS gaining a lot of currency among the Mahmoods on the street and is NOT gaining currency among the leadership ( who hang on to the dream of having their own little fiefdom.

    What if the Palaseinians said ok I Israel you control the land between the river and the sea, you call it The Land of Israel, you tell us God/Balfour or whoever promised it you.. Well ok its yours. And since we were born here that makes us Israelis right ?

    And then they redeifined ” the struggle ” as one for civil rights and equal citizenship in this from the river to the sea land. ( This approximates to the advice that Eraket is currently giving Abbas but the nasty old bastard won’t take it, but Abbas isn’t for ever ).

    What then ? We then have something akin to an anti apartheid movement that the world would get behind. Don’t we ?

    • RZ – an interesting hypothesis. Let me give you an equally likely one.

      IF I emigrated to America and IF they changed the law so that people born outside the USA could become POTUS, and IF I became a politician, and IF I somehow got my hands on the gazillions of dollars needed to run an election campaign, and IF I persuaded the Democrats or the Republicans to chose me to run and IF the majority of Americans voted for me, then I’d be POTUS, wouldn’t I?

      • Labenal, settlers are taking you to a one state solution with Palestinian majority.

        You know it, they know it.

  5. Oh feeling lucky today are we Labenal ?

    Gambling the future of the Jewish State on the assumption that the Palestinians won’t as Eraket puts it ” hand back the keys ” ? Well that is the way the very light breeze is blowing. And what is a very light breeze today…..

    • I’m the last person who would “gamble the future of the Jewish state”. In fact, Israel refuses to contemplate annexing the WB and all its Arab inhabitants exactly BECAUSE it does not want to “gamble the future of the Jewish state”.

      The point is, your post was a supposition based on a hypothesis on top of a theory and wrapped in several layers of bulls**t. Therefore it does not require a serious response.

  6. realzionist, do you mean Eraket the liar who said 500 Palestinians were killed in Jenin. A Classic Pallywood liar.

    • I love hearing from zero-sum advocates in this area, because your collective analysis and expertise just radiates so much wishful thinking and stupidity. There isn’t going to be a one-state deal outside of a genocidal war, which even the CiF holier than thous don’t really want, so the question is whether they’ll be a two-state answer that genuinely produces peace or a two-state answer that genuinely produces a new era of war.

    • Strange that the antisemitic propaganda seems to be irrelaevant to self defined “lefts” who in reality are just followers of the NS.

  7. If Rachel Shabi wants a 1 state solution she’s free to move to Gaza and live under Hamas or move to Syria and live under Assad.
    This fool Shabi would never do that, cause she knows if she criticized Hamas or Assad, she would be shot dead.

  8. Oh dear – even the Palestinians are starting to think about a real one-state solution – with Jordan!

    Farouk Kaddoumi, a veteran PLO official, dropped a political bombshell Wednesday with a call for “returning” the West Bank to Jordan.

    Kaddoumi, who is based in Tunisia, said he supported the idea of a federation or confederation between the West Bank and Jordan. His remarks, which came during an interview with the London-based Al- Quds Al-Arabi newspaper, are the first of their kind to be voiced by a senior PLO figure in decades.

    Kaddoumi’s remarks about returning the West Bank to Jordan apparently came in response to recent statements made by Jordan’s Prince Hassan bin Talal, who served as crown prince between 1965 and 1999.

    At a meeting with Palestinians in Amman, the prince said the territories of the West Bank were actually part of the Hashemite Kingdom. He added that the two-state solution was now irrelevant.

    Eat your heart out, Pretzel – but remember you heard it first from me.

    • I think Kaddoumi is just lashing out at Abbas with that one. That’s my guess.

      At this point, I think Jordan would fight another war to avoid getting the West Bank back.

  9. “At a meeting with Palestinians in Amman, the prince said the territories of the West Bank were actually part of the Hashemite Kingdom.”

    AKUS, are you telling us that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are actually part of Jordan, and that the 500,000 Israeli settlers are actually Jordanian nationals?