A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Saturday, February 25, 2017
Two States or One State?
THE
STARK REALITY IS THAT BOTH SOLUTIONS ARE IMPOSSIBLE UNLESS IMPOSED FROM
OUTSIDE, AND JUST WHERE DO WE SEE ANY PROSPECT FOR THAT?
( February 23, 2017, Boston, Sri Lanka Guardian) Israel
has created a terrible problem which it is incapable of solving. That
is why it has always been the case that the United States must pretty
much dictate a solution, but it is unable to do so, paralyzed as it is
by the heavy influence of Israel and America’s own apologists and
lobbyists.
Trump’s suggestion of a one-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian
conflict is welcomed by some because Israel’s settler policy is said to
have made two states impossible, as it was most certainly intended to
do. However, a little reflection on hard facts makes it clear that a
one-state solution is just as impossible.
A single-state solution would be acceptable to all reasonable minds, but
you only have to follow the news to know that Israel contains a good
many unreasonable minds. Its early advocates and founders were, quite
simply, fanatics, and its policies and attitudes were shaped by that
fanaticism.
The Israeli establishment could simply not accept a Palestinian
population with equal rights and the franchise as part of Israel. They
could not do so because they have embraced an almost mystical concept of
Israel as “the Jewish state.” Of course, the de facto reality of
today’s combined population of Israel and its occupied territories is
that Palestinians, who importantly include not just Muslims but many
Christians, are already about half of the total.
And there are physical realities forming huge barriers against a single
state, things of which many people are not aware. Very importantly,
fertility rates in Arab populations are considerably higher than in the
European Ashkenazi population which forms Israel’s elite. That has
nothing to do with ethnic characteristics. It is a result of much lower
levels of affluence influencing the behavior of people having children.
It is a universal reality we see.
That’s why Arabic populations are such relatively young populations with
a high proportion of children. When Israel bombs a place like Gaza or
Lebanon, as it does periodically, it always kills many hundreds of
children because they make a big share of the population. An advanced
country like Japan has low fertility and traditionally is averse to much
migration. It faces a future with an aging and declining population.
All older European and North American countries have fertility rates too
low to replace their otherwise declining populations. America or France
or Israel or similar states simply do not have enough babies to replace
their populations. That’s a fundamental reality of advanced, affluent
society. People with rich, demanding lives do not have large numbers of
children, anywhere, knowing, as they do, that the few they do have will
almost certainly survive and will better thrive with more concentrated
resources.
That’s the real reason behind most countries’ immigration policies, not
generosity or kindness. But, of course, Israel has a serious problem
with immigration, too. As the “Jewish state” it is open to only one
category of migrant, and that category of people makes a tiny fraction
of the world’s population. Further, most of that tiny fraction live in
comfortable, affluent places, far more desirable to live in than Israel –
places like America, Canada, Australia, Britain, France, etc.
A single-state Israel would combine low fertility Europeans with higher
fertility Arabic people, thus creating a long-term trajectory for a
minority-Jewish state, a reality which would be repellent to all
conservative Jews and many others, in light of the founding notion of
Israel as a refuge from believed widespread anti-Semitism, plus the
vaguely-defined but emotionally-loaded notion of a “Jewish state,” and,
still further, the biblical myths of God’s having given the land
exclusively to Jews.
You simply cannot make rational sense out of that bundle of attitudes
and prejudices, yet you cannot get a rational solution to a massive
problem otherwise, a problem, it should be noted, of Israel’s own
deliberate making in the Six Day War. Likely, when Israel’s leadership
started that war, they calculated that Palestinians would come to feel
so miserable under occupation that they’d just pick up and leave over
time. Moshe Dayan, one of the architects of the war, actually spoke
along those very lines of keeping the Palestinians miserable so they
would leave. But their calculations were wrong. Most people, anywhere,
do not pick-up and leave their native place. Otherwise the world would a
constant whirlwind of migrations.
Although Israel does not discuss the relative population growth rate
situation in public, authorities and experts there are keenly aware of
the reality. It is difficult to imagine them ever embracing a single
state for this reason. When you found a state on ideology and myths, as
Israel was founded, you very soon bump up against some unhappy
realities.
So, if there is not to be a Palestinian state, what are Israel’s other options? There seem to be only two.
One is to deport all or most Palestinians, an ugly idea which is
probably also unworkable, although it has very much seriously been
discussed among educated Israelis periodically. Apart from the Nazi-like
connotations around such an act, who, on earth, is going to take
literally millions of people from Israel? In the past, Israeli
ideologues have seriously suggested both the country of Jordan and parts
of Egypt contiguous with Israel as possibilities.
Can any realistic person believe those states stand ready to take
millions of people in? No, of course not, but that hasn’t stopped the
ideologues of Israel from going back to the idea again and again. Of
course, there is the pure ethical problem of moving millions against
their wills and seizing all their property, but ethics have not never
featured large in Israel’s policies from the beginning.
The other solution is to re-create apartheid South Africa’s Bantustans,
little enclaves of land with often undesirable characteristics into
which you crowd all the people that you don’t want and declare that
these are their new countries. We see this already in Israel, notably in
Gaza, which really is a giant refugee camp much resembling a
concentration camp with high fences and automated machine-gun towers
surrounding it, the residents being permitted almost no freedom of
movement or even economic activity, as for example Gaza’s fishermen
being fired on by Israeli gunboats if they stray even slightly beyond
tight boundaries in the sea.
The world would not long tolerate that approach no matter how much
influence the United States might unfairly exert. After all, for a long
time, the United States protected and cooperated with apartheid South
Africa, always regarding it as an important bulwark against communism,
anti-communism being the fervent secular religion of the day in America.
This was so much the case that it even overlooked what it absolutely
had to know about, apartheid South Africa’s acquisition of a small
arsenal of nuclear weapons with the assistance of Israel, Israel always
being keen to keep good access to South Africa’s mineral wealth.
Clearly, those two options are not solutions. Realities absolutely
demand either a legitimate two-state solution – which Israel’s leaders
have never truly accepted while giving it time-buying lip-service – or a
one-state solution which is probably even more unacceptable to Israel’s
leaders and much of its population, guaranteeing, as it does, the
eventual minority status of Jews.
Israel has itself created a terrible problem which it is incapable of
solving. That is why it has always been the case that the United States
must pretty much dictate a solution, but it is unable to do so,
paralyzed as it is by the heavy influence of Israel and America’s own
apologists and lobbyists.
So, in effect, the world just goes around and around on this terrible
problem, never doing anything decisive. The macabre dance of Israel and
the United States we’ve had for decades yields today’s de facto reality
of Israel as nothing more but nothing less than a protected American
colony in the Middle East, one in which all kinds of international norms
and laws are completely suspended, one where millions live with nor
rights and no citizenship. But, after all, colonies have never been
places where the rule of law and human rights prevail, have they? Never.