[lbo-talk] One-state and two-state strategies

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 6/8/06, Marvin Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
> Yoshie writes:
>
> > On 6/8/06, Marvin Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
> >> The relationship of forces in the long Israel-Palestine conflict has
> >> evolved
> >> in such a way that it is now Israel which is effectively pursuing a
> >> single-state strategy while the Palestinians have had to fall back on a
> >> two-state solution - including Hamas which has also de facto had come to
> >> terms with Israel's existence.
> >
> > "[P]ursuing a single-state strategy" is an understatement.  That there
> > exists -- has existed -- a single Jewish state from the river to the
> > sea is already a fact, the fact denied by nearly all concerned,
> > including Palestinians.
> =========================
> Yes, that's stating it more baldly. There is presently only one state in the
> old mandatory Palestine. I think most Palestinians do recognize that,
> however, and have been trying to change it. It wasn't always the case; the
> present situation was the result of the '67 war and occupation, and for a
> time after that, culiminating in the Oslo accords, the Israelis were more
> prepared to accept a trunctated and dependent Palestinian client "state" in
> exchange for stability and legitimacy.

It's a myth that Tel Aviv has ever accepted a two state solution.  If
it had, it would not have built and kept building settlements.  But
this myth lives on, which puts Palestinians at disadvantage on the
propaganda front.  Palestinians should confront the fact and stay on
message: what we have is Israel from the river to the sea; and
Palestinians should develop a strategy based on this fact: pursue one
person, one vote in the already existing one state.

But Palestinians, always fractious, have never been good at developing
and sticking to one message.
-- 
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>