Thank you for continuing to center this conversation around overall human safety and dignity. I can’t imagine the enormous stress that you’re under and I just appreciate your consistent insistence on getting this information into the world.
I wonder if you would revisit the story behind how apartheid was finally overturned in South Africa , and what do you think the tipping point was.
Wasn't something similar said about the end of apartheid in South Africa, where Black and mixed-race people far, far outnumbered the Afrikaaners and other white people? Come to think of it, similar warnings were made about abolition in the U.S., but as it turned out the violence that followed the Civil War and especially the end of Reconstruction was overwhelmingly committed by white people, i.e., the victors.
True enough, repression can lead to terrible violence, as it did in France and Russia and, if you count the Civil War, in the U.S., but here it was the South's decision to withdraw from the Union in order to continue its repression that led to war.
I immediately thought of the chapter in Omar El Akkad's "One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This," titled, "Fear." He observes that on the axes of fear and possibility, some populations are permanently defined by what they MIGHT do, and never by the horror of what is actually done to them.
Peter I am having such a hard time defining who is a Jew anymore as Israel surely doesn't feel like it is Jewish at all. And I know of so many Jews who never bought into Zionism and are way more observant than I am . If I moved to Ramallah and was granted residency there by the PA, wouldn't I be a Palestinian more than a Jew? Maybe we can think of Israeli Jews like Sabbateans... as off the track, a sad turn of history...
You are missing my point. I am focusing on state identity. Jews and Palestinians-- its apples and oranges. I'm not asking to live in either place...its just that Judaism is a religious identity whatever else the Isrseli govt wants to call it ! .Palestinians are several religions .why is this so hard?
Its all about identity..and states rights to define us for their purposes ..in the usa we dont yet do it by religion ..yet .. and process that there are Arab Jews...
The bottom line is that a Jew cannot live in Ramallah, period. Any Palestinian who tries to sell you an apartment or land will be arrested and likely executed. Would you like to live in a place with such laws?
If you can contribute the way Daniel Barenboim did, more power to you, and maybe they will give you an honorary Palestinian citizenship. That said, he never lived there.
What a complex situation we face in the region once known as Palestine. For millennia, Arabs and Jews have harbored deep-seated enmity, culminating in a century-long conflict that has roots stretching back even before the tragic 1929 pogrom, which led to the expulsion of a longstanding Jewish community from Hebron. Most recently, in October 2023, we witnessed a horrific act of violence against the Jewish people that further exacerbated this ongoing strife.
Yet, remarkably, Professor Beinart proposes a solution: that Jews relinquish their singular homeland to create a binational state where they would become a minority, all while trusting that this leap of faith will mend the wounds of history. It is a chilling suggestion, one that overlooks the decades of animosity and suffering that both communities have endured.
One of the most perplexing aspects of the debate is Professor Beinart's objection to what he describes as a "Democracy for only Jews in Israel." He seems to overlook the striking absence of democracy in the Arab nations that surround Israel. His criticism might hold more weight if Israel were bordered by democratic or even semi-democratic states. However, the reality is that the Arab countries neighboring Israel have historically denied basic rights to their own Arab citizens, including those who were displaced from Palestine during the establishment of Israel.
Furthermore, the Palestinian leadership has struggled to establish effective governance in both the West Bank and Gaza, leading to ongoing challenges. A concerning indicator of this failure is the significant decline of the Christian community in the West Bank. In 1947, Christians made up about 8% of Mandatory Palestine’s population. Following Israel's creation, this number represented 10% of the West Bank's population. By 1967, it had fallen to 5%, and today, it stands at roughly 1%. The Latin Patriarchate and Greek Orthodox Patriarchate both describe emigration as “severe” and “ongoing.”
It's important to note that, contrary to some narratives, the Christian population in Israel has actually grown since its establishment, albeit modestly. Moreover, emigration rates from Israel are comparatively low, particularly when contrasted with those from neighboring Arab states, including Lebanon. What is even more significant is that this is proposed to extinguish the one and only Jewish state, when there are some 17 Arab states that define Islam as the state religion. It boggles the mind that anyone thinks Kumbaya will somehow flourish in the face of this kind of data.
Bernie, you've responded to a factual argument with an antisemitic proverb implying Jews invite their own persecution, and you sign every post with 'Israel delenda est' — a call for the destruction of the one Jewish state. You haven't contested a single claim I made. Not Hebron, not the Christian population collapse in the West Bank, not the democratic vacuum surrounding Israel. A genocidal signature and a bigoted proverb aren't a rebuttal. You've told the readers everything they need to know — about you. I won't be responding further.
Mr kohn, you can continue to regugiate as many zionist lies and half truths as you please. But the last three years have revealed to people worldwide the truth of what we have been told were simply tropes. And as you and your zionist brethren continue to make these tropes a reality you do so at your own peril.
Here is another proverb that you zionist have proven true. "The Jew cried out in pain as he strikes you".
For Israeli Jews to think that being a minority is a "chilling proposition" reminds me of white supremacist purveyors of the "replacement theory." They don't want to be "replaced" and the frightening implication is that they could become a minority population.
And the rejoinder is: "What? Do you think that minorities get treated badly? Is that it?"
Personally, the solution to this is to do the work to learn how to build a multi-racial, multi-faith secular democracy. You can't just wave your hands and say "make it so." You have to engage the entire population in unlearning the lessons of ethnofascism and in learning the processes and ideology of democracy.
Yes, how lovely a multi-ethnic society. Where is that again? The USA is the only place on this planet designed to be multi-ethnic from its beginnings, and, as Larry David would say, “Eh.” How is that working? Thoroughly segregated communities. Tremendous economic differences between various ethnicities. And you want to lecture others?
Imagine that today Israelis and Palestinians decide on a Palestinian state in the West Bank. You may not know this, but when this was last discussed (20 years ago), the Palestinians insisted all Jews leave the West Bank. But what if there were no such bar today? How do you think Palestinians would feel if, after signing such a deal, they set up their state and soon thereafter a horde of Jews or others migrated to the West Bank and became a majority? Wouldn’t that spell the end of the Palestinian state?
If the intent is for the Palestinians to have their own state, culture, and national ethos, then that state would have to make sure that Palestinians are the clear majority. I think it's what they want, as do the Israelis.
Oh, and by the way, before you advertise how grand multi ethnic states are, why not start right here in América—and make it happen right here
So you cite something that happened 20 years ago and it didn't work and never tried again. Black people in the U.S. and others of Native American, Mexican American and other Latino heritage, Asian Americans of many ethnic/national origins, as well as progressive white people have been working for many life times and we haven't given up because we know what we're up against -- not a nation "designed to be multi-ethnic" but a nation built on genocide, settler colonialism, and the chattel slavery of millions based on race.
You don't know that much about the United States, and you don't sound very interested in the endeavor to make peace in Israel/Palestine. You tried that once and it didn't work. Well, that's that, I suppose. Time to spend all your time explaining and justifying and rationalizing the apartheid state, I guess.
It seems to me, although this was not your intention, that you are proving my point: it has not been easy to glue everyone together. And to be clear, while there are many “tribal” associations in the US, they have never broken out into open warfare except during the genocide against Native Americans, and of course slavery, although it never led to open war, is still a unique stain on the American landscape that we have yet to fully heal.
And yet you are asking two "tribes" who have been at war with each other for more than 100 years and continue to this day, and your solution approach is as Rodney King suggested in 1992, “why can we just all get along”. As much as I would like for peace to break out in the Holy Land, I think it's insulting for people here who, as you pointed out, are far from getting along with each other to make such a suggestion and, worse, put the onus on the Israelis to do so.
As for your statement, “you cite something that happened 20 years ago, and it didn't work and never tried again. “ It wasn’t just that one time; it was many times. My experience with people on this site is that they have a TikTok understanding of the conflict—It's complicated.
You said, "... of course slavery, although it never lead to open war..."
Like I said, you know very little about the U.S. and have never heard of the Civil War between the Union and the Confederacy over slavery which cost over 500,000 lives.
You said, "...And yet you are asking two "tribes" who have been at war with each other for more than 100 years and continue to this day, and your solution approach is as Rodney King suggested in 1992, “why can we just all get along”.
No, it'll take more honest and difficult action coming from a more serious commitment than has been "tried" by Israel. Israel will have to start complying with international law, will have to put some thought and serious commitment into changing the hearts and minds of Israelis who have been taught to fear and hate the Palestinians, will have to have the intelligence and diplomatic/political skill to lead the effort to roll back the oppressive military occupation and control of the West Bank AND rein in and in many cases remove the violent settlers who have been operating with impunity and the support of the Israeli military. Get started.
Also, Jewish people are much safer in the U.S. than in Israel. People of color in the U.S. are much safer than the Palestinians who are under the military control of the IDF. It's bizarre that you think nobody has anything to teach you about how to get along. We are at least fighting the efforts to impose fascism, while fascism seems to be more fully established in Israel.
You make many points, some of which I agree with, but let me respond in the order they appear.
1. You are absolutely right; I left out the civil war, and I should have included it. After all, it is yet another example of how the various American tribes are not getting along. Think about it: a hundred years after this war, the state of Virginia suspended public education for 5 years in Prince County as a form of resistance (keep that word in mind!) to integration. As for Blacks in America vs Palestinians in Israel, I will take that up below.
2. You want Israel to” take more honest and difficult action coming from a more serious commitment than has been "tried" by Israel”. I fully agree. I think Israel became habituated to gunboat diplomacy because, for the better part of its existence, the Arab mantra has been: “No peace, No recognition, No negotiation”. This came in the aftermath of the 1967 war in which Egypt and Syria attempted to end the state of Israel and failed. Let’s keep in mind that Israel found itself in possession of the West Bank and Gaza Strip with no one to negotiate a return of these territories. It became easier with a superior war machine to settle violations of its territory via force, given that no one was willing to negotiate an end of hostilities.
3. By far the oddest request you make is the following: “ (Israel) will have to put some thought and serious commitment into changing the hearts and minds of Israelis who have been taught to fear and hate the Palestinians.” Palestinian violence against Jews has a long history going back over 100 years to Hebron when the Jewish community that had lived there almost from biblical times was wiped out. And then, moving to today, maybe you consider what Hamas did on Oct 7: “resistance”. Call it what you want; it is nevertheless a fact that more than 1,000 people were slaughtered, women were raped, babies were burned alive (there are Hamas videos to attest to this). Then there are videos of how 250-plus men, women, and children were carted off to Gaza, some of the women not even fully clothed, to cheering crowds (it was streamed live). Not to mention what they experienced in Gaza (never shown in the US but shown in Israel). From a sheer comparative population numbers perspective, that would be equivalent to some 30,000 Americans slaughtered overnight and several thousand carted off to somewhere else. What do you think America would do? How do you think we would perceive a people who carried out something like this?
4. Roll back the oppression on the West Bank. I fully agree. Full stop!
5. As for where Jews are safer. May I suggest you go to Israel. And then tell me about it.
6. As for Black people vs Palestinians. Frankly, I think Palestinians are better off in Israel than Blacks in America (not the West Bank or Gaza). How is that? They do experience discrimination; so do Black people in America. But Palestinians have no problem getting into elite universities in Israel. They are 50% of Haifa U., more than 20% of Tel Aviv U., Hebrew U. in Jerusalem, and Israel’s Technion (equivalent to MIT and Caltech). Black people are less than 6% of the Ivy League and 2% of MIT and Caltech. Palestinians also make up 25% of Israel’s doctors Ameri/can Blacks in America 6%. You would say, what about segregated towns? There are many Arab towns, and they have been Arab forever. I assure you the last thing they want is for Jews to move in. And there are mixed population towns; they are doing quite well. Go to Haifa; visit the Arab and Israeli nightclubs; it's working. Again, it's complicated.
You make some interesting and keen points that force to reconsider my viewpoints. While I think the two-state solution is the more ideal solution, the one-state solution may ultimately be a more realistic solution given the facts on the ground, especially given ceaseless land encroachment by Israeli settlers with tacit government support, thus making the former option less likely over the long-term. Imagining future violence is an estimation whereas current violence is a factual reality and that is an excellent point too. I do think that creating Israel was a necessary evil following the Holocaust but what it has become today is nothing short of sickening, oppressive, genocidal, hateful and morally disgusting. Yet at the same time, I feel unity in purpose is important too which is why we should seek to unite with fellow travelers like J Street, the Liberal Zionists, regardless of other passionate viewpoints. But thank you for providing more food for thought. I enjoy reading ideas that help rock my boat a bit and force me to think, painful as that may sometimes be.
WE the People remember when the COVID global pandemic was beginning to rage and Cheeto said to the nation, "Don't worry, it'll be over by summer". Confiding to Bob Woodward, Cheeto knew that wasn't true. Then Cheeto decided that he would put Jared in charge of obtaining respirators with his college room mate. Then he mused that with his extensive medical background that bleach could do some "internal cleansing". After the deaths of several whackjobs who tried the bleach trick, the makers of bleach products put out statements to avoid liability. After 1M+ deaths followers of Cheeto were asking for the vaccine before going on respirators and eventually succumbing to a respiratory death. Then there was the horse parasite prescription of Ivermectin, the use of which was debunked by the scientific community. No science just one inappropriate adventure after another.
So now WE the People are experiencing the same unbelievable incompetence, but this time on the global stage with foreign policy. Will the electorate ever learn that it's the Nazi Republicans that create this kind of leadership. Over the decades the party has gradually decided that the only thing that is necessary is gain power, no need to do anything for WE the People or support the country in time of need. As a matter of fact, screw the people, it's the wealthy donor class that we work for.
Perhaps it would be a good thing do define what you mean by "equality". According to international conventions, a state is required to give equal individual rights to all its citizens, not equal collective rights. In other words, the Peter Beinart of 2010, who called for a two-state solution with Arab citizens of Israel having full civil and political rights and a large degree of cultural autonomy(not full communal equality), was a strong proponent of liberal democracy.
Chaim Gans calls on Israel to call itself a binational state with a Jewish majority inside the green line. Interestingly enough, Jabotinsky too called on the future Jewish state to have a binational constitution with a rotation between a Jewish and an Arab Prime minister. Such a Jewish state too would be totally consistent with "liberal democracy".
But the very idea that a Jewish-majority polity is incompatible with democracy makes very little sense, both from a theoretical and a comparative perspective - unless one believes that the province of Quebec is a racist "ethnostate" because it aims to preserve its French character despite the presence of a sizable English-speaking minority…
"But the very idea that a Jewish-majority polity is incompatible with democracy makes very little sense, both from a theoretical and a comparative perspective - unless one believes that the province of Quebec is a racist "ethnostate" because it aims to preserve its French character despite the presence of a sizable English-speaking minority…"
1. The issue is not that "a Jewish-majority polity is incompatible with democracy." What's incompatible with democracy is attaining a Jewish-majority polity through expulsion of non-Jews and continuing to bar the return of non-Jews who happened to have fled or were otherwise away from home when the state declared its independence.
2. On "unless one believes that the province of Quebec is a racist "ethnostate" because it aims to preserve its French character despite the presence of a sizable English-speaking minority": the measures by which the Quebec government seeks to preserve the "French character" of that province are about use of the French language. It's not about ethnicity. The government is perfectly happy if long-time English-speaking residents start living their lives in French instead. Perhaps social acceptance wouldn't necessarily follow, because of some ethnically-based xenophobia, but that's a social phenomenon, not a matter of characterizing what kind of government the place has.
1- Let’s not open up the discussion about what happened during the First Arab-Israeli War. The Israelis were attacked first, and all populations deemed hostile were expelled at the time. In fact, in all parts of Palestine that fell under Arab control, every single Jew was expelled (about 10% of the Yishuv). Anyhow, no one claims that Poland, the Czech Republic, Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, India, Pakistan, Spain, Portugal and so many other states that are largely based on the expulsion of a native population are not legitimate. Interestingly enough, these states refuse to give a right of return to the descendents of the populations that they expelled but they keep privileging the immigration of their ethnic diaspora.
However, the EU allows descendents of ethnic Germans to return to the Czech Republic or to Poland. An Israeli-Palestinian confederation could therefore largely resolve the Palestinian refugee issue.
2- Even if Israel were to declare itself a Hebrew (rather than a Jewish) state, that would not change anything to the conflict, or about Israel’s existence as a Jewish-majority state (and let’s not forget that a significant part of the Zionist left, including Amos Oz and Yossi Beilin, believe that anyone who identifies as a Jew should be recognized as such).
Back in 1970, the PLO responded to Uri Avnery’s book, “Israel Without Zionists” that the way Israeli Jews define their identity (Jews or Hebrews) doesn’t change anything to the fact that it remains a Jewish-majority state established on stolen Arab land. At the end of the day, no state is culturally neutral. Kohn’s dichotomy between “ethnic” and “civic” is now criticized by most scholars of nationalism.
Once again, the young Peter Beinart, Amos Oz, Chaim Gans, Alex Yakobson and Amnon Rubinstein were all proponents of liberal democracy. Quebec was a French-Catholic entity until the early 1960s. It became an inclusive secular French-speaking polity around the mid 1960s. States can become more inclusive without having to disband. The same thing can happen with Israel…
Peter, you mention the minority of Palestinians - so called "Arab Israelis" - having second class citizenship.
Maybe you share my understanding that many Arab Israelis are Jewish but they repress or deny their Arab identity because of the widespread bigotry in Israeli Jewish society. Is that why you stated "so called 'Arab Israelis'"?
Hi. My understanding is that Peter means the Palestinian (non-Jewish) citizens of Israel when he refers to 'so-called "Arab Israelis"", who are a minority in Israel compared to Jews, and have limited rights in Israeli but do have the right to vote. That right to vote doesn't mean much since they are a small minority (21%, according to a recent Central Bureau of Statistics survey) in Israel due to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the Zionists.
They are often referred to, in Israel, as "Arab Israelis", because, of course, in the average Jewish Israeli mind there are no Palestinians, just Arabs.
Jews who originally came from Arab speaking countries are referred to as Mizrahi Jews in Israel. In the past, and to some small extent today as well, these Mizrahi Jews were subject to some discrimination from Ashkenazi (European ancestry) Jews in Israel, but not legal discrimination, which Palestinian Israelis continue to suffer under. See Peter's interview with Diane Buttu, "This Is Our Home", from March this year. I hope this was helpful to you.
From the Wikipedia page on "Demographics of Israel":
"The Israel Central Bureau of Statistics defines the population of Israel as including Jews living in all of the West Bank and Palestinians in East Jerusalem but excluding Palestinians anywhere in the rest of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and foreign workers anywhere in Israel. As of December 2023, this calculation stands at approximately 9,842,000 of whom:
73.2% (about 7,208,000 people) are Jews, including about 503,000 living outside the self-defined borders of the State of Israel in the West Bank
21.1% (around 2,080,000 people) are Israeli citizens classified as Arab, some identifying as Palestinian, and including Druze, Circassians, all other Muslims, Christian Arabs, Armenians (which Israel considers "Arab")[2]
An additional 5.7% (roughly 554,000 people) are classified as "others". This diverse group comprises those with Jewish ancestry but not recognized as Jewish by religious law, non-Jewish family members of Jewish immigrants, Christians other than Arabs and Armenians, and residents without a distinct ethnic or religious categorization.[2][1]"
The part about excluding "foreign workers anywhere in Israel" caught my eye. Wikipedia links to this web page of the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics:
"The population is defined on the basis of the permanent (de jure) population, and consists of permanent residents - Israeli citizens and permanent residents without Israeli citizenship (including those who had been out of the country less than one year at the time of the estimate)." The fine print mentions that "The population estimates also do not include foreign workers."
I don't know of any other country whose statistics bureau counts its population without including foreign workers who are living there. This news article from last week says "there are currently 246,023 foreign workers in Israel, of whom 44,782 are in the country illegally."
Apparently (from the Israeli bureau of statistics website) Israel used to do what every other country does: "Until the 1961 Census, the population was defined on the basis of the current (de facto) population, and included all people staying in the state of Israel on the date of the estimate who were registered in the population census."
The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics page also says in the fine print that "The population estimates relate to the population residing in the area of the State of Israel and to the population residing in Israeli localities held by the State of Israel. These areas included the Sinai in 1967-1982 and the Gaza Strip in 1967-2005." Interesting turn of phrase there: "Israeli localities" that are not "in the area of the State of Israel" but are "held by the State of Israel." I know of no other country that has such "localities" and counts its residents among its population. A normal country would either include such localities as part of the area of its state (by annexation), or count them as external territories or colonies separate from the metropole.
I assumed the "so called" was because most Arabs/Palestinians who live in Israel, and whose families were often there long before Israel came into existence on May 14, 1948, aren't considered "Israelis" by many Israelis. I'm curious about your understanding. What are your sources for that?
The term "Arab Israelis" is regularly used by defenders of the Israeli government to refer to citizens of Israel who are Arab and *not* Jewish. These defenders like to point out that not everyone in Israel is Jewish; there are also a couple million "Arab Israelis" who, they say, have equal rights with Jewish Israelis. The term is controversial because many, perhaps most of the people who are given this label don't actually embrace it, but prefer to call themselves "Palestinian citizens of Israel." Israeli government defenders never use that label, because they want people to think that the term "Palestinian" never applies to citizens of Israel.
I have been reading Ibram X Kendi’s “Stamped from the Beginnning: The Definitve History of Racist Ideas in America.” Your article reminded me of the chapters regarding the call for equality for blacks in America before and after the abolition of slavery. Fears of violence against whites and of blacks taking over demographically in southern states thus threatening the power of the slave and landowners were all arguments used to deny “equality before the law” and yet we know that at their core, these argumenst reflected a deep an unabiding racism. Racist ideas drive the denial of rights and wholesale slaughter of Palestinians today. I am not comparing our experience to that of blacks in America; how could I? But racism is racism and we should call it as such and stop dancing around the subject with long-winded arguments about why Palestinians, Arabs, or whatever you want to call us are not entitled to equality in the so-called democracy of Israel, especially as we all have to admit that the final annexation of the West Bank and Gaza (and possibly southern Lebanon) is imminent.
When they say there is going to be violence, they mean violence against Jewish Israelis. The current violence against Palestinians is fine.
Thank you for continuing to center this conversation around overall human safety and dignity. I can’t imagine the enormous stress that you’re under and I just appreciate your consistent insistence on getting this information into the world.
I wonder if you would revisit the story behind how apartheid was finally overturned in South Africa , and what do you think the tipping point was.
Wasn't something similar said about the end of apartheid in South Africa, where Black and mixed-race people far, far outnumbered the Afrikaaners and other white people? Come to think of it, similar warnings were made about abolition in the U.S., but as it turned out the violence that followed the Civil War and especially the end of Reconstruction was overwhelmingly committed by white people, i.e., the victors.
True enough, repression can lead to terrible violence, as it did in France and Russia and, if you count the Civil War, in the U.S., but here it was the South's decision to withdraw from the Union in order to continue its repression that led to war.
I immediately thought of the chapter in Omar El Akkad's "One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This," titled, "Fear." He observes that on the axes of fear and possibility, some populations are permanently defined by what they MIGHT do, and never by the horror of what is actually done to them.
Peter I am having such a hard time defining who is a Jew anymore as Israel surely doesn't feel like it is Jewish at all. And I know of so many Jews who never bought into Zionism and are way more observant than I am . If I moved to Ramallah and was granted residency there by the PA, wouldn't I be a Palestinian more than a Jew? Maybe we can think of Israeli Jews like Sabbateans... as off the track, a sad turn of history...
I dont know where you live but if you live in a secular democracy , doesn't israel seem strange to you?
You are missing my point. I am focusing on state identity. Jews and Palestinians-- its apples and oranges. I'm not asking to live in either place...its just that Judaism is a religious identity whatever else the Isrseli govt wants to call it ! .Palestinians are several religions .why is this so hard?
If you are Jewish, you can visit but not live there. They have rules about Jews. Maybe Sam Bahour (spelling?), who is on this site, can explain.
Its all about identity..and states rights to define us for their purposes ..in the usa we dont yet do it by religion ..yet .. and process that there are Arab Jews...
My point still taken ..and also btw Daniel Barenboim did get exactly rhat but no matter...you get my point
The bottom line is that a Jew cannot live in Ramallah, period. Any Palestinian who tries to sell you an apartment or land will be arrested and likely executed. Would you like to live in a place with such laws?
If you can contribute the way Daniel Barenboim did, more power to you, and maybe they will give you an honorary Palestinian citizenship. That said, he never lived there.
What a complex situation we face in the region once known as Palestine. For millennia, Arabs and Jews have harbored deep-seated enmity, culminating in a century-long conflict that has roots stretching back even before the tragic 1929 pogrom, which led to the expulsion of a longstanding Jewish community from Hebron. Most recently, in October 2023, we witnessed a horrific act of violence against the Jewish people that further exacerbated this ongoing strife.
Yet, remarkably, Professor Beinart proposes a solution: that Jews relinquish their singular homeland to create a binational state where they would become a minority, all while trusting that this leap of faith will mend the wounds of history. It is a chilling suggestion, one that overlooks the decades of animosity and suffering that both communities have endured.
One of the most perplexing aspects of the debate is Professor Beinart's objection to what he describes as a "Democracy for only Jews in Israel." He seems to overlook the striking absence of democracy in the Arab nations that surround Israel. His criticism might hold more weight if Israel were bordered by democratic or even semi-democratic states. However, the reality is that the Arab countries neighboring Israel have historically denied basic rights to their own Arab citizens, including those who were displaced from Palestine during the establishment of Israel.
Furthermore, the Palestinian leadership has struggled to establish effective governance in both the West Bank and Gaza, leading to ongoing challenges. A concerning indicator of this failure is the significant decline of the Christian community in the West Bank. In 1947, Christians made up about 8% of Mandatory Palestine’s population. Following Israel's creation, this number represented 10% of the West Bank's population. By 1967, it had fallen to 5%, and today, it stands at roughly 1%. The Latin Patriarchate and Greek Orthodox Patriarchate both describe emigration as “severe” and “ongoing.”
It's important to note that, contrary to some narratives, the Christian population in Israel has actually grown since its establishment, albeit modestly. Moreover, emigration rates from Israel are comparatively low, particularly when contrasted with those from neighboring Arab states, including Lebanon. What is even more significant is that this is proposed to extinguish the one and only Jewish state, when there are some 17 Arab states that define Islam as the state religion. It boggles the mind that anyone thinks Kumbaya will somehow flourish in the face of this kind of data.
"The Jew will always tell you what happened to him, but never why".
You are a living example of the truth behind that Russian proverb, Mr kohn. Israel delenda est.
Bernie, you've responded to a factual argument with an antisemitic proverb implying Jews invite their own persecution, and you sign every post with 'Israel delenda est' — a call for the destruction of the one Jewish state. You haven't contested a single claim I made. Not Hebron, not the Christian population collapse in the West Bank, not the democratic vacuum surrounding Israel. A genocidal signature and a bigoted proverb aren't a rebuttal. You've told the readers everything they need to know — about you. I won't be responding further.
Mr kohn, you can continue to regugiate as many zionist lies and half truths as you please. But the last three years have revealed to people worldwide the truth of what we have been told were simply tropes. And as you and your zionist brethren continue to make these tropes a reality you do so at your own peril.
Here is another proverb that you zionist have proven true. "The Jew cried out in pain as he strikes you".
Israel delenda est.
For Israeli Jews to think that being a minority is a "chilling proposition" reminds me of white supremacist purveyors of the "replacement theory." They don't want to be "replaced" and the frightening implication is that they could become a minority population.
And the rejoinder is: "What? Do you think that minorities get treated badly? Is that it?"
Personally, the solution to this is to do the work to learn how to build a multi-racial, multi-faith secular democracy. You can't just wave your hands and say "make it so." You have to engage the entire population in unlearning the lessons of ethnofascism and in learning the processes and ideology of democracy.
Yes, how lovely a multi-ethnic society. Where is that again? The USA is the only place on this planet designed to be multi-ethnic from its beginnings, and, as Larry David would say, “Eh.” How is that working? Thoroughly segregated communities. Tremendous economic differences between various ethnicities. And you want to lecture others?
Imagine that today Israelis and Palestinians decide on a Palestinian state in the West Bank. You may not know this, but when this was last discussed (20 years ago), the Palestinians insisted all Jews leave the West Bank. But what if there were no such bar today? How do you think Palestinians would feel if, after signing such a deal, they set up their state and soon thereafter a horde of Jews or others migrated to the West Bank and became a majority? Wouldn’t that spell the end of the Palestinian state?
If the intent is for the Palestinians to have their own state, culture, and national ethos, then that state would have to make sure that Palestinians are the clear majority. I think it's what they want, as do the Israelis.
Oh, and by the way, before you advertise how grand multi ethnic states are, why not start right here in América—and make it happen right here
So you cite something that happened 20 years ago and it didn't work and never tried again. Black people in the U.S. and others of Native American, Mexican American and other Latino heritage, Asian Americans of many ethnic/national origins, as well as progressive white people have been working for many life times and we haven't given up because we know what we're up against -- not a nation "designed to be multi-ethnic" but a nation built on genocide, settler colonialism, and the chattel slavery of millions based on race.
You don't know that much about the United States, and you don't sound very interested in the endeavor to make peace in Israel/Palestine. You tried that once and it didn't work. Well, that's that, I suppose. Time to spend all your time explaining and justifying and rationalizing the apartheid state, I guess.
It seems to me, although this was not your intention, that you are proving my point: it has not been easy to glue everyone together. And to be clear, while there are many “tribal” associations in the US, they have never broken out into open warfare except during the genocide against Native Americans, and of course slavery, although it never led to open war, is still a unique stain on the American landscape that we have yet to fully heal.
And yet you are asking two "tribes" who have been at war with each other for more than 100 years and continue to this day, and your solution approach is as Rodney King suggested in 1992, “why can we just all get along”. As much as I would like for peace to break out in the Holy Land, I think it's insulting for people here who, as you pointed out, are far from getting along with each other to make such a suggestion and, worse, put the onus on the Israelis to do so.
As for your statement, “you cite something that happened 20 years ago, and it didn't work and never tried again. “ It wasn’t just that one time; it was many times. My experience with people on this site is that they have a TikTok understanding of the conflict—It's complicated.
You said, "... of course slavery, although it never lead to open war..."
Like I said, you know very little about the U.S. and have never heard of the Civil War between the Union and the Confederacy over slavery which cost over 500,000 lives.
You said, "...And yet you are asking two "tribes" who have been at war with each other for more than 100 years and continue to this day, and your solution approach is as Rodney King suggested in 1992, “why can we just all get along”.
No, it'll take more honest and difficult action coming from a more serious commitment than has been "tried" by Israel. Israel will have to start complying with international law, will have to put some thought and serious commitment into changing the hearts and minds of Israelis who have been taught to fear and hate the Palestinians, will have to have the intelligence and diplomatic/political skill to lead the effort to roll back the oppressive military occupation and control of the West Bank AND rein in and in many cases remove the violent settlers who have been operating with impunity and the support of the Israeli military. Get started.
Also, Jewish people are much safer in the U.S. than in Israel. People of color in the U.S. are much safer than the Palestinians who are under the military control of the IDF. It's bizarre that you think nobody has anything to teach you about how to get along. We are at least fighting the efforts to impose fascism, while fascism seems to be more fully established in Israel.
You make many points, some of which I agree with, but let me respond in the order they appear.
1. You are absolutely right; I left out the civil war, and I should have included it. After all, it is yet another example of how the various American tribes are not getting along. Think about it: a hundred years after this war, the state of Virginia suspended public education for 5 years in Prince County as a form of resistance (keep that word in mind!) to integration. As for Blacks in America vs Palestinians in Israel, I will take that up below.
2. You want Israel to” take more honest and difficult action coming from a more serious commitment than has been "tried" by Israel”. I fully agree. I think Israel became habituated to gunboat diplomacy because, for the better part of its existence, the Arab mantra has been: “No peace, No recognition, No negotiation”. This came in the aftermath of the 1967 war in which Egypt and Syria attempted to end the state of Israel and failed. Let’s keep in mind that Israel found itself in possession of the West Bank and Gaza Strip with no one to negotiate a return of these territories. It became easier with a superior war machine to settle violations of its territory via force, given that no one was willing to negotiate an end of hostilities.
3. By far the oddest request you make is the following: “ (Israel) will have to put some thought and serious commitment into changing the hearts and minds of Israelis who have been taught to fear and hate the Palestinians.” Palestinian violence against Jews has a long history going back over 100 years to Hebron when the Jewish community that had lived there almost from biblical times was wiped out. And then, moving to today, maybe you consider what Hamas did on Oct 7: “resistance”. Call it what you want; it is nevertheless a fact that more than 1,000 people were slaughtered, women were raped, babies were burned alive (there are Hamas videos to attest to this). Then there are videos of how 250-plus men, women, and children were carted off to Gaza, some of the women not even fully clothed, to cheering crowds (it was streamed live). Not to mention what they experienced in Gaza (never shown in the US but shown in Israel). From a sheer comparative population numbers perspective, that would be equivalent to some 30,000 Americans slaughtered overnight and several thousand carted off to somewhere else. What do you think America would do? How do you think we would perceive a people who carried out something like this?
4. Roll back the oppression on the West Bank. I fully agree. Full stop!
5. As for where Jews are safer. May I suggest you go to Israel. And then tell me about it.
6. As for Black people vs Palestinians. Frankly, I think Palestinians are better off in Israel than Blacks in America (not the West Bank or Gaza). How is that? They do experience discrimination; so do Black people in America. But Palestinians have no problem getting into elite universities in Israel. They are 50% of Haifa U., more than 20% of Tel Aviv U., Hebrew U. in Jerusalem, and Israel’s Technion (equivalent to MIT and Caltech). Black people are less than 6% of the Ivy League and 2% of MIT and Caltech. Palestinians also make up 25% of Israel’s doctors Ameri/can Blacks in America 6%. You would say, what about segregated towns? There are many Arab towns, and they have been Arab forever. I assure you the last thing they want is for Jews to move in. And there are mixed population towns; they are doing quite well. Go to Haifa; visit the Arab and Israeli nightclubs; it's working. Again, it's complicated.
You make some interesting and keen points that force to reconsider my viewpoints. While I think the two-state solution is the more ideal solution, the one-state solution may ultimately be a more realistic solution given the facts on the ground, especially given ceaseless land encroachment by Israeli settlers with tacit government support, thus making the former option less likely over the long-term. Imagining future violence is an estimation whereas current violence is a factual reality and that is an excellent point too. I do think that creating Israel was a necessary evil following the Holocaust but what it has become today is nothing short of sickening, oppressive, genocidal, hateful and morally disgusting. Yet at the same time, I feel unity in purpose is important too which is why we should seek to unite with fellow travelers like J Street, the Liberal Zionists, regardless of other passionate viewpoints. But thank you for providing more food for thought. I enjoy reading ideas that help rock my boat a bit and force me to think, painful as that may sometimes be.
I think you might find Omar Bartov's book Israel What went wrong.. very interesting.
Shades Of COVID Mismanagement
WE the People remember when the COVID global pandemic was beginning to rage and Cheeto said to the nation, "Don't worry, it'll be over by summer". Confiding to Bob Woodward, Cheeto knew that wasn't true. Then Cheeto decided that he would put Jared in charge of obtaining respirators with his college room mate. Then he mused that with his extensive medical background that bleach could do some "internal cleansing". After the deaths of several whackjobs who tried the bleach trick, the makers of bleach products put out statements to avoid liability. After 1M+ deaths followers of Cheeto were asking for the vaccine before going on respirators and eventually succumbing to a respiratory death. Then there was the horse parasite prescription of Ivermectin, the use of which was debunked by the scientific community. No science just one inappropriate adventure after another.
So now WE the People are experiencing the same unbelievable incompetence, but this time on the global stage with foreign policy. Will the electorate ever learn that it's the Nazi Republicans that create this kind of leadership. Over the decades the party has gradually decided that the only thing that is necessary is gain power, no need to do anything for WE the People or support the country in time of need. As a matter of fact, screw the people, it's the wealthy donor class that we work for.
Perhaps it would be a good thing do define what you mean by "equality". According to international conventions, a state is required to give equal individual rights to all its citizens, not equal collective rights. In other words, the Peter Beinart of 2010, who called for a two-state solution with Arab citizens of Israel having full civil and political rights and a large degree of cultural autonomy(not full communal equality), was a strong proponent of liberal democracy.
Chaim Gans calls on Israel to call itself a binational state with a Jewish majority inside the green line. Interestingly enough, Jabotinsky too called on the future Jewish state to have a binational constitution with a rotation between a Jewish and an Arab Prime minister. Such a Jewish state too would be totally consistent with "liberal democracy".
But the very idea that a Jewish-majority polity is incompatible with democracy makes very little sense, both from a theoretical and a comparative perspective - unless one believes that the province of Quebec is a racist "ethnostate" because it aims to preserve its French character despite the presence of a sizable English-speaking minority…
"But the very idea that a Jewish-majority polity is incompatible with democracy makes very little sense, both from a theoretical and a comparative perspective - unless one believes that the province of Quebec is a racist "ethnostate" because it aims to preserve its French character despite the presence of a sizable English-speaking minority…"
1. The issue is not that "a Jewish-majority polity is incompatible with democracy." What's incompatible with democracy is attaining a Jewish-majority polity through expulsion of non-Jews and continuing to bar the return of non-Jews who happened to have fled or were otherwise away from home when the state declared its independence.
2. On "unless one believes that the province of Quebec is a racist "ethnostate" because it aims to preserve its French character despite the presence of a sizable English-speaking minority": the measures by which the Quebec government seeks to preserve the "French character" of that province are about use of the French language. It's not about ethnicity. The government is perfectly happy if long-time English-speaking residents start living their lives in French instead. Perhaps social acceptance wouldn't necessarily follow, because of some ethnically-based xenophobia, but that's a social phenomenon, not a matter of characterizing what kind of government the place has.
Israel is a Jewish Supremacy state. That is incompatible with being a democracy.
Good slogan!
1- Let’s not open up the discussion about what happened during the First Arab-Israeli War. The Israelis were attacked first, and all populations deemed hostile were expelled at the time. In fact, in all parts of Palestine that fell under Arab control, every single Jew was expelled (about 10% of the Yishuv). Anyhow, no one claims that Poland, the Czech Republic, Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, India, Pakistan, Spain, Portugal and so many other states that are largely based on the expulsion of a native population are not legitimate. Interestingly enough, these states refuse to give a right of return to the descendents of the populations that they expelled but they keep privileging the immigration of their ethnic diaspora.
However, the EU allows descendents of ethnic Germans to return to the Czech Republic or to Poland. An Israeli-Palestinian confederation could therefore largely resolve the Palestinian refugee issue.
2- Even if Israel were to declare itself a Hebrew (rather than a Jewish) state, that would not change anything to the conflict, or about Israel’s existence as a Jewish-majority state (and let’s not forget that a significant part of the Zionist left, including Amos Oz and Yossi Beilin, believe that anyone who identifies as a Jew should be recognized as such).
Back in 1970, the PLO responded to Uri Avnery’s book, “Israel Without Zionists” that the way Israeli Jews define their identity (Jews or Hebrews) doesn’t change anything to the fact that it remains a Jewish-majority state established on stolen Arab land. At the end of the day, no state is culturally neutral. Kohn’s dichotomy between “ethnic” and “civic” is now criticized by most scholars of nationalism.
Once again, the young Peter Beinart, Amos Oz, Chaim Gans, Alex Yakobson and Amnon Rubinstein were all proponents of liberal democracy. Quebec was a French-Catholic entity until the early 1960s. It became an inclusive secular French-speaking polity around the mid 1960s. States can become more inclusive without having to disband. The same thing can happen with Israel…
Peter, you mention the minority of Palestinians - so called "Arab Israelis" - having second class citizenship.
Maybe you share my understanding that many Arab Israelis are Jewish but they repress or deny their Arab identity because of the widespread bigotry in Israeli Jewish society. Is that why you stated "so called 'Arab Israelis'"?
Hi. My understanding is that Peter means the Palestinian (non-Jewish) citizens of Israel when he refers to 'so-called "Arab Israelis"", who are a minority in Israel compared to Jews, and have limited rights in Israeli but do have the right to vote. That right to vote doesn't mean much since they are a small minority (21%, according to a recent Central Bureau of Statistics survey) in Israel due to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the Zionists.
They are often referred to, in Israel, as "Arab Israelis", because, of course, in the average Jewish Israeli mind there are no Palestinians, just Arabs.
Jews who originally came from Arab speaking countries are referred to as Mizrahi Jews in Israel. In the past, and to some small extent today as well, these Mizrahi Jews were subject to some discrimination from Ashkenazi (European ancestry) Jews in Israel, but not legal discrimination, which Palestinian Israelis continue to suffer under. See Peter's interview with Diane Buttu, "This Is Our Home", from March this year. I hope this was helpful to you.
And foreign workers, mostly south Asians, cannot become citizens. They aren't Jewish. Some applied to convert to Judaism. They were refused.
No Israeli government has ever included an Arab party.
From the Wikipedia page on "Demographics of Israel":
"The Israel Central Bureau of Statistics defines the population of Israel as including Jews living in all of the West Bank and Palestinians in East Jerusalem but excluding Palestinians anywhere in the rest of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and foreign workers anywhere in Israel. As of December 2023, this calculation stands at approximately 9,842,000 of whom:
73.2% (about 7,208,000 people) are Jews, including about 503,000 living outside the self-defined borders of the State of Israel in the West Bank
21.1% (around 2,080,000 people) are Israeli citizens classified as Arab, some identifying as Palestinian, and including Druze, Circassians, all other Muslims, Christian Arabs, Armenians (which Israel considers "Arab")[2]
An additional 5.7% (roughly 554,000 people) are classified as "others". This diverse group comprises those with Jewish ancestry but not recognized as Jewish by religious law, non-Jewish family members of Jewish immigrants, Christians other than Arabs and Armenians, and residents without a distinct ethnic or religious categorization.[2][1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel
The part about excluding "foreign workers anywhere in Israel" caught my eye. Wikipedia links to this web page of the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics:
https://www.cbs.gov.il/en/Pages/All-Terms.aspx?k=Population+of+Israel
"The population is defined on the basis of the permanent (de jure) population, and consists of permanent residents - Israeli citizens and permanent residents without Israeli citizenship (including those who had been out of the country less than one year at the time of the estimate)." The fine print mentions that "The population estimates also do not include foreign workers."
I don't know of any other country whose statistics bureau counts its population without including foreign workers who are living there. This news article from last week says "there are currently 246,023 foreign workers in Israel, of whom 44,782 are in the country illegally."
https://www.jns.org/news/israel-news/israel-faces-surge-in-unauthorized-foreign-workers-knesset-told
Apparently (from the Israeli bureau of statistics website) Israel used to do what every other country does: "Until the 1961 Census, the population was defined on the basis of the current (de facto) population, and included all people staying in the state of Israel on the date of the estimate who were registered in the population census."
The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics page also says in the fine print that "The population estimates relate to the population residing in the area of the State of Israel and to the population residing in Israeli localities held by the State of Israel. These areas included the Sinai in 1967-1982 and the Gaza Strip in 1967-2005." Interesting turn of phrase there: "Israeli localities" that are not "in the area of the State of Israel" but are "held by the State of Israel." I know of no other country that has such "localities" and counts its residents among its population. A normal country would either include such localities as part of the area of its state (by annexation), or count them as external territories or colonies separate from the metropole.
I assumed the "so called" was because most Arabs/Palestinians who live in Israel, and whose families were often there long before Israel came into existence on May 14, 1948, aren't considered "Israelis" by many Israelis. I'm curious about your understanding. What are your sources for that?
The term "Arab Israelis" is regularly used by defenders of the Israeli government to refer to citizens of Israel who are Arab and *not* Jewish. These defenders like to point out that not everyone in Israel is Jewish; there are also a couple million "Arab Israelis" who, they say, have equal rights with Jewish Israelis. The term is controversial because many, perhaps most of the people who are given this label don't actually embrace it, but prefer to call themselves "Palestinian citizens of Israel." Israeli government defenders never use that label, because they want people to think that the term "Palestinian" never applies to citizens of Israel.
I have been reading Ibram X Kendi’s “Stamped from the Beginnning: The Definitve History of Racist Ideas in America.” Your article reminded me of the chapters regarding the call for equality for blacks in America before and after the abolition of slavery. Fears of violence against whites and of blacks taking over demographically in southern states thus threatening the power of the slave and landowners were all arguments used to deny “equality before the law” and yet we know that at their core, these argumenst reflected a deep an unabiding racism. Racist ideas drive the denial of rights and wholesale slaughter of Palestinians today. I am not comparing our experience to that of blacks in America; how could I? But racism is racism and we should call it as such and stop dancing around the subject with long-winded arguments about why Palestinians, Arabs, or whatever you want to call us are not entitled to equality in the so-called democracy of Israel, especially as we all have to admit that the final annexation of the West Bank and Gaza (and possibly southern Lebanon) is imminent.
I didn't catch the logic behind the argument that more equality will cause more bloodshed. It is not readily apparent.
*candidate for NY State comptroller