this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
68 points (77.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43821 readers
897 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

We know what happens with peaceful protests, elections, and foreign interference (and more foreign interference), so how can Palestine gain it's freedom? Any positive ideas are welcome, because this situation is already a humanitarian crisis and is looking bleaker by the day.

Historical references are also valuable in this discussion, like slave revolts or the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, although hopefully in the case of Palestine a peaceful and successful outcome can be achieved, as opposed to some of the historical events above.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 63 points 9 months ago (11 children)

Within Israel, the vast majority of people don't particularly care about any kind of manifest destiny style reclamation of the West Bank or Gaza, and if that were the only issue, I genuinely don't think there would be a significant problem.

What essentially everyone does care about, however, is repeatedly having rockets lobbed at them. When people feel under threat, reason starts to fall away, people begin dehumanizing the "other", and you get the massive mess we have today. The fact of the matter is that Israel will never accept any situation where its people are under threat. No matter what you think about what acts are or aren't justified or your opinion on how various parts of the history played out, none of that changes this basic reality.

Palestine is not going to be able to militarily eradicate Israel. There is precisely zero chance that Israelis allow themselves to be subjected to a second diaspora and they'll fight to the death to prevent this, and that's to say nothing of external players like the United States. Again, whether you think this is a good thing or a bad thing, it is a true thing.

On the flip side, Israel is perfectly capable of essentially eradicating the Palestinians, though this would subject it to massive international condemnation that would also have huge economic impacts. You're already beginning to see whispers of this as the world increasingly sees Israel's response in Gaza as being excessively harsh. The most they could do is a slow and steady degradation of Palestinian society while encouraging them to "voluntarily" leave, which is arguably what the strategy has essentially been under Likud with settlements and the like.

So, what's required for a peaceful co-existence? Firstly, you need a mutual acknowledgement from both leaders (and also, a legitimate Palestinian leadership in the first place) that the other side exists and has a right to do so, ie, Palestinians giving up on the idea of eradicating Israel and Israelis giving up on the idea of fully annexing and ethnically cleaning Palestinian lands. This is not a trivial thing. The Israeli far-right, though they're not dominant, are growing and believe they have a divine right to the West Bank, with the Arabs being seen as little more than animals in the way. The extreme Palestinian side is that all Israelis are essentially foreign invaders and should be forcibly removed or killed. Both of these positions must be completely taken off the table.

Secondly, Israel will not engage unless it is confident that its security will not be threatened, which will in practice mean that Palestinian authorities must be de-militarized beyond what's necessary for basic local law enforcement. Again, this might seem unfair, and hell, it probably is. But the fact of the matter remains that Israel is the side holding the guns here, so you either play by their rules and try to find some positive outcome, or you flip the table and enjoy the complete loss, but with some moral satisfaction. Similarly, there would probably need to be some kind of border controls for imports that Israeli authorities can inspect for covert weapons shipments, since it's a known thing that Iran does regularly try to bring weapons into Gaza. Ideally, this would be some kind of bi-national force with Palestinian cooperation.

If you reach these points, then you still have other very big questions to deal with, like precise borders, land swaps, the question of Jerusalem, how to connect Gaza and the West Bank, any right of return for displaced Palestinians both recently and during the Nakba, and plenty of other things I'm sure I'm forgetting about. But ultimately, if you have a Palestinian and Israeli leadership that are actually interested in peace and accept the existence of the other, and both agree to cooperate on matters of security and prioritizing that peace above and past grievances, no matter how legitimate, that gives you a real foundation you can build from.

I wouldn't get my hopes up though.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What essentially everyone does care about, however, is repeatedly having rockets lobbed at them. When people feel under threat, reason starts to fall away, people begin dehumanizing the "other", and you get the massive mess we have today. The fact of the matter is that Israel will never accept any situation where its people are under threat.

I get what you mean, but the current situation has continued since even before the rocket attacks. Gaza was blockaded before rocket attacks even became a thing (setting aside the second Intifada because that's its own thing). What I mean is: Israeli's feeling under threat is probably a factor, but it's not the main issue.

and also, a legitimate Palestinian leadership in the first place

True enough, but let's remember that it's Israel that engineered a situation where they can claim Palestine has no legitimate leadership. You're not wrong about the fact, but I just wanted to make the cause clear.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 13 points 9 months ago

For sure, I'm not at all trying to portray Israel as blameless here, because they are not.

I think the blockade does have some basic level of merit, at least in principle (it can't really be doubted that Hamas does import weapons and materials with Iranian backing), but it's critical that those kinds of controls only go as far as they're needed and no further. However, the Israeli government has never really cared about not going to far, so Palestinians have no real reason to trust that they're being treated in good faith, violence comes to feel like the only real option, and onwards the mess rolls along.

Along with Palestinians needing to accept that Israel is going to exist in some capacity and that it will not accept any deal that doesn't ensure its security, Israelis need to accept that if they don't take every step towards keeping peaceful paths available and fruitful, then people will turn to violent ones. Israel can of course easily win a conflict of violence, but it doesn't have to be this way

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (19 children)

The simple answer is, realistically, Palestine can't do it alone without help. Some other country will have to step up and get involved.

Currently, even the countries who don't necessarily back Israel aren't interested in helping Palestinians, including major Muslim countries in the Middle East.

It could have something to do with the history of Jordanian Civil war, which was a war between the King of Jordan and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Islamic countries like Jordan and Egypt haven't exactly been stellar friends to the people of Palestine ever since. (Whether that position is justified is up to you to decide, I am not here to argue whether it is good or bad.)

So unless things change somehow, they will likely not gain their freedom.

[–] cali_ash@lemmy.wtf 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Some other country will have to step up and get involved.

Alternatively/Additionally, some countries need to stop getting involved. Mostly Iran. They have no interest in helping Palestinians either, they just care about removing Israel from the map and will back any extremist groups in the area that does so as well.

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 5 points 9 months ago

Thank you, that is a good answer. I have been wondering why Jordan has been pretty hands-off, I'll have to look into the Jordanian civil war.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 17 points 9 months ago

Realistically? Unless the international community (or the Muslim world) have a change of heart, the Hamas way of "get Israel to broadcast their atrocities to the world as loudly as possible) seems to be the best bet currently. A direct war of liberation is impossible because of the blockade, but at this rate the international community might actually give Israel the Apartheid treatment in two or three decades.

[–] Tedrow@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Probably give them Madagascar. I'm sure that will solve it. /s

It will really take a global effort. I don't think Palestine and Israel can be disentangled at this point. It's really just about accountability for the Israeli government at this point and increasing Palestinians presence in governing.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The support of Israel in the USA becomes a partisan issue.

We are already seeing division within Democrats for supporting Israel, with younger people mostly anti-Zionism. Likely with the next Democratic President and possibly because of Israeli meddling in supporting Republicans, the USA drops its veto of Palestinian statehood. At this point, Israel likely gets very cagey and may try to start a war to expel all Palestinians, but that act of aggression will be met with a response.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] small44@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There's no realistic solution right now. The stronger will always dictate the term of the possible solution and the weaker won't accept that and will keep fighting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kemsat@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Realistically, it can’t.

[–] chobeat@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

no colonial power and no empire ever lasted forever. Everything made by human eventually dissolves. The current strategy of trying to stay alive (kinda) and keeping their identity is more than enough to eventually see the American empire collapse on itself and Israel with it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Realistically?

They can't. Not without a major change in American politics, which is unlikely given the amount of lobbying power that Israel has, and the grip that Evangelicals have on right-wing political power in the US. Anti-BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) laws intended to prevent people from protesting Israeli policies by cutting funding to the country have passed in nearly all states. We can see, with the way that current events are unfolding, that even expressing support for the Palestinian people is resulting in people being labelled as antisemitic.

(For reference - Evangelicals support Israel as a Jewish apartheid ethnostate because they believe that the Jews need to control Jerusalem and Israel in order for Jesus to return. It has nothing to do with Evangelicals liking Jews, which they mostly don't. If you don't want to believe that, I can certainly help you find sermons from megachurch pastors saying precisely that, but I generally try to avoid listening to that trash.)

We're very slowly starting to see that kind of change now, with the way that the youngest generations in the US as more supportive of the Palestinian people. But it's not likely to mean much, since by the time they have enough political power to do anything, Israel will have completed genocide.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago

Seems very unlikely. The most likely way is if Israel gets annihilated, which would require also destroying the US military capacity. Absolute horror and possibly ww3 is the only way.

I think they probably have to leave. They've been treated horribly, but there is no hope on the horizon as far as I can see. Israel is cursed, Gaza is cursed.

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There really is no other solution than stopping the attacks and trying to establish diplomatic connections.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

By not killing civilians maybe. By engaging in actual normal warfare if it insists it cannot achieve success peacefully. By not encouraging persecution around the world or siding with nations such as Russia and North Korea. By respecting human rights within its borders. Can't be too much to ask.

[–] NovaPrime@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)
[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Warfare that is self-contained, distinguishes between combatant and non-combatant, does not cause damage that ends up being permanent, and doesn't make metaphorical deals with the devil.

[–] NovaPrime@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

There is no such thing as "normal" or "good" or "moral" warfare. War is war. And war is hell. Regardless of where it's happening or what reasons are given to justify it. Every bit of time, resources, and effort directed toward war is time, resources, and effort stolen from advancing humanity and uplifting ourselves. By it's very nature, war has no rules. The dream of a "self-contained, limited-casualty, non-permanent damage" warfare is frankly naive. My experience may be colored by having grown up in and witnessed war in various times in my life, but there is NEVER a reason for war. Because at the end of each and every disagreement, conflict, war...etc., one thing happens: they have to sit down and talk. So it's all just futile and wasted effort. We steal from ourselves and our children only to end up doing the very thing we should have been doing all along: putting ego (in the psychological sense) aside and talking.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Maybe ask Israel to stop occupying Gaza (and the rest of Palestine) before demanding that. This isn't a war between countries; this is an occupied territory fighting for freedom.

[–] danhakimi@kbin.social 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Gaza has not been occupied since 2005.

Palestinian arabs have been launching pogroms against Jews without rest since 1920, but Israel didn't occupy the West Bank or Gaza until 1967. Maybe if Israelis felt they could possibly be safe without occupying the West Bank, they would try it. Like they tried with Gaza. Gee, look how that played out.

Gee, I wonder how Germany and Japan managed to get freedom from occupation... Oh right, they went with peace!

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

How could they engage in normal warfare?

Edit: also, does killing civilians make a whole country fair game to be attacked violently or something?

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago

Let me put it this way, how many of us are anti-nuclear-arms? I'm sure most of us are. Nuclear assault is seen as the epitome of abnormal warfare as it kills people who have nothing to do with a conflict, and nuclear war, defined as when the two nations start throwing nuclear weapons at each other, is seen as absolutely unnecessary escalation under any circumstances considered normal as well as no better just because someone fired the first shot. If there is no distinction between "normal" and "abnormal" warfare though, surely nuclear attack wouldn't be off the table.

Other forms of warfare follow this logic. Biological weapons attack indiscriminate people and spread in a population and even cross borders. Arson spreads and doesn't care what it consumes. Landmines like those still littering previously war-torn nations, including those we discuss here, are not programmed to factor in political or religious allegiance. Such things are akin to boxing out of a ring and are highly condemned. If Palestine and its allies don't change its stance on how warfare is supposed to work, then if they did become fully independent, it would be a shameful new existence, built on national character flaws that would haunt and define any who call themselves Palestinian patriots.

When the Ismaili Muslims were still around in the 1100's, their mode of warfare was simply to have spies sneak into a fortress and eliminate the leader, sparing the people who do the dirty work, with the intention that the heir would yield, like how in chess you wouldn't eliminate the other pieces besides the king if you don't have to. It was called fedai warfare and this was the world's most peaceful form of open warfare and perhaps more normal than what we call normal. What a leap we took in modern times, where nobody is safe and nothing is off the table.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] itsnotits@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

gain its* freedom?

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί