Showing posts with label palestine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label palestine. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

We Fight Because You Are Here

"All we ask is, to be let alone" The will of a people to self determine, free from outside government's influence over the internal affairs of a group of self governed, is the strongest cause for war in recent history. However, recent increase in central government size and influence has triggered a near collapse of modern society - economically and socially.

The Declaration of Independence proclaimed that it is the right of the people to cast off political ties when the governed are no longer represented. On this basis of thought a war of Independence, the American Revolution, was fought. The Americans wanted the freedom to self govern, with the simple message to the British: All we ask is to be let alone.

During the war between the states, the series of secession from the Union by southern states came as solidarity to the same cause - self determination, free from the dictatorial influence of the growing northern states. Jefferson Davis gave word as to how the north could end the war, simply by going home, when he stated: All we ask is to be let alone.

The push for land and resources through the Midwestern states was met with heavy resistance by the civilizations already living and hunting on these grounds. The Plains Indians sued for peace on many occasions, only to be slapped in the face by the imperialist US Government determined to claim ownership over land and natural wealth by way of 'Manifest Destiny'. As the tribes of the great plains bore witness to mass occupation of their lands and the eradication of their herds, they engaged in the great Indian Wars with the United States. They fought because the US had invaded their sovereign lands, though through treaty upon treaty they promised peace, if only their lands would be let alone.

Arizona fights, through new laws, against Mexico and the inept US government, because the Mexican Civilian population has invaded their sovereign land. All they ask is to be let alone.

Tibet fights against the Chinese government for the continued occupation of their historically native lands. All they ask is to be let alone.

And so goes the story, time and again. A people, a land, a will to be independent is disregarded by another outside entity... and war ensues. Such is the struggle of recent history.

Enter the Palestine issue. The land that was once entirely known as Palestine under British Control was mandated to be split into two entities upon British withdrawal from interest in the land. The United Nations passed a resolution approving the
creation of two states, Israel and Palestine, with full sovereign authority. Shortly after the vote, there were riots in Israel/Palestine, and after British withdrawal there was a full scale invasion by Egypt, Syria, and Jordan in which Israel captured and held defensive positions of lands against outside forces - the difference between the 1947 UN partition lines and the 1949 armistice lines – or roughly the map of Israel as we know it today (with the Gaza Strip and the West Bank). The issue with the Israeli/Palestinian is a little more complex than “All we ask is to be let alone”; however the concept is very much the same: self determination.

Assuming a starting line of 1948, when Israel declared Independence and was subsequently recognized by a plurality of world governments, the intent of the region was a two state division of the land – mutually sovereign governments, laws, and land. The war of 1948-49 was brought about because, where Israel had an organized governmental structure, the Palestinian Arabs were basically ‘claimed’ by foreign kings, thus the kings fought for land. Fast forward this struggle 60 years and though the players may have changed, the maps and issues remain virtually the same.

Today the concern lies with the independent state of Palestine and the right to self determination of her people. There are those extreme views that decry the existence of Israel and call for her destruction, however, peace is never found in extremism, rather in moderation. It is in moderation where cooler heads can prevail.

Let us use the analogy used above – we fight because you are here – and compare it to tribal lands in the United States. During US expansion treaties were signed strictly defining US territory and Tribal territory. Through settlement and military action in support of white settlers the tribes were drawn into war, time and again, to defend their sovereign and treaty protected land. The Supreme Court, in 1980, ruled that the use of military force and settlement of the Sioux lands was in violation of the treaty of Fort Laramie. The US Justice system determined that treaty defined lines should protect from settlement of another’s sovereign land. As the “last best hope” for humankind, one would have to at least surrender themselves to some logic and reasoning of the United States.

This brings me to a conclusion – that the United States’ silent alliance with Israel is in direct violation of the lessons already learned through bloodshed on our own land. The continued silence and inaction over increased settlement of one nation by the other is in violation of US law as well as UN law. The people of the Palestinian state should be given the freedom of self determination and sovereignty. As well, the natural tendency to resist occupation of Palestinian sovereign lands (as defined by the 1949/1967 armistice lines) can only be expected by a people who simply want to be left alone.

*this does not include the Gaza problem where Hamas maintains a political platform of absolute destruction of Israel... this is extremism, and there is no way to peace but through reason and moderation.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

A Different Approach to Israel

As I have said a number of times, I am a huge supporter of Israel, and her right to be a free and independent democracy.

As I was laying in bed the other night, I was trying to come up with a different approach to peace in the region...

There is much tension between Jewish Israel and her Muslim neighbors... there is much tension from the Arab Muslims within the country... friends and neighbors fight one another over religion and territorial boundaries...

Most all of the Palestinians live in squalor, uneducated, without the basic elements of stability: food, water, shelter, and safety.

The Palestinians have no vested interest in a successful Israel... The very existence of Israel means that at any moment their government could bulldoze their home, cut their power, or blockade and starve out their neighborhood.

So my question is this: How do you give the Palestinians something to fight for in Israel, rather than something to fight against?

My answer seemed radical, and I am going to do a LOT more research on this idea. Cursory searches have led to similar ideas, but seemingly for wrong reasons, or with the wrong approach. I will outline my thoughts, and I would love some comments... but keep in mind that this is just very early in the idea process, and there is much research for me to undertake.

My idea is similar to the "one nation" idea... But I want to ensure that Israel maintains it's ability to protect itself from foreign invaders and maintain order.

First I propose one nation: The Confederation of Israel/Palestine. There will be a weak central government in charge of national defense, ensuring resource allocation, maintaining infrastructure, and providing judicial oversight. The confederated central government will consist of One President, and One Prime Minister in the Executive Branch. The President will have control over internal affairs while the PM will have control over foreign affairs. Each will have to work together to ensure commonality for the nation. They will both be selected by the house of commons. 50 regional ministers, similar to congress, will be the legislative branch. There will be one house of commons (not two houses like the US) which consists of 25 members from Israel, 25 members from Palestine. They will have control over finances and laws/regulations, power to enact taxes, etc. The members will be elected by the people. The judicial members will be selected by the president, and certified by the HOC. They will have authority to review cases in the lower courts. This will resemble, in a sense, the structure of the US federal government, however, it will be a weak government, with the rights and powers left to the 2 states. The national capitol would be Jerusalem... a united district, similar to D.C., where neither state has authority over the city. They operate independent of either state.... this mean there is no division of Jerusalem, and both states can declare it their capitol.

Second, I propose the creation of two state governments, one of Israel, one of Palestine. The two state governments will be in charge of local security, police forces, crowd control, local judicial issues, and ensuring the basic rights are being met. They will have the authority to elect governors, and state representatives. They will focus on local commerce, trade, education and interstate relations.

The idea of the confederation was one that may allow the groundwork for distribution of opportunity, eduction, and infrastructure, as well as ensuring equal opportunity for employment, housing, water, and power.

My thought was that if we focus on the establishing and providing the basic elements of survival, food, shelter, and security... then back that with educating the population on the merits of joining in a democratic society, and the importance of ownership of their rights and land... that will provide the basis for peace and prosperity.

I think that if the Palestinians feel that they have equal rights, equal representation, and equal opportunity at a federal level, they will be less likely to want to destroy their own chance for progress. There may still be bitterness between the states, but the federal government would ensure that the regulated militias of each state are not used to attack one another.

That is where I am starting... Like I said, this is just a cursory idea, and I have much research to do. I came up with these ideas based on current relations in the region, current leadership, sentiment, etc... I think it may be possible to approach something like this...

I know one thing is for sure... the two state option leaves Palestine with no food, no money, no power (electricity), and no security. If the arrangements leave them with nothing, why would they be interested in going forward?

(I know that they have been given money, but used it to arm their militia and fight Israel, but they see Israel as the enemy... if we change the playing field, making Israel a partner, perhaps we can change the way the game is played)

Any thoughts? This is a radical idea... so I would love to hear some of your opinions.