Gaza

Israel clearly has more open suppliers

On that topic. I’ve not seen much transparency on the supply to Isreal from the US’s war reserve stock held in Israel, I’ve seen suggestions its happening but no real details on how much. I’m guessing the real size of the reserve is going to remain secret.

Dont suppose you’ve seen any credible sources on that?

Have to say JHJ makes some salient points but as with the Ukraine thread any examination of western culpability will probably be dismissed by the usual suspects with the same degree of hubris and and self-justification.

Probably won’t be long before this thread is keeping a running score of attacks and delving into the minutiae of weapons technology. 🤔

dazh- surely you understand that the usual suspects have been keeping score since mark opened this thread?

It’s just how they are…let me take you back to your post two million years ago.

You know who they are, so do they, so do I.

I don’t think Israel has a credible or viable way out of this.

They clearly won’t back down in any meaningful way; criticism of their behaviour is still muted; Netanyahu has shown he will do anything to stay in power.

They have a strong domestic armaments sector – external support very welcome, thanks Joe  – but not essential.

This will fester for decades.

I’m not convinced by this ‘plucky little Israel’s doing it alone.’ If supplies and political support were cut off from the US and UK, things would be different. Apartheid and repression can’t last, it generates and multiplies the opposition. Just look at how Bloody Sunday increased recruitment to the nationalist movements. As with Ireland a single democratic secular state is the only answer.

I’m not convinced by this ‘plucky little Israel’s doing it alone.’ If supplies and political support were cut off from the US and UK, things would be different. Apartheid and repression can’t last, it generates and multiplies the opposition. Just look at how Bloody Sunday increased recruitment to the nationalist movements. As with Ireland a single democratic secular state is the only answer.

Mostly agree with you Bill, although I dont think a single democratic secular state is the most likely outcome, it’s not western europe.

This will fester for decades.

I cant see anything but this happening. And it was going to fester for decades before Israel’s invasion.

As with Ireland a single democratic secular state is the only answer.

with a side order of Hamas terrorism to make things lively? They don’t want a secular solution (or Democratic for that matter)

I don’t know what Hamaa would think of a single state solution but their 2017 charter advocates for a two state solution based on 1967 borders, which is roughly where the Oslo Accords were heading. I say that because I’m not sure how helpful the narrative that Hamas can’t be satisfied with a solution is – if no solution can be found that makes them happy, Netanyahu is surely right and I cannot believe that that’s the case.

AFAIK, Hamas are opposed to the 2-state solution, as they oppose any solution that denies the right of Palestinians to reclaim land/property that was taken in the 1948 Nakbah, I don’t think that POV has ever changed.

The 2 state solution has the support of 70-72% of Israelis, but  the far right are viscerally opposed and have done their upmost to ensure that most Palestinians are as well.

“As with Ireland a single democratic secular state is the only answer.”

It’s pretty much only naive foreigners that want this. Israelis regard that as being an invitation to disarm and await a pogrom at a hands of their numerically superior neighbours who already attacked them 3 times without warning (1967, 1973, 2023). The views that the history of Jews is one of being slaughtered, harassed and almost extinguished by Europeans and Arab States because they were not secure in their own homeland is not an extreme one. For Palestinians, it is inconceivable that they should be forced to live alongside people that have stolen their land and committed atrocities against them, and that their State should not be a Palestinian one.

It’s also odd to suggest that the Northern Ireland peace process is a model for a single state solution in Israel and Palestine: there’s been almost 30 years of peace and stability only after Ireland disclaimed territorial ambitions on NI and only after nationalists abandoned reunification as a precondition to the peace process. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than the past, and there’s no white hot desire for reunification at the moment (especially among Ireland’s taxpayers, who have just seen another study on how expensive reunification would be for them).ⁿ

In any case, the UK and Ireland arrangement after 1922 is a 2 state solution – you’re just arguing about where the border is between them! Unionists and Israelis have the same response to Nationalists and Palestinians: you already have a state that was carved out of a large colonial entity for you, and it’s called Ireland/Jordan.

But ultimately comparisons to Ireland are unhelpful. The situation in Israel and Palestine is so nuanced and specific that trying to jam it into a familiar conceptual framework from elsewhere is going to fail (especially if one’s preconceptions of Ireland are also muddled).

Equally, posts that rely on sarcasm or irony or parody are going to cause more heat than light.

“AFAIK, Hamas are opposed to the 2-state solution, as they oppose any solution that denies the right of Palestinians to reclaim land/property that was taken in the 1948 Nakbah, I don’t think that POV has ever changed.”

I guess it depends on your interpretation! 🙂 Here’s the paragraph from the 2017 charter –

“However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus.”

Would a solution that met their “formula of national consensus” be acceptable to them? I THINK so – they’re otherwise pretty clear on what they don’t find acceptable.

“Israelis regard that as being an invitation to disarm and await a pogrom at a hands of their numerically superior neighbours who already attacked them 3 times without warning (1967, 1973, 2023). ”

Just as a point of order, Israel fired the first shots in 1967.

Just as a point of order, Israel fired the first shots in 1967.

That’s an interesting point…Egypt threatened to close Israel’s access to the Red Sea and Egypt had lined its forces up on the border and expelled UN forces.

It’s widely held that Israel was getting its self-defence in first because of this, however, documents have since been declassified to show that major powers believed that Egypt was in self-defence mode because Israel had announced that closing the access would be cause for war.

Sort the blame for that one out 🙂

Paragraph 20 in full paints a much weaker endorsement of a two-state solution:

“20. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensu”

And as has already been said, their words and actions since do appear to supersede the 2017 charter. I also don’t tbink a two-state solution will be possible with Hamas.

And I’d also like to say thanks to everyone for the comments and discussion so far and to Mark and the STW mods.

And as has already been said, their words and actions since do appear to supersede the 2017 charter

I fear is where we are at. Lots of times history has shown us words are used to stall for time ahead of violence, though in the case of Hamas (without wanting to sound like I’m condoning the October attack) it’s pretty clear that the Israeli government didn’t want a 2 state solution either.

This thread has been good so far. Much more thought provoking .

FWIW I don’t believe the unjustifiable atrocity of 7/10 supercedes the Hamas charter. They see themselves as the legitimate armed resistance against an illegal occupation – unless there’s a negotiated solution (including Hamas at the table) there will never be a time where they stop trying to bloody the nose of Israel.

People point to one paragraph of the 2017 charter as if it is evidence of Hamas’ commitment to achieving peace and a 2-state solution but ignore pretty much all the rest:

Palestine, which extends from the River Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west and from Ras al-Naqurah in the north to Umm al-Rashrash in the south, is an integral territorial unit.

Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine… Not one stone of Jerusalem can be surrendered or relinquished.

Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.

There is no alternative to a fully sovereign Palestinian State on the entire national Palestinian soil, with Jerusalem as its capital.

And hanging on to claims of 1967 borders doesn’t make sense from a Palestinian perspective anyway – pre-4th June 1967 Gaza was under Egyptian control and the West Bank was under Jordanian control. So Hamas claiming that’s what they want is directly opposed to their desire for a fully sovereign Palestinian state.

I think it’s more that their charter has been either worded extremely carefully to create ambiguity, or people are simply misinterpreting it. If you look at the language in detail:

Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus”

The emphasis is mine. There’s a fundamental difference between “Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967” and “Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital, along the lines of the 4th of June 1967”

“I think it’s more that their charter has been either worded extremely carefully to create ambiguity, or people are simply misinterpreting it. ”

I think designed to create ambiguity, given how unambiguous the rest of it is.

They see themselves as the legitimate armed resistance against an illegal occupation – unless there’s a negotiated solution (including Hamas at the table) there will never be a time where they stop trying to bloody the nose of Israel.

Israel do not seem to accept the truism that when you negotiate you have to do so with your enemies. And in fact so far they have been justified because the negative consequences have been (relatively) minimal. The end point they seem to have in mind is not that the Palestinians will stop trying to bloody their nose; it’s that the Palestinians will be killed, or driven out of Gaza via Egypt, and driven out of the West Bank bit by bit as their land is overrun.

That might appear a bit cynical and bleak, but what other endpoint can you envisage? And if you were a Palestinian, what would you do? Stay and live a life of misery under a brutal occupation to uphold a principle? Or emigrate somewhere/anywhere?

So if Hamas aren’t the solution to resisting occupation, how are the Palestinians supposed to oppose the apartheid state of Israel and the ongoing theft of their lands by colonial settlers?

Whilst there is all this (justified) focus on Gaza, what is happening in the West Bank?

I think the points you have raised have been raised before in the thread.

It’s all interconnected and messed up in all directions.

“Just as a point of order, Israel fired the first shots in 1967.”

That’s a fair point, and actually my description of the war being “without warning” doesn’t make sense considering the months of escalating tensions that came before it.

Meanwhile, and I know some will immediately dismiss this because it comes from an Israeli journalist in the (rough) Israeli equivalent of the Guardian, but I thought this article was very interesting in showing how:

1) the Palestinian elite fled Gaza for Cairo at the beginning of the war, in an echo of what happened in 1947

2) Hamas on the ground was increasingly autonomous from their leadership in Qatar, and Qatari and Iranian sponsors (which undermined Netanyahu’s idea that Qatari finding would somehow keep Hamas on a leash)

3) bonkers the Hamas leadership’s plans for the October attacks were – dividing up Israeli land into cantons and planning out which administrators were going to be appointed

4) riven Palestinian politics is between Hamas and Fatah – with Palestinians seeking “refuge” in their own homeland from each other

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-05/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/hamas-actually-believed-it-would-conquer-israel-and-divided-it-into-cantons/0000018e-ab4a-dc42-a3de-abfad6fe0000

Also, does the Hamas charter actually matter to anyone but political historians? Is it really impacting anything in reality?

bonkers the Hamas leadership’s plans for the October attacks were – dividing up Israeli land into cantons and planning out which administrators were going to be appointed

If Hamas are indeed a product of the Israeli intelligence services, that’s an understandable aim 😉

“Israel do not seem to accept the truism that when you negotiate you have to do so with your enemies. And in fact so far they have been justified because the negative consequences have been (relatively) minimal. The end point they seem to have in mind…”

I agree with what you say here in modern years (although tbf there was a lot of negotiating with the PLO in the 1990s, despite its involvement in some terrible atrocities). I am not sure “Israel” has actually thought about an endpoint: different PMs and parties have simply kicked the can down the road, happy to preserve an interim status where the PNA is weak and inept, but it wasn’t really kicking off or disrupting Israeli life too much. And once you build walls and import immigrant labour to work in factories and farms, then you don’t even need to deal with individual Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza so much. Conversely, reaching a final peace deal of any sort would have involved selling it to the peaceniks (who wanted a 2 state solution) and the hard right (who wanted a 1 state solution from the river to the sea, preferably accompanied by some population transfer), which seems like hard work, and also involves working out WTF happens with the right of return, regularisation of land borders and ownership, and demilitarisation, and the status if Jerusalem.

“If Hamas are indeed a product of the Israeli intelligence services…”

But they’re not, the picture is much more complicated, and that’s just the kind of oversimplification that paves the way to lazy conspiracy theories in which the Israelis are behind everything. Buying into stuff that requires you to believe that even Israel’s failures (like the October attacks) are its successes because it’s so meticulous and perfect in its strategy so that everything comes up how the Israeli deep state wants it.

While that’s consistent with decades of PR out of the Shin Bet and others, reading sensible historical analysis shows that Israeli leaders are capable of being just as inept, foolish and short-sighted as our own – almost if they’re just regular people after all… This is a country of 10 million people, it’s not a very big talent pool…

Once things become too complicated, no solution will ever be found…

Is Israel an apartheid state that since formation has been colonizing lands, and displacing people from their homes through violence and coercion?

Well yes, but it’s more complicated than that etc etc

A solution can be found, but it needs compromise on both sides.

A solution can be found, but it needs compromise on both sides.

I’m a bit out of my depth amongst the intellectual big hitters here, so am only likely to post occasionally, but wanted to flag up Lyse Doucet’s interview with Ehud Barak (ex-israeli Prime Minister) on the BBC News.

I thought he was very tolerant & hugely sensible and seemingly pro a true 2 state solution (although I’m not sure he’s keen on Palestinian statehood).

Having sensible people in power (on both sides) would make such a difference!

The Israeli government has been largely against compromise and has actively supported the removal by force of Palestinians on the west bank thus scuppering a two state solution as they would need to return the west bank land to Palestinian control which would entail removing the stettlers by force which would be very difficult physically and politically

On that topic. I’ve not seen much transparency on the supply to Isreal from the US’s war reserve stock held in Israel, I’ve seen suggestions its happening but no real details on how much. I’m guessing the real size of the reserve is going to remain secret.

Dont suppose you’ve seen any credible sources on that?

It was complicated in Jan 2023 when the US moved part of the US stockpiles from Israel to Ukraine; various sources agreed that 300,000 155mm artillery shells were transferred. The US also dipped into stock held in SKorea to supply Ukraine.

The actual quantities aren’t freely available but a US Congress report is… https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL33222 On p.28 it says, “If the U.S. military has contributed the maximum amount legally permitted in each applicable fiscal year, then the non-inflation-adjusted value of materiel stored in Israel would currently stand at $4.4 billion.”

Israel had a complex relationship with Russia and Ukraine at the time and wouldn’t supply weapons to Ukraine because they needed access to Syria for operations there.

The US has transferred lots of smaller quantities of weapons to Israel since October, the Times of Israel report that >100 transfers have been made and the smaller quantities mean that approval isn’t needed from US Congress https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-us-quietly-approved-more-than-100-arms-sales-to-israel-since-october-7/

This is a facetious suggestion borne out of frustration at how little progress there’s been for decades now, but perhaps China Miéville has a solution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_%26_the_City

Personally, i don’t see this conflict coming to a decent conclusion in my lifetime, it’s just got too many moving parts to it.

Personally, i don’t see this conflict coming to a decent conclusion in my lifetime, it’s just got too many moving parts to it.

For context, the two-state solution was first proposed in 1937

Personally, i don’t see this conflict coming to a decent conclusion in my lifetime, it’s just got too many moving parts to it.

“The Israeli government has been largely against compromise and has actively supported the removal by force of Palestinians on the west bank thus scuppering a two state solution as they would need to return the west bank land to Palestinian control which would entail removing the stettlers by force which would be very difficult physically and politically…”

And yet that’s exactly what Israel did to all the Gaza settlements when it withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Despite what the settlers want, evidently the presence of settlements isn’t the end of the conversation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza

I don’t really want to post YouTube vids as they can get a bit tiresome so I started to precis what I watched but decided its better to hear directly from those involved

I’ve nothing constructive to add that hasn’t already been said but this thread is very refreshing. Long may it continue.

Israel’s government is in a precarious state with Israel’s Courts and this seems likely to worsen within a fairly short time. The question is how this is likely to effect the continuing war.

An exemption for certain Jewish religious communities from military service that has existed since the Jewish State’s founding in 1948 was brought to an end by Israel’s High Court of Justice in 2017. The government and courts have run out of extensions and the ruling came into effect at the end of March 2024 and Benjamin Netanyahu will have to produce a legally and politically acceptable plan by the end of this month.

His problem is that two of Israel’s coalition parties hold 1/4 of the seats in his emergency government and oppose the ending of the exemption. In addition, Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef has said, “If you force us to go to the army, we’ll all move abroad” and is speaking for 12% of the population.

Shlomit Ravitsky Tur-Paz, an expert on the intersections of religion and state, thinks that the plan won’t be agreed and either an extension will be granted by the Court or the government will fall… https://forward.com/news/598903/israel-haredi-draft-exemption-military/

Benjamin Netanyahu has another problem with the courts and he’s been on trial since 2020 for fraud and bribery. The trial has continued throughout the war. He’s run out of extensions, covid, reduced court sessions due to war and claims of immunity

Who mentioned lots of moving parts?

So if Netanyahu is ousted, will that mean a swift end to the bombardment of Gaza and an end to the violent and coercive displacement of people from their homes?

(which has been happening since the state of Israel was founded in 1948)