If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights (also for the Palestinians in the territories), then, as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished.
– Ehud Olmert, former prime minister of Israel
While international attention has shifted to the war in Syria, little media focus is given to the recent successful initiative at Blair House in Washington, D.C., between Secretary of State John Kerry and Qatar’s Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani on behalf of Arab League states. Sheikh Hamad agreed with Secretary Kerry to endorse the American backed proposal for a two-state solution that partitions Israel in order to create a new Palestinian state. As Arab state representatives retreated from their prior demands that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders, the Arab League initiative represents progress toward a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Graffiti marks the wall dividing the Palestinian city of Bethlehem from Israelis in the West Bank. Credit: Creative Commons/Montecruz Foto.
Currently, Israelis and Palestinians live interspersed together within non-contiguous borders. However, the problem with partition is that it divides the population based upon ethnic, racial, religious, or linguistic characteristics. Partition actions use types of profiling to assign people to states based upon their human characteristics. The use of profiling contradicts human rights because equal treatment requires that people be recognized as individuals irrespective of their ethnic, racial or religious identity. So, Israelis and Palestinians must reject obnoxious forms of human profiling should they agree on a partition plan. This poses a particular challenge for Israel because it is the homeland of the Jewish peoples who are themselves a persecuted religious group.
International human rights treaties offer states alternatives to partition. Instead, human rights conventions offer types of integration that protect the existence and identity of national linguistic, ethnic, and religious groups. Human rights distinguish integration from that of assimilation in which a group’s ethnic characteristics, including language, education, culture, and religion is melted away into the so-called melting-pot to blend with that of the majority. Instead, integration guarantees autonomy (self-government) by permitting minorities to perpetuate their unique characteristics. Since Israelis and Palestinians live interspersed they are already compelled to cooperate on areas of mutual responsibility such as border security, migration, right-of-return, dual-citizenship, public services, trade, and employment.
Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recommends standards to protect the existence and identity of minority groups that include forms of self-governance. Also, increasing numbers of state constitutions recognize self-government for domestic minority groups, with some guaranteeing the right to secession. Examples of this can be found in Ethiopia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, and Spain.
These approaches offer a continuum of remedies short of statehood. For example, Canada established the Nunavut territory that protects the Inuit peoples (former Eskimos). It also initiated a prestigious Royal Commission on the Aboriginal Affairs to study the history of Aboriginal problems and recommend actions to correct injustices. Because each case is different such studies about the plight of minorities and indigenous groups are critical as they help states choose the appropriate remedial policies. The Royal Commission recommended the creation of a House of First Peoples as a branch of the Canadian Parliament to permit Aboriginals equal representation. This is an example of best practices that could assist the Palestinians.
Other states are implementing different forms of autonomy (self-government) to support aspiring nations. A few examples are Great Britain’s Westminster Parliament devolution schemes for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland; Finland’s Accession Treaty for the Swedish populated Aland Islands; the Nordic Council of Minister’s initiative on Sami autonomy; and the Italy and Austria treaty granting autonomy to Trentino-South Tryrol.
A flag marks an Israeli settlement in the Palestinian city of Hebron. Credit: Creative Commons/Jordan Klein.
So far, Israelis have taken actions that are contrary to partition. For instance, Israel’s ruling Likud party promotes settlement on Palestinian populated territories, namely, the West Bank. However, Israeli settlement policies have the unintended consequence to assimilate Palestinians into the Israeli population. Some Israelis describe their goal as Eretz Yisrael, meaning, greater Israel. These Israelis make a biblical claim to annex the West Bank (Judea & Samaria). Israeli territorial expansion has been so successful that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself warned about Israel’s demographic time bomb, that is, the inevitability of a Palestinian majority in Israel. Several demographic studies about high Palestinian birth rates by The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, as well as the Arab Strategic Report projected a Palestinian majority (2025-2048).
Surprisingly, similar views are held by Palestinians. Recent polling conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that although 55 percent of Palestinians polled support a two-state solution that 44 percent of Palestinians opposed partition. However, an earlier poll of Palestinian West Bank and Gaza residents conducted by Stanley Greenberg of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research along with the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion revealed by a two-thirds majority that most Palestinians said the goal should be only to start with a two-state solution, and then move to a single Palestinian state. So, there remains substantial support amongst both Israelis, as well as Palestinians to maintain a unitary state albeit one with different national characteristics.
Palestinian self-determination rights are statu nascendi, meaning only at the beginning of the process leading to statehood. However, self-determination rights are not synonymous with statehood. Instead, the final decision remains with the right-holder to decide whether to live autonomously within the host-state, or as an independent state.
A human rights based approach could assist both Israel and the Palestinians. This is because human rights contain reciprocal responsibilities against irredentism, as well as requires a commitment to state unity. Also, human rights do not exclude a partition of Israel. In fact, they can help to facilitate this but in a manner that comports with other important rights, such as the rule of non-discrimination. Human rights merely require that human groups treat each other with what legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin termed “equal concern and respect.”
William K. Barth is a lawyer who researched international minority rights. His book is titled On Cultural Rights: The Equality of Nations and the Minority Legal Tradition (Martinus Nijhoff). Dr. Barth was awarded his doctorate in politics from the University of Oxford. He currently practices law in California.
I said this once and was accused of being a racist. the best solution for the Palestinians is for the West Bank and Gaza to join a federated state with Jordan. Jordan’s population is now more than half Palestinian. few may recall that Jordan was part of the Palestine mandate up until 1922, when the first partition was initiated. Tis would give the West Bank and Gaza viability in a federated state that is culturally more alike.
Yes, quslified groups can self determine the type of autonomy they desire. You raise an important point about the need for Israel and the Palestinians to operate within a regional framework. Israel requires all the participation it can obtain from important regional states & IR organizations such as the Arab League, CE, as well as the UN. These are critical forums that can facilitate solutions.
I think there can be one state in which all rights are protected and respected. It happens in many parts of the world. No nation today is one religion or one ethnicity. It can be done. For a few hundred years different religions, ethnic groups lived here in relative peace – or as well as many other parts of the world at the time. This can happen again.
Palestinians and Israelis don’t share your idea and thaty counts more than your uninformed opinion,
Syria is a great example of people living together in peace
One holocaust was enough
Palestinians and Israelis don’t share your idea and that counts more than your uninformed opinion,
Syria is a great example of people living together in peace
Remember that the group has the right to decide their own preferred outcome, that is, autonomy, within the host-state (integration), or secession (statehood). Palestinians must determine for themselves what they want to do albeit cultural or minority rights contemplates either result.
Both of your ideas are creative and merit consideration.
What is a qualified group and who determines this?
We need Palestinians who express their identity by loving Israelis.
And we need Israelis who express their identities by loving Palestinians.
Right now there are too many who form their identity by hostility/hatred/violence against the other side.
Too many only see innocence on their side and guilt on the other side
Recall that there are some 5,000 – 8,000 minority groups. IR treaty standards recognizes only some of these minorities as peoples, that is, groups entitled to self determination & statehood.
The sentiment for mutual concern and respect is important. Reconciliation programs were successfully used in South Africa to help end Apartheid. Similar programs are necessary both in Israel with respect to the Palestinians as well as in neighboring Arab states that discriminated against Jewry.
William, you might have noticed that there are no Jews who reside in Arab countries, They were ethnically cleansed i the 1950’s, hundreds of thousands of ten.
Reconciliation can play an important role & it should involve the regional Arab states you write about.
You mean the states that booted Jews out of their country and demand the Palestinians right of return?
On May 17 you recommended Jordon’s participation.
Jordan was part of British mandated Palestine and is now more than 50% Palestinian.
I discuss the right of Palestinian self-determination. It is important to remember that states may not use obnoxious actions to resolve minority questions such that ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and segregation which are all considered as crimes against humanity. Also, states cannot use mass expulsion or deportation of domestic minorities into other states. These are types of horrific actions that were used in the past to resolve so-called minority questions. Instead, states’ must use non-discriminatory action that cultivates responsible forms of Palestinian self-determination. I agree with both Jim and Sammy that regional states should assist Palestinian self-determination.
What about apartheid in Lebanon, where there are Palestinians who languish in what are no longer refugee camps for over 60 years? They cannot live anywhere outside of the camps, nor can they apply for permanent residency status. They work outside and have to return to where they are forced to live. The Arab League keeps it this way to keep this”refugee issue” hot. When refugees fled east and west after the 1947 India partition, everyone found their home.How did that happen?
It was a tragedy for Jews expelled from Arab countries.Your selective outrage of noted
I disagree that subjugation of the Palestinians is somehow justified because of actions taken against both Jewry and Palestinians by other regional states. States are no longer defined by ethnic (racial) characteristics such as the so-called white states or black states. Reconciliation programs have been successfully used in other regions to end the ethnic hatred that you discuss.
Jews worked hard and created a Jewish state, the only one in the world. It is thriving and technologically advanced. Palestinians want the world to do al the work for them. But they do not wan to live with each other. You cannot se[rated regional events from the Israeli-Palestinan conflict, because regional states have entered themselves into the conflict. Hezbollah is building up an arsenal of missiles and Iran and moving ahead with its nuclear program.
Pre 67 Israel has a minority of 1 million Arabs, al with full citizenship and voting rights. There are no Arab countries with a Jewish minority.if you want to look at ethnic hatred, look at the history of Lebanon and present day Syria. You want ethnic hatred, read some of the words of the Iranian president.
90,000 slaughtered in Syrian and you and your friends do not blink an eye.
Again, I hope that other commentators on this site pay attention to your distraction from the issues at hand in those different articles and see that you,Sammy, always distract them from the subject at hand,and repeat the same thing with different words.That could only say one thing that is your goal seem always to distract people from seeing what is wrong with Israel and its policies. A real Hasbara(misleading information to confuse the public,by the State of Israeli agents) . If people have not paid attention to what you write, they should now. You are all over the places ,with one goal, distract, and promote Israeli innocence. I hope others see that and don’t wast their times responding to your Hasbara .
90000 dead from Arab on Arab violence in Syria.Go ahead and blame Israel.
You argue against Palestinian self determination because other states that contain an ethnic Arab majority engage in obnoxious discrimination. However war, violence and killing will not solve either of the problems we discuss.
I seriously doubt you understand that you cannot separate
the Arab experience from the Palestinians, seeing as
neighboring Arab states through themselves deep into the conflict
To the extent that there may be a post- colonial solidarity I agree with you. However, you appear to profile people who are ethnically Arab. Regional states in the Middle East have their own national identity. We do not profile European-states as white or Gentile. We distinguish them by national identity i.e. Italy, France, and Sweden. We must treat all people in equal manner irrespective of their unique ethnic, religious, racial or linguistic characteristics.
The Arab Legions collectively invaded Israel in 1948. The Arab League had a collective policy towards Israel of non recognition of the Jewish state. The was a pan Arab moving under the leadership of the Pan Arab Baathist party.Egypt Jordan and Syria prepared a collective invasion in 1967.
Human Rights do not weaken security rather they enhance it. Minority rights contain protections against the kind of irredentism you write about. Many states deprived human rights to minority groups based upon your rational that minorities are disloyal, or that they are all terrorists. Palestinians must not be deprived of human rights because other states mistreat their own domestic minority groups.
Arab citizens of pre-67 Israel have full rights.. The status of the Wets Bank is yet to be determined through negotiation. Te only problem is it is difficult to negotiate with the multi headed Palestinian leadership. Palestinian leadership has been failing its people for 65 years, starting with the rejection of the 1947 partition.
As for the region world. one counties welfare affects the other. Hezbollah of Lebanon and Iran have pledged the support to help Palestinians to eliminate Israel. Are you telling me that it is not tied into the conflict? I suggest you read something other than your own fools narrative.The troubles in Egypt and Syria have made borders with those countries unstable and dangerous, israel is a tiny country and it does not take much for it create a whole lot of hurt within Israel’s borders.
To clarify, Israel as the sovereign may take unilateral action to recognize Palestinian self-determination.
Unilateral? What country would risk its own security without reciprocity?
Prior, I agreed that an international or regional structure would be helpful.
Unfortunately, their is no international or regional body that creates new states, or that decides minority group claims for self determination. This is why claims by minority groups that seek self determination usually degenerate into violence. Unfortunately, new states are often created only by war.
Since their is no international forum to decide self determination claims the sovereign host-state, that is, Israel in this case must decide whether to incorporate (integrate) the Palestinians’ territory (& peoples), or partition the Israeli state (2 states).
You argue that Israel incorporates the Palestinans’ territory (&peoples) into Israel albeit that Palestinians be granted a different & unequal status. I disagree and argue that Israel instead recognize the Palestinians.
I never argued that the Palestinian territories be incorporated into israel. I argued that the West Bank and Gaza be come part of a federated state with Jordan. President Abbas actually floated that idea and it makes more sense then any thing else. The West Bank and Gaza do not get lost Jordan, they would be an autonomous unit separate for Jordan, but sharing their resources.They share a language and more than 50% of Jordan’s population is Palestinian.
http://unitedwithisrael.org/south-african-mp-israel-is-not-an-apartheid-state/#.UaEKCfnGpqE.facebook
South African MP: Israel is Not an Apartheid State
South African MP Rev. Dr. Kenneth Meshoe, a person of colowho survived the apartheid regime, explains why he does not believe that Israel can be considered an apartheid state.
South African MP Rev. Dr. Kenneth Meshoe wrote in the San Francisco Examiner, “As a black South African who lived under apartheid, this system was implemented in South Africa to subjugate people of color and deny them a variety of their rights. In my view, Israel cannot be compared to apartheid in South Africa. Those who make the accusation expose their ignorance of what apartheid really is.” Meshoe made this statement upon visiting San Francisco, where he was shocked to learn of posters posted within the city comparing Israel to the apartheid regime in South Africa.
San Francisco was not the only American city to post such posters relatively recently. The Americans for Palestine group placed posters on the New York subway not too long ago where Desmond Tutu is quoted as stating, “I’ve been very distressed by my visit in the Holy Land; it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa.” The ad then continues, “Americans give Israel $3 billion per year. End Apartheid Now! Stop US aid to Israel!” Yet, Meshoe has very strong arguments why Tutu and various anti-Israel groups wrongly compare the situation in Israel to the apartheid regime in South Africa.
He asserted, “As a black South African under apartheid, I, among other things, could not vote, nor could I freely travel the landscape of South Africa. No person of color could hold high government office. The races were strictly segregated at sports arenas, public restrooms, schools and on public transportation. People of color had inferior hospitals, medical care and education. If a white doctor was willing to take a black patient, he had to examine him or her in a back room or some other hidden place. In my numerous visits to Israel, I did not see any of the above.”
Indeed, Meshoe pointed out that in Israel, racial equality is enshrined in Israeli law. As the Israeli Declaration of Independence proclaims, Israel will “ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irregardless of religion, race, or sex.” If one takes a train or bus in Israel, one will witness Muslims sitting next to Jews; Ethiopian Jews of color sitting next to Jews of European and Middle Eastern origin. On university campuses, in work places, and in restaurants, the same scene can be witnessed. No public bathroom in Israel is segregated by race or religion. Furthermore, there are Arabs serving as university professors, doctors, emergency room heads, soldiers, and even as Knesset members. Arabs in Israel have rights and privileges that a black living under the apartheid regime in South Africa can only dream of.
Meshoe concluded, “I believe that it is slanderous and deceptive for Israel’s self-defense measures against the terrorists’ campaign of suicide bombing, rocket attacks and other acts of terrorism that have occurred, and continue to occur, to be labeled as apartheid. I am shocked by the claim that the free, diverse, democratic state of Israel practices apartheid. This ridiculous accusation trivializes the word apartheid, minimizing and belittling the magnitude of the racism and suffering endured by South Africans of color.”
Minority groups around the world suffer from a long history of states attempting to transfer entire populations out of the country to eliminate ethnically different national groups and purge nation-states of minorities. This was particularly the case under the League of Nation’s minority protection treaty system which established the exchange of minority populations between many states such as Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece. The so called Jordan option raises the issue of expulsion in that it is intended to rid or purge the state of Israel of an ethnically or religiously different minority group. Forms of ethnic cleansing are a perfidy and violate human rights. There is no justification for this even though one of the commenters argued that it is retaliation against regional states who engage in similar obnoxious conduct. South African leaders including Nelson Mendela and Desmond Tutu have long criticized the unequal treatment of the Palestinians.
The Jordan option raises NO issues with expulsion o transfer. Where do you get that idea? It has NOTHING to do with Israeli Arab citizens within pre 67 Israel.
You brought up Tutu and Mandela? I brought up the opinion of a South African M?
Yes, it is true that South African leaders including the main South African leaders who lead the movement to end Apartheid in South Africa have criticized the unequal treatment of Palestinians. Also, the current post-Apartheid, African South-African government has provided technical support on behalf of Palestinian self-determination.