 |
| What a Palestinian state might look like |
That’s what I noticed in his recent Forward
op-ed. Therein, he makes some interesting points about what the future
holds with respect to Israelis and Palestinians. Which actually make sense and
at the same time, don’t. Confusing as that may sound, that is the reality in
which Israel lives right now.
Michaelson correctly notes that there are two diametrically
opposed political factions that have the same view about what the political
solution to the conflict between these two peoples should be: a one-state
solution. But their visions of how that state would be governed could not be
further apart.
On the one he makes the following observation:
Clearly, many on the left still want to reverse 1948, to remove the “settler-colonialist Zionist entity” from the land and return control of it to its indigenous Palestinian inhabitants.
It is from this perspective that they support what they
consider a rational compromise. Israel would cease to be a Jewish state. The
two peoples would combine into a single democratic, binational, secular state,
with full rights granted equally to Jewish and Palestinian citizens. One might
call this the “Mamdani option.”
And then he describes the single-state version of the
extreme right:
One state from the river to the sea, only this state is an ethno-nationalist, non-democratic Greater Israel built on repression and minority rule.
I would quibble with including the word “repression” of
Palestinians as part of their ideology. And I do not think the rest of his
description is fair or accurate. “
Sociocide of Gaza”? An “elimination project”? While there
are surely some extremists who think that way, I believe they are outliers. I
don’t think the policies of the right go that far. I do think, however, that
implementation of their vision could devolve into repression, given the violent
history between the two peoples.
I otherwise agree that they have ethno-nationalist,
non-democratic Greater Israel goals.
Ideologically, the extreme right-wing vision for a future
Israel is based on the Kahane model: a Jewish state where Palestinians would
willingly be subject to Israeli law and granted civil rights equally with
Jewish citizens. But they would not have any political rights other than in
their own municipalities. Palestinians unwilling to agree would be expelled
from the country.
Michaelson correctly notes that both versions are extremist
pipe dreams that will never happen.
A two-state solution would give each side some of what they
want, but certainly not all of what they want. An imperfect solution. But “the
perfect” is the enemy of “the good”. If agreed to and implemented – a two state
solution makes eminent sense. It would lead to peaceful coexistence and freedom
for all. No more wars. No more bloodshed.
But Michaelson ignores the 300-pound gorilla in the room…
To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post -
click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's
easy and it's free.
