This was an interesting and important history lesson, Alex. However, you raise all the problems and, while you seem to think -- at least it seems that way to me -- that the best solution is territorial exchange to increase the land available to the Gazans who will remain, you agree this is not likely to be agreed upon by the nations that need to get together to bring it about.
You say nothing about the fact that, unlike bordering countries who let Ukrainians flee the war zone, Egypt keeps its borders closed except for allowing in the few that can pay exorbitant fees. You say nothing of the fact that were civilians allowed to escape the war zone/demolition zone that Gaza has become, there are probably many who would prefer to raise their children elsewhere even if it meant giving up on the dream of wiping Israel off the map.
BTW, that is another thing you avoided mentioning -- how that is the dream of those raised under the auspices of Hamas and UNRWA. Have I misread your article?
I don't address the issues around Gazans leaving/not leaving because I don't think there's much evidence it's realistically going to happen so it's not really relevant, whatever one's position on it is. And I did refer in the article to the problem of perpetual refugeehood, but again, even if one solved this problem the fundamental geographic problem would remain.
You know there is so much of telling us what the problems are and whenever one comes up with potential solutions, they are told why it cannot work. Can we not hear what you think should be done and the implications of that?
I've been very clear about what should be done but I know you don't like it: There are two peoples here with a deep connection to the land and they aren't going to go anywhere. The only solution is to invest massively in that reality, defeating the rejectionists on both sides (with force if necessary) and then work out the details. Anything else is a non-starter unless one really supports genocide or mass ethnic cleansing.
I find it fascinating that some can think that those who now call themselves Palestinians are really a "people" with deep connection to the land when the very definition of Palestinian refugees says it includes anyone who was living in what has become Israel between 1946-1948. Nothing about having longer roots than that. And it says nothing about the fact that those who are referred to as Palestinians include Arabs, Bosnians, Kurds, Armenians, all of whom speak Arabic NOW, but are not Arabs. Some of these are starting to talk, in private conversations, about how they are not Arabs and not Palestinians. Just points that should be taken into consideration in conversations about the so-called Palestinian people.
“Nobody would have wilfully created a territory like the Gaza Strip”
And yes, Egypt did precisely that. At the end of the 1948 War, Jordan annexed the West Bank, effectively overruling the Armistice Agreement and making a political border.
Egypt could have done the same by annexing Gaza. It refused to do so. In the Sadat peace process, Egypt declined to take Gaza back.
As you pointed out, Gaza was part of southern Palestine before 1948. After 1948, the Gaza Strip was effectively a creation of Egypt.
Palestinians and Egyptians are not all that similar culturally. It's plausible to imagine Jordan, or Syria annexing such a population, but Egypt doing so would be very strange. This fact has been obscured by the Arab nationalist ideology of Nasser, but Arab nationalism is delirious nonsense. Unfortunately, many Zionists have become extremist Arab nationalists and believe Libyans and Bahrainis are one nation or something and this clouds their expectations and thinking.
The English, Irish, Scots, and Welsh are not all that similar culturally. Nevertheless, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland effectively lasted from 1603 to 1922, all due to England's annexations.
My point remains: Egypt created the Gaza Strip by occupying it from 1948 to 1967. Its separate existence was confirmed by Egypt refusing to take it back after the peace treaty between Sadat and Begin. When Israel left in 2005, it confirmed what Egypt had created: a distinct polity called the Gaza Strip.
I agree, that's a good analogy. The United Kingdom suffered Scottish rebellions in 1715 and 1745, had to conduct mass ethnic cleansing of the Scottish highlands, put down dozens of Irish rebellions and suffered ongoing terrorism and, in the end, it still lost Ireland and half of Scotland wants to go too.
So that's what Egypt would have to do, roughly, to incorporate the Gaza Strip, and what's in it for them?
The last serious Scottish rebellion was in the mid-1700s. The various Irish rebellions after 1603 were minor affrays until 1916. (I’m Irish, by the way.) After 1922, the UK lost most of Ireland.
It seems we have circled around to find a point of agreement. Egypt could take control of Gaza, and Jordan should retake control of the West Bank. It was a dreadfully immoral position of King Hussein to abandon his citizens in 1988.
It could be done, again with a lot of trouble. The question, to repeat, is what's in it for them. I think that better than appealing to morality is just to pay them. Compared with the cost of constant armed conflict, it's cheap.
I don't live in or near Israel, so if I sound idealistic or naive, please forgive me.
The circumstances today are different to 1949-1967. Israel and Egypt have - what seems to me - a cold peace. If Egypt ‘took’ Gaza, they could ask for a ‘land swap’ from Israel.
Gaza obviously cannot rule itself. Israel cannot rule it - it will be a permanent colonial power.
Whatever the broader merits of spatial defense it seems nuts that envelope communities had so few firearms available to them that fateful dawn. A lot of lives could have been saved
The owner & neighbour of the plot to my North side, claimed, on the basis of historical geo-survey observations, that I had been occupying a 4metre strip of his land since I purchased the plot 13years ago
There were two solutions
1) I compensate him financially to the value of the strip, calculated as a median between its value at purchase 13 yrs back & its current value today
2) I surrender the strip to him, redrawg the boundary, then, in order to maintain the integrity of my plot, similarily claim a 4metre strip from my immediate neighbour to the South, & he to his neighbour to.the South, andvso on & so on, triggering a chain reaction of conflict & controversy all down the line, & likely to engulf the whole community in all manner of negative
outcomes incl.serious violence
Which do you think we chose? No prizes for guessing the correct answer
So...Jews from all over Europe & The Middle East lost their lands, lives, homes & property in just 6yrs of war 1939-1945
And over half of Israel's Jewish population are descended, in just one or two generations, from indigenous Jews of the Middle East, Maghreb & Arab Muslim lands, where they had lived continuously for hundreds & in some cases thousands of yrs, long predating the advent of Islam, but wthin a period of just 20yrs, 1948 to 1968, their lives became untenable, & they fled as refugees to the adjacent Land of Israel
And 28% of Israel's population are Israeli Arabs most of whom are Palestinian Arabs- Muslims predominantly, & Christians
So, in a certain sense, the 3way tripartite land swap has already taken place, with 3 parties: the Jews of Europe, the Jews of the Middle East & the Arab states who took over Jewish land, & other Arabs who remained in Israel
On a separate but related note, when Moshe Dayan wrote so eloquent of the weight of the Gates of Gaza, was he not also referencing Samson, similarily seduced & beguiled by his love for Delilah, pulling down the pillars in their temple in Gaza?"
This was an interesting and important history lesson, Alex. However, you raise all the problems and, while you seem to think -- at least it seems that way to me -- that the best solution is territorial exchange to increase the land available to the Gazans who will remain, you agree this is not likely to be agreed upon by the nations that need to get together to bring it about.
You say nothing about the fact that, unlike bordering countries who let Ukrainians flee the war zone, Egypt keeps its borders closed except for allowing in the few that can pay exorbitant fees. You say nothing of the fact that were civilians allowed to escape the war zone/demolition zone that Gaza has become, there are probably many who would prefer to raise their children elsewhere even if it meant giving up on the dream of wiping Israel off the map.
BTW, that is another thing you avoided mentioning -- how that is the dream of those raised under the auspices of Hamas and UNRWA. Have I misread your article?
I don't address the issues around Gazans leaving/not leaving because I don't think there's much evidence it's realistically going to happen so it's not really relevant, whatever one's position on it is. And I did refer in the article to the problem of perpetual refugeehood, but again, even if one solved this problem the fundamental geographic problem would remain.
You know there is so much of telling us what the problems are and whenever one comes up with potential solutions, they are told why it cannot work. Can we not hear what you think should be done and the implications of that?
I've been very clear about what should be done but I know you don't like it: There are two peoples here with a deep connection to the land and they aren't going to go anywhere. The only solution is to invest massively in that reality, defeating the rejectionists on both sides (with force if necessary) and then work out the details. Anything else is a non-starter unless one really supports genocide or mass ethnic cleansing.
I find it fascinating that some can think that those who now call themselves Palestinians are really a "people" with deep connection to the land when the very definition of Palestinian refugees says it includes anyone who was living in what has become Israel between 1946-1948. Nothing about having longer roots than that. And it says nothing about the fact that those who are referred to as Palestinians include Arabs, Bosnians, Kurds, Armenians, all of whom speak Arabic NOW, but are not Arabs. Some of these are starting to talk, in private conversations, about how they are not Arabs and not Palestinians. Just points that should be taken into consideration in conversations about the so-called Palestinian people.
If you want you can call them whatever you want, but the basic point still stands.
Yes, MY basic points still stand.
All national identities are invented, that doesn't make them not real.
“Nobody would have wilfully created a territory like the Gaza Strip”
And yes, Egypt did precisely that. At the end of the 1948 War, Jordan annexed the West Bank, effectively overruling the Armistice Agreement and making a political border.
Egypt could have done the same by annexing Gaza. It refused to do so. In the Sadat peace process, Egypt declined to take Gaza back.
As you pointed out, Gaza was part of southern Palestine before 1948. After 1948, the Gaza Strip was effectively a creation of Egypt.
Palestinians and Egyptians are not all that similar culturally. It's plausible to imagine Jordan, or Syria annexing such a population, but Egypt doing so would be very strange. This fact has been obscured by the Arab nationalist ideology of Nasser, but Arab nationalism is delirious nonsense. Unfortunately, many Zionists have become extremist Arab nationalists and believe Libyans and Bahrainis are one nation or something and this clouds their expectations and thinking.
The English, Irish, Scots, and Welsh are not all that similar culturally. Nevertheless, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland effectively lasted from 1603 to 1922, all due to England's annexations.
My point remains: Egypt created the Gaza Strip by occupying it from 1948 to 1967. Its separate existence was confirmed by Egypt refusing to take it back after the peace treaty between Sadat and Begin. When Israel left in 2005, it confirmed what Egypt had created: a distinct polity called the Gaza Strip.
I agree, that's a good analogy. The United Kingdom suffered Scottish rebellions in 1715 and 1745, had to conduct mass ethnic cleansing of the Scottish highlands, put down dozens of Irish rebellions and suffered ongoing terrorism and, in the end, it still lost Ireland and half of Scotland wants to go too.
So that's what Egypt would have to do, roughly, to incorporate the Gaza Strip, and what's in it for them?
The last serious Scottish rebellion was in the mid-1700s. The various Irish rebellions after 1603 were minor affrays until 1916. (I’m Irish, by the way.) After 1922, the UK lost most of Ireland.
It seems we have circled around to find a point of agreement. Egypt could take control of Gaza, and Jordan should retake control of the West Bank. It was a dreadfully immoral position of King Hussein to abandon his citizens in 1988.
Then, land swaps, as mentioned, could happen.
It could be done, again with a lot of trouble. The question, to repeat, is what's in it for them. I think that better than appealing to morality is just to pay them. Compared with the cost of constant armed conflict, it's cheap.
‘What’s in it for them?’ Fair question.
I don't live in or near Israel, so if I sound idealistic or naive, please forgive me.
The circumstances today are different to 1949-1967. Israel and Egypt have - what seems to me - a cold peace. If Egypt ‘took’ Gaza, they could ask for a ‘land swap’ from Israel.
Gaza obviously cannot rule itself. Israel cannot rule it - it will be a permanent colonial power.
Whatever the broader merits of spatial defense it seems nuts that envelope communities had so few firearms available to them that fateful dawn. A lot of lives could have been saved
Posting on behalf of Tony C:
"I have house on a quarter acre plot of land adjacent to the market in a village in the interior of Eastern Kenya
www.tonycorengategiproject.com
(excuse the plug but it is relevant here)
The owner & neighbour of the plot to my North side, claimed, on the basis of historical geo-survey observations, that I had been occupying a 4metre strip of his land since I purchased the plot 13years ago
There were two solutions
1) I compensate him financially to the value of the strip, calculated as a median between its value at purchase 13 yrs back & its current value today
2) I surrender the strip to him, redrawg the boundary, then, in order to maintain the integrity of my plot, similarily claim a 4metre strip from my immediate neighbour to the South, & he to his neighbour to.the South, andvso on & so on, triggering a chain reaction of conflict & controversy all down the line, & likely to engulf the whole community in all manner of negative
outcomes incl.serious violence
Which do you think we chose? No prizes for guessing the correct answer
So...Jews from all over Europe & The Middle East lost their lands, lives, homes & property in just 6yrs of war 1939-1945
And over half of Israel's Jewish population are descended, in just one or two generations, from indigenous Jews of the Middle East, Maghreb & Arab Muslim lands, where they had lived continuously for hundreds & in some cases thousands of yrs, long predating the advent of Islam, but wthin a period of just 20yrs, 1948 to 1968, their lives became untenable, & they fled as refugees to the adjacent Land of Israel
And 28% of Israel's population are Israeli Arabs most of whom are Palestinian Arabs- Muslims predominantly, & Christians
So, in a certain sense, the 3way tripartite land swap has already taken place, with 3 parties: the Jews of Europe, the Jews of the Middle East & the Arab states who took over Jewish land, & other Arabs who remained in Israel
On a separate but related note, when Moshe Dayan wrote so eloquent of the weight of the Gates of Gaza, was he not also referencing Samson, similarily seduced & beguiled by his love for Delilah, pulling down the pillars in their temple in Gaza?"