pdf was so many clicks away: [https://peacenow.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/settlements\_map\_En\_2023\_.pdf](https://peacenow.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/settlements_map_En_2023_.pdf)
Couldn't agree more. This is the kind of content that should be the forefront of this sub. Not political posturing masquerading as jpegs of scribbly overlays.
I know this is a highly sensitive and controversial topic here, but this is the best map I have seen of the West Bank so far, and it'd be a shame if I don't share it. It clearly shows population size of each Israeli settlement and Palestinian population centre. Ariel in particular is going to be a pain in the ass for any peace deal. It has 20,000 settlers and deep inside the West Bank. You can also see the outposts littered across the West Bank. Really hope this doesn't get downvoted to oblivion.
Source: https://peacenow.org.il/en/%D9%8Dsettlements-map-2023
Literally creating two states out of that mess is impossible. Presumably this is intentional because of how incredibly obvious it is. What, all those little enclaves are all somehow going to be part of the state of Palestine? Broken up by walled roads and Israeli settlements? Obviously that's not gonna happen.
Look at that fucking map. Even if government in all of the little Palestinian areas were devolved to them, this'd never be a state, it'd be de facto part of Israel. There are only a handful of options: leave the Bank and ensure there's territorial connections bw the palestinian enclaves so as to create a separate state; keep the Bank and bring everyone inside Israel as citizens; or keep the Bank and leave everyone inside who isn't Israeli without meaningful representation (status quo). I shall not mention the fourth option but of course that's there too; the one we're all hopefully trying to ensure never happens again. Israel often gets big mad about it being put like this but I don't know what to say--those really seem like the only options. These were choices many people alive today didn't make, but shit man, again, look at that map. That's the reality, no option will please everyone, but there has to be some kind of choice.
Many of these settlements are active eviction and demolition. It's not like they just appeared out of nowhere. The US maintains its decades-long position that a two state solution be respected, because we know exactly what the state of Israel is doing every time they advance a new settlement. Israel is accelerating the pace of development in the West Bank to actively create the very situation that prevents a two state solution. The US denounces new settlements for this very reason.
Also one land two nations - another option discussed, which, if it could work ( considering the levels of hate right now, hard to imagine) would address the need Palestinians have to return. It would be two nations but freedom of movement all over.
Kind of a confederacy - two governments
https://www.alandforall.org/english/?d=ltr
A West Bank Palestinian shared this on another sub. People from both communities have been working on this idea for a long time, I guess, especially in light of the fact that the West Bank us now Swiss cheese- full of holes- but also the fact that it reverses the horrible expulsion of Palestinians from what is now Israel
(I think these people must be pretty special when you read that on Oct 10, of all dates, they managed their first joint board convening
“On October 10th 2023, after a long preparatory process and, in an act that felt like a fragile miracle, ALFA held its first joint Board convening.”)
There's a similar case - Bosnia (with plenty of foreign involvement). They've survived almost 3 decades now. There isn't any open conflict but the root causes of violence have still been left unsolved.
That's basically what it would be if not for terrorism. The checkpoints and walls were all a reaction to suicide bombers. Before the first intifada Palestinians and Israelis moved around each other neighborhoods without worrying.
Israel supporters who say they support a two state solution never actually address the reality of Israel actively destroying that possibility. It's not simply the case that it's difficult and with the right will it can happen but that Israel is demographically moving further to the right and so is its government. When supporters of the two state say a one state is unworkable what they're actually saying is the status quo is fine and eventually the Palestinians will get pushed out of the West Bank into other countries.
As someone who is a supporter of a two state solution, the answer is simple: land swaps for border towns, which has been agreed on before, and kick the settlers out of the West Bank. Terrible people doing terrible things who never should have been there in the first place.
Exactly.
However, I don't see this as a realistic option by now. Even if both parties were to reach an agreement, it appears that neither is willing (or able?) to ensure their own population's compliance with the conditions of a peace deal.
Well, looking back at 2003, I'm sure the settlers didn't enjoy being pulled out of Gaza. But Sharon was, for better or worse, a real hardliner. In this case, he wanted the settlers out of Gaza. So what did he do? He got them the hell out. That's the attitude Israel needs to have about this. While settlers shouldn't be there at all, it's good that the majority of them are near the border. I guess I still believe in the two state solution, or at the very least, I think it's the only way forward.
The number of settlers in the West Bank significantly exceeds those in Gaza
However, even if a new government were to dismantle most of the settlements, that alone wouldn't pave the way for a viable two-state solution. The demands from even the moderate faction of the Palestinian side extend far beyond mere settlement removal, while Israel also holds legitimate concerns.
Of course (many, not all) Palestinians wouldn’t be satisfied completely just by settlers being pulled from the West Bank. Israel has time and time again destroyed any chance of the Palestinians trusting an agreement from them. You can’t beat someone half to death repeatedly for almost 80 years and expect them to trust you when you say you’re done. Especially when the only gesture is stealing a *bit* less land.
Both sides bear responsibility for the failure of the peace process.
Over a span of about 30 years, there existed a window of opportunity where a stable two-state solution seemed achievable, and numerous internationally mediated attempts were made.
The question of which party was more at fault for the failure of these attempts and the subsequent escalation depends on the narrative one follows. However, maintaining that one side is solely responsible for or benefits from the status quo suggests a lopsided perspective of the conflict.
But why wouldn't they? Israeli Arabs couldn't possibly be full citizens with rights and voting privileges because Israel is an ethno-nationalist state and would never allow an Arab to leave peacefully in their country. (/s, obviously).
In all seriousness, I think finding ways to give them minimally-populated land and also offering any people in land-swapped areas the option to stay in Israel and some sort of financial compromise would be the best option. But yes it sucks that people who are happily Israeli Citizens get put up as a bargaining chip because people don't understand the nuanced dynamics of other countries.
A very significant section of Israeli society is vehemently pro settlement. You’re in a fantasy land if you think any Israeli government (left or right wing, assuming the Israeli left even still exists) has the political capital to make that happen.
I mean settlers have been kicked out of Gaza before by the Israeli government following the detachment plan, while it is much harder to do so nowadays it's not impossible
The settlements in the West Bank are a lot bigger than the ones in Gaza, and Gaza has less religious significance too. It will be so much harder, to the point where the settlers might prefer violence against their own government than to move.
It might not be popular, at the same time Israeli Arabs are a thing and represent a significant minority of the population. There's been issues with integration, and I won't say discrimination doesn't exist, but they are a part of Israeli society in as much a way as African Americans are a part of American society. So I don't see why it couldn't necessarily happen in reverse with Jews as a minority in the Palestinian territories. Now, I'm sure there's arguments why, but it's a fair consideration.
This means a quarter of the West Bank's population will be extremist settlers who have deliberately gone to take over Palestinian territory. These aren't moderate or even normal conservative Israelis. They will need to be disarmed and if the PA has proper sovereignty they will probably seek legal action on property seizures of Palestinians by settlers. All in all it's a disaster, it would only be feasible if the IDF forcibly returned them to Israel proper. We know this will never happen though given Israel's politics and voter demographics.
I definitely agree that will be a consideration, particularly for the small ones, however the larger ones aren't necessarily extremist (if you look, much of the population in Ariel, for example, are there due to low housing costs rather than ideology), so there is more a likelihood of integration in practice, so at least there would likely be a India-Pakistan situation. I think it would be messy, sure, but more possible than land swaps only at this point and certainly more feasible than a one state solution.
Don't you run the risk of those settlers getting killed, becoming martyrs and making Israel swing back towards a radical government that would just reoccupy those areas?
Then the West shouldn't financially support a radical government (which includes the current one that's pulling this crap with cabin ministers who assassinated the last moderate Prime Minister). The settlers are breaking international law, why are we worried about the safety of criminals?
Sure, but the government just has to credibly state you have 120 days to leave, we will assist you, but if you don't flee, it's your problem.
Risk of backsliding, but I'm not sure if we want to justify involunary ethnic cleansing under the guise of Israel might get radical if they don't commit ethnic cleansing.
I don't think they will accept that either. They are armed to the teeth and I can not imagine a scenario where settlerers voluntarily submit to an palestinian authority.
That and by (international) law most of them are basically squatters often living on land that was originally taken for military use or just occupied by force. So even if they accept an palestinian authority they very likely would end up landless, homeless.
A highly radicalised armed group without any future perspective ... Well we saw how that turned out in Gaza.
I think the only possible solution is for Israel (or in some cases their original home countries) to the settlers back and reintegrate them carefully like you usually do with militant extremists.
I would expect a bosnia republika srpska situation then. The israeli settlers won't accept becoming part of a arab muslim majority country and will probably start a uprising against palestinian gov maybe even try to create their own small state and try to violently ethnically cleanse palestinians just like how serbs tried in bosnia
That’s under the assumption the current Israeli government wants them to leave, which they don’t because they are intentionally colonizing the land to make a two state solution harder so they can eventually take over the entire West Bank
What are the chances most right wing Israeli Jewish settlers agree to live under Palestinian law with equal rights as opposed to their current set up where they get special rights and privileges over Palestinians and where they get to attack Palestinians and use the IDF as bodyguards to save them from Palestinians fighting back ? If they join a Palestinian state they won’t have those privileges anymore and I think most of them would likely rather leave to Israel proper than give up those privileges to live in a Palestinian state with equal rights. What are the chances Israeli settlers agree to submit to a Palestinian authority and live under equal rights ? As the old saying goes “when you’re privileged equality feels like oppression” that’s likely how most of them would end up feeling if they were relegated to equal rights from special superior rights. I could see some of them staying if they think Israel might re occupy it again or if they’re super attacked to their homes and will give up everything to stay there.
Also if hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlers live in the new Palestinian state and Israel’s government continues to trend right wing what’s stopping Israel and the settlers from claiming Palestinians are oppressing and or killing them and using that to justify them reoccupying the West Bank especially since the new Palestinian state would most likely be demilitarized so Israel could easily invade it and take over. Israel could easily claim that hundreds of thousands of Jews are being oppressed and killed in the new Palestinian state and its Israel’s duty as the only Jewish state in the world to save Jews in need and that Israel can’t just ignore Jews suffering right next door to them as they live good lives right next to them and use that to invade and occupy the West Bank. It’s not like other countries would invade Israel and force them to stop occupying the West Bank.
The people who live in those settlements in the West Bank are motivated by the goal of annexing the West Bank to Israel. That's rather antithetical to the creation of a Palestinian state.
There's also a fair argument to be made that quite a few of those settlements would face sectarian violence, much in the way the settlers are doing to rural palestians today.
This is me not even expanding on the fact that there settlements are illegal under international law in the first place and some of these settlements called “outposts” are illegal even under Israeli law even though most Israeli settlements on Palestinian land are legal under Israeli law that’s how extreme they are.
u/WheatBerryPie
u/ArmoredPudding
u/Katastrophenspecht
If they leave to Israel because they don't like the new situation, that's fine. I'm just saying the Palestinians should not have a right to ethnically cleanse them by denying them equality with Arab Palestinians.
Actually the idea of “2 state solution” is buried now.
Israel made an experiment - a mini model of this, leaving Gaza in 2005. And as we all know - the result isn’t what Israel can admit.
If experiment turned good, and Gaza became new Middle East Singapore or HongKong - even removing Ariel was solvable problem.
Even #1 as a lot of variance, namely how much of the bank Israel should keep/swap and whether Israeli settlers that will be in the Palestinian state will have the right to naturalize as Palestinians.
The 2007 peace deal offering would in fact result in Israel losing control of much settlements; not sure if Palestinians are willing to negotiate on #2 (settlers that stay have right to become Palestinians)
Most of the settlers barely acknowledge the state of Israel exists. With some exceptions, these are fundamentalists who believe there should be no state of Israel until the Messiah returns.
Most Israelis would prefer the settlements didn't exist. They are, for the most part, a quirk of Israel's political system that gives far, far too much power to tiny ultra-rightist religious parties needed to form a coalition in a nation so evenly divided.
You cannot keep saying most Israelis prefer if the settlements didn't exist when they consistently keep electing individuals with a far right pro settlement agenda
It’s not impossible, it would just be unique. You could essentially have two states of peoples overlapping in some parts but not overlapping in others. When the two came into conflict (i.e., a kid from one steals from a store in the other), you’d need a very fair and rigid system for dealing with it. Perhaps via foreign advisors. But this isn’t impossible at all.
The problem is non of these options are wanted by the people on either side. There is no peaceful solution as public opinion currently stands, though everyone will tell you they peace.
Leave the area and let the people staying there form a state... Hmmm, kinda reminds me of something Israel already did in Gaza... You could say that the result great, unless you support a terrorist organization running the state you want too be formed.
I wouldn't worry, I'm sure everyone will try have a rational evidence based discussion, where they obhectively try to understand both perspectives and remove their personal biases 😉
You can see the Ariel settlement from my husbands family’s land. I mean the UN has called settlements illegal under article 49 of the Geneva convention. Israel has its own land but that apparently doesn’t stop them from going to settle on others.
In the map you can clearly see Biddya and a few smaller cities are in the way, unless you draw some wonky borders surrounding Palestinian populations just to keep Ariel.
Bold of you to assume that
A. The settlers would ever accept Palestinian rule and
B. That the Palestinians would ever accept 700,000 jews living in their independent state
I don’t think any population would accept Israel settlers specifically living anywhere near them. There’s a reason those people live far away from all their countrymen.
>That the Palestinians would ever accept 700,000 jews living in their independent state
Honestly even if they would, settlers are generally truly bottom of the barrel racial supremacist people. Like the worst of the worst of Israeli society, the kind that voted in etreme-right parties like "Otzma Yehudit" (Jewish Power, openly advocating Jewish supremacy, no joke), and ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir.
Basically the West Bank is fucked.
The Jewish population of East Jerusalem mostly is concentrated in towns on the outskirts of the city like Maaleh Adumim, not in places like Silwan.
The map shows location of residence, not proportion of total population.
A lot of this is done intentionally. By developing new settlements in the area, it makes any future deal for a two-state solution impossible. That’s why imo the only real solution is one state (with equal rights), but that’s not gonna happen any time soon with the current status quo.
It really doesn't make it impossible, there have been many two-state solution offers. Camp David was an absolutely INCREDIBLE offer where Palestinians were offered over 97% of the entire West Bank. A one state solution is wholly impossible and incomprehensible. Neither Israel nor Palestine want it nor would they accept it.
Lots of misconceptions about Camp David
Did Camp David give up Israeli claims to Ariel (by Nablus)? No.
Israeli claims to East Hebron and Kiryat Arba? No.
Go look it up on the map and tell me how something 22 kilometers (half-way) into the West Bank can somehow stay as part of Israel while promoting a separate "sovereign" state of Palestine.
Well the current status quo is simply unsustainable. Terrorism attacks will continue while Palestinians slowly get choked out of land and self-determination.
It'll be impossible two make two states out of this. What's needed is to create a secular state and give citizenships to the people in the west bank. but I don't think either side wants to do that unfortunately.
The Arab population would be about 7 million between the River and the Sea ( 2 million Arab Israelis and 5 million Palestinians). But this excludes the 6 million Palestinians that reside outside of the Holy Land, many of whom want to return.
That is why negotiations are pernamently sabotaged
Israel has two mostly legal choices:
+ **annex west bank**: all palestinians there are now citizens and they know what they will do with politicians that fucked them over for last decades
+ **abbadon settlements**: palestinians have now own state, but you lost shitton of colonized land
Israeli government doesn't want to do either of those, so they came up with 3rd option:
+ **sabotage negotiations**: blame Palestinians for rejecting your horseshit proposals and use it to claim more land
It works perfectly, allows west to act like nothing is happening and palestinians are still treated like shit! Sound like total victory for Likud
I agree right wing parties like Likud will sabotage negotiations; the PA has sabotaged prior attempts though by more centrist governments - mostly because as the reaction to the Palestinian Papers show, they do not actually have the political capital to surrender the right of return to Israel proper the majority of Palestinians belief they should have.
Israel's more centrist and left-wing governments are willing to abandon a large number of settlements (see peace offerings in 2000, 2001 and 2007). The "problem" is that they aren't willing to unilaterally abandon all of the without a stable Palestinian state on the other side signing a peace deal.
As what's the point? You just end up with a Gaza situation where if the people don't outright vote in a terrorist organization as a government, the terrorist organizations operate with impunity and rather than occupying Palestine you bomb it to smithereens every 20 years or so (the latter which seems worse for both parties).
> in 2000
That one demanded nearky 10% of the west bank and basicaly all of the Jerusalem
> in 2001
Taba summit was not called by Israel, and Israel was the one who ended them by leaving talks.
> in 2007
This one again asked for 10% of the bank.
----
In reality, only fair proposal Israel gave was Olmert's secret offer in 2008.
...btw, do you know why it was "secret"? Because it was absurdly unpopular in Israel
---
> The "problem" is that they aren't willing to unilaterally abandon all of the without a stable Palestinian state on the other side signing a peace deal.
That was not the problem - problem was that Palestinians obviously didn't accepted horseshit proposals.
---
> As what's the point?
I already said - point is to blame Palestinians and use it as justification to take more territory
---
> ? You just end up with a Gaza situation where if the people don't outright vote in a terrorist organization as a government
Palestinians explicitly accepted the idea that future Palestinian state will be demilitarized
Which instantly dismantles this "but terrorists will do shit" complaint.
---
> rather than occupying Palestine you bomb it to smithereens every 20 years or so
"We must treat palestinians as shit, otherwise terrorists will win"
So you agree 10% if the WB is worth continuing the conflict over, instead of Palestinians getting their own state? Do you think they’ll have to compromise nothing?
> So you agree 10% if the WB is worth continuing the conflict over, instead of Palestinians getting their own state?
Preventing transformation of Palestinian state into crippled bantustan is worth it, correct.
(and yes, that is what most of those plans would lead to)
---
> Do you think they’ll have to compromise nothing?
First, **palestinians don't need to compromise on jack shit - all of west bank is their rightfull territory and Israeli settlements are war crime**.
And second - despite the fact they don't need to - **Palestinians are still open to compromise** in negotiations. Land swaps, quesiton of Jerusalem, security and economy - in all of this, Palestinians were open to losing something to achieve deal.
Do you know who is not open to final compromise? **Israel**. Instead of giving normal proposal (expect the secret offer), all of their deals are "you will be disfunctional bantustan under out authority".
Everyone says the road *leads* to a bantustan, like it’s some final destination.
I wish we would all get it through our heads that apartheid is not the final destination, in the case of Israel. It’s not South Africa.
It’s but a short stop on the way to far far worse. Israel has zero *zero* use for Palestinians. They want them driven out oppressed to death, whatever it takes, as long as it takes (but preferably as fast as possible) to get away with it without too much world condemnation.
Of course, but we don't know if south africa wouldn't do the exact same thing.
South Africa never fully realized it's vision of bantustans, while Israel mostly did with West Bank and Gaza. And i am pretty sure that if south africa achived its plans, it wouldn't take long for them to decide that "actually, we want territory of bantustans too"
>First, **palestinians don't need to compromise on jack shit - all of west bank is their rightfull territory and Israeli settlements are war crime**.
Sorry, just because some Security Council resolution says X doesn't mean X happens. I don't see a unified Cyprus either.
>**Palestinians are still open to compromise** in negotiations.
They have never publicly committed to a position where Palestinians have no right to immigrate to Israel. It's an absurd ask to begin with which is why I see them as more intransigent.
Abu Mazen never gave Olmert's government an answer to his 2008 offer. If it was fair, was it not even worth a "not good enough, we would like to see X or Y in addition to the current offer..."?
That is not what happened
According to Palestine paper, what actually happened is that Palestinians asked for actual map (because only thing they had was literall scribble on napkin) and when they were rejected, they asked for some time to think about proposal.
But when another round of talks was scheduled, Olmert was already removed from his office.
Abass never explicitly said no to this offer, which was confiermed by Olmert himself in interview.
>2000
Arafat was never offered a state though. The Camp David and later offers collapsed because the offer the Palestinians were given was most of the West Bank but no control over the borders, airspace, immigration, military, or final independence or sovereignty. They were offered a kind of Indian Reservation not an independent sovereign state
How did they not have border or immigration control?
I agree they were required to not have standing military and had airspace under Israel (or at least they couldn't block Israel from using their airspace).
Either way, still better than what they have today.
I had an Israeli tell me their long plan is to keep putting pressure on the Palestinian population so they would immigrate gradually in larger numbers. They have their settlers there as well going rampant against the Palestinian villiages. In the end the Palestinian population would be lowered to acceptable levels so Israel would be able to annex the land without suffering major setbacks.
Bingo. And it became undeniable thanks to this war
28th of october last year, the document was leaked from Israeli ministry of intelligence. It proposed:
+ expulsing all Palestinians from Gaza - mostly into Egypt
+ use propaganda to make Gazans leave - stuff like "Allah made sure that you lost this land"
+ make USA pressure countries to accept these expulsed people, especialy Egypt
+ claim it is all done in name to prevent "humanitarian catastrophe"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_paper:_Options_for_a_policy_regarding_Gaza%27s_civilian_population
Israeli government denied that this was their policy and claimed it was just "hypothethical concept"
Anyway, do you know what happened following that? **Israel started pushing idea of "humanitarian emigration"**
First it started with obious degenerate part of israeli governemnt
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-uk-slam-inflammatory-call-by-israeli-minister-smotrich-voluntary-emigration-of-gaza/
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-calls-voluntary-emigration-gazans-2023-11-14/
Bibi claimed that degenerate Smotrich doesn't represent gove...wait, they actually do the same thing:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-in-talks-with-congo-and-other-countries-on-gaza-voluntary-migration-plan/
Palestinians agreeing any od these horeshit proposal would be instant victory for Israel.
They will get all of the land and west bank Palestinians will be coffined in their little bantustans.
I mean they could have not gone about building so many settlements then. If you don't want to live in the state with Palestinians then they shouldn't have made the two state solution impossible
>It'll be impossible two make two states out of this
The only chance of it succeeding would be a brutal war crimey mass human displacement (population transfer) like after the Greco-Turkish war, which would be terrible from a human rights perspective and would probably be extremely unpopular for anyone involved.
I disagree. The settlements are indeed an obstacle to peace, but not the only one, nor are they the main one.
A reasonable two state solution would certainly require Israel to evacuate at least some of the settlements, but it can be done when a leadership in Israel will be both responsible enough, reasonable enough and courageous enough - which is not trivial, of course, and also a Palestiniam leadership that will be responsible, reasonable and courageous enough to make the concessions that their side needs to make. But its not like the rules of nature dictate that the sides will never be able to negotiate, nor that they can't negotiate over concrete proposals with maps. As evidence:
* Signing peace with Egypt in 1979, Israel gave the entirety of Sinai, which roughly cut Israel's land area *in half*. Israel evacuated settlers from Yamit.
* The Oslo accords set up concrete maps dividing the areas of the West Bank to C Areas (Israeli control on both security and civil matters), B areas (Israeli control over security matters, Palestinian control over civil matters) and A areas (Palestinian control over both security and civil matters).
* Other negotiation rounds since saw Israeli and Palestinians leaderships negotiate maps which would include Israeli settlement evacuations
* In 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza strip (and some settlements in the North West Bank) and evacuated settlers. It should also be noted rgaf most Israeli settlers in the Gaza strip lived not close to the border of the Gaza strip but on the south coast of the Gaza strip.
A two state solution won't be easy, but to me, it's the only one that makes sense. The geography of the settlements make it a problem, yes (I mean, the whole point of the settlements was to make it less practical for Israel to give up areas won in war, back when it seemed like if those areas would be given back, it would be to Jordan and Egypt, and not to a prospective Palestinian state), but they're not an obstacle impossible to overcome, nor are they the primary obstacle.
I think the two main obstacles are the right of return. And, the fact that even if Israel pulls out of the west bank and gaza many Palestinians will want to keep fighting. Perhaps an out right majority. So you have to figure out how to stop a hezbollah type group from forming.
Your own bigotry is showing here: there are 2 million Arabs living in Israel, why can't the future Palestinian state include Jews? Some of these settlements predate the Israeli state by centuries and always had Jews living in them.
you really think the palestinians wouldnt slaughter them? as someone who lives right at the edge of the green line but still inside of it, i wouldnt want to stay to find out
As seen previously in the Arab world, the Jews would likely be slaughtered or expelled - which is precisely why the main barrier to a solution to the conflict has been the Arab/Palestinian side refusing to accept that Jews have a right to exist as their equals.
This is exactly what many on the pro-Palestinian side of the conflict are advocating for. A lot of people on this sub do not realize that this argument is inherently anti-Zionist.
Would one state lead to the dissolution of Islamist groups like Hamas and PIJ? Seems like they’re exactly the kinds of groups that actively oppose secularism. If not, then how do you get Israelis to believe they’d be safe in such a state?
Pushing for this solution without acknowledging the elements actively opposing the very ideals of such a state seems to be putting the car before the horse.
Turning Israel into Lebanon where a militia actually runs half the country isn’t a solution.
>Turning Israel into Lebanon where a militia actually runs half the country isn’t a solution.
THANK YOU. it was tried before and what happened? The *Palestinian liberation organization* started a 40 year long Civil War with the Christians and destroyed the most beautiful place in the middle east
No matter how much you may want to dissolve those groups, it’s simply impossible at this point without wiping out every last Palestinian. These groups would be heavily restricted and banned from the political sphere in this state, as would Likud and all the other far-right groups in the current Israeli government. It wouldn’t be turned into Lebanon in the sense that a Islamist or Zionist militia would have influence there, but UN peacekeepers would definitely need to be deployed throughout the region to prevent this. It would take a long time, possibly even decades to phase out the ideas pushed into the minds of Israelis by their governments, and it would be just as difficult to get Palestinians to forgive Israelis for what they have done to them for the past 76 years. This is why the state of Israel should never have been created in the first place. It would have been much easier to do this in 1948, and even then it would require a lot of work for it to be successful. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. We’re a mile away from even a two-state solution, so advocating for a one-state solution can only set a higher goal to strive for, which creates a far more positive effect than a negative one.
There’s plenty of reasons why those groups are incompatible with the new, one-state, but I’m just focusing specifically on the secular aspect. These groups, even if they had nothing against Jews and Israelis (they do), would actively oppose a secular democracy. They do not believe in secularism, and there are no real examples of secular, liberal democracy being practiced in the Muslim nations of the Middle East.
If we can’t commit to secularism, then there is no way to protect Jewish people in that state. I just think it’s a pipe dream to think it would work there when it hasn’t worked anywhere else.
In 1948 the Arabs tried to eliminate Israel for having the audacity to try and exist next to them. You think one state would have protected those Jews?
You are completely misunderstanding my comment. I was arguing that these groups should be prevented from having any influence or government control in this supposed state. Secular groups like the PFLP, Hadash, and the Israeli Labor Party should be promoted.
>If we can’t commit to secularism, then there is no way to protect Jewish people in that state.
Which is why I am saying there should be a secular state. Israel is not a secular state, so by your logic Jews can not be safe living under it, so we can’t have a two-state solution.
>In 1948 the Arabs tried to eliminate Israel for having the audacity to try and exist next to them.
Which wouldn’t have happened if one secular state was established. But I’m not trying to justify the Arab invasion. Egypt, Lebanon and Syria are all secular, so they would likely support a secular state being established, especially since it would remove the threat of Israel and liberate the Palestinians living there.
The one state solution simply would never work - you have a wealthy first world country with one language and primary religion and you’re going to try and marry it with a very poor 3rd world country with a poor economy and different language and religion. There is no shared identity that would allow it exist as a cohesive unit.
Do you think if we combined the Dominican Republic and Haiti together it would go well? What about India and Pakistan? See the issues?
Israel would end up with even more welfare queens than it has today (looking at the Orthodox Jews which are a growing problem). The point of Israel is a state for Jews to be safe in. It’s the only Jewish state in the world. They worked hard to build a beautiful country - it would be ruined economically and destabilized if it had to absorb the Palestinian political groups - who also have no interest in running a functioning state btw. Do you think Hamas and Fatah would just suddenly play nice as political parties? They can’t even stand each other let alone Likud.
just want to point out that there are palestinian villages in israel and they generally live in peace with the jews, so idealy there will be the same situation there
That would be good, until the first Suicide bomber/shooter or Goldstein does something horrific. Then the borders will be shut down and it'll all go to shit again.
Strangely enough, until the first intifada there were pretty much open borders from Gaza and the West Bank.
There's a reason there's a wall - before the 2nd intifada there was suicids bombers coming from west bank to israel proper on the daily... Seperation wall dropped the suicide terrorist attacks by 95%
The worst thing to ever happen to the West Bank was the intafada. Once the terrorist attacks ramped up movement restrictions began. The West Bank economically relies on Israel for jobs and commerce. It would provide such a boost to the Palestinians to access the Israeli labor markets
People are saying that Palestine can’t be recognized as nation cause it doesn’t have borders… well, West Bank de jure area should be so this map literally… also that’s a lot of full Israeli control of area
Sorry if i sound ignorant but when a palestinian state is created in the west bank, just let the settlers stay and we will call them palestinian jews, just like how palestinians in israel call themselves israeli arabs. What am i missing in the equation?
The people who live in those settlements are motivated by the goal of annexing the West Bank to Israel. That's rather antithetical to the creation of a Palestinian state.
There's also a fair argument to be made that quite a few of those settlements would face sectarian violence, much in the way the settlers are doing to rural palestians today.
True, but psst - here’s the thing: they’re not supposed to be there in the first place
You don’t have to ask their opinions, as they have a state to fall back on
They live in apartheid. These settlers don't come and consider themselves equal to the Muslims, they say they are better. Maybe Muslims say the same but Israel has all the power economically, politically and militarily.
This is a great map. Thank you. Sadly, Israel moves so quickly, it’s already out of date. Several Palestinian villages have been emptied, more land seized, more building planned, etc
In theory it could be united like South Africa was in the nineties. But that relied on the whites (or Israel?) voting for it to happen, and a personality like Nelson Mandela to get people talking and put their weapons down. Right now there is none of this in the making.
Also, post-apartheid South Africa hasn’t exactly been an easy or peaceful transition in the long run. There is also very little desire on either side to share anything. So war it is.
The issue is the whole point of Israel is to be a jewish nation. The only one in the world. a vote to allow the population fo the occupied territories become citizens would effectively end israel.
This is the best maps i’ve seen on this sub in a while. It’s sad that it isn’t going to get as much attention as it deserves because of how people react to its content
Basically what the Israelis want is there to be no Palestinian statehood as that is a danger to their security. So my question is what is the long term goal of Israel? because from an outside you are insuring a one state solution. You cannot not give Palestinians citizenship when you eventually encircle them and have them exist in islands surrounded by Israeli territory. Hence the word apartheid that is gonna increasingly going to be thrown around.
Exactly. Their plan is to steal, kill, and lie in front of the world with their army of lobbied politicians and bribed news outlets
Problem is, the internet and cameras put dents in this, allowing people to see what's really happening
That's where the astroturfing bots come in
As an Israeli, what a fucking mess, what went through the minds of both sides when agreeing to this crap is beyond me, literally don’t see any benefit to absolutely anyone
This wasn't made by an Israeli agency, it's an Israeli peace advocacy group that does boots on the ground solidarity and protection work with communities in the west bank.
Thank you for posting the resolution. That high res is so good it almost have my phone a stroke lol. At least someone here still respects this subreddit's original format. :)
This map actually shows something that I literally never see in maps of settlements in the west bank, that being the actual concentration of population and settlement in settlement blocs
This is actual map porn, all politics aside.
pdf was so many clicks away: [https://peacenow.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/settlements\_map\_En\_2023\_.pdf](https://peacenow.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/settlements_map_En_2023_.pdf)
From a purely map porn perspective, this is an excellent map
Couldn't agree more. This is the kind of content that should be the forefront of this sub. Not political posturing masquerading as jpegs of scribbly overlays.
I know this is a highly sensitive and controversial topic here, but this is the best map I have seen of the West Bank so far, and it'd be a shame if I don't share it. It clearly shows population size of each Israeli settlement and Palestinian population centre. Ariel in particular is going to be a pain in the ass for any peace deal. It has 20,000 settlers and deep inside the West Bank. You can also see the outposts littered across the West Bank. Really hope this doesn't get downvoted to oblivion. Source: https://peacenow.org.il/en/%D9%8Dsettlements-map-2023
Literally creating two states out of that mess is impossible. Presumably this is intentional because of how incredibly obvious it is. What, all those little enclaves are all somehow going to be part of the state of Palestine? Broken up by walled roads and Israeli settlements? Obviously that's not gonna happen. Look at that fucking map. Even if government in all of the little Palestinian areas were devolved to them, this'd never be a state, it'd be de facto part of Israel. There are only a handful of options: leave the Bank and ensure there's territorial connections bw the palestinian enclaves so as to create a separate state; keep the Bank and bring everyone inside Israel as citizens; or keep the Bank and leave everyone inside who isn't Israeli without meaningful representation (status quo). I shall not mention the fourth option but of course that's there too; the one we're all hopefully trying to ensure never happens again. Israel often gets big mad about it being put like this but I don't know what to say--those really seem like the only options. These were choices many people alive today didn't make, but shit man, again, look at that map. That's the reality, no option will please everyone, but there has to be some kind of choice.
Many of these settlements are active eviction and demolition. It's not like they just appeared out of nowhere. The US maintains its decades-long position that a two state solution be respected, because we know exactly what the state of Israel is doing every time they advance a new settlement. Israel is accelerating the pace of development in the West Bank to actively create the very situation that prevents a two state solution. The US denounces new settlements for this very reason.
Denounces new settlements but keeps giving them money so no consequences whatsoever
Also one land two nations - another option discussed, which, if it could work ( considering the levels of hate right now, hard to imagine) would address the need Palestinians have to return. It would be two nations but freedom of movement all over. Kind of a confederacy - two governments https://www.alandforall.org/english/?d=ltr A West Bank Palestinian shared this on another sub. People from both communities have been working on this idea for a long time, I guess, especially in light of the fact that the West Bank us now Swiss cheese- full of holes- but also the fact that it reverses the horrible expulsion of Palestinians from what is now Israel (I think these people must be pretty special when you read that on Oct 10, of all dates, they managed their first joint board convening “On October 10th 2023, after a long preparatory process and, in an act that felt like a fragile miracle, ALFA held its first joint Board convening.”)
IMO this makes the most sense to me. But I think there’d need to be substantial foreign involvement to make it work.
There's a similar case - Bosnia (with plenty of foreign involvement). They've survived almost 3 decades now. There isn't any open conflict but the root causes of violence have still been left unsolved.
That's basically what it would be if not for terrorism. The checkpoints and walls were all a reaction to suicide bombers. Before the first intifada Palestinians and Israelis moved around each other neighborhoods without worrying.
Israel supporters who say they support a two state solution never actually address the reality of Israel actively destroying that possibility. It's not simply the case that it's difficult and with the right will it can happen but that Israel is demographically moving further to the right and so is its government. When supporters of the two state say a one state is unworkable what they're actually saying is the status quo is fine and eventually the Palestinians will get pushed out of the West Bank into other countries.
As someone who is a supporter of a two state solution, the answer is simple: land swaps for border towns, which has been agreed on before, and kick the settlers out of the West Bank. Terrible people doing terrible things who never should have been there in the first place.
Exactly. However, I don't see this as a realistic option by now. Even if both parties were to reach an agreement, it appears that neither is willing (or able?) to ensure their own population's compliance with the conditions of a peace deal.
Well, looking back at 2003, I'm sure the settlers didn't enjoy being pulled out of Gaza. But Sharon was, for better or worse, a real hardliner. In this case, he wanted the settlers out of Gaza. So what did he do? He got them the hell out. That's the attitude Israel needs to have about this. While settlers shouldn't be there at all, it's good that the majority of them are near the border. I guess I still believe in the two state solution, or at the very least, I think it's the only way forward.
The number of settlers in the West Bank significantly exceeds those in Gaza However, even if a new government were to dismantle most of the settlements, that alone wouldn't pave the way for a viable two-state solution. The demands from even the moderate faction of the Palestinian side extend far beyond mere settlement removal, while Israel also holds legitimate concerns.
Of course (many, not all) Palestinians wouldn’t be satisfied completely just by settlers being pulled from the West Bank. Israel has time and time again destroyed any chance of the Palestinians trusting an agreement from them. You can’t beat someone half to death repeatedly for almost 80 years and expect them to trust you when you say you’re done. Especially when the only gesture is stealing a *bit* less land.
Both sides bear responsibility for the failure of the peace process. Over a span of about 30 years, there existed a window of opportunity where a stable two-state solution seemed achievable, and numerous internationally mediated attempts were made. The question of which party was more at fault for the failure of these attempts and the subsequent escalation depends on the narrative one follows. However, maintaining that one side is solely responsible for or benefits from the status quo suggests a lopsided perspective of the conflict.
8000 settlers were in Gaza \~500,000+ settlers are in the West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem
Land swaps? I doubt that many Israeli Arabs want to be part of Palestine.
But why wouldn't they? Israeli Arabs couldn't possibly be full citizens with rights and voting privileges because Israel is an ethno-nationalist state and would never allow an Arab to leave peacefully in their country. (/s, obviously). In all seriousness, I think finding ways to give them minimally-populated land and also offering any people in land-swapped areas the option to stay in Israel and some sort of financial compromise would be the best option. But yes it sucks that people who are happily Israeli Citizens get put up as a bargaining chip because people don't understand the nuanced dynamics of other countries.
A very significant section of Israeli society is vehemently pro settlement. You’re in a fantasy land if you think any Israeli government (left or right wing, assuming the Israeli left even still exists) has the political capital to make that happen.
A lot of Israel supporters who support a two state solution also despise the settlers and settlements
How they feel doesn't matter, what matters is the reality on the ground and the inevitable direction things are going in.
I mean settlers have been kicked out of Gaza before by the Israeli government following the detachment plan, while it is much harder to do so nowadays it's not impossible
The settlements in the West Bank are a lot bigger than the ones in Gaza, and Gaza has less religious significance too. It will be so much harder, to the point where the settlers might prefer violence against their own government than to move.
Why does Israel have to kick them out? I say they stay and be subject to Palestinian law and offered rights to naturalize as Palestinians. done.
There's that solution too, though I don't imagine it'll be popular in either communities.
It might not be popular, at the same time Israeli Arabs are a thing and represent a significant minority of the population. There's been issues with integration, and I won't say discrimination doesn't exist, but they are a part of Israeli society in as much a way as African Americans are a part of American society. So I don't see why it couldn't necessarily happen in reverse with Jews as a minority in the Palestinian territories. Now, I'm sure there's arguments why, but it's a fair consideration.
This means a quarter of the West Bank's population will be extremist settlers who have deliberately gone to take over Palestinian territory. These aren't moderate or even normal conservative Israelis. They will need to be disarmed and if the PA has proper sovereignty they will probably seek legal action on property seizures of Palestinians by settlers. All in all it's a disaster, it would only be feasible if the IDF forcibly returned them to Israel proper. We know this will never happen though given Israel's politics and voter demographics.
I definitely agree that will be a consideration, particularly for the small ones, however the larger ones aren't necessarily extremist (if you look, much of the population in Ariel, for example, are there due to low housing costs rather than ideology), so there is more a likelihood of integration in practice, so at least there would likely be a India-Pakistan situation. I think it would be messy, sure, but more possible than land swaps only at this point and certainly more feasible than a one state solution.
Don't you run the risk of those settlers getting killed, becoming martyrs and making Israel swing back towards a radical government that would just reoccupy those areas?
Then the West shouldn't financially support a radical government (which includes the current one that's pulling this crap with cabin ministers who assassinated the last moderate Prime Minister). The settlers are breaking international law, why are we worried about the safety of criminals?
The voice of reason. I couldn’t agree with you more! It’s ridiculous!
Sure, but the government just has to credibly state you have 120 days to leave, we will assist you, but if you don't flee, it's your problem. Risk of backsliding, but I'm not sure if we want to justify involunary ethnic cleansing under the guise of Israel might get radical if they don't commit ethnic cleansing.
I don't think they will accept that either. They are armed to the teeth and I can not imagine a scenario where settlerers voluntarily submit to an palestinian authority. That and by (international) law most of them are basically squatters often living on land that was originally taken for military use or just occupied by force. So even if they accept an palestinian authority they very likely would end up landless, homeless. A highly radicalised armed group without any future perspective ... Well we saw how that turned out in Gaza. I think the only possible solution is for Israel (or in some cases their original home countries) to the settlers back and reintegrate them carefully like you usually do with militant extremists.
I would expect a bosnia republika srpska situation then. The israeli settlers won't accept becoming part of a arab muslim majority country and will probably start a uprising against palestinian gov maybe even try to create their own small state and try to violently ethnically cleanse palestinians just like how serbs tried in bosnia
That’s under the assumption the current Israeli government wants them to leave, which they don’t because they are intentionally colonizing the land to make a two state solution harder so they can eventually take over the entire West Bank
What are the chances most right wing Israeli Jewish settlers agree to live under Palestinian law with equal rights as opposed to their current set up where they get special rights and privileges over Palestinians and where they get to attack Palestinians and use the IDF as bodyguards to save them from Palestinians fighting back ? If they join a Palestinian state they won’t have those privileges anymore and I think most of them would likely rather leave to Israel proper than give up those privileges to live in a Palestinian state with equal rights. What are the chances Israeli settlers agree to submit to a Palestinian authority and live under equal rights ? As the old saying goes “when you’re privileged equality feels like oppression” that’s likely how most of them would end up feeling if they were relegated to equal rights from special superior rights. I could see some of them staying if they think Israel might re occupy it again or if they’re super attacked to their homes and will give up everything to stay there. Also if hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlers live in the new Palestinian state and Israel’s government continues to trend right wing what’s stopping Israel and the settlers from claiming Palestinians are oppressing and or killing them and using that to justify them reoccupying the West Bank especially since the new Palestinian state would most likely be demilitarized so Israel could easily invade it and take over. Israel could easily claim that hundreds of thousands of Jews are being oppressed and killed in the new Palestinian state and its Israel’s duty as the only Jewish state in the world to save Jews in need and that Israel can’t just ignore Jews suffering right next door to them as they live good lives right next to them and use that to invade and occupy the West Bank. It’s not like other countries would invade Israel and force them to stop occupying the West Bank. The people who live in those settlements in the West Bank are motivated by the goal of annexing the West Bank to Israel. That's rather antithetical to the creation of a Palestinian state. There's also a fair argument to be made that quite a few of those settlements would face sectarian violence, much in the way the settlers are doing to rural palestians today. This is me not even expanding on the fact that there settlements are illegal under international law in the first place and some of these settlements called “outposts” are illegal even under Israeli law even though most Israeli settlements on Palestinian land are legal under Israeli law that’s how extreme they are. u/WheatBerryPie u/ArmoredPudding u/Katastrophenspecht
If they leave to Israel because they don't like the new situation, that's fine. I'm just saying the Palestinians should not have a right to ethnically cleanse them by denying them equality with Arab Palestinians.
Yeah I agree. Just saying that it's not impossible, obviously way more challenging
You’ve made more sense than anyone I’ve heard so far from this conflict. Thanks
Actually the idea of “2 state solution” is buried now. Israel made an experiment - a mini model of this, leaving Gaza in 2005. And as we all know - the result isn’t what Israel can admit. If experiment turned good, and Gaza became new Middle East Singapore or HongKong - even removing Ariel was solvable problem.
Correct, that was exactly the plan with Gaza and it was just accelerated with the war. They will eventually try to do the same to the West Bank
Even #1 as a lot of variance, namely how much of the bank Israel should keep/swap and whether Israeli settlers that will be in the Palestinian state will have the right to naturalize as Palestinians. The 2007 peace deal offering would in fact result in Israel losing control of much settlements; not sure if Palestinians are willing to negotiate on #2 (settlers that stay have right to become Palestinians)
The settlers would never agree to become Palestinians, hell most of them don't even recognise that Palestinians EXIST!
Most of the settlers barely acknowledge the state of Israel exists. With some exceptions, these are fundamentalists who believe there should be no state of Israel until the Messiah returns. Most Israelis would prefer the settlements didn't exist. They are, for the most part, a quirk of Israel's political system that gives far, far too much power to tiny ultra-rightist religious parties needed to form a coalition in a nation so evenly divided.
You cannot keep saying most Israelis prefer if the settlements didn't exist when they consistently keep electing individuals with a far right pro settlement agenda
It’s not impossible, it would just be unique. You could essentially have two states of peoples overlapping in some parts but not overlapping in others. When the two came into conflict (i.e., a kid from one steals from a store in the other), you’d need a very fair and rigid system for dealing with it. Perhaps via foreign advisors. But this isn’t impossible at all.
The problem is non of these options are wanted by the people on either side. There is no peaceful solution as public opinion currently stands, though everyone will tell you they peace.
Leave the area and let the people staying there form a state... Hmmm, kinda reminds me of something Israel already did in Gaza... You could say that the result great, unless you support a terrorist organization running the state you want too be formed.
There are only two solutions - a free Palestine, or genocide.
Israeli settlements were designed this way to break up Palestinian communities and restrict their movements.
Best map I’ve seen too and I look for them
Amazing map, I'm Israeli and it's the best I've seen I really enjoyed looking at it and learning
I wouldn't worry, I'm sure everyone will try have a rational evidence based discussion, where they obhectively try to understand both perspectives and remove their personal biases 😉
You can see the Ariel settlement from my husbands family’s land. I mean the UN has called settlements illegal under article 49 of the Geneva convention. Israel has its own land but that apparently doesn’t stop them from going to settle on others.
you can actually see Israeli plans unfold on this map. they build those very strategically.
It also has one of Israel's public universities
Ariel is literally least problematic place. It is connected to “green line” Israel without any Arabs on the middle. So it stays Israeli
In the map you can clearly see Biddya and a few smaller cities are in the way, unless you draw some wonky borders surrounding Palestinian populations just to keep Ariel.
[удалено]
That's how every checkpoint works. You can always drive into the west bank freely, and the checkpoint is on the way out.
birds rain cough tart long scary full command subsequent workable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This really puts into perspective how screwed the situation now is…
Screwed only for one side. The other side gets cheap land and more soldiers protecting them than Israel's actual borders
Bold of you to assume that A. The settlers would ever accept Palestinian rule and B. That the Palestinians would ever accept 700,000 jews living in their independent state
I don’t think any population would accept Israel settlers specifically living anywhere near them. There’s a reason those people live far away from all their countrymen.
Meh. Many settlers are extremists, but many are just people who found cheaper housing in the settlements due to govt incentives.
>That the Palestinians would ever accept 700,000 jews living in their independent state Honestly even if they would, settlers are generally truly bottom of the barrel racial supremacist people. Like the worst of the worst of Israeli society, the kind that voted in etreme-right parties like "Otzma Yehudit" (Jewish Power, openly advocating Jewish supremacy, no joke), and ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir. Basically the West Bank is fucked.
Most settler just live in the suburbs of one of a few cities while those deeper into the West Bank are gradually more Radical
Yeah. Like. The settlement in Hebron. It’s not big but. That’s gonna be an issue if there’s ever a deal.
Israel literally pays them as well.
this underestimates the jewish population of east jerusalem, which is over 40% now.
Afaik don't they typically live in denser enviroments?
yes, half of the brown dots there should be pink.
that’s not how population density works
The Jewish population of East Jerusalem mostly is concentrated in towns on the outskirts of the city like Maaleh Adumim, not in places like Silwan. The map shows location of residence, not proportion of total population.
[удалено]
[удалено]
exactly, jews live in significantly denser districts.
I didn't realize how tangled up the whole region was. How do you even sort out that shit?
A lot of this is done intentionally. By developing new settlements in the area, it makes any future deal for a two-state solution impossible. That’s why imo the only real solution is one state (with equal rights), but that’s not gonna happen any time soon with the current status quo.
It really doesn't make it impossible, there have been many two-state solution offers. Camp David was an absolutely INCREDIBLE offer where Palestinians were offered over 97% of the entire West Bank. A one state solution is wholly impossible and incomprehensible. Neither Israel nor Palestine want it nor would they accept it.
[удалено]
Lots of misconceptions about Camp David Did Camp David give up Israeli claims to Ariel (by Nablus)? No. Israeli claims to East Hebron and Kiryat Arba? No. Go look it up on the map and tell me how something 22 kilometers (half-way) into the West Bank can somehow stay as part of Israel while promoting a separate "sovereign" state of Palestine.
Well the current status quo is simply unsustainable. Terrorism attacks will continue while Palestinians slowly get choked out of land and self-determination.
That is the point - you don't. Israel is doing this intentionaly
Now THIS is map porn, fellas
What about crab 🦀 people populations?
They live underground 
People on one side of that fence 🤝 people on the other side of that fence Religiously not allowed to eat crab 🦀 people
This is why the Crab 🦀 people will finally reign supreme in the holy land!
Maybe im the weird one, do you also see a head of a man?
I came to comment this, I see a man with long hair, an earring and a tied goatee
What areas of the map make up what areas of the face
It'll be impossible two make two states out of this. What's needed is to create a secular state and give citizenships to the people in the west bank. but I don't think either side wants to do that unfortunately.
IMO this whole Palestine situation can be solved with a party and a bunch of cake.
That would put the Arab population to 5 million and Jewish population to 7. The Israelis would never accept this.
The Arab population would be about 7 million between the River and the Sea ( 2 million Arab Israelis and 5 million Palestinians). But this excludes the 6 million Palestinians that reside outside of the Holy Land, many of whom want to return.
I just excluded Gaza. Thats why its 5, 2 million in Israel + 3 in the West Bank.
That is why negotiations are pernamently sabotaged Israel has two mostly legal choices: + **annex west bank**: all palestinians there are now citizens and they know what they will do with politicians that fucked them over for last decades + **abbadon settlements**: palestinians have now own state, but you lost shitton of colonized land Israeli government doesn't want to do either of those, so they came up with 3rd option: + **sabotage negotiations**: blame Palestinians for rejecting your horseshit proposals and use it to claim more land It works perfectly, allows west to act like nothing is happening and palestinians are still treated like shit! Sound like total victory for Likud
I agree right wing parties like Likud will sabotage negotiations; the PA has sabotaged prior attempts though by more centrist governments - mostly because as the reaction to the Palestinian Papers show, they do not actually have the political capital to surrender the right of return to Israel proper the majority of Palestinians belief they should have. Israel's more centrist and left-wing governments are willing to abandon a large number of settlements (see peace offerings in 2000, 2001 and 2007). The "problem" is that they aren't willing to unilaterally abandon all of the without a stable Palestinian state on the other side signing a peace deal. As what's the point? You just end up with a Gaza situation where if the people don't outright vote in a terrorist organization as a government, the terrorist organizations operate with impunity and rather than occupying Palestine you bomb it to smithereens every 20 years or so (the latter which seems worse for both parties).
> in 2000 That one demanded nearky 10% of the west bank and basicaly all of the Jerusalem > in 2001 Taba summit was not called by Israel, and Israel was the one who ended them by leaving talks. > in 2007 This one again asked for 10% of the bank. ---- In reality, only fair proposal Israel gave was Olmert's secret offer in 2008. ...btw, do you know why it was "secret"? Because it was absurdly unpopular in Israel --- > The "problem" is that they aren't willing to unilaterally abandon all of the without a stable Palestinian state on the other side signing a peace deal. That was not the problem - problem was that Palestinians obviously didn't accepted horseshit proposals. --- > As what's the point? I already said - point is to blame Palestinians and use it as justification to take more territory --- > ? You just end up with a Gaza situation where if the people don't outright vote in a terrorist organization as a government Palestinians explicitly accepted the idea that future Palestinian state will be demilitarized Which instantly dismantles this "but terrorists will do shit" complaint. --- > rather than occupying Palestine you bomb it to smithereens every 20 years or so "We must treat palestinians as shit, otherwise terrorists will win"
So you agree 10% if the WB is worth continuing the conflict over, instead of Palestinians getting their own state? Do you think they’ll have to compromise nothing?
> So you agree 10% if the WB is worth continuing the conflict over, instead of Palestinians getting their own state? Preventing transformation of Palestinian state into crippled bantustan is worth it, correct. (and yes, that is what most of those plans would lead to) --- > Do you think they’ll have to compromise nothing? First, **palestinians don't need to compromise on jack shit - all of west bank is their rightfull territory and Israeli settlements are war crime**. And second - despite the fact they don't need to - **Palestinians are still open to compromise** in negotiations. Land swaps, quesiton of Jerusalem, security and economy - in all of this, Palestinians were open to losing something to achieve deal. Do you know who is not open to final compromise? **Israel**. Instead of giving normal proposal (expect the secret offer), all of their deals are "you will be disfunctional bantustan under out authority".
Everyone says the road *leads* to a bantustan, like it’s some final destination. I wish we would all get it through our heads that apartheid is not the final destination, in the case of Israel. It’s not South Africa. It’s but a short stop on the way to far far worse. Israel has zero *zero* use for Palestinians. They want them driven out oppressed to death, whatever it takes, as long as it takes (but preferably as fast as possible) to get away with it without too much world condemnation.
Of course, but we don't know if south africa wouldn't do the exact same thing. South Africa never fully realized it's vision of bantustans, while Israel mostly did with West Bank and Gaza. And i am pretty sure that if south africa achived its plans, it wouldn't take long for them to decide that "actually, we want territory of bantustans too"
>First, **palestinians don't need to compromise on jack shit - all of west bank is their rightfull territory and Israeli settlements are war crime**. Sorry, just because some Security Council resolution says X doesn't mean X happens. I don't see a unified Cyprus either. >**Palestinians are still open to compromise** in negotiations. They have never publicly committed to a position where Palestinians have no right to immigrate to Israel. It's an absurd ask to begin with which is why I see them as more intransigent.
Abu Mazen never gave Olmert's government an answer to his 2008 offer. If it was fair, was it not even worth a "not good enough, we would like to see X or Y in addition to the current offer..."?
That is not what happened According to Palestine paper, what actually happened is that Palestinians asked for actual map (because only thing they had was literall scribble on napkin) and when they were rejected, they asked for some time to think about proposal. But when another round of talks was scheduled, Olmert was already removed from his office. Abass never explicitly said no to this offer, which was confiermed by Olmert himself in interview.
>2000 Arafat was never offered a state though. The Camp David and later offers collapsed because the offer the Palestinians were given was most of the West Bank but no control over the borders, airspace, immigration, military, or final independence or sovereignty. They were offered a kind of Indian Reservation not an independent sovereign state
How did they not have border or immigration control? I agree they were required to not have standing military and had airspace under Israel (or at least they couldn't block Israel from using their airspace). Either way, still better than what they have today.
I had an Israeli tell me their long plan is to keep putting pressure on the Palestinian population so they would immigrate gradually in larger numbers. They have their settlers there as well going rampant against the Palestinian villiages. In the end the Palestinian population would be lowered to acceptable levels so Israel would be able to annex the land without suffering major setbacks.
Seems like a high bar. Gaza has been worse than the west bank for a long time and even that didn't result in substantial emigration.
They are hoping in the long run their population will dwarf that of the arabs so keeping the pressure is a better bet for the future.
Settler communities have the highest birth rates in Israel
Exactly
Bingo. And it became undeniable thanks to this war 28th of october last year, the document was leaked from Israeli ministry of intelligence. It proposed: + expulsing all Palestinians from Gaza - mostly into Egypt + use propaganda to make Gazans leave - stuff like "Allah made sure that you lost this land" + make USA pressure countries to accept these expulsed people, especialy Egypt + claim it is all done in name to prevent "humanitarian catastrophe" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_paper:_Options_for_a_policy_regarding_Gaza%27s_civilian_population Israeli government denied that this was their policy and claimed it was just "hypothethical concept" Anyway, do you know what happened following that? **Israel started pushing idea of "humanitarian emigration"** First it started with obious degenerate part of israeli governemnt https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-uk-slam-inflammatory-call-by-israeli-minister-smotrich-voluntary-emigration-of-gaza/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-calls-voluntary-emigration-gazans-2023-11-14/ Bibi claimed that degenerate Smotrich doesn't represent gove...wait, they actually do the same thing: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-in-talks-with-congo-and-other-countries-on-gaza-voluntary-migration-plan/
Then Palestine plays right into it every time and does the worst thing possible.
Palestinians agreeing any od these horeshit proposal would be instant victory for Israel. They will get all of the land and west bank Palestinians will be coffined in their little bantustans.
I mean they could have not gone about building so many settlements then. If you don't want to live in the state with Palestinians then they shouldn't have made the two state solution impossible
>It'll be impossible two make two states out of this The only chance of it succeeding would be a brutal war crimey mass human displacement (population transfer) like after the Greco-Turkish war, which would be terrible from a human rights perspective and would probably be extremely unpopular for anyone involved.
I disagree. The settlements are indeed an obstacle to peace, but not the only one, nor are they the main one. A reasonable two state solution would certainly require Israel to evacuate at least some of the settlements, but it can be done when a leadership in Israel will be both responsible enough, reasonable enough and courageous enough - which is not trivial, of course, and also a Palestiniam leadership that will be responsible, reasonable and courageous enough to make the concessions that their side needs to make. But its not like the rules of nature dictate that the sides will never be able to negotiate, nor that they can't negotiate over concrete proposals with maps. As evidence: * Signing peace with Egypt in 1979, Israel gave the entirety of Sinai, which roughly cut Israel's land area *in half*. Israel evacuated settlers from Yamit. * The Oslo accords set up concrete maps dividing the areas of the West Bank to C Areas (Israeli control on both security and civil matters), B areas (Israeli control over security matters, Palestinian control over civil matters) and A areas (Palestinian control over both security and civil matters). * Other negotiation rounds since saw Israeli and Palestinians leaderships negotiate maps which would include Israeli settlement evacuations * In 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza strip (and some settlements in the North West Bank) and evacuated settlers. It should also be noted rgaf most Israeli settlers in the Gaza strip lived not close to the border of the Gaza strip but on the south coast of the Gaza strip. A two state solution won't be easy, but to me, it's the only one that makes sense. The geography of the settlements make it a problem, yes (I mean, the whole point of the settlements was to make it less practical for Israel to give up areas won in war, back when it seemed like if those areas would be given back, it would be to Jordan and Egypt, and not to a prospective Palestinian state), but they're not an obstacle impossible to overcome, nor are they the primary obstacle.
Your exceedingly well reasoned analysis is sitting at 0 upvotes after I gave you one lol
I think the two main obstacles are the right of return. And, the fact that even if Israel pulls out of the west bank and gaza many Palestinians will want to keep fighting. Perhaps an out right majority. So you have to figure out how to stop a hezbollah type group from forming.
One state Is the worst thing for both sides.
Your own bigotry is showing here: there are 2 million Arabs living in Israel, why can't the future Palestinian state include Jews? Some of these settlements predate the Israeli state by centuries and always had Jews living in them.
you really think the palestinians wouldnt slaughter them? as someone who lives right at the edge of the green line but still inside of it, i wouldnt want to stay to find out
As seen previously in the Arab world, the Jews would likely be slaughtered or expelled - which is precisely why the main barrier to a solution to the conflict has been the Arab/Palestinian side refusing to accept that Jews have a right to exist as their equals.
This is exactly what many on the pro-Palestinian side of the conflict are advocating for. A lot of people on this sub do not realize that this argument is inherently anti-Zionist.
Would one state lead to the dissolution of Islamist groups like Hamas and PIJ? Seems like they’re exactly the kinds of groups that actively oppose secularism. If not, then how do you get Israelis to believe they’d be safe in such a state? Pushing for this solution without acknowledging the elements actively opposing the very ideals of such a state seems to be putting the car before the horse. Turning Israel into Lebanon where a militia actually runs half the country isn’t a solution.
>Turning Israel into Lebanon where a militia actually runs half the country isn’t a solution. THANK YOU. it was tried before and what happened? The *Palestinian liberation organization* started a 40 year long Civil War with the Christians and destroyed the most beautiful place in the middle east
No matter how much you may want to dissolve those groups, it’s simply impossible at this point without wiping out every last Palestinian. These groups would be heavily restricted and banned from the political sphere in this state, as would Likud and all the other far-right groups in the current Israeli government. It wouldn’t be turned into Lebanon in the sense that a Islamist or Zionist militia would have influence there, but UN peacekeepers would definitely need to be deployed throughout the region to prevent this. It would take a long time, possibly even decades to phase out the ideas pushed into the minds of Israelis by their governments, and it would be just as difficult to get Palestinians to forgive Israelis for what they have done to them for the past 76 years. This is why the state of Israel should never have been created in the first place. It would have been much easier to do this in 1948, and even then it would require a lot of work for it to be successful. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. We’re a mile away from even a two-state solution, so advocating for a one-state solution can only set a higher goal to strive for, which creates a far more positive effect than a negative one.
There’s plenty of reasons why those groups are incompatible with the new, one-state, but I’m just focusing specifically on the secular aspect. These groups, even if they had nothing against Jews and Israelis (they do), would actively oppose a secular democracy. They do not believe in secularism, and there are no real examples of secular, liberal democracy being practiced in the Muslim nations of the Middle East. If we can’t commit to secularism, then there is no way to protect Jewish people in that state. I just think it’s a pipe dream to think it would work there when it hasn’t worked anywhere else. In 1948 the Arabs tried to eliminate Israel for having the audacity to try and exist next to them. You think one state would have protected those Jews?
You are completely misunderstanding my comment. I was arguing that these groups should be prevented from having any influence or government control in this supposed state. Secular groups like the PFLP, Hadash, and the Israeli Labor Party should be promoted. >If we can’t commit to secularism, then there is no way to protect Jewish people in that state. Which is why I am saying there should be a secular state. Israel is not a secular state, so by your logic Jews can not be safe living under it, so we can’t have a two-state solution. >In 1948 the Arabs tried to eliminate Israel for having the audacity to try and exist next to them. Which wouldn’t have happened if one secular state was established. But I’m not trying to justify the Arab invasion. Egypt, Lebanon and Syria are all secular, so they would likely support a secular state being established, especially since it would remove the threat of Israel and liberate the Palestinians living there.
[удалено]
This is why I propose the 17 state solution. It’s the only way now.
The one state solution simply would never work - you have a wealthy first world country with one language and primary religion and you’re going to try and marry it with a very poor 3rd world country with a poor economy and different language and religion. There is no shared identity that would allow it exist as a cohesive unit. Do you think if we combined the Dominican Republic and Haiti together it would go well? What about India and Pakistan? See the issues? Israel would end up with even more welfare queens than it has today (looking at the Orthodox Jews which are a growing problem). The point of Israel is a state for Jews to be safe in. It’s the only Jewish state in the world. They worked hard to build a beautiful country - it would be ruined economically and destabilized if it had to absorb the Palestinian political groups - who also have no interest in running a functioning state btw. Do you think Hamas and Fatah would just suddenly play nice as political parties? They can’t even stand each other let alone Likud.
Oh right because that worked so well in lebanon. Israel is not going up commit collective suicide
just want to point out that there are palestinian villages in israel and they generally live in peace with the jews, so idealy there will be the same situation there
That or a schengen-area-style freedom of movement deal seem to be the only potential outcomes that don't result in more innocent people killed
That would be good, until the first Suicide bomber/shooter or Goldstein does something horrific. Then the borders will be shut down and it'll all go to shit again. Strangely enough, until the first intifada there were pretty much open borders from Gaza and the West Bank.
There's a reason there's a wall - before the 2nd intifada there was suicids bombers coming from west bank to israel proper on the daily... Seperation wall dropped the suicide terrorist attacks by 95%
The worst thing to ever happen to the West Bank was the intafada. Once the terrorist attacks ramped up movement restrictions began. The West Bank economically relies on Israel for jobs and commerce. It would provide such a boost to the Palestinians to access the Israeli labor markets
More like more walls to stop innocent people from dying This is area is clash of ideology,religion and ethnicity.
Withdraw all the IDF soldiers from the West Bank, and watch how they will flee. France did it in 1962 and worked.
It almost seems like that's the point of having Jewish settlements in the middle
End settlements
Damn those Israeli settlers really cut up the land in weird ways. Divide and conquer I guess
I think the land was cut up in the Oslo accords, not by settlers. But it was still a terrible agreement that should not have been acceptable.
Actually check out what Netanyahu said about the Oslo accords. He did some sketchy zoning for military to make settlements spread like wildfire
Realy great map. Thanks
People are saying that Palestine can’t be recognized as nation cause it doesn’t have borders… well, West Bank de jure area should be so this map literally… also that’s a lot of full Israeli control of area
bantustans
summer future spectacular cake label alleged hungry arrest wide onerous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
“People will downvote but” Has more upvotes than the original comment
This should be part of state of Palestine according to Oslo Accords Ii, but you see the illegal colonization spreading like cancer
Here we go again.
Sorry if i sound ignorant but when a palestinian state is created in the west bank, just let the settlers stay and we will call them palestinian jews, just like how palestinians in israel call themselves israeli arabs. What am i missing in the equation?
The people who live in those settlements are motivated by the goal of annexing the West Bank to Israel. That's rather antithetical to the creation of a Palestinian state. There's also a fair argument to be made that quite a few of those settlements would face sectarian violence, much in the way the settlers are doing to rural palestians today.
True, but psst - here’s the thing: they’re not supposed to be there in the first place You don’t have to ask their opinions, as they have a state to fall back on
I'm well aware they're violating International Humanitarian Law. They problem is they have the backing of an Israeli state that disagrees.
This is why the Israeli government should be pressured to do something about them Source: am Israeli
Suicide bombers?
They live in apartheid. These settlers don't come and consider themselves equal to the Muslims, they say they are better. Maybe Muslims say the same but Israel has all the power economically, politically and militarily.
[удалено]
This is a great map. Thank you. Sadly, Israel moves so quickly, it’s already out of date. Several Palestinian villages have been emptied, more land seized, more building planned, etc
which villages have been emptied? im only aware of settlements themselves being expanded
Ein Samiyah, Rashash, Fadel to name the ones I used to do activism in but which have been emptied by violence since this map was made.
the one across my view has only expanded, but okay
In theory it could be united like South Africa was in the nineties. But that relied on the whites (or Israel?) voting for it to happen, and a personality like Nelson Mandela to get people talking and put their weapons down. Right now there is none of this in the making. Also, post-apartheid South Africa hasn’t exactly been an easy or peaceful transition in the long run. There is also very little desire on either side to share anything. So war it is.
The issue is the whole point of Israel is to be a jewish nation. The only one in the world. a vote to allow the population fo the occupied territories become citizens would effectively end israel.
This is the best maps i’ve seen on this sub in a while. It’s sad that it isn’t going to get as much attention as it deserves because of how people react to its content
This looks like a face
yeah this whole conflict is doomed.
This is actually a really informative map !! Thanks for posting
Basically what the Israelis want is there to be no Palestinian statehood as that is a danger to their security. So my question is what is the long term goal of Israel? because from an outside you are insuring a one state solution. You cannot not give Palestinians citizenship when you eventually encircle them and have them exist in islands surrounded by Israeli territory. Hence the word apartheid that is gonna increasingly going to be thrown around.
Exactly. Their plan is to steal, kill, and lie in front of the world with their army of lobbied politicians and bribed news outlets Problem is, the internet and cameras put dents in this, allowing people to see what's really happening That's where the astroturfing bots come in
As an Israeli, what a fucking mess, what went through the minds of both sides when agreeing to this crap is beyond me, literally don’t see any benefit to absolutely anyone
This is why a two state solution isn't feasible.
Huh, I wonder why the Israeli agencies have such high quality data on the living situation of Palestinians.
Because it’s them who take censuses
This wasn't made by an Israeli agency, it's an Israeli peace advocacy group that does boots on the ground solidarity and protection work with communities in the west bank.
Kind of resembles cancer clusters
Waiting for Zionist bots to defend Israeli occupation
I'm a *Zionist bot* and I actively dislike it, probably not for the same reasons as you do.
Where are the active archeological digs going on?
Phagocytose for a nation; Phagonatose!
Why so much “open” land to the east? Desert?
Thank you for posting the resolution. That high res is so good it almost have my phone a stroke lol. At least someone here still respects this subreddit's original format. :)
Everything about this map is absolutely gorgeous.
it kinda looks like a face from a 3/4 angle
This map actually shows something that I literally never see in maps of settlements in the west bank, that being the actual concentration of population and settlement in settlement blocs
What a fine mess.
There are 5 brown colors on the map, but the legend only defines 4. The legend does not include the Firing Zone (which is distinct from settlements).