Current Affairs

There is an argument among the extremists in Israel for an enlarged state. Eretz Israel is translated as greater Israel and encompasses the West Bank and Gaza. But what nobody really asks is what do you do with the Palestinians? Of course there have been calls to forceably deport the Palestinians from these lands, and to a degree the war in Gaza is coming to the point that ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is not that far from the imagination of those watching, especially if the situation worsens and Egypt relents in its argument that the borders will no longer be closed and opens the border to refugees escaping the war.

Is there a precedent to argue this – well the state of Israel was created with the ethnic clearance of Palestinians from the land, villages, towns and cities. But you could argue that was 1948, and the imperialism of the West that swept this period of ethnic cleansing under the carpet is very different today. South Africa has already gone to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and put together a very strong case that Israel is in the process of committing genocide. Israel of course disputes this argument and in their own way have defended their argument that the present conflict is not genocide, but a war that is necessary and must continue if Israel is to be safeguarded from the terrorism that happened on 7^th October.  

But is there really an argument that there can be a peaceful solution that safeguards the Palestinians and secures the Israelis. Bibi Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister argues that there cannot be a return to the two state solution after the war and to all intents and purposes the promises of the Oslo Accord signed thirty years ago, will not go through any revision and cannot be implemented in either its original state or anyway that it could be revised. Bibi Netanyahu, has also argued that Gaza will not become an administrated revisionist argument when the war is over. Gaza he argues will be administered by a military government and will be part of the states responsibility to guarantee the states security.

The embattled Palestinian Legislator have not made to much noise, other than to say they will not administer the affairs of the Gazan’s and that they believe that Israel cannot make the decision to manage the affairs democratically. This is where the arguments come to an impasse, Israel has vowed to rid Gaza of Hamas, but if Israel is to administer the Gaza strip militarily, there has to be some type of government that takes responsibility for the welfare of those under military rule. If that is a military council as it was before the independence of Gaza from Israeli rule in 2005, when Israel withdrew from Gaza, there are questions that need to be argued.

One of the last arguments that Abu Akleh argued before her assassination, was whether the West Bank should come under the governorship of Israel. It was widely realised that the Palestinian Legislator was creaking under the weight of not holding elections since 2012, it was also seen as an institution that was geriatric in its make up and also it had been argued that it was corrupt. The argument was put together with a questionnaire that asked Palestinians where they saw their future and whether they would be part of the Israeli state. Overwhelmingly, the Palestinians argued for a continuation of the Legislator, but they would like a more democratic process that would elect new leaders. But there was also thirty percent of respondents who saw themselves as being part of Israeli society. This was enormous, it also led to her death at the hands of a killer in the IDF.

Israel has a problem, it argues that it is one of the only Middle Eastern nations that is a democracy. It is riven by insecurity that appears as racism, the arguments of the right in the last election argued that the government that had been in power was an apologist for Arab rights as the government was a coalition of parties that included an Arab party. The government that won the election is full of hard arguments that push the argument of increased construction in the West Bank and settlements. There are roughly 700,000 settlers in the West Bank and a population of 3.25 million Palestinians, which if Israel is going to annex the West Bank, puts pressure on Israel’s argument that it is a democracy, if the Palestinians are not allowed to be part of the democratic argument of Israel.

Furthermore, Israel argues that they will continue to manage the affairs of the Palestinians in Gaza, which has a population of 2.23 million, which places further pressure on the Israeli state, which argues as a democracy, but negates the rights of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. There have been those in government who argue for the widespread ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, but the ICJ, who are looking into the argument of South Africa and their argument that genocide is being committed in Gaza, would also be interested in the question of ethnic cleansing.

In a speech in Paris, the Israeli finance minister argued that the “notion of a Palestinian people was artificial. He said that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian nation. There is no Palestinian history. There is no Palestinian language.” It was one of many remarks that have been made by the hardline leaders of the Israel government, but the argument of demographics comes to the fore, especially with the question of whether Israel is a democracy or can remain a democracy in the future if the Palestinians remain on their land and there is no ethnic cleansing.

Israel has a population just over 9 million, with 2 million coming from Israel’s Arab community making up 20 percent of voters. The Israeli government are very aware of this demographic, they have argued that Jordan should take the Palestinians in the West Bank and Egypt should open its borders. Both nations are aware of this argument and have kept their borders closed, knowing full well that a change in their demographics will in the future lead to unrest and the possibility of direct conflict with Israel if they have a large unrestful Palestinian population.

That Bibi Netanyahu has argued that there will not be a return to the two state solution, he is in danger of wiping out Israel’s arguments that it is the only democracy in the Middle East. There are question how Israel will manage Gaza, but if the population is put under military law and they are negated their right to democracy, these are also questions that Israel will be forced to argue at a later date, when arguments of democratic principles come to the fore. If the present government annexes the West Bank, it has to give the Palestinians the right to vote in elections, which will further challenge the demographics of the state, especially as Palestinians and Arab Israelis will make up over fifty percent of the electorate of the state. If Israel was to ethnically cleanse the state of Palestinians, it would be seen as a pyriah state, especially as the voices that support the Israeli state are becoming quieter in every election that takes place in America. Israel needs to review whether a two state solution is the only argument if it is to survive as a modern Jewish State, but there are so many questions that need to be asked, that Bibi Netanyahu is ignoring at a cost that will be detrimental to Israel’s claim that it is a democracy.