Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

shira

(30,109 posts)
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 07:51 AM Jul 2013

Palestine - Jordan/West Bank Bi-National State Under Discussion

Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have been discussing the creation of a bi-national State in the West Bank and Jordan according to Professor Richard Falk - United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territories occupied since 1967.

Professor Falk is revered by the Palestinians whilst simultaneously being targeted by many others - including United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay - for his controversial views on a range of matters including his suggestion that the Boston marathon bombing was a justifiable response to America’s interventionist US foreign policy and his posting of an anti-Semitic cartoon on his web site.

Writing in his blog “Citizen Pilgrimage” - Professor Falk disclosed discussions were taking place on a bi-national State during an exchange he and I were having - after he had written:

“I do agree with you about the ‘two state’ solution being a dead letter, and rather bad faith on all sides to pretend otherwise.

The question seems to me to be “What Next?” I think the Jordanian option is one answer, but not one I endorse. There is a need for this discussion, I agree to this extent.”

I then sent Professor Falk a recent article written by me arguing for the creation of a bi-national state in Jordan and the West Bank to embrace the aspirations of the Arab populations of both territories.

Professor Falk’s response on 8 July was unexpected and very encouraging:

“I have read your article with care, and it does provide a clear alternative to the two-state solution. It is also an approach that I know from my diplomatic contacts is being encouraged by Israeli negotiators in private meetings with the Palestinian Authority, and toward which the PA has not expressed outright rejection, but apparently a willingness to consider.”


more...
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/56490
66 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Palestine - Jordan/West Bank Bi-National State Under Discussion (Original Post) shira Jul 2013 OP
Professor Falk is revered by the Palestinians ? oberliner Jul 2013 #1
It's like you've turned into a beautiful butterfly! Scootaloo Jul 2013 #2
There's a J-Post article on this, but it's restricted access.... shira Jul 2013 #3
What is your take on the idea? oberliner Jul 2013 #5
If there is to be one state or one bi-national state.... shira Jul 2013 #6
Neither make any sense to me oberliner Jul 2013 #16
Thank you for that post. Ken Burch Jul 2013 #19
Bad news for you Ken, only 40% of Palestinians oppose.... shira Jul 2013 #21
It isn't a religious belief. Ken Burch Jul 2013 #25
It's definitely a religious belief. You think the pollsters are lying about that 40%? shira Jul 2013 #26
Ouch Scootaloo Jul 2013 #7
See HuffPo article below. It's not just J-Post shira Jul 2013 #9
Ha Ha Ha Ha ...Kinda like the Demographic threats the Jewish state will face .... King_David Jul 2013 #53
Whatever all that means Scootaloo Jul 2013 #54
Thanks King_David Jul 2013 #55
It means you haven't figured out how to make a point? Scootaloo Jul 2013 #56
It means your worried about the demographic King_David Jul 2013 #57
Actually, I'm not the least bit worried; Amman is. Scootaloo Jul 2013 #59
what is Israel's reason for not wanting a confederation between Israel and Palestinian? azurnoir Jul 2013 #58
Because mixing the 2 populations would be disastrous in every way. shira Jul 2013 #60
Gee well that whas the point of the post... King_David Jul 2013 #61
The article has been published on other web sites as well david singer Jul 2013 #45
Always nice to get applause from the newbies oberliner Jul 2013 #4
I can read from back then... Scootaloo Jul 2013 #11
Cool oberliner Jul 2013 #15
Not wishful thinking on my part david singer Jul 2013 #37
so you are the esteemed rightist who founded the "Jordan is Palestine" blog? azurnoir Jul 2013 #40
I do not hide that fact and make it clear at the foot of every article I publish david singer Jul 2013 #46
lol I've already done that on more than one occasion azurnoir Jul 2013 #47
very revealing ... Israeli Jul 2013 #48
Here's the map from 'your" Jordan is Palestine blog azurnoir Jul 2013 #41
That image brings to mind another image... Scootaloo Jul 2013 #64
I tend to agree with oberliner, that wishful thinking drives your article. delrem Jul 2013 #43
But how much are his comments worth? oberliner Jul 2013 #49
I think there is. aranthus Jul 2013 #62
Jordan May Play Greater West Bank Role shira Jul 2013 #8
You made me read HuffPo. There will be no forgiveness! Scootaloo Jul 2013 #12
Just added more to #9.... shira Jul 2013 #13
also see azurnoir Jul 2013 #18
Que Black September II. nt hack89 Jul 2013 #10
By then, it'll be internal Jordanian/Palestinian politics.... shira Jul 2013 #14
So...not only the "Jordan is Palestine" canard...the "nobody ever actually CARED about Palestinians" Ken Burch Jul 2013 #20
Right, your side doesn't care about Palestinians one bit.... shira Jul 2013 #22
I'm not ON a "side". I'm just me. Ken Burch Jul 2013 #24
If nothing can be done about it, then Human Rights Groups should just pack it in.... shira Jul 2013 #27
tell us in his immense wisdom what does this visionary David Singer azurnoir Jul 2013 #17
I believe that no one - Jew or Arab - will have to leave his present home david singer Jul 2013 #38
lol Israel and Jordan will do no such thing why should either one? azurnoir Jul 2013 #39
also what wold happen to the Palestinians in the diaspora? azurnoir Jul 2013 #44
Not going to happen. LeftishBrit Jul 2013 #23
So with the two-state solution in tatters... david singer Jul 2013 #42
Why are you pushing this "confederation" thing anyway? Ken Burch Jul 2013 #28
I honestly think that it's because the topic gets "hits" delrem Jul 2013 #29
not true ... Israeli Jul 2013 #30
Caroline Glick, ugh! LeftishBrit Jul 2013 #33
Yup ... Israeli Jul 2013 #35
There's definite interest on both sides. Why ignore or deny it? shira Jul 2013 #31
There are only two problems with the suggestion LeftishBrit Jul 2013 #32
Post #8 above (HuffPo) shows interest from both sides. shira Jul 2013 #34
Yup again .. Israeli Jul 2013 #36
If Hamas got control of the WB sabbat hunter Jul 2013 #63
That's Jordan's motivation then, right there...to keep Hamas (MB) out shira Jul 2013 #65
Jordan itself doesn't WANT to confederate with Palestine. Ken Burch Jul 2013 #66
Should Palestine become part of Jordan? King_David Jul 2013 #50
Talk of Palestinian-Jordanian confederation irks observers on both sides of the river King_David Jul 2013 #51
Jordan May Play Greater West Bank Role King_David Jul 2013 #52
 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
1. Professor Falk is revered by the Palestinians ?
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 08:28 AM
Jul 2013

On what is the author basing that claim?

Also, it does seem worth pointing out who wrote this article:

David Singer is an Australian Lawyer, a Foundation Member of the International Analyst Network and Convenor of Jordan is Palestine International—an organization calling for sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza to be allocated between Israel and Jordan as the two successor States to the Mandate for Palestine. Previous articles written by him can be found at: jordanispalestine.blogspot.com

Seems like maybe this is "wishful thinking" on the writer's part.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
2. It's like you've turned into a beautiful butterfly!
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:02 AM
Jul 2013


I'm so proud.

Humor aside though, This is basically just a self-masturbatory article from Singer. "I sent a letter to this Falk guy who didn't find it totally detestable, so it's a go!" Of course on any other day I'm pretty certain that singer would find Professor Falk utterly contemptible, as hardline zionists are prone to do towards whosoever holds the position of UN Special Rapporteur. Myeh, details!

Also, note to Shira? Canada Free press? Really? you're not even trying anymore, are you? This is on their front page:
With each passing day, it becomes more evident that the United States is a “captured operation,” and has been taken over from within. At the epicenter of the tyrannical takeover is none other than Barack Hussein Obama, a man also known as Barry Soetoro.

The terrifying yet largely unreported fact is that after two elections and nearly five years, we still do not know with certainty the legal name, true legal identity or status of the man holding the highest office in America.


C'mon, you can do better than some freak show right-wing tabloid that runs birther nonsense, right? Right? How do you even run into places like this?



Oh, that's how.
 

shira

(30,109 posts)
3. There's a J-Post article on this, but it's restricted access....
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:24 AM
Jul 2013
http://www.jpost.com/Experts/Palestine-The-bi-national-state-that-can-work-318186

The only other 2 sources I could find were AmericanThinker and CanadaFreeperPress.

I thought it would provoke some good discussion.
 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
5. What is your take on the idea?
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:37 AM
Jul 2013

Would you support a confederation of the kind alluded to in the article you posted? Personally, I think it is an absolute non-starter that is as unlikely and preposterous as what the one-state solution folks propose. Perhaps even moreso.

I always thought you were behind the two-state solution, along the lines of the Geneva Initiative. Is that no longer your position?

As for Richard Falk, the less involved he is in anything related to this conflict, the better.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
6. If there is to be one state or one bi-national state....
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:45 AM
Jul 2013

..this idea makes infinitely more sense than combining Israel with the W.Bank.

It has a chance of working, given that there's definite interest b/w the PA and Jordan.

Israel already has a good peace treaty with Jordan, so why not try?

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
16. Neither make any sense to me
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 02:10 PM
Jul 2013

Two states, side by side, living in peace with one another.

I think that's what we ought to be working towards.

If Livni has been allowed to form a government after the election where her party won the most seats, we might even be there by now.

Sadly, the current Israeli government seems less than interested in making anything like this happen.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
19. Thank you for that post.
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 10:50 PM
Jul 2013

and shame on ANYONE who pushes for the totally discredited "Jordan is Palestine" canard. That idea is on the scrapheap of history and there's no possible reason to try to revive it. It would leave Palestinians totally powerless, since the Hashemites would never agree to give up their absolute control of the state, or even rename the country to remove the insult to non-Hashemites in the current official name of the "kingdom".

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
21. Bad news for you Ken, only 40% of Palestinians oppose....
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 10:12 AM
Jul 2013

...a confederation with Jordan.

http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2013/p48e.html

Shame on the 60% who do not oppose that, Ken? Your Palestinians, Ken, the ones you "support" so very, very much.



This is where reality bites for you, challenging your most cherished religious beliefs. Like debating evolution with fundamentalists who cannot deal with the facts.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
25. It isn't a religious belief.
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 06:15 PM
Jul 2013

If Palestinians wanted confederation with Jordan, they wouldn't have formed the PLO while they were still UNDER Jordanian rule.

And it's immoral to give them the choice of either moving across the river and forever leaving their homes, or staying where they are and being stateless. Why should they ever have to do that? Israel's security doesn't require the West Bank to be under permanent Israeli control.

Besides, that poll only shows 31% favoring confederation now, the other 29% would want it AFTER getting an independent state...that's different than your fantasy of Palestinians accepting a situation in which they'd be permanently powerless, which is what confederation without independence would have to mean.

That poll cannot be taken as a vindication of keeping IDF troops in the West Bank, or of any of the other miseries the Occupation has inflicted on those people.

I support Israel's right to exist IN PEACE within the pre-1967 lines. Why isn't that enough for you? If they get peace, the pre-1967 lines are enough...and if they don't NO amount of territory would ever be enough. And expelling the Palestinians from the West Bank as you seem to dream of doing would make peace PERMANENTLY impossible...not because I wouldn't want it, I always want peace...but because Israel would forever lose any right to ASK for peace with its neighbors. And you know it.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
26. It's definitely a religious belief. You think the pollsters are lying about that 40%?
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 10:55 PM
Jul 2013

Last edited Mon Jul 15, 2013, 07:07 AM - Edit history (1)

You need to be able to absorb new information and facts and then modify your views in order to fit the situation. You are simply dismissing anything that blows up your worldview. Religious fanatics do that too.

And it's immoral to give them the choice of either moving across the river and forever leaving their homes, or staying where they are and being stateless. Why should they ever have to do that? Israel's security doesn't require the West Bank to be under permanent Israeli control.


They wouldn't have to move anywhere, Ken. The W.Bank would join in confederation with Jordan.

Besides, that poll only shows 31% favoring confederation now, the other 29% would want it AFTER getting an independent state...that's different than your fantasy of Palestinians accepting a situation in which they'd be permanently powerless, which is what confederation without independence would have to mean.


So 60% are for such a confederation, either now or after a peace deal with Israel. You're against the majority Palestinian view, so how is it you fancy yourself as pro-Palestinian?

That poll cannot be taken as a vindication of keeping IDF troops in the West Bank, or of any of the other miseries the Occupation has inflicted on those people.


I'm not using the poll as vindication of the IDF keeping troops in the W.Bank. History proves that when Israel withdraws from territory in that region w/o making a peace deal, matters get worse and more people die. That needs to be avoided. Why are you so anxious for more war and bloodshed by allowing the W.Bank to become Gaza part II?

I support Israel's right to exist IN PEACE within the pre-1967 lines. Why isn't that enough for you? If they get peace, the pre-1967 lines are enough...and if they don't NO amount of territory would ever be enough. And expelling the Palestinians from the West Bank as you seem to dream of doing would make peace PERMANENTLY impossible...not because I wouldn't want it, I always want peace...but because Israel would forever lose any right to ASK for peace with its neighbors. And you know it.


I support 2 states in peace, either by way of Geneva, the Clinton Parameters, Olmert's plan or whatever. I couldn't give a shit about the plan so long as there's genuine peace. And no one is calling for expelling Palestinians from the W.Bank, so what's with this ridiculous straw-man of yours?
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
7. Ouch
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:46 AM
Jul 2013

Maybe J-post is doing a good thing by keeping it under the fold, then. If those are the only two other sources, then it's almost not worth mentioning in the first place.

The entire setup is unrealistic in several deep ways.

1) Perhaps most importantly, Jordan's king does not want the West Bank to become part of Jordan. If this were to happen, the overwhelming majority of Jordanians would be living in the West Bank... Which would essentially result in a massive shift of political power, and not in the favor of the king - or any king. Despite the bloviations from certain quarters, the Palestinian people are probably the most dedicated to democracy in the region, even if it keeps getting stymied for them. They're not going to knuckle over for some pocket fisherman the British installed in their funky little patch-of-nothing territory.

2) The Palestinians don't want to become part of Jordan. The Palestinians want to be Palestine. Anything else carries an air of being a booby prize. If there's going to be a binational booby prize, then the Palestinians are going to be looking west, not east. After all, that's where a hell of a lot of them are from, and it's what this whole business is about!

3) This plan seems to involve Israel "gaining" Gaza. Just think about that for all of thirty seconds and I think you'll reach the same conclusion that I did - "that doesn't make any fucking sense!"

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
9. See HuffPo article below. It's not just J-Post
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:52 AM
Jul 2013

Last edited Sat Jul 13, 2013, 12:41 PM - Edit history (2)

1) Perhaps most importantly, Jordan's king does not want the West Bank to become part of Jordan. If this were to happen, the overwhelming majority of Jordanians would be living in the West Bank... Which would essentially result in a massive shift of political power, and not in the favor of the king - or any king. Despite the bloviations from certain quarters, the Palestinian people are probably the most dedicated to democracy in the region, even if it keeps getting stymied for them. They're not going to knuckle over for some pocket fisherman the British installed in their funky little patch-of-nothing territory.


Jordan's King is for a confederation once independence is achieved, whatever that means. End of occupation, independent state. I don't see the point of an independent state immediately going into a confederation.

2) The Palestinians don't want to become part of Jordan. The Palestinians want to be Palestine. Anything else carries an air of being a booby prize. If there's going to be a binational booby prize, then the Palestinians are going to be looking west, not east. After all, that's where a hell of a lot of them are from, and it's what this whole business is about!


Only 40% of Palestinians oppose a confederation with Jordan, suggesting that the majority could very well go with it...
http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2013/p48e.html

3) This plan seems to involve Israel "gaining" Gaza. Just think about that for all of thirty seconds and I think you'll reach the same conclusion that I did - "that doesn't make any fucking sense!"


I didn't see that, and I don't see why anyone in Israel would want Gaza.

King_David

(14,851 posts)
53. Ha Ha Ha Ha ...Kinda like the Demographic threats the Jewish state will face ....
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 12:06 AM
Jul 2013
1) Perhaps most importantly, Jordan's king does not want the West Bank to become part of Jordan. If this were to happen, the overwhelming majority of Jordanians would be living in the West Bank... Which would essentially result in a massive shift of political power, and not in the favor of the king - or any king. Despite the bloviations from certain quarters, the Palestinian people are probably the most dedicated to democracy in the region, even if it keeps getting stymied for them. They're not going to knuckle over for some pocket fisherman the British installed in their funky little patch-of-nothing territory.



Love it...and Bookmarked it...

How do you spell Hypocrisy , Zionism 101?


Ha Ha Ha Ha

LOVE IT !!!!
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
56. It means you haven't figured out how to make a point?
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 07:05 AM
Jul 2013

It means that you're good at making word salad?

Help me out here.

King_David

(14,851 posts)
57. It means your worried about the demographic
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 12:48 PM
Jul 2013

Threat to the Palestinians should they confederate with Jordan .

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
58. what is Israel's reason for not wanting a confederation between Israel and Palestinian?
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:01 PM
Jul 2013

doesn't it have something to do with a demographic shift? pot meet ketle oh BTW I'm book marking this too

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
60. Because mixing the 2 populations would be disastrous in every way.
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 07:42 PM
Jul 2013

The last time the 2 populations were together was in 1948 when there was a civil war.

Separation is needed.

david singer

(5 posts)
45. The article has been published on other web sites as well
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:28 AM
Jul 2013

These sites include JWire and On Line Opinion



 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
4. Always nice to get applause from the newbies
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:33 AM
Jul 2013

As I said before, I'm very glad you have joined us here. I appreciate the energy and humor that you infuse into the discussions. It more than makes up for whatever shortcomings you may have such as your belief that Progressive Zionists (such as myself) don't exist, or your tendency to put folks into groups/camps and make erroneous assumptions about what they believe. I am confident that you'll catch up eventually if you decide that is worth doing. It's a shame that you weren't around back when this forum was more active and lively.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
11. I can read from back then...
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 10:09 AM
Jul 2013

"More active and lively" is, in actuality, "more bitchy one-line snipes" and a steady stream of "gotcha!" topics that amount mostly to irrelevant "THEY'RE THE DEBBIL!" drivel. Also having peeked into other related forums, it seems there we concerted efforts at intimidation and slander against people posting back then. And not the good, honest, intimate "I think you're a dumbfuck to your face!" sort of slander we have going now (It's like my family at Christmas!) but sneaky, off-site, conspiratorial bullshit "mean girls" kind of stuff. I'm not sorry I missed it, I found more intelligent discussion trying to explain evolution to "true believers" during those years

And it's not that I think you don't exist. You obviously do, though I'm not sure if you're a person, a stunningly complex algorithm, or just a trained dolphin. Point being, you are clearly an individual intelligence, and as you think, you are. I've explained this before though, I'm pretty sure.

As for being a newbie... only in this particular neighborhood, Oberliner.

david singer

(5 posts)
37. Not wishful thinking on my part
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 12:23 AM
Jul 2013

Professor Falk's comments can be viewed on his blog page "Citizen Pilgrimage" - as I quoted in my article.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
40. so you are the esteemed rightist who founded the "Jordan is Palestine" blog?
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 12:56 AM
Jul 2013

David Singer is an Australian Lawyer, a Foundation Member of the International Analyst Network and Convenor of Jordan is Palestine International—an organization calling for sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza to be allocated between Israel and Jordan as the two successor States to the Mandate for Palestine. Previous articles written by him can be found at: jordanispalestine.blogspot.com

david singer

(5 posts)
46. I do not hide that fact and make it clear at the foot of every article I publish
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:58 AM
Jul 2013

Who are you Mr Anonymous?

Why don't you come out and tell us who you are and what you do for a living?

Indeed this page seems to be comprised of everyone hiding under the cloak of anonymity enabling you all to snipe and criticise at will.

You only demean yourselves and show yourselves up for the cowards you are in not putting your real names behind your opinions.

The fact that some commonsense now seems to be appearing that will see sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza allocated between Jordan and Israel is no doubt galling to those with an abiding hatred of Jews who only wish to see them driven into the sea.

Are you one of those azurnoir?

Is the division of the Mandate for Palestine 80% for the Arabs and 20% for the Jews that hard for you to accept?

Will you only be satisfied when the division is 100% Arabs - 0% Jews.

Do you want to perpetuate the conflict or solve it?

The bi-national state of Jordan and the Jewish State of Israel present the best option for resolving a conflict that has gone on for far too long.

Hopefully the parties will be able to negotiate such a solution in a far more timely manner than the wasted efforts of the last twenty years seeking to create three States in Mandate Palestine.




azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
47. lol I've already done that on more than one occasion
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 02:05 AM
Jul 2013

I've been here for 7 years now as far as your assumptions/accusation about my thoughts and aspirations-those are quite revealing indeed

Israeli

(4,151 posts)
48. very revealing ...
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 03:52 AM
Jul 2013

here azurnoir read this :

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1322844498/

If “Jordan is Palestine”, then there is no reason for Israel not to annex the West Bank, expropriate Palestinian lands, enlarge the existing settlements and create new ones, and in general “convince” Palestinians to find a better life east of the river.


THE INITIATORS of the Israeli bill make it clear that their main purpose is Hasbarah (“explaining”), the Hebrew euphemism for propaganda. Their idea, they believe, will put an end to the isolation and delegitimization of Israel. The world will accept that the State of Palestine already exists, beyond the Jordan, so that there is no need for a second one in the West Bank.


The Israeli Right has never really given up the idea of a Greater Israel (which in Hebrew is called “the whole of Eretz-Israel”). This means the total rejection of the Two-State solution in all its forms and the creation of a Jewish state from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.

However, in such a state there would be living, as of today, some 6 million Israeli Jews and about 5.5 million Arab Palestinians (2.5 in the West Bank, 1.5 in the Gaza Strip, 1.5 in Israel proper.) Some demographers believe that the number is even larger.

According to all demographic forecasts, the Palestinians will quite soon constitute the majority in this geographic entity. What then?


I would suggest that almost every Israeli who supports the Greater Israel idea has this – at least unconsciously – in mind. Perhaps not as a plan for action in the near future, but certainly as the only solution in the long term.


 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
64. That image brings to mind another image...
Sun Jul 21, 2013, 06:33 AM
Jul 2013


Ooooooh, Eli Hertz. Seems we have a whole network of these gibbering dumbfucks.

delrem

(9,688 posts)
43. I tend to agree with oberliner, that wishful thinking drives your article.
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:17 AM
Jul 2013

Richard Falk doesn't concede the extent that you say he does.

"It is also an approach that I know from my diplomatic contacts is being encouraged by Israeli negotiators in private meetings with the Palestinian Authority, and toward which the PA has not expressed outright rejection, but apparently a willingness to consider.”

That quote doesn't admit anything that your project aspires to.

The Palestinian people are different than the PA, just as they are different than Hamas, and just as the Jordanian people are different than the King of the Hashemite family/tribe. So Falk's weak assent, that the plan you espouse is something pushed onto the table by Israel that the PA is willing to consider, doesn't sustain the weight you want to put on it.

What liberty would the Palestinian people gain by submitting to an hereditary dictatorship, a Hashemite Royalty? I notice that your Zionist plan, which intends to annex whatever Palestinian land as it can possibly take while laying down anothert stinky red-herring about possible "solutions", doesn't allow any voice for the actual Palestinian people.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
49. But how much are his comments worth?
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 06:10 AM
Jul 2013

He seems like a less than reliable source given his track record.

aranthus

(3,385 posts)
62. I think there is.
Sat Jul 20, 2013, 06:05 PM
Jul 2013

What is in this deal for Jordan? Not much of an upside, if any, and they now are saddled with having to control Palestinian violence against Israel, and the PR disaster that would be. It's destabilizing of the Kingdom, and gives them nothing of any value. King Hussein wisely washed Jordan's hands of the Palestinian issue and the current government isn't fool enough to reverse that policy. It's not a peace deal, since it does nothing to resolve the Palestinian diaspora or the demand for a right of return. Nor is it an effective way of managing the conflict. It effective recreates the situation pre-1967, and that was inherently unstable and unsustainable.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
8. Jordan May Play Greater West Bank Role
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 09:47 AM
Jul 2013
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-sharnoff/jordan-palestine_b_3546693.html

also

http://en.ammonnews.net/article.aspx?articleno=22067#.UeFb3xaYfUQ

snippet...

Despite numerous reconciliation efforts mediated by the Arab League and pledges to form a unity government, Hamas and Fatah are no closer in unifying than Israelis and Palestinians are in reaching a peace agreement.

How then, it must be asked, would a Palestinian state emerge with a divided government whose leaders do not recognize one another? Do geopolitical realities on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza suggest that the internationally supported two-state solution is irrelevant?

Recent events suggest that Jordan, which ruled the West Bank from 1949-1967, seeks to once again play a larger role in Palestinian affairs.

During my conversation with veteran journalist Randa Habib -- who has written extensively on Jordan and the Royal Family -- she explained that Jordan's official position is the creation of an independent Palestinian state. However, Jordan is not opposed to confederation or federation with the West Bank which could occur only after independence.

Jordan has proposed some type of union with the West Bank since March 1972, when King Hussein floated the possibility of a United Arab Kingdom. Hussein envisioned a federal plan which included a Jordanian region with Amman as the capital; and a Palestine region including the West Bank with Eastern Jerusalem as the capital. Although rejected by Israel, the Palestinians and most of the Arab League, variations of this proposal were publicly advocated by Jordan until the King rescinded legal and administrative ties to the West Bank in July 1988.

Although King Abdullah rejects the Jordan is Palestine slogan advocated by some in the Israeli right, he might entertain the possibility of Palestinian confederation. In the past few months, there has been more open discussions about confederation prospects -- not by Israelis or Americans but by Jordanians and Palestinians -- than there has been in the past decade.

In October, Jordanian Crown Prince Hassan told a Palestinian audience that the West Bank legally remained Jordanian territory. In December, Jordanian activist Mudar Zahran stated that Jordanians "would absolutely welcome a joint confederation between us and (the West Bank Palestinians) if it keeps the area secure."

Palestinians may also support this initiative.

In December, editor of Al Quds Al Arabi Abdel Bari Atwan proposed confederation with Jordan after Palestinian independence. In the same month, Mahmoud Abbas told his cabinet to prepare for the possibility of confederating with Jordan in the absence of a two-state reality. In March, King Abdullah and Abbas signed an agreement reaffirming Jordan's custodianship of the Holy Places in Jerusalem.

Although Jordan's role in the Muslim holy places in Jerusalem is nothing new and was acknowledged by Israel during the signing of the peace treaty with Jordan in 1994, it is the first public acknowledgment of Jordanian claims by Palestinians. Randa Habib described this significance as a reminder to "the Arab world of this (Jordan's) role in case Hamas/Gaza and Egypt/Morsi will take advantage of the changes in the region."

During my interview with Palestinian Professor Mohammed Dajani, he said a West Bank-Jordanian confederation could produce positive results: "I think a Palestinian-Jordanian federation may ease the heavy burdens from the shoulders of the people. We are living in the age of globalization and it is a priority for small nations to stand by each other to be able to develop and prosper."
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
12. You made me read HuffPo. There will be no forgiveness!
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 10:20 AM
Jul 2013

Just lots and lots of scrubbing. With pumice. Bwuh.

That said, it seems a different idea than the one in your OP - the idea mentioned by Dajani still holds an independent Palestinian state as a centerpiece to everything else, while your OP reads more like a Jordanian re-annexation of the territory without there ever being a Palestinian state - essentially Israel and Jordan playing Russia and Germany with Palestine as Poland (and no, don't read too much into that comparison.)

My instinct says that a Jordan-Palestine confederation would probably end up like the United Arab Republic did - one nation with two power bases just doesn't work.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
13. Just added more to #9....
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 12:40 PM
Jul 2013

Had to step out for awhile and when I got back, I noticed I was in the middle of editing a response to you. I didn't respond to your points originally.

Seems Jordan's for it once there's an independent Palestine, whatever that means. Why there'd need to be a 2 state agreement b/w the Israelis and Palestinians before any confederation is beyond me if all 3 parties agree.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
14. By then, it'll be internal Jordanian/Palestinian politics....
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 12:43 PM
Jul 2013

Our pro-Palestinian friends won't care less anymore about Palestinians of the W.Bank.

All they'll have to focus on would be Arabs within Israel after that point. They may have to take up a new hobby or two.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
20. So...not only the "Jordan is Palestine" canard...the "nobody ever actually CARED about Palestinians"
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 11:09 PM
Jul 2013

canard as well. Nice to see you getting so effecient in your demagoguery.

:eye:

You're still pushing the same old line:

...that the whole conflict is based on nothing but "antisemitism(in truth a real problem, but not one you actually want to see solved, because it helps further your agenda to be able to invoke it, even in situations like this where it isn't really the source of the problem)and NOTHING ELSE.

...that no who expressed sympathy with the Palestinians and their suffering was or is ever sincere about it or ever had any reason to speak on this issue other than, once again"antisemitism&quot this despite the fact that the sort of people who speak out against things like the Occupation and the illegal settlements are the spiritual and ideological descendants of the people who first raised the alarm against Hitler, and who did so and later fought against his ideology in places like Spain and then in the anti-fascist militias in World War II while the "mainstream" types who later tried to buy off their consciences by being ostentatiously "pro-Israel" were giving aid and comfort to the Third Reich on "anticommunist" grounds)

...AND that Palestinians themselves never HAD any legitimate grievances with Israel and never really suffered at all, but were, instead, even when they were put and remain under harsh military occupation, the "villains" and the "oppressors" in all of this.

In short, you're a Reality Denier. And I'm pretty sure most Israelis would say you were as well. Especially the overwhelming majority that think the notion of a West Bank/Jordan confederation is about as relevant as the idea of, say, rebuilding the Maginot Line.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
22. Right, your side doesn't care about Palestinians one bit....
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 10:20 AM
Jul 2013

...which explains your silence WRT rights abuses going on vs. Palestinians not only in Gaza via Hamas but also throughout the Arab world where they suffer under Apartheid conditions - where they are not only denied free-speech, but also the right to work in certain professions, go to certain schools, and own land.

Classic oppression of the poor and helpless. Where's your concern?



You only show concern when Israel can be blamed.

Once again, demonstrating how you're not much more than a mouthpiece for the totalitarian enemies surrounding Israel. You condemn Israel 1000x more than you ever condemn the Fascist, Imperialist, Apartheid Islamist leadership in that region. Again, anti-West, pro-totalitarian. I love how you guys try portraying yourselves as anti-fascist, anti-racists too....when you're mouthpieces for the most vile fascist and racist tyrants on the planet. They use and abuse the Palestinians while attacking the West, and you're happy to assist.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
24. I'm not ON a "side". I'm just me.
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 06:10 PM
Jul 2013

And it's a lie to call me a "mouthpiece". I speak only for myself. Why is it that you can't accept that a person can disagree with you ON THEIR OWN, on the merits of an issue?

It's horrible what's being done to Palestinians in those other situations, but nothing can be done about it.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
27. If nothing can be done about it, then Human Rights Groups should just pack it in....
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 11:03 PM
Jul 2013

The UN should close shop too.

There's no point reporting it in the news either....it's hopeless, right?

I mean, what's the point if nothing can be done about peoples' situations under brutal totalitarian rule?

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
17. tell us in his immense wisdom what does this visionary David Singer
Sat Jul 13, 2013, 03:01 PM
Jul 2013

believe will be the fate of the nearly 400,000 Israeli's now living in the West Bank?

david singer

(5 posts)
38. I believe that no one - Jew or Arab - will have to leave his present home
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 12:38 AM
Jul 2013

Israel and Jordan will redraw the present international border between their two existing states to incorporate the remaining 5% of Mandate Palestine still remaining unallocated between Arabs and Jews.

This re-subdivision would see no one - Arab or Jew - having to leave his present home.

In effect the territorial status quo that existed between 1950-1967 will be restored taking into account the changes on the ground since 1967.

Such arrangements will take place within the context of the existing peace treaty between Israel and Jordan and after direct negotiations between Israel, Jordan and the PLO.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
44. also what wold happen to the Palestinians in the diaspora?
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:24 AM
Jul 2013

wold they be welcomed in such a state? Also would Israeli Jews be living under an Arab government?

LeftishBrit

(41,208 posts)
23. Not going to happen.
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 05:19 PM
Jul 2013

Just as unrealistic as the idea of the Israeli-Palestinian one-state solution.

P.S. does this author have any evidence that Falk is 'revered by the Palestinians'?

Falk and Singer both seem as nutty as each other.

david singer

(5 posts)
42. So with the two-state solution in tatters...
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:16 AM
Jul 2013

... what should be the next solution that is attempted in an effort to end conflict - not perpetuate it?

What is so nutty about going back to a situation which existed for 17 years, worked satisfactorily until then and would have continued until today had Jordan not entered the Six day War?

Circumstances on the ground will not produce the entire territory going back to Jordan. But somewhere between 80-90% is possible.

As to Falk being revered by Palestinians - I quote the following from
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=267176

"Commentator Nadia Hijab, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Institute for Palestine Studies, wrote that Falk "has been attacked by Israel for years. But now, in a new twist, he is being hung out to dry by the Palestinian Authority in perhaps the unkindest cut of all."

Writing for Agence Global, Hijab also reported that in February, 11 Palestinian human rights groups wrote to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay expressing dismay at the PA actions toward Falk.

According to Hijab, the rights groups' letter called Falk’s reports "powerful instruments to advocate for Palestinian people’s rights."

Hijab also wrote that 19 Palestinian groups further wrote to Abbas, criticizing Falk’s treatment and “pointing out the repercussions for the Palestinians’ internationally recognized human rights."

The bi-national state being postulated is based on history,geography, demography and statements made over decades by leading Jordanian and Palestinian spokesmen.

Yes - Falk and I are an unlikely duo.

But neither of us is nutty - do you have any evidence we are?

Put up or shut up.

Concentrate on the message - not seek to denigrate the persons who are delivering it.



 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
28. Why are you pushing this "confederation" thing anyway?
Sun Jul 14, 2013, 11:46 PM
Jul 2013

It has no security advantages for Israel over accepting a Palestinian state. Palestinians would never accept an arrangement in which the Royal Jordanian Army was enforcing Hashemite rule over them, and the Hashemites wouldn't go "Black September" on Palestinian militants...because this time, they'd know it would lead to a massive uprising against t heir rule.

Even looking at the poll YOU like to keep citing, most Palestinians in that survey either oppose confederation or ONLY want it after independence...and having it after independence would not produce a situation that would be any different than just having an independent Palestinian state in the first place. An independent Palestinian state in confederation with Jordanian wouldn't tolerate having Jordanian troops on its soil(I assume that having Jordanian troops in Palestine is the reason YOU are so hot on pushing the confederation canard)

Jordan doesn't want this(they renounced any claim to Palestine years ago), most Israelis other than the Kahanist e.xtreme right think its silly.

Why are you so sold on this when it really has nothing to offer anybody and when it wouldn't be the end of the dispute?

Peace can't be made using something predicated on the concept that Palestinians can NEVER be trusted to be peaceable, but must always be living under someone else's thumb.

delrem

(9,688 posts)
29. I honestly think that it's because the topic gets "hits"
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 01:06 AM
Jul 2013

and at the same time fulfilling its purpose of taking our mind off actual fact and the real situation, off what really needs fixing.

Israeli

(4,151 posts)
30. not true ...
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 04:29 AM
Jul 2013
most Israelis other than the Kahanist e.xtreme right think its silly.


unless you count Caroline Glick as Kach ,
she has been pushing the Jordanian Option since 2005 .

See :
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2006/04/the-jordanian-option.php

should that fail she also has been pushing annexation

See:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Our-World-Israels-only-two-options

anything but anything except Peace and Two States for two people .

LeftishBrit

(41,208 posts)
33. Caroline Glick, ugh!
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 11:10 AM
Jul 2013

What she is, more than anything else, is a right-wing Republican, transferring American right-wing attitudes to the Israeli context; and shrilly attacking American Jews and liberal Israelis for not being as hawkish as she is.

Her main preoccupations are with hawkish military and foreign policies and anti-Palestinian attitudes, but she is clearly also an economic right-winger and anti-environmentalist, and hates President Obama. All-round right-winger

Israeli

(4,151 posts)
35. Yup ...
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 01:29 PM
Jul 2013

I completely agree with you ....but she is not Kach .

There are many like her over here ....so saying :

most Israelis other than the Kahanist e.xtreme right think its silly.

is wrong .

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
31. There's definite interest on both sides. Why ignore or deny it?
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 09:17 AM
Jul 2013

Consider Fatah and Hamas really hate each other. Fatah and the Jordan Monarchy are united against the fanatics of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Jordan can better ensure that the W.Bank doesn't quickly become Gaza once the IDF leaves. The last thing Abbas wants is Hamas in total control. He'd be tried and hanged in quick order. Not so much with Jordan providing security.

Besides, all Palestinians prior to 1988 were Jordanian citizens. It makes sense.

LeftishBrit

(41,208 posts)
32. There are only two problems with the suggestion
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 11:06 AM
Jul 2013

(1) The Palestinians don't want it

(2) The Jordanians don't want it

(Anyone remember Black September? I'm sure that both the Palestinians and Jordanians do.)

This is just as much a western fantasy as the Israel-Palestine one-state solution. If not more so.


 

shira

(30,109 posts)
34. Post #8 above (HuffPo) shows interest from both sides.
Mon Jul 15, 2013, 11:40 AM
Jul 2013

Shimon Peres still believes that when Shamir torpedoed the London Agreement b/w Israel and Jordan (that Peres negotiated with King Hussein back in 1987) this was the greatest missed opportunity in the I/P conflict...

http://www.vosizneias.com/128223/2013/04/15/peres-i-do-not-regret-the-oslo-accords/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peres–Hussein_London_Agreement

sabbat hunter

(6,829 posts)
63. If Hamas got control of the WB
Sat Jul 20, 2013, 11:31 PM
Jul 2013

Abbas might be hanged then tried.

Jordan seems to have enough problems with its own citizens of Palestinian descent, I cannot see them wanting to bring more in. Unless King Abdullah is planning some sort of dual monarch ala the Austro-Hungarian Empire, in which the Palestinians have a ton of self rule, their own parliament for domestic matters.
But I cannot envision that happening.


Best thing Israel can do is withdraw unilaterally from most of the WB (with the exception being the old city and its immediate environs).

Any Israelis living there can either become citizens of Palestine or go back to Israel proper.

as for RoR, that will never happen, but monetary compensation should happen for any Palestinian driven out by Israeli forces during the war for independence (but not for ones who left on their own or at the behest of arab commanders on the ground)
But at the same time any Jew who were forced to leave Muslim countries after the foundation of Israel should also be compensated.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
65. That's Jordan's motivation then, right there...to keep Hamas (MB) out
Sun Jul 21, 2013, 06:35 AM
Jul 2013

The only thing keeping Hamas out now is the IDF, not Abbas' goons. In Jordan, the only thing keeping the MB (Muslim Brotherhood) down and limited are Jordan troops. Jordan would have a vested interest in keeping the fanatics out of power in the W.Bank.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
66. Jordan itself doesn't WANT to confederate with Palestine.
Mon Jul 22, 2013, 05:23 PM
Jul 2013

And those polling results you cite actually show a majority either opposing confederation or ONLY backing it after the creation of an independent Palestinian state. You would NEVER get a situation in which the Palestinians would accept simply trading occupation by the IDF for occupation by the thugs of the Royal Jordanian Army. If they'd wanted that, they wouldn't have formed the PLO while they were still living under Jordanian occupation. They'd have just said "Ok, we're Jordanians, and that's the end of it".

Wanting confederation AFTER the creation of a Palestinian state has nothing in common with "the Jordanian option", and would never include the presence of Jordanian troops in the West Bank..


Btw, the statement that Palestinians were Jordanian citizens prior to 1988 is meaningless and irrelevant. Prior to the end of South African apartheid, the black majority in South Africa were almost all considered, by that regime, to be citizens of "tribal homelands" statelets recognized by no other country in the world, in order to justtify denying black South Africans any rights at all in South Africa itself. The world didn't recognize that, and prior to 1988 it didn't recognize the conceit that Palestinians were Jordanians(a concept you are trying to revive because you still want to deny that "Palestinians" aren't a real national grouping).

Give it up. "Jordan is the Palestinian state" was a lie in the past, is a lie now, and will ALWAYS be a lie.


King_David

(14,851 posts)
50. Should Palestine become part of Jordan?
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:53 PM
Jul 2013

By Jake Wallis Simons World Last updated: January 11th, 2013

In recent months, a controversial idea that has been on ice for more than 20 years has re-entered public discourse in Jordan. In a meeting with a Palestinian charity in October, Prince Hassan Bin Talal – uncle of King Abdullah II, the ruler of Jordan – suggested that if Israeli forces were to eventually withdraw from parts of the West Bank, Jordan would have a claim to the land, as they had been in possession of it prior to the Israeli occupation. He said that although he “did not personally oppose the two state solution”, it had become irrelevant. Palestine should become part of Jordan.

This idea was popular in decades past. In 1972 King Hussein revealed his plan to establish a federal United Arab Kingdom in Jordan, Gaza and the West Bank, and claim sovereignty over these three areas. In 1985 he agreed with Yasser Arafat to pursue a goal of Palestinian self-determination within a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation. In 1988, however, during the first intifada, the King abruptly severed all Jordan’s legal and administrative ties to the Palestinian territories, stating that the time had come for the Palestinians to determine their own future and negotiate with Israel directly. In the decades that followed, attention became focused on securing an independent state for the Palestinians, and the notion of any sort of Jordanian-Palestinian amalgamation became deeply taboo

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jakewallissimons/100197555/should-palestine-become-part-of-jordan/

King_David

(14,851 posts)
51. Talk of Palestinian-Jordanian confederation irks observers on both sides of the river
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:55 PM
Jul 2013

Media reports that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is advancing a plan for confederation with Jordan have sparked a flurry of negative reactions both in Jordan and in the Palestinian territories.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/talk-of-palestinian-jordanian-confederation-irks-observers-on-both-sides-of-the-river/

King_David

(14,851 posts)
52. Jordan May Play Greater West Bank Role
Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:57 PM
Jul 2013

The recent resignation announcement by Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah -- who had served just two weeks -- struck a humiliating blow to President Mahmoud Abbas and raises serious questions about the competence of governance and the future of the Palestinian question. No one has been tapped to replace Hamdallah, although it is likely to be one of the two Deputy Prime Ministers Ziad Abu Amr or Mohammed Mustafa.

Abbas, an unelected leader whose term expired in January 2009, scored a significant symbolic victory last November in the United Nations in which the General Assembly granted Palestine non-member observer status. This grants Palestinians the option of filing legal complaints with international bodies against Israeli housing in East Jerusalem and the West Bank -- territory claimed by Palestinians for a future state.

Israel and the United States, however, oppose unilateral actions which undercut direct bilateral negotiations and have used economic pressure to prevent this from happening.

Palestinians could set their own destinies apart from Israel.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-sharnoff/jordan-palestine_b_3546693.html

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»Palestine - Jordan/West B...