Can Palestinians and Israelis coexist in a single democratic state?

[u/endingcolonialism]

An article by Alain Alameddine and Seth Morrison on the Middle East Monitor, also in Hebrew on the One Democratic State Initiative's website

Seventy-six years of occupation, ethnic cleansing and settler-colonization, leading up to today's genocide in Gaza, cannot disappear overnight. In light of this, does the historical Palestinian and antizionist Jewish vision for a single democratic state where Palestinians and previous Israelis coexist make any sense? How would such a state guarantee the security of its citizens—Wouldn't previous oppressors and victims be at each others' throats?

Zionism claims that Jews have always been and will always be persecuted. Accordingly it presents a model for a state exclusive to Jews as the only solution, and promotes this apartheid throughout the world, by taking advantage of the long history of European antisemitism to encourage Jewish immigration to Palestine to leave their societies, cleansing non-Jews from Palestine using different means of violence, and even supporting similar identitarian projects in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria and other countries. In other words, Zionism claims that violence is inherent to having different identities and that separation is the only solution. The Palestinian liberation movement on the other hand has historically declared that violence in the region is the outcome of an oppressive settler colonial project, and that dismantling it is the solution.

Who is right? Could a democratic state guarantee peace and security for all of its citizens? And what do historical cases of colonization and decolonization have to teach us?

Dismantling colonial relations of power, establishing the legitimacy of the democratic state

In Ghassan Kanafani's "Returning to Haifa", the Palestinian child raised by Israeli settlers ended up joining the occupation forces. One could also easily imagine a settlers' son raised by Palestinians joining the resistance. This shows that violence, both the occupiers' and the occupied's, is the result of a political structure rather than of any inherent qualities. The fact that over 90% of Jewish Israelis side with the genocide in Gaza and that most Palestinians side with armed resistance is the result of colonial relations of power that were imposed by a colonial state. In other words, the role of the decolonial democratic state is not to "inherit" a cohesive society but to build and develop cohesion within it. In the word of Fanon, "decolonization brings a natural rhythm into existence … Decolonization is the veritable creation of new men". This required understanding how the settler state has imposed colonial relations of power and then determining what policies will dismantle them. The democratic state is a democratizing state.

For example, the state will grant Palestinians the rights that the Zionist state had deprived them, particularly the right of return and the right to compensation, without being unjust to Jews. It will implement a model that would be fair to all, regardless of their socioeconomic status. It will abrogate racist laws such as the Basic Law or Citizenship Law, ensuring that all are totally equal before the Law, and will criminalize political Zionism and all kinds of settler colonial ideologies. Instead of having different school curricula for Jews and non-Jews, it will unify the curriculum; and will make sure that universal civic values replace Zionist values in it. At the socio economic level, it will establish a comprehensive safety net with universal free education, universal health care and full equality in hiring and wages, closing today's income, poverty and education gaps. Previous war crimes will also have to be investigated, although the mechanisms will need to be determined by the future citizens of that state—both Palestinians and their Israeli partners.

The state will also have the monopoly of violence, which includes disarming segments of the population that are currently armed. And to quote Ner Kitri in his article "The transition from a Jewish state to true democracy will benefit all", it will use this monopoly to "protect its citizens’ lives rather than colonial privileges". Finally, the state will commit not to use its armed forces for expansionist purposes as Israel historically has. As in the cases of Kenya, South Africa and Algeria which we will discuss in more details below, deportation will not be on the table. Israelis who feel a genuine connection to the land (be it for religious, cultural or other reasons) will enjoy life as equals in a dezionized Palestine, while those who choose to leave will be able to do so peacefully.

By eliminating colonial privileges while guaranteeing rights to all, the new Palestinian state will establish and solidify its legitimacy in the eyes of its society. Crucially, instead of legitimizing its existence on the basis of representing sectarian interests, it will do so on the basis of its functional capacity to administer the affairs of its society and to guarantee its citizens' rights—rights that Israel denies Palestinians and failed to deliver to Jews. This change—this decolonization, in the fullest sense of the word—will signal a rupture with Zionism and the global colonial project. The result will be a society where tribal identities will melt away and whose citizens will not merely "coexist" but actually live together, the two previous demographic groups forming a single "mosaic of life" as Ilan Pappe expressed it.

This said—is this a realistic vision of what could happen? What does the history of Palestine, as well as historical cases of decolonization, have to teach us?

Violence under colonization and after it: Historical examples

Palestine has always been the home of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Bahai and observers of many different religions who lived together in peace. Before colonial Zionists, Palestine welcomed non-Palestinians such as Kurds, Armenians, Circassians and European Jews. For example, Zionist education initiative "TBTN" indicates that there was an "important and vital Jewish community in Gaza during the early Muslim period", and that "the Jewish community experienced a period of prosperity under Ottoman rule". TBTN explains this peace was disturbed on two occasions: First in 1799, when Jews fled Gaza ahead of Napoleon's invasion of Palestine, "marking the temporary end of a Jewish presence in the area." These Gazans returned in the 19th century and "the city was again an important Jewish center". This ended in the 1920s when, following the mass migration of Jews to Palestine and Balfour's promise to establish "a national home for Jews in Palestine", riots started throughout Palestine and Gazan Jews fled once again. In both cases, violence was the result of European colonial interference, not of inherent religious or cultural differences. As expressed in the Palestinian letter "To Our Other", "it is Zionism that has stood in the way of life, common life, on the basis of freedom and fairness".

Some recognize the above and understand that Jews and Palestinians can coexist in a dezionized land, but fear that in this specific case—over 76 years of oppression—it will prove impossible for previous oppressors and victims to live together. Obviously, feelings of supremacy on one hand and of revenge on the other are to be expected. Interestingly, historical cases of decolonization seem to reveal a pattern: When the balance of forces tips in favor of the indigenous, a transition that is more or less rough happens, a large number of settlers leave, those willing to let go of colonial privileges remain in peace. In other words, history shows that although the process of liberation can be violent, the liberation actually ends, not increases, violence between previous enemies.

Kenya is one such example. The Mau Mau uprising, which began in the early 1950s, was a significant and violent resistance movement against British colonial rule. After years of unrest and increasing pressure, the British government was forced to negotiate the independence of Kenya with the native liberation movement. The new state promoted a policy of forgiveness and reassured settlers that they could stay and contribute as equals. Many settlers left, fearing reprisals. Those who stayed did have to relinquish privileges, particularly in terms of land and resource redistribution, but there were zero cases of large-scale revenge.

The Évian accords that ended the French colonization of Algeria stated that Europeans could depart, remain as foreigners, or take Algerian citizenship. In his article "The liberation of Palestine and the fate of the Israelis", Eitan Bronstein Aparicio explains that following the announcement "a violent terrorist organization named OAS (Organisation Armée Secrète or “Secret Army Organization”) emerged and caused many casualties, mainly Algerians but also anti-colonial French, in an attempt to prevent the liberation of Algeria". This violence subsided within two months. After which, Eitan continues, "Most [settlers] chose to leave Algeria. They ran away in panic, out of fear of the day their domination would be over. But in fact, there was no real existential threat to them. They left because they were captive in their own colonial identity. In other words, they could not imagine a situation in which they would live in equality with the Algerians. And they paid a huge price for being uprooted from their home due to their own occupier mentality … [While] 200,000 French decided to stay and live in the liberated Algeria. From their testimonies, we learn that they saw Algeria as their home, and they had no reason to leave."

The end of apartheid in South Africa followed the same pattern. The negotiations between the apartheid government and the African National Congress (ANC) were accompanied by considerable violence and unrest, including clashes between rival political groups, police crackdowns, and incidents like the Boipatong massacre and the assassination of Chris Hani, a prominent ANC leader. The first democratic elections, however, were marked by a high turnout. The government enacted decolonial policies such as Black Economic Empowerment and land reforms that stripped settlers of a number of their privileges, and settlers who chose to remain as citizens did so peacefully. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission also provided an interesting model, investigating past abuses and allowing perpetrators of human rights violations who provided full disclosure of their actions and demonstrated that their crimes were politically motivated (Truth) could apply for amnesty (Reconciliation), thus judging the colonial political program that had caused the crimes rather than the human tools it had used to do so.

Other cases of decolonization seem to follow the same pattern, showing that what we need to fear is not the dismantling of the colonial Israel state or the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state, but the unfolding of the transitionary period between them. This danger can be brought to a minimum, or even averted by learning from and improving on the South Africa and Kenya models, when the Palestinian liberation movement and their Israeli partners for decolonization and peace work together on it. The colonized have made it clear, decade after decade, that a democratic state is what we want to see from the river to the sea. They must work to make this vision even clearer to both friend and foe. We invite our other—today's colonizers—to "upgrade from settlers to citizens", as our Israeli comrade Ner Kitri beautifully expressed, and to join us in our common fight for freedom for all.

"[We were led] to believe we could not live without the nation-state, lest we not only be denied its privileges but also find ourselves dispossessed in the way of the permanent minority. The nation made the immigrant a settler and the settler a perpetrator. The nation made the local a native and the native a perpetrator, too. In this new history, everyone is colonized—settler and native, perpetrator and victim, majority and minority. Once we learn this history, we might prefer to be survivors instead." — "Neither Settler Nor Native", Mahmood Mamdani

Alain Alameddine is a decolonial praxicist with a focus on Palestine and the Sham region and a coordinator at the One Democratic State Initiative. He is happy to be reached at alain.a@odsi.co.

Seth Morrison is an American, Jewish antizionist activist supporting pro-Palestine organizations including Jewish Voice for Peace. Organizational information for identification only. He writes in his personal capacity. [sethmorrison30@gmail.com](mailto:sethmorrison30@gmail.com)

[u/EgyptianNational]

A similar question to this would be: can black Americans and white Americans live together desegregated? Can white and black South Africans? Can Muslims and Christian Arabs live together?

All of those questions were answered probably with a “yes of course, they just have to grow up and try.”

It’s the same thing here. And just like in those examples all it takes is those with the power to give a little to get a lot.

[u/SolomonDRand → u/EgyptianNational]

One small silver lining is that, in my youth, you likely would have mentioned Irish Catholics and Protestants, but they did exactly what you said and now that conflict seems like a historical oddity instead of a horrible status quo.

[u/EgyptianNational → u/[deleted]]

I genuinely can’t understand what you are asking.

[u/acacia_tree]

Yes it’s possible. What will end up happening is that the most racist of the Israelis will voluntarily leave because they won’t want equal rights. Everyone else who is willing to live in an integrated society will stay. I think it’ll end up being somewhat in between what happened after the French occupation of Algeria ended and what happened after South African apartheid ended.

[u/Icy-Charity5120 → u/acacia_tree]

I love this description. Muslims and Jews coexisted for thousands of years until this racist and extremist ideology came around along with mass migration and forced take overs. Both populations can consider Palestine home if the bad apples leave. We just have to revise the rhetoric and justifications surrounding it because right now majority of jews in Palestine are not Jews of conscience

[u/musingmarkhor]

It’s hard to imagine any coexistence or cooperation with how radicalized Jewish Israelis are. There would need to be massive upheaval and Jewish Israelis would need to voluntarily submit themselves for accountability.

[u/latin220 → u/musingmarkhor]

Actually a lot of South African Afrikaners the most racist of the whites moved to Israel and were offered expedited citizenship once they converted to Judaism. So we’re not dealing with your regular diaspora Jewish person, but some of the most radicalized and racist people on earth. Not all, but this is their story…

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/podcasts/2021-10-04/ty-article-podcast/listen-the-afrikaners-who-found-a-new-home-in-israel/0000017f-dbe7-d3ff-a7ff-fbe749520000

[u/acacia_tree → u/musingmarkhor]

The reality is that a lot the most radicalized Israelis will end up voluntarily leaving. Which is for the best.

[u/specialistsets → u/acacia_tree]

Why do you think that? if anything the most radicalized would sooner start militias and take the law into their own hands just like in the 1920s-1940s

[u/allneonunlike → u/specialistsets]

I see this happening no matter what in the next 10 years, like the rape rioters fighting the IDF and police over Sde Teiman. The most radicalized elements in Israeli society aren’t willing or able to live peacefully with anyone, including other Jews. Hopefully a violent Israeli civil war leads to the colony collapsing and being reformed into a democratic, non-apartheid state.

[u/specialistsets → u/allneonunlike]

Civil war in Israel is as unlikely a scenario as civil war in the US

[u/_Sc0ut3612 → u/specialistsets]

But civil war in the US is all but inevitable.

[u/acacia_tree → u/specialistsets]

Those militias were only successful because they had British backing. Israelis already have the IDF, which is losing in hand to hand combat with the Palestinian resistance. The only reason why the IDF does this much damage is because they are killing children with US made bombs. If Israel falls then the Israelis who do not want to live in a society with equal rights will go home.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/acacia_tree]

I'm pretty sympathetic to your perspective, but I think it's a falsehood to suggest that all Israelis have homes other than Israel.

To be clear, I think they'd be fine. The U.S. and Western European countries would admit them. They would probably do very well. But while the rates of foreign passport-holding and "dual citizens" are high, they aren't a majority.

[u/acacia_tree → u/PlinyToTrajan]

I’m aware of that. But they’d go “home” to where their most recent ancestors are from.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/acacia_tree]

Not necessarily. They'll go to countries with strong Zionist lobbies and high economic opportunity.

[u/specialistsets → u/acacia_tree]

The earliest Jewish militias predate the British and merged into Haganah in 1920, and the British varied from just-barely-tolerating them to considering them enemies. Irgun and Lehi were always seen as enemies of the British. And despite British opposition, all were successful in securing significant material support from abroad. Israelis see this pre-State history as an essential part of their origin story so it is naive to think it would not be attempted again if their statehood was challenged.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/specialistsets]

Well said.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/acacia_tree]

That's bad, because they'll work to lobby the governments in the countries they go to to intervene in Palestine.

[u/acacia_tree → u/PlinyToTrajan]

They’re going to be completely ostracized wherever they go

[u/Expensive-Success301]

I don’t think israelis are capable of living with anyone right now. Who would even want to live with them and why should Palestinians be forced to share their land with such monsters? Do you think IOF genociders could integrate into a society thst valued Palestinians as equal citizens? Until there is justice for the victims of such a cruel and inhumane genocide there will be no peace. Until the genociders are bought to accountability to face their actions there can be no reconciliation.

[u/latin220 → u/Expensive-Success301]

They said the same thing with South Afrikaners who were vehemently racist against Black Africans. They eventually got over it and those that didn’t actually converted to Judaism and were offered Israeli citizenship…. Oh wait that explains so much… 🤦‍♂️

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/podcasts/2021-10-04/ty-article-podcast/listen-the-afrikaners-who-found-a-new-home-in-israel/0000017f-dbe7-d3ff-a7ff-fbe749520000

[u/Expensive-Success301 → u/latin220]

Wow, I never knew this, but not suprising at all. I think the reconciliation process in South Africa was probably about as successful as you could predict it would be, however I am convinced that the degree of indoctrination and programming in zionist Israel is on a level we have never seen before, like a nightmarish reality born of the ashes and bones of ethnic cleansing and allowed to flourish without impunity into the full blown genocide we see today.

Reconciliation can only begin with ownership and accountability of crimes committed, and unfortunately I don’t see any room for this within the ideology of political zionism: it is extremism in its most fundamental form and can only be subdued by destroying the ideology on every level completely, so people will forever shame zionism and make it so unacceptable that it becomes extinct.

The same virulence they attack antisemitism with must also be applied to zionism as a construct, but instead these organisations such as ADL and AIPAC uphold the core tenants of zionism as not only acceptable but justifiably necessary.

[u/latin220 → u/Expensive-Success301]

My grandma told me about this along time ago. Some of the worst Israeli settlers and some of the most extreme racists came out of South Africa.

[u/specialistsets → u/latin220]

South Africans in Israel are overwhelmingly liberal Ashkenazi Jews whose ancestors escaped Eastern Europe in the 20th century. I can't imagine there are more than a few ethnic Afrikaners who converted to Judaism and moved to Israel, that is by no means common.

[u/valonianfool → u/Expensive-Success301]

Im surprised to see this comment get so many upvotes, I get what you're saying but I dont believe its right to generalize israelis. 

[u/KessaBrooke → u/valonianfool]

I agree with you, when we call all Israelis monsters we are also generalizing based on nationality like they do to Palestinians. Some of the fiercest defenders of aid have been anti-occupation Israelis. They shouldn't be centered or unduly praised for doing the bare minimum, but they aren't all monsters. There are also plenty of Old Yishuv Jewish families who have never been Zionist and raised their kids accordingly.

[u/Ok_Editor_710 → u/Expensive-Success301]

I agree with you totally. Israel is a morally bankrupt project

[u/bogby55]

Love what this article tries to accomplish but am I the only one that sees this as wildly naive. Why would Palestinians want to live side by side with people that either genocide them or sided with the genocide?

The more this goes i genuinely believe that the only solution is for Israelis to leave which i think is wrong but it just seems hopeless af. Too much bad blood.

[u/Ok_Editor_710 → u/bogby55]

I agree with your observations, but where are the Israelis who don't have dual citizenship going to go?

[u/bogby55 → u/Ok_Editor_710]

I mean that's the problem. Dual citizens are like maybe 3 million people if I remember the recent estimates. So that still leaves like another 4 million that basically have no where to go, nor frankly do i think should they as its their home.

How would justice be implemented in this new society like how will that even be measured? The article is laying out a really idealistic plan but not taking into account the actual realities on the ground which is my main issue with it.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/Ok_Editor_710]

They can continue to live in the area under the new regime.

[u/sudo_apt-get_intrnet]

The IP situation is different from other colonial/apartheid situations because of the combination of 2 factors:

• Unlike in the Algerian/Kenyan cases, Israel is not an example of colonialism in the literal sense. There is not actual defined foreign power directly occupying the land from afar via annexation, even if it is a Western colony in the neo-colonialsm sense. The vast majority of Israelis don't have somewhere to "go back to".

• Unlike in the South African case, Jewish Israelis aren't a small minority. In fact, with the ongoing genocide making population counts difficult it is entirely likely that Jewish Israelis are actually the majority in the region. This means that unlike in post-Apartheid South Africa or Algeria a pure democratic approach is not likely to produce equitable results, since the oppressors will still maintain control over the oppressed via majority rule.

The only way I can see an 1-state solution working out is either via:

• Something causing a massive demographic shift, allowing either Israelis to maintain demographic control even through a Palestinian Right of Return or Palestinians to maintain demographic control even through Israelis' significantly higher wealth. There's no morally good, non-violent way for this to happen. It would require a) something causing a whole lot of Israelis to flee from their homes (through large-scale violence) and not returning, b) something causing a lot of Jews to flee to Israel, which at this point would only be the US govt initiating a campaign of actual state-level antisemitism, or c) a something eliminating a huge chunk of the worldwide Palestinian population, either via assimilation or via Holocaust.

• An external force coming in as an occupying power to reform society completely, the only one having enough strength and authority to do so being a US-supported UN taskforce (US-supported so the Israelis don't literally go nuclear, and UN-labelled to provide an air of international, not-western-only backing & influence). The Israeli portion of the population needs to be de-Zionified, and the only historical cases I know of that had that sort of large-scale society reconstruction work out involved direct occupation by another country. This of course would require the Israeli State itself to relinquish enough power to allow this societal reconstruction, including likely giving up its nuclear capabilities, which doesn't seem very likely to me.

[u/R0x04 → u/sudo_apt-get_intrnet]

Yep, this is the most accurate comment here. It's simply not realistic and the comparisons in the article don't work.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/sudo_apt-get_intrnet]

Maybe the solution is to set up the system on something other than one person, one vote. If one population intentionally commits genocide against another to limit their possible democratic influence, consequences are in order. Israel is a militarized society with widespread military service and direct participation in genocide. The United States did not immediately allow former Confederate States of America loyalists to vote after the peace was struck (not necessarily by denying them access to the polls, but by assigning their states no Congressional representatives or electoral votes, lasting in some areas until 1876).

[u/marsmodule]

I don’t see why not, if the hegemonic USA stopped arming

[u/thisplaceneedshelp]

It would require a lot of deconstruction on the Israeli side. Many of them have been conditioned into privilege that they need to get rid of in order to coexist with Palestinians

[u/TutsiRoach]

Unequivocally YES and i believe its the only way. Using Rwanda as a blueprint.

Reparations, equality, rehabilitation.

Creating mixed neighbourhoods with quotas like Singapore

The only way the lakud zionists can (cost effectively) become human again is to face up to what they have done and see Palestinians as humans. If they are forced out they will take their hate with them.

The only way Palestinians will (cost effectively) become human again and get the post traumatic help they need is en mass, with a lot of help, if they are pushed out and re-homed elsewhere as the jews were post WW2 they too will be a risk to people where they end up.

It is possible, it will take work, but the sooner they start the quicker and easier it will happen

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K8kxOvfUtP0

[u/Time_Waister_137]

I have been asking myself a similar question since the ‘67 war. But I am not sure if theoretically homogenizing the situation as it is today within contemporary time frames will lead us to a solution. For some of the ultra-orthodox, the enemies they seek justice from are unassailable: the assyrians and babylonians who destroyed the peoples of judah and israel roughly 3000 years ago. One has to only to listen to Netanyahu: Only by being ultra strong will that never happen again.

[u/R0x04]

As much as I would love to see this happen, I think it is an unrealistic pipe dream. Sorry but Israelis will never agree to forfeit the one and only Jewish majority state even if the entire world boycotted and shunned them, or if every single neighboring country attacked them.

Two states is the only realistic solution even if it's not fair or just. That would be the most Israelis would agree to, and even that will take tremendous outside pressure to make it happen.

[u/acacia_tree → u/R0x04]

You are neglecting the fact that Israelis are already leaving en masse

[u/R0x04 → u/acacia_tree]

They aren't.

[u/acacia_tree → u/R0x04]

You’re also neglecting the fact that Israelis won’t even agree to two states. They just want to have one state of Jewish hegemony. So what then, we let them have their way? What’s your point?

[u/R0x04 → u/acacia_tree]

My point is it's way more likely they would agree to that with enough external pressure. They will literally never agree to a non-Jewish Majority state, and if you think otherwise, you don't know Israelis.

[u/acacia_tree → u/R0x04]

Did you see what I said? They don’t even want two states. They want one state of Jewish hegemony. There should be one state for all. Israelis who don’t agree will end up leaving.

[u/R0x04 → u/acacia_tree]

Of course they don't want it. It would require tremendous pressure, as I said in my initial comment. How are you gonna get one state to happen? Nuclear war?

Read this comment for an accurate analysis - https://www.reddit.com/r/JewsOfConscience/s/ErNQgJOZZQ

[u/acacia_tree → u/R0x04]

I don’t agree with this analysis. Realistically, if the United States withdrew its support from Israel, Israel would fall in days. They are losers in hand to hand combat with the resistance and the only reason why they maintain their power is with US weapons and bombs. The Palestinian resistance would implement a one state solution . Israelis who opposed could fight back but they would lose and end up leaving. Anyone else who wanted to live with equal rights would stay.

[u/R0x04 → u/acacia_tree]

I'm sorry, but this is just not true at all. Israel has one of the strongest armies in the world, and certainly in the middle east, even without US support. They have their own military industrial complex and a mandatory draft. Even if every country around it attacked, they have a nuclear triad as a last resort, so those countries would never even consider it an option.

I would love for a one state solution, but it's a total pipe dream and not realistic. We can agree to disagree. I'm for realistic solutions like mounting massive pressure on Israel to recognize a Palestinian state in Gaza and WB, including forced removal of all settlers or land swaps agreed upon by the Palestinians.

[u/PlinyToTrajan → u/R0x04]

I think the truth is somewhere in between. I don't think Israel would fall within days. But in the medium- and long-term, it would have real military challenges. It has already fatigued its forces, and it fights currently in the Gaza strip, Lebanon, and Syria. And let us not forget that Iran is a country of 90 million people and many of its cities and military installations are high in the mountains.

[u/PlinyToTrajan]

Very interesting argument.

One thing that's often confused me is why the current facts of recent Palestinian military resistance (e.g., the attacks on military installations on Oct. 7th), Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians, and Israeli genocide of Palestinians seem to cause so many people to immediately turn to the topic of the best long-term arrangements (e.g., two-state solution, one-state solution).

Isn't the highest priority by far to stop the current genocide and severe human rights abuses? And only then to turn to the topic of the best long-term arrangement.

[u/22octav]

naïve belief, won't work, the cultures are just too different

[u/zarakor]

Everyone should follow these intellectuals 😻

[u/NAHTHEHNRFS850]

Yes.

The real question is:

1. "Would eithier ethnicity be willing to sacrifice their desire for nationality to have peace?"

Or

1. "Would both ethnicities be willing to sacrifice their identities to form a new nationality to have peace?"

[u/Ihsan2024]

They could have back in the 1930s/1940s rather than the shoddy attempt to create two states.

But sadly, I think this is simply not feasible. Too much bad blood now. And hard to work around the developments of the past 80 years...

[u/Bob-the-cat21]

They can if they let each other live and let live. First, get rid of extremists on both sides. Second, be fair.

[u/Ok_Editor_710 → u/Bob-the-cat21]

Extremists on both sides is false and lazy talking point.. All the extremism originates with Israel. Check your history.

[u/4mystuff → u/[deleted]]

To what end do you prevent refugees from returning. Even the words you use are indicative that those Palestinians are the former occupants of the land who have been exiled,thus "refugees" and "return".

If the objective is to preserve a "Jewish" state, then were back to what we have now, an apartheid state with religious supremacy. You may lose that fight to demographic changes down the line given the birthrates of the current land occupants.

If the objective is to protect Jews, then that must be enshrined not only in the constitution of such future state, but in the justice and equity of ALL its citizens. Those citizens are Jews, Christians, Muslims, and any other belief of non-belief. If the state starts by carving out protections for one group or another, it is likely to fail. A system built on force protection will ultimately fail.