Politics
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join Similar Worlds today »

Will Netanyahu's departure help relations with the Palestinians?

The Palestinians themselves don't think so.

It's probable but not yet certain that Israel's longest serving and most violent leader will be sent out of power. His corruption and decrease in popularity means that there is a big tent coalition of parties set to remove Bibi from office. This is a good thing.

The coalition in question though even has some parties who are to the right of Netanyahu and whose main problems with him is that he hasn't built enough settlements on Palestian land or bombed enough buildings.

Even the centre and centre-left of Israeli politics is Zionist and hawkish. The institutions of the country, from the courts to the IDF, are geared towards driving Palestinians from their land and further entrenching the military occupation. 'End of a dark era and the beginning of a new dark era,' is how one Palestinian put it. The problems are systemic and change needs to come from outside by stopping arms sales to Israel and forcing the state to comply with international law.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/04/palestinians-welcome-end-of-netanyahu-era-but-fear-more-of-the-same
Oldest First | Newest First | Top
LvChris · 41-45, M
[@422868,Burnley123] I gave up about 8 hours ago. That British endurance shines through. 🤣
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
[@335805,LvChris] It has its limits. Trust me.
Kwek00 · 36-40, M
[@335805,LvChris] I answered his questions about the sovereign state hourst ago. But if you think it's funny, you go right ahead.
[@422868,Burnley123] Learn to read
helenS · 31-35, F
It's highly unlikely that Mr. Netanyahu's departure will change [u]anything[/u]. The intention to annihilate Israel as a country, and kill all Jewish people (perhaps by drowning in the Mediterranean?) and transforming Israel into a larger version of the Gaza strip will certainly remain. Of course, the Arab civil war would continue in what's now Israel. And, also of course, this will never happen - the "victims of zionism" will just perpetuate their own self-inflicted misery.
helenS · 31-35, F
[@422868,Burnley123] There are [u]no Israeli settlements[/u] in Gaza.
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
[@6602,helenS] Fair point. I apologise. Its an issue for the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
helenS · 31-35, F
[@422868,Burnley123] 🌷
Adstar · 51-55, M
No.. The Palestinians are not interested in better relations.. They are interested in the destruction of Israel..
Adstar · 51-55, M
[@1201621,MotherHubbard] [quote]I doubt that fighting is the end goal of Palestinian fighting.[/quote]

This makes no sense to me.. Want to explain what you are saying?
MotherHubbard · 56-60, F
[@1086573,Adstar] I guess-. Might made it Israel. It'll never be right.
Adstar · 51-55, M
[@1201621,MotherHubbard] Here is a bit of wisdon you can learn from this discussion.. The world is never fair MotherHubbard..
alongalone · M
Well u.s. has protected that land but the fighting solves nothing
Crazywaterspring · 56-60, M
As an American tax payer I hope so. Israel couldn't exist without American aid.
deadgerbil · 22-25, M
Idk, wasn't Netanyahu replaced by another right wing group? Doesn't seem like a good start. I'd have to do a deep dive on Israeli politics
MotherHubbard · 56-60, F
I think his departure is necessary for things to improve.
Taking a hard line against the native population was like campaigning, for Bibi.
Northwest · M
The new government introduces something that's never happened in Israel's history: an Arab minister. In its 73 year history, 20% of Israel's citizens have not had representation at the Cabinet level.

That deal was actually cut between Bennett and Mansour Abbas, and Islamist Knesset member, not Yair Lapid. The latter was invited into the coalition.

Bennet differs from Netanyahu, in that he's actually a religious zealot, who favors settlements on ideological/religious grounds, whereas Netanyahu, much like Trump, is a con man, who uses religionists to get and remain in power.

Bennett and Abbas (no relation to Mahmoud Abbas) share a common goal: improve the lives of Arabs within Israel. The deal includes $17B in spending on basic services to Arab villages, Bedouin settlements, an immediate stop to demolition of Arab houses (a tactic Israel used to force Palestinians to emigrate), schools, social services, removing roadblocks in the West Bank, police harassment of Palestinians, etc.

The other thing that just happened, is that an Arab party, is the key to keeping the new government in place. If Abbas pulls out, the government will collapse.

Bennett is also more likely to respond to US initiatives. He's practically an American, with American parents, having lived in the US for years growing up, and he made $300M from starting/selling two tech companies in the US.

The 1 state solution Bennett favors is one where Palestinians are just as invested in the state as Jews. That's at least his vision. Netanyahu's plan, fully adopted by Trump, was based on making Palestinians lives so miserable, they would want to emigrate on their own.

Lapid favors a 2-state solution, and as co-PM, he gets his say as well.

I read some of the commentary in this thread, and it's amazing how well propaganda works, on both sides.

There's still a chance the new government may still collapse. Netanyahu released details tying Bennett to the Qana massacre, where 106 children were slaughtered in Southern Lebanon, while taking shelter in a UN refugee shelters. 4 UN peacekeepers were also killed. Hundreds of children were also maimed for life.

At the time, Israel said that an artillery battery malfunctioned, and returned fire on what it thought was Hezballah fire, and said that it made adjustments to auto-fire software. Turns out Bennett was the officer who ordered the artillery fire, after his unit came under Hezballah attack, while he was inside Lebanon.

Netanyahu is accusing him of cowardice, and of ordering an artillery attack on the UN refugee center, instead of verifying where the threat may have come from.

Bennett is denying that, and while acknowledging it was a massacre, says that the screwup was not his, and someone else is responsible.
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
[@9416,Northwest] Thanks for the well informed post. I'm less optimistic that things will improve.
Northwest · M
[@422868,Burnley123] I am not very optimistic. I was simply presenting things as they are. The Israeli left-wing press is not optimistic about about Bennett and they've never had a good relationship with him, going back to when he was Netanyahu's Chief of Staff.

It's a coin toss at best.

Hamas will do its best to try to make it fail. It makes the US-Iran negotiations all the more important.
Northwest · M
PS: the misinformation in this thread is mind boggling, but not surprising.
Bennett is even more conservative than Netanyahu, although he's a secularist, so the Haredi community may lose some of their special status. They view the inclusion of Ra'am as a betrayal. It's a nutty coalition; if we had something similar in the U.S., it would be like a coalition between Bernie Sanders, Josh Hawley, Ilhan Omar, and Ted Cruz, with Matt Gaetz serving as president for two years followed by Joe Biden, and AOC and Marjorie Taylor Greene getting cabinet positions. The only thing uniting these parties is the desire to get rid of Netanyahu, so once he's gone the incentive to work together will be gone, too.

Bennett is also opposed to the two-state solution, which isn't a bad thing as a separate, viable Palestinian state has been unworkable for a long time now. The annexation of the West Bank in the long run will benefit the Palestinians, as any disparate treatment would clearly be apartheid if they were part of Israel. Under the current system, they're under military occupation, so the legal definition of "apartheid" doesn't apply even if they are living under what amounts to de facto apartheid.

Annexation would increase international pressure on Israel to give Palestinians in the West Bank equal status and representation in the Knesset, as Arab Israelis have right now. This is why only a minority of Israeli Jews support annexation. Bennett's party has only 6 seats in the Knesset. The equivalent in the U.S. would be the Constitution Party and Don Blankenship being elevated to the presidency. The Constitution Party is extreme right-wing, way to the right of the Republicans.

I know you're not in the US, but I'm not familiar enough with UK politics to give examples from there, so feel free to ask for an explanation if you don't know who these people are.
Northwest · M
[@1026,LeopoldBloom] [quote]The only thing uniting these parties is the desire to get rid of Netanyahu, so once he's gone the incentive to work together will be gone, too.
[/quote]

Until he's serving time in jail, Netanyahu remains a threat. An upset stomach might be all it takes for 1 or 2 Knesset members from the coalition to change their minds, and the government will collapse, giving Netanyahu another shot.

Bennett moved ahead of time, and secured Benny Gantz's agreement not to respond to orders from Netanyahu to start a military action against Iran, to try to abort the new government.
[@422868,Burnley123] A sovereign nation of "West Bank" would not be economically viable, although there's more support for that than there is for a one-state solution. President Rivlin's proposal of a federation of self-governing cantons currently has around 15% support among Israelis.
[@9416,Northwest] I agree, the coalition has a one-seat majority, and once Netanyahu is out, there's nothing else holding it together. This may be why Bennett insisted on serving first as there's no guarantee that the coalition will still be around in two years.
independentone · 61-69, M
It sure can't hurt
RodionRomanovitch · 56-60, M
Some things never change. The Palestinian people will never be granted self-determination nor given basic human rights as co-equals with Jews. Israeli policy is to perpetuate the occupation and 'manage' the conflict. The only way meaningful change will come is if a peace settlement is imposed upon the parties , and that will never happen while the US remains Israel's guarantor.
MotherHubbard · 56-60, F
[@18451,RodionRomanovitch] because the USA can still totally get away with what it always got away with? Things do change
CountScrofula · 36-40, M
The only entity with the power to end this is Israel.

The endless expectation that the Palestinians must all magically become Gandhi is insane, unrealistic, and dehumanizing. Over 200 people were killed recently, 66 of them children. You expect anyone to behave peacefully after that?

Israel has the standing army, all the money, and a stable state. They need to not just go to a ceasefire, but weather any attacks that occur after a ceasefire without retaliating.

The entity with the power is the one who has to end this, and the Palestinians have absolutely no power.
Kwek00 · 36-40, M
[@624254,CountScrofula]
[quote]But no. Life in West Bank and life in Tel Aviv are not equivalent.[/quote]

Which is a partially the consequence of the attitude of Palestinian leaders. The other people that are to blame is the Israelian attitude and all the partners of United Nations that refuse to call people responsible on both sides according to International Law. Mainly, the US and it's partners because of strategic interests.

[quote]But no. Life in West Bank and life in Tel Aviv are not equivalent.[/quote]

Part of how the living conditions are on the West Bank, is also a consequence of the political body that governs them. It's almost as if it's okay to have a really bad governement and other people have to be blamed for this aspect.

[quote] Israel is not a bombed out wreck as the rockets rarely land and when they do[/quote]

If you open fire on me, and you miss every shot and I hit you in the head. Well, then someone else can argue that I wasn't proportional with my violence because you are dead and I'm not. But the intend of you wanting to kill me was clearly there. So I really don't care how much you missed.

[quote]This 'both sides' stuff is disingenuous[/quote]

I member a time that there was actually a deal, and that ridiculous wall wasn't build yet. And in the wake of that deal, families wedding parties just blew up because suicide terrorism. And when the Palestinian governement was urged to look into this, the thing was that they couldn't control it.

I also remember a time long ago, when there was first talk of a 2 state proposition, but the Palestinians allied themselves with the armies that tried to whipe Israel of the map, because that was just a better option I guess.

This fantasy that the political body in Palestine is just outside the realm of critique because of a power inbalance? Well, I don't agree with that. Diplomacy, on both sides on diffrent moments have all been wrecked all for their own personal gains. It wasn't once sided, and that's why we have a mess today where both sides are at eachothers throats and no of the two wants to make a deal. And then you have an international community that just want this crap to stop because they see the horror on TV now and then, but what they don't get is that if both sides are unwilling to make a deal, that there isn't going to be one.
Kwek00 · 36-40, M
[@422868,Burnley123]
[quote]@Kwek00 Which itself was retaliation for ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem.[/quote]

What people on here keep trying to sell, is because of this East Jeruzalem situation, we can have a blind spot when a side just randomly starts shooting rockets over a border to make as much casualties as possible.

You can handle this in so manny diffrent ways, but I guess shooting rockets over a border to make what ever casualty you can is the way to earn some respect and get the international community to look into this case again and support you? ... At least, in fantasyland, that is the case.

[quote]Count is right in that when one side has all the power (and commits 80%+ of the violence BTW) a reductive 'both sudesism' makes no sense.[/quote]

Only if you look at the casualties, not at the violence used.

[quote]If you are gonna have an Oslo Accords style peace process (I see nothing more viable), then the side with the power needs to comply with it, this tine. This won't happen while Israel is given money, weapons and diplomatic cover from the world's superpower.[/quote]

If you can actually make a new treaty that is clear for everyone and enforce it this time around, then what's the problem? But to do this, both sides need to sit at the table make an agreement AND THEN the international community really has to do their jobs. That means that if Israel would break the accords, they would be punished. And that knife slices both ways. But you need to make an agreement first.
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
[@421865,Kwek00] I'm not repeating my moral and strategic criticisms of Hamas because I don't need to.

I think blaming the Palestians for bad government and conditions in Gaza and the West Bank is beyond ridiculous. Given the blockade and the periodic bombing, its a challenge to survive and have any kind of society at all.

The main point, which you keep taking past, is that the two sides equivalency argument makes no sense when one side has the power. An occupied people in third world conditions vrs an occupying force miliatily and economically backed by a superpower.

The settlements and bullying of Palestianians long predated Hamas coming to power and would continue if the Palestinians had different people in charge. The both sides ism here shuts down the possibility of the international community bringing serious pressure to bear on the dominant antagonist.
LvChris · 41-45, M
Not for two years. After Bennett is done with his turn, maybe things can get better if they've not already gotten 10x worse.
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
[@335805,LvChris] Assuming the coalition lasts two years. I would bet afainst that.
CountScrofula · 36-40, M
[@422868,Burnley123] I think the coalition is literally just in place so Netanyahu can lose political protection and go under so politics can continue without him.
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
[@624254,CountScrofula] Absolutely.
GhostPoncho · 51-55, M
I tend not to think so as it seems the Israeli right and religious fanatics have a stranglehold on Israeli politics. I’m not an expert but it also seems there is general consensus that Israel should be an apartheid state.
Northwest · M
[@903658,BelovedTed] Israel is a de facto apartheid state.
NinjaBoy · 18-21, M
No. I heard the guy who is set to replace him is even further to the right. There is no functioning left in Israel. There is no party that is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. People are just sick of Netanyahu and his corruption, they don't fundamentally oppose his policies on Palestine. Nothing is going to change.
smiler2012 · 56-60, M
{@burnley123] i look at this in a more simplistic way . politicians are part of this long running feud not being able to find a solution for lasting peace . but i also think there is another reason just pure hatred between the two warring factions maybe difference of religions maybe the palenstinians are getting a bum deal over land

 
Post Comment  
 
10145 people following
Politics
Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
New Post
Group Members