Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

What will Israel consider in order to make a peace deal?

Today, Anthony Blinkin said this:

"Israel must stop taking steps that undercut Palestinians ability to govern themselves effectively. Extremists' settler violence carried out with impunity, settlement expansion, demolitions, evictions all make it harder – not easier – for Israel to achieve lasting peace and security.
Israel must be a partner to Palestinian leaders who are willing to lead their people are living side by side in peace with Israel as neighbors. As I told the prime minister, every partner that I met on this trip said that they're ready to support a lasting solution that ends the long-running cycle of violence and ensures Israel's security. But they underscored that this can only come through a regional approach that includes a pathway to a Palestinian state. If Israel wants its Arab neighbors to make the tough decisions necessary to help ensures lasting security, Israeli leaders will have to make hard decisions themselves."

I guess you will see how much Israel wants peace. Considering that they have pretty much been in constant war for 75 years, it certainly seems like continued fighting will not achieve their goal. They are fighting an ideology, not a country, and it seems they are unwilling to consider why that ideology propagates despite their attempts to destroy it.

What kind of "hard decisions" do you think Israel is willing to make if it means lasting peace? Removing all settlements from the West Bank? Removing settlements from the Golan Heights? Allowing a two-state system and giving up control of Gaza and the West Bank? Frankly, I don't see the current Israeli administration conceding squat. As an American, I would like to see our government use it's leverage here.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Ynotisay · M
I'm of the belief that the government of Israel, which is different than the people, doesn't truly want peace. I think having enemies is more important for fueling an identity as well as a revenue stream.
sascha · F
@Ynotisay How do you think "the people" would have responded if Israel had not taken military action in Gaza?
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@Ynotisay I agree 100% Let's put it this way, 80 years of fighting, almost continuously, and the problem has only gotten worse.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@sascha The point is that this goes back long before Oct 7th, and that the policies of the Israeli Government have contributed to this strife.
Ynotisay · M
@sascha That wasn't the question. I don't think any reasoned person would expect a nation to not respond to that kind of a terrorist attack. But denouncing the far-right, extremist Israeli government isn't even closely related to supporting terrorism. Which I think is the point you were making. Maybe I'm wrong.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@Ynotisay I see it as not that much different that the USA after 9/11. I think all Americans wanted a military response to the terrorist attack. For many Americans, that simply meant taking out Bin Laden and Al Qaeda and the Taliban. When it came to Iraq, many of us saw that as angry retaliation and unnecessary, and we were called "anti-American" for having that view.

We spent 20 years in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban and trying to change the culture there. And what is there now? The Taliban. Is Iraq better off without Saddam? Questionable.

The same fate will fall upon Israel. They may "destroy" Hamas, but they will be back in 5-10 years with another name. The difference is the USA is a hemisphere away and does not rely on international support.

If Israel truly wants lasting peace and recognition, they need to take a hard look at why so many want to fight them and realize "antisemitism" isn't the only reason.
Ynotisay · M
@trollslayer A thoughtful comment. Thanks for that.