|Back to Index|
One Israel-Palestine state
I questioned whether Israel Shamir's idea of one Israeli-Palestine state would be viable. Diana Hull says: "Although the one man, one vote, one state idea sounds fair and equitable, the huge difference in Total Fertility Rates between Israelis and Palestinians would ensure that Jews would become a small minority in this merged country in several generations. There is such a thing as demographic warfare. The high birth rate of Muslims in Yugoslavia was a least a part of the problem they had with the Serbs". Paul Simon says: "Hmmm, after a bloody internal conflict, the major powers decide to create an artificial state. In it are peoples who are vaguely genetically and culturally related and occupy adjacent and overlapping lands. However, they hate each other and have many differences in language and, perhaps most importantly, religion. Israel-Palestine or Yugo-semetia? Doesn't sound promising to me..."
Note that both Diana and Paul bring up Yugoslavia, which provides a prime argument against multiculturalism, which is politically correct. European countries show that it is really incorrect or questionable. What is the solution? One Israeli proposal is to build a wall between the two populations. Shades of the Berlin wall! The Israeli army wants to give up some Jewish settlements which are hard to defend, but stubborn Sharon refuses. He is now giving the Greek Patriarch, who is the senior Christian dignitary, a treatment almost like that given Arafat. This will incense the Orthodox world. Greece and Turkey show signs of overcoming their ancient hatred, and some view this as a model for Israel and Palestine. We wait for proof that the former will stick, and the cases are not identical. I recall the time when it was politically correct to support the creation of the state of Israel. Political correctness is often just an unwillingness to think things through.
Ronald Hilton - 4/27/02