The Jews are not a majority in the
region, or even in the territory they occupy, probably.
The region is not the issue, or at least not a major one. The whole region is not in an uprising against Israel nor is Israel trying to occupy the whole region. I'm pretty sure the Jews are still a majority in the territory they occupy although they probably wont be if they still occupy all of it for another generation. But even then they will not be a small minority like the White South Africans.
If the region of concern were the tiny gerrymandered country of Israel, then I'd agree with you here. But trying to analyze Israel in terms of the postage stamp sized piece of strangely shaped land it occupies, as if it were on the moon instead of in the Middle East, is silly.
The main region of concern is Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. The rest of the region has some effect but not a major one as long as there is no regional war. Trying to analyze an uprising in terms of the entire population of a large region, most of whom are not involved in the uprising is silly. The "gerrymandering" of the land is a red herring. Many other countries are just as oddly or arbitrarily shaped. It would have been an issue with the original (pre 1948 war) Israel.
The same analysis you're using would have applied to the white
regions of South Africa, but that didn't fly either.
Because everyone involved considered themselves South African, and considered all of South Africa to be their country. Also I believe the population was more mixed then in Israel.
In order to survive, Israel has to obtain the support of every
US administration from here to 10 years after never.
I'm not so sure that is true. If Israel looses US support it won't enable the Palestinians to overcome Israel, it would require a large scale Arab military effort. As long as the other Arab countries don't have major foreign support (like they used to get from the Soviet Union) and as long as they don't get their act together in terms of reforms to make their militaries more effective and in terms of effectivly coordingating the armies from different countries, I think it is possible for Israel to survice without US support, esp. if that lack of support is temporary (one administration that doesn't support Israel but doesn't support the Arabs either). Certainly a loss of US support would eventually put Israel at risk, but I think the risk is minor if the support is not lost for more then a few years, and in any case "at risk" is not the same as doomed to destruction.
Re: "The heavy weapons are good to keep the cross border terror from happening." This is an interesting statement, especially in the light of the WTC cross border terrorism incident, as well as in the light of Israel's experience. I won't comment further.
Armies and police can not provide an impenetrable shield against cross border terrorism but they can make it difficult. With Israel's military superiority cross border terrorism and guerilla attacks would be a trivial matter for the Arabs.
(1) South Africa no longer has white rule. Israel will also eventually no longer have Jewish rule. What they call the resulting country doesn't matter. States rename themselves all the time.
Its not just a matter of a name. South Africans considered themselves to be members of the same nation. The only question was who would rule that nation. The Jews and Palestinians do not consider themselves to be part of the same nation.
(3) The South Africans did try to give up land for peace. That was what the Bantustans were. And you're right, it was not a realistic attempt. Israel's attempt to give up land for peace is similarly doomed.
If the Israelis give the Palestinians all or at least the vast majority of the West Bank and Gaza, with control over their own borders and with decent water supplies and with control of a lot of the area that is now controlled by Israel settlers (without all the road blocks and security zones) then Israel would not be offering the equivalent of the Bantustans. The Bantustans where a small part of South Africa that was being offered to a majority of the population. Not a big percentage of the land being offered to a big but not majority group. Also the Bantustans where isolated from each other and from avenues of commerce with other nations, and they where usually the worst land in South Africa. On top of that they where often very arbitrary, it wasn't a matter of giving the areas with the most blacks to the blacks and the areas with the most whites to the whites. Israel sans west bank and Gaza will be majority Jew (And many of the non Jews are not considered Palestinians). The West Bank and Gaza will be majority Palestinian Arab.
Finally and most importantly the ANC did not defeat white rule. The whites negotiated it away when they felt they could get a reasonable deal. If enough trust can be developed between the two sides at some point there probably will be 2 countries. If the the two sides never trust each other then the current situation can continue for a long time.
You point out situations like South Africa and Vietnam where the side with the most military power did not win, but you don't point out any where the issue was settled forcibly by just an uprising and terrorism like that practiced by the Palestinians. In Vietnam the US lost it's desire and went home. The Israelis are home. In Vietnam after the US left the communists had the military advantage and they won with a large scale conventional military invasion, not by an uprising, or by using terrorism or guerilla warfare. The situation in South Africa was not settled by force, either an uprising or a war. It was settled by negotiation after the whites where finally convinced that it wouldn't be the end of the world if someone like Nelson Mandela became president. If half of the country was majority white and half majority black you still may have had a two country solution even with someone like Nelson Mandela as the head of the ANC. If Arafat was head of the ANC I doubt there would have been any agreement, you would probably still have white rule in South Africa.
Tim |
