Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (13330)	5/23/2002 5:38:58 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I ran across this in the Tucson paper, of all places. I don't think I've ever seen this opinion expressed. Thought you might find it interesting. Tucson, Arizona Thursday, 23 May 2002 Palestinians must drop separate state dream By Jalal Ghazi Despite increasing momentum worldwide for a Palestinian state, as a Palestinian, I say forget it. We're better off fighting for our rights within Israel. I'm proud of my heritage, and I'm no apologist for Israeli oppression. But it's time my fellow Palestinians and their supporters faced facts: Israel will never pull its settlers from the West Bank, will never relinquish control of West Bank water, will never allow Palestinians to control borders with Arab neighbors and will never allow the Palestinians to have an army. That means any Palestinian state to emerge from in the midst of current historical realities will be a pseudo-nation, a fractured, thirsty and powerless entity incapable of bringing freedom, prosperity or security to its citizens. There are 213,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Another 200,000 live in East Jerusalem, where Palestinians want to establish a separate capital. And Israel has actually accelerated the construction of settlements on confiscated Palestinian lands since signing the Oslo peace agreement in 1993. They will never leave. Two extremely important strategic reasons keep Israelis there. The first is water. The West Bank provides Israel with more than 30 percent of its water. More than 70 percent of Israeli settlements in the West Bank are placed directly over water wells and aquifers, allowing Israel to control about 80 percent of all West Bank water. Since its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, Israel has prohibited Palestinians from digging any new wells. Palestinians must link their water pipes to Israeli settlement systems, giving Israelis control of Palestinian water use. In several negotiations with Palestinian officials since 1993, Israel has made it clear that it has no intention of giving up control of West Bank water, even if it is located under Palestinian towns and villages. Any Palestinian state simply wouldn't be allowed to have enough water for a prosperous future. West Bank Palestinians currently are forced to pay three times as much as Israelis for precisely the same amount of water. This would be harder to justify within a one-state structure. Second, giving up the West Bank would narrow Israel's geographical width to as little as nine miles between the Mediterranean and the new Palestinian state. Since 1973, after the nearly devastating surprise attack on Israel by Egypt and Syria, Israel has regarded the West Bank as an essential security zone. Yes, Israel has signed peace agreements with Jordan and Egypt, but the danger of a coup by extremists in either country means Israel will not give up this important ground. Most Israelis live close to the West Bank, increasing the value of the West Bank as a defense for these densely populated areas. Clearly, the intifada and world opinion have forced Israel to respond in some way to the Palestinians' plight. What Israel has in mind is the establishment of sovereign Palestinian territories, like American Indian reservations in the United States. Such a Palestinian "state" will never share borders with Jordan, Lebanon, Syria or Egypt, for Israel insists on controlling these borders. American Indians currently live in the wealthiest nation on Earth, yet they live in extreme poverty. They live in one of the world's most democratic societies, but virtually without political representation. A Palestinian state won't be any better. Instead, Palestinians should fight for their rights within the state of Israel, choosing the path blacks took in the U.S. civil rights movement. Ironically, Israel's brutal destruction of the Palestinian Authority gives Palestinians a chance to return to pre-Oslo conditions and embark on such a path. During the first intifada (1987-93), Palestinians had roughly the same rights held by green card holders in the United States. They could not become citizens, but could travel, work and use the legal system in Israel. Palestinians had no real justice before 1993 and certainly don't have it now. But before Oslo, they were using nonviolent means of resistance effectively in their struggle for rights and dignity. Today, working within Israel, using civil disobedience and not suicide bombs, a nonviolent Palestinian struggle for freedom might reinvigorate the Israeli peace movement, which was all but dead before the recent siege of Jenin and other West Bank towns. There will be no peace as long as Israel thinks it can segregate Palestinians into isolated West Bank towns, restrict their freedoms, deny them land, water and a viable economic future and call the resulting impotent structure a Palestinian state. Nor will peace come as long as some Palestinians think terrorizing Israelis will cause them to leave. Both peoples have no place to go. Both ultimately need each other, in one truly democratic land without walls, fences or checkpoints. * Jalal Ghazi is a graduate student in international studies at San Francisco State University. He is a Palestinian who grew up in East Jerusalem.