Something has to give in gaza. What that is and what it will look like is anyone's guess. But setting everyone on their ear, demanding people take responsibility, is actually a good place to start
Great analysis. If I'm not mistaken, before Islam, were not Arabs called Saracens? An advanced trading culture? Maybe they still have it in them? But you're right, these people can't be responsible now. But no government money need be involved. I got the same feeling last night when I heard Trump as I did when I saw Reagan give his "Star Wars" speech. But then I knew he could do it. Interesting times. Oh, Happy Birthday to the Gipper. (Feb. 6). Maybe you can get a speaking gig at the Library so we can attend. Take care.
Very well written. It’s a starting point for, hardly an end point for some modicum of stability in theME. As you correctly point out, nothing has worked to date.
And while he has [almost] unlimited political capital and influence, let him use his bully pulpit to shake the status quo by the neck.
For right now, that’s plenty. I only regret that the unctuous Ben Gvir and Smotrich couldn’t be happier..
Very interesting. I didn't know that the original charter of the PLO excluded Gaza and the West Bank. So many details of history that the media doesn't know, or if it does, prefers to keep from us. I don't know what Trump is really thinking, but when he talks about moving the locals out of Gaza he is shining the light on the Arab states that, with all their sob-stories about the Palestinians, don't want to take a single one of them. That starts with Egypt, which has built a wall against Gaza far bigger than the so-called "Apartheid Wall" (Jimmy Carter) that Israel has built.
First, the Palestinians do not want to leave Palestine and they won’t leave Palestine. Even the severely co-opted United States will never endorse ethnic cleansing, which is a synonym for genocide.
In due course and before long there will be more indigenous Arabs in the combination of Palestine/Israel than there are Jews. And, no foreign country will be coerced into taking 2.5 million people from another foreign country. That certainly applies to Egypt, Jordan, etc. Perhaps you’re not aware that the Palestinian population of Hashemite Jordan (total population about 11 million) already includes about 3 million Palestinian refugees.
Maybe the United States could do its part and take 1 million or so Palestinian refugees if they want to leave. But, if the United States “takes ownership“ of Gaza that would mean that the people of Gaza would eventually assume a status roughly the same as residents of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc. The people of Gaza would thus become citizens of the United States while staying there, even though they wouldn’t have congressional representation. As citizens of the United States, they could then move anywhere in the U.S. that they chose, just as Puerto Ricans and people from Guam are able to do.
As usual, we should take Trump seriously, not literally. But this kind of thinking is welcome, even refreshing. It may seem crazy, but what's that word again when you keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result?
To get the people who live there to move is almost as difficult as killing the idea of Hamas (which is probably easier) Remember after WW2. Where was the first place the Jewish people headed. Germany and Poland. We can rebuild gaza to what it was under the Israeli administration but it will take at least 15 years we just have a big problem to solve.
I don't know what to think about this proposal. But every time we think he has gone over the edge, it turns out he has poked the right bear and got things moving, albeit maybe just moving in A direction, not the right direction. I think I will give him the benefit of the doubt and let this play out before I pick a side on the argument
Hooray. After failure on failure using the same tired formula, Trump wants to take a different course. And all those who ran out of ideas entirely after about 1993 act as if HE is the crazy one. Einstein said it best, I am told. About doing the same thing over and over.
Brilliant article, regardless of one’s take on Gaza. I think you are correct, though. And you proved it with entertaining prose, common sense, and solid details.
Attached (below) is an email message that I wrote to Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies almost 6 years ago.
<start>
Mr. Schanzer:
Congratulations on your recent article on Gaza and Hamas; the insight expressed in the article underscored what many observers of the Middle East have known for a long time: There is no good solution for Gaza.
Please allow me to offer an alternative "out-of-the-box" vision, given the following stipulations:
-- Israel has no interest in governing Gaza
-- Egypt has no interest in governing Gaza
-- Hamas and the related terror groups must be eliminated to ensure Israeli security
-- There are no civic organizations within the Arab world trustworthy enough to govern Gaza
The alternative vision is, after destroying Hamas, ceding control of Gaza to large resort-oriented corporate entities whose mandate would be to construct high-end tourist resorts along the (beautiful) beaches of Gaza. The immediate benefit would be a substantial improvement in the Gaza economy because of all of the construction and service jobs created by these organizations.
Responsibility of all civic governance of Gaza would be given to the corporate entities. Israel (and likely, the rest of the world, but who really cares, anyway) would be completely indifferent to the methods used by the corporate entities to sustain a civil society that does not attack its neighbors.
Gaza would be prohibited from constructing an airport, and all tourists patronizing the Gaza resort would be bused in from Israel. Failure of the corporate entities to sustain a civil, non-violent society would be met by closure of the Israeli-Gaza border and a loss of all potential customers.
We have overwhelming proof that peace cannot exist between Gaza and Israel as long as Arab politicians run the territory. So let's try something else, specifically, governance by entities that have a substantial financial stake in the maintenance of peace.
"Resortistan".
Please accept my warmest wishes, and please keep up the fine work. Your voice is of great interest and of great importance.
What do you do with the Palestinians who do not want to leave? Keep in mind, the Arabs from the beginning (1947-49) refused them assimilation within their borders, preferring instead to use them as a tool in their forever war against the Jews in Palestine. Back then assimilation could have worked, but since then they have been radicalized by a Jihadi mindset which has been principally financed with Western money. The only place the majority of Palestinians in Gaza would voluntarily choose to emigrate would be into Israel proper, preferably with the Jews magically removed. The Arab States that have relations with Israel, as well as those that hope to in the future, have spent an enormous amount of resources cracking down on the radicalization of their own populations, so expecting them to take in a couple million Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers would seem to me to be a non-starter. I agree completely that a return to the "two state" answer with the PA as currently constituted and Hamas having any presence in Gaza are also non-starters, but while Trump's development scheme for Gaza is intriguing, I have yet to hear a workable plan for dealing with the existing Arab population. World hunger, homelessness, world peace, as well as the end to the Israeli/Palestinian "conflict," are all noble goals that will only be fully realized in the world of fiction. Why? Because we live in a world populated by human beings. In the real world the best that we can hope are solutions where levels of toleration for these scourges of humanity can constantly be reduced.
The obvious and only solution is for Israel to reclaim ownership of its territory. Trump needs to help Israel achieve this. From the river to the sea. That's where Israel needs to be!
On the surface, the proposal almost seems like it will work.
Israel wants US support (Christian military) to attack Iran, and having the US own land there would delight PM Netanyahu and Security Minister Ben-Gvir.
Trump, I think, envisions a private real estate development program, not a government boondoggle. This requires Gaza have competent fair governance. No part of Islam is capable of that. Full stop. Therefore, Israel must provide sovereign governance and basic services of a government (consider Japan post WWII but with full Israeli sovereignty). The funding under such circumstances will be globally sourced and I think it will be there. The program will take at least a generation so the Arab world (Egypt and Jordan most like) must accommodate the displaced Pals whether they like it or not. And they will have to figure out how to become civilized in the process. The alternative to something like this is not return to status que but rather is recolonization of those parts of Islam that can't behave.
Something has to give in gaza. What that is and what it will look like is anyone's guess. But setting everyone on their ear, demanding people take responsibility, is actually a good place to start
Great analysis. If I'm not mistaken, before Islam, were not Arabs called Saracens? An advanced trading culture? Maybe they still have it in them? But you're right, these people can't be responsible now. But no government money need be involved. I got the same feeling last night when I heard Trump as I did when I saw Reagan give his "Star Wars" speech. But then I knew he could do it. Interesting times. Oh, Happy Birthday to the Gipper. (Feb. 6). Maybe you can get a speaking gig at the Library so we can attend. Take care.
Very well written. It’s a starting point for, hardly an end point for some modicum of stability in theME. As you correctly point out, nothing has worked to date.
And while he has [almost] unlimited political capital and influence, let him use his bully pulpit to shake the status quo by the neck.
For right now, that’s plenty. I only regret that the unctuous Ben Gvir and Smotrich couldn’t be happier..
Very interesting. I didn't know that the original charter of the PLO excluded Gaza and the West Bank. So many details of history that the media doesn't know, or if it does, prefers to keep from us. I don't know what Trump is really thinking, but when he talks about moving the locals out of Gaza he is shining the light on the Arab states that, with all their sob-stories about the Palestinians, don't want to take a single one of them. That starts with Egypt, which has built a wall against Gaza far bigger than the so-called "Apartheid Wall" (Jimmy Carter) that Israel has built.
First, the Palestinians do not want to leave Palestine and they won’t leave Palestine. Even the severely co-opted United States will never endorse ethnic cleansing, which is a synonym for genocide.
In due course and before long there will be more indigenous Arabs in the combination of Palestine/Israel than there are Jews. And, no foreign country will be coerced into taking 2.5 million people from another foreign country. That certainly applies to Egypt, Jordan, etc. Perhaps you’re not aware that the Palestinian population of Hashemite Jordan (total population about 11 million) already includes about 3 million Palestinian refugees.
Maybe the United States could do its part and take 1 million or so Palestinian refugees if they want to leave. But, if the United States “takes ownership“ of Gaza that would mean that the people of Gaza would eventually assume a status roughly the same as residents of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc. The people of Gaza would thus become citizens of the United States while staying there, even though they wouldn’t have congressional representation. As citizens of the United States, they could then move anywhere in the U.S. that they chose, just as Puerto Ricans and people from Guam are able to do.
Bigotry plus ignorance. A lovely combo
Were you making a point? Or just being rude?
As usual, we should take Trump seriously, not literally. But this kind of thinking is welcome, even refreshing. It may seem crazy, but what's that word again when you keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result?
To get the people who live there to move is almost as difficult as killing the idea of Hamas (which is probably easier) Remember after WW2. Where was the first place the Jewish people headed. Germany and Poland. We can rebuild gaza to what it was under the Israeli administration but it will take at least 15 years we just have a big problem to solve.
I don't know what to think about this proposal. But every time we think he has gone over the edge, it turns out he has poked the right bear and got things moving, albeit maybe just moving in A direction, not the right direction. I think I will give him the benefit of the doubt and let this play out before I pick a side on the argument
Hooray. After failure on failure using the same tired formula, Trump wants to take a different course. And all those who ran out of ideas entirely after about 1993 act as if HE is the crazy one. Einstein said it best, I am told. About doing the same thing over and over.
Brilliant article, regardless of one’s take on Gaza. I think you are correct, though. And you proved it with entertaining prose, common sense, and solid details.
Attached (below) is an email message that I wrote to Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies almost 6 years ago.
<start>
Mr. Schanzer:
Congratulations on your recent article on Gaza and Hamas; the insight expressed in the article underscored what many observers of the Middle East have known for a long time: There is no good solution for Gaza.
Please allow me to offer an alternative "out-of-the-box" vision, given the following stipulations:
-- Israel has no interest in governing Gaza
-- Egypt has no interest in governing Gaza
-- Hamas and the related terror groups must be eliminated to ensure Israeli security
-- There are no civic organizations within the Arab world trustworthy enough to govern Gaza
The alternative vision is, after destroying Hamas, ceding control of Gaza to large resort-oriented corporate entities whose mandate would be to construct high-end tourist resorts along the (beautiful) beaches of Gaza. The immediate benefit would be a substantial improvement in the Gaza economy because of all of the construction and service jobs created by these organizations.
Responsibility of all civic governance of Gaza would be given to the corporate entities. Israel (and likely, the rest of the world, but who really cares, anyway) would be completely indifferent to the methods used by the corporate entities to sustain a civil society that does not attack its neighbors.
Gaza would be prohibited from constructing an airport, and all tourists patronizing the Gaza resort would be bused in from Israel. Failure of the corporate entities to sustain a civil, non-violent society would be met by closure of the Israeli-Gaza border and a loss of all potential customers.
We have overwhelming proof that peace cannot exist between Gaza and Israel as long as Arab politicians run the territory. So let's try something else, specifically, governance by entities that have a substantial financial stake in the maintenance of peace.
"Resortistan".
Please accept my warmest wishes, and please keep up the fine work. Your voice is of great interest and of great importance.
(Signed)
<end>
Very well written, and I fully agree.
What do you do with the Palestinians who do not want to leave? Keep in mind, the Arabs from the beginning (1947-49) refused them assimilation within their borders, preferring instead to use them as a tool in their forever war against the Jews in Palestine. Back then assimilation could have worked, but since then they have been radicalized by a Jihadi mindset which has been principally financed with Western money. The only place the majority of Palestinians in Gaza would voluntarily choose to emigrate would be into Israel proper, preferably with the Jews magically removed. The Arab States that have relations with Israel, as well as those that hope to in the future, have spent an enormous amount of resources cracking down on the radicalization of their own populations, so expecting them to take in a couple million Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers would seem to me to be a non-starter. I agree completely that a return to the "two state" answer with the PA as currently constituted and Hamas having any presence in Gaza are also non-starters, but while Trump's development scheme for Gaza is intriguing, I have yet to hear a workable plan for dealing with the existing Arab population. World hunger, homelessness, world peace, as well as the end to the Israeli/Palestinian "conflict," are all noble goals that will only be fully realized in the world of fiction. Why? Because we live in a world populated by human beings. In the real world the best that we can hope are solutions where levels of toleration for these scourges of humanity can constantly be reduced.
The obvious and only solution is for Israel to reclaim ownership of its territory. Trump needs to help Israel achieve this. From the river to the sea. That's where Israel needs to be!
Magaza!
On the surface, the proposal almost seems like it will work.
Israel wants US support (Christian military) to attack Iran, and having the US own land there would delight PM Netanyahu and Security Minister Ben-Gvir.
So, it's a hard pass.
Trump, I think, envisions a private real estate development program, not a government boondoggle. This requires Gaza have competent fair governance. No part of Islam is capable of that. Full stop. Therefore, Israel must provide sovereign governance and basic services of a government (consider Japan post WWII but with full Israeli sovereignty). The funding under such circumstances will be globally sourced and I think it will be there. The program will take at least a generation so the Arab world (Egypt and Jordan most like) must accommodate the displaced Pals whether they like it or not. And they will have to figure out how to become civilized in the process. The alternative to something like this is not return to status que but rather is recolonization of those parts of Islam that can't behave.