Zionists panic over Palestine vote in UK Parliament

Here's a motion to be debated in the UK Parliament on Monday 13 October:

this House believes that the Government should recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel.

There hasn't been much news about the debate and I have to say I don't feel particularly moved by it but then Ive never claimed to support the so-called two state solution.  But Zionists here in the UK have gone into collective panic.

The first thing I noticed was a post to Harry's Place by a chap called Stephen Hoffman.  Actually that's where I got the text of the motion from.  Here's what Zionists are suggesting should be done to neutralise the motion:

At end, add’, on the conclusion of successful peace negotiations between the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority.

which of course means, this House believes that the Government should never recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel.

Now the original motion is pretty weak and open to interpretation.  A state of Palestine alongside Israel could be in Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Lebanon.  But according to the Jewish Chronicle,

The [Zionist] activist said MPs backing the motion had been "very clever. The motion is very blandly worded and could be interpreted as being supportive of a two-state solution, which all key groups here support".

Yup, it's certainly bland but how could the words "recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel"  be open to any interpretation other than support for a two state solution?

Ah I know, the JC very smartly avoiding quoting the motion so here it is again just in case Marcus Dysch (who else?) happens to pop by:

this House believes that the Government should recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel

Bad news for one staters like me but why is the JC so down on it it won't even show it to its readers?

Bibi's one state solution

Here's an article by Saree Makdisi on the implications of Bibi's decision to further colonise the West Bank, separating north from south and the whole thing from Jerusalem.  It appears in the International Herald Tribune which is the "global edition of the New York Times".  This is just a snippet:

Once the fiction of a separate Palestinian state is revealed to have no more substance than the Wizard of Oz — which the E1 plan will all but guarantee — those Palestinians who have not already done so will commit themselves to the only viable alternative: a one-state solution, in which the idea of an exclusively Jewish state and an exclusively Palestinian one will yield to what was really all along the preferable alternative, a single democratic and secular state in all of historical Palestine that both peoples will have to share as equal citizens.

A campaign for rights and equality in a single state is a project toward which the Palestinians will now be able to turn with the formidable international support they have already developed at both the diplomatic and the grassroots levels, including a global boycott and sanctions movement whose bite Israel has already felt.

For Palestinians, in any case, one state is infinitely preferable to two, for the simple reason that no version of the two-state solution that has ever been proposed has meaningfully sought to address the rights of more than the minority of Palestinians who actually live in the territory on which that state is supposed to exist.

Things have been changing quickly lately. Israel was left isolated at the UN over the Palestinian UN bid and it had to settle for unfavourable terms over its recent lost war in Gaza. I'm guessing things haven't changed so much for Saree Makdisi's article to appear in the New York edition of the New York Times but I could be wrong.

Mainstreaming the one state solution

Here's another call for the one state solution from, to my mind anyway, an unexpected source.  Simon Hughes of the UK's Liberal Democrats has described himself before now as "unequivocally a lover of Israel".   George Galloway picked up on it back in 2004 when he said it and so did I.

Well now he's calling for the one state solution on the grounds that Israel has made the two state solution impossible.  Here he is in The Jewish Chronicle:

Liberal Democrat deputy leader Simon Hughes has said that the opportunity for a two state solution to the Israel-Palestine dispute is now “near to the end” and the international community should consider a “one state solution”.

Speaking on the eve of his party conference, the veteran Lib Dem politician said he believed a single federated state in which Muslims, Jews and Christians had separate constitutional rights may now be the best option.

Mr Hughes’s controversial words are a departure from Liberal Democrat and government policy.

The Lib Dem deputy leader said: “We are near to the end of the opportunity of being able to get a peaceful two-state solution because of the extent of the settlements.” The separation of Gaza from the West Bank and the increasing encroachment of the settlements meant that an alternative to the two-state model must be explored: “We need to be honest and realistic about having a Plan B and a Plan C as well as a Plan A, as an international community.”

It gets a bit weird when he suggests that Jews in the UK should try and persuade Israel of his "new" idea:

 Mr Hughes said that the UK Jewish community should press the Israeli government to honour international law. “I call on Jewish friends who are moderate and internationalist and careful about these things to use all their influence to make sure that international law is honoured and particularly that forced removals of people don’t go ahead where possible.

“On the minority rights issue, the human rights issue, the international law issue, the United Nations issue: these are things that just stack up against Israel as unnecessary steps that don’t enhance its reputation. That’s a government of Israel point, it’s not an anti-Jewish point.”

Not sure why he thinks Jews in the UK would be influential there but when I posted about him back in 2004 I titled the post, "I love ethnic cleansing and apartheid laws": Simon Hughes. Funny then that he specifically mentions the ethnic cleansing though not by name. He appears not to be ready to describe Israel's laws as "apartheid" laws just yet.  I'm suggesting that this member of the UK Jewish community has influenced Simon Hughes. It's just curious that he has gone from being a supporter of the State of Israel to flirting with the idea of abolishing it altogether.

Tax breaks for settlement expansion

I can't see how this changes much but who am I to argue with Ha'aretz?

Today - a few days after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas a sign of Palestinian refusal of the peace process - the Ministerial Committee for Legislation will discuss another project showing Israel's addiction to the settlement drug.

Coalition Chairman Zeev Elkin and his Likud colleague Zion Pinyan have proposed an amendment to the law governing tax breaks on contributions to foster the growth of communities. Donors will be able to deduct 35 percent of their contribution. Thus the state's tax exemption to institutions that promote public goals will be expanded to include organizations that promote the settlements.

The initiators of the legislation say the amendment has a "negligible" significance on the budget. But its political significance cannot be overstated.

The proposed amendment, like declaring the settlements a preferred development area and promoting the legalization of outposts, is a crude breach of Israel's international obligations. Ariel Sharon's government, in which Netanyahu served as finance minister, pledged in 2004 to U.S. President George W. Bush to stop allocating resources to encourage settlement in the occupied territories. This move was designed to stop creating hasty facts on the ground that would make it difficult to implement a two-state solution.

Actually the implementation of a two-state solution may have been impossible years ago but this editorial reminded me of The Jewish Chronicle's front page on Friday just gone:

The agreement between Fatah and Hamas for a Palestinian unity government, to be headed by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, almost certainly signals the end of the short-lived attempt to re-launch Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. 

What peace talks? What two state solution. The capacity of zionists, of every hue, for self-delusion is breathtaking.