LogFAQs > #976784773

Do not credit me for this , as I did not make this , but I felt there were a lot of good points, and it should help inform and keep up the fight against the Propaganda.

Peace is possible. But we have to first dismantle the false narrative that war is the only answer. Each war-mongering talking-point is in large text. The text below it debunks or provides needed context for the misleading claims.

" The palestinians were offered their own state multiple times but rejected it "

This is a crass characterization. The first 'offer' was viewed by Arabs as an attempt to legitimise ethnic cleansing. The first partition was proposed by the peel commision in 1937, and then voted through by the UN in 1947. The Arab representation objected on the basis that:

• https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-212035/
• It would result in the eviction of many palestinians from their homes
• Arabs were seeking a shared state where all religious groups were respected
• Arabs outnumbered Jews 2:1 and didnt fancy being pushed out into the hills of the west bank

Once the resolution was passed, a civil war occured. 500 Palestinian towns were destroyed, and 800,000 arabs fled into neighbouring countries, known as the Nakba. As a result, the neighbouring arab countries declared war in order to prevent further bloodshed. Here is the Arab declration of war, and it's very reasonable.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cablegram_from_the_Secretary-General_of_the_League_of_Arab_States_to_the_Secretary-General_of_the_United_Nations

" The Governments of the Arab States hereby confirm at this stage the view that had been repeatedly declared by them on previous occasions, such as the London Conference and before the United Nations mainly, the only fair and just solution to the problem of Palestine is the creation of United State of Palestine based upon the democratic principles which will enable all its inhabitants to enjoy equality before the law, and which would guarantee to all minorities the safeguards provided for in all democratic constitutional States affording at the same time full protection and free access to Holy Places. The Arab States emphatically and repeatedly declare that their intervention in Palestine has been prompted solely by the considerations and for the aims set out above and that they are not inspired by any other motive whatsoever. They are, therefore, confident that their action will receive the support of the United Nations as tending to further the aims and ideals of the United Nations as set out in its Charter. "

The next effort at a 2-state solution was the Oslo accords in 1993. The Oslo accords were agreed, but they were not an agreement on the final 2-state solution. It was meant to create a palestinian autonomy and recognised negotiating partner as the basis for future negotiations. It created a temporary arrangement of who-controls-what in the west bank. The intention was that Israel would slowly withdraw from the west bank, removing settlements and transferring authority to the Palestinians. THe early days of the Oslo accords saw some progress, with Israel removing some settlements. However, due to mistrust on both sides, the process failed, and Israel starting building more settlements. The failure of the Oslo accords is very nicely explained here:
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/why-the-oslo-accords-failed/

Things deteriorated under Netanyahu, whose clear intention is to annex all of the west bank. The strategy is to isolate palestinian communities into separate 'enclaves', boxed in by Israeli settlements. This boxing makes enclave expansion impossible. Freedom of movement is restricted between enclaves. Here is Netanyahu mocking the Oslo accords, and eloquently explaining how to use it to his advantage:

https://youtu.be/mvqCWvi-nFo?si=ivqUTnIuK6VF9edO

Many Palestinian believe the Oslo accords to be a huge failure as it legitimised the apartheid system that still operates today. This all serves as a depressing lesson about how peace agreements can be weaponised.
In 2008, Ireali priminister Olmert offered Abbas 93% of the west bank:
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ehud-olmert-s-peace-offer

But Abbas didnt commit to it, preferring future talks and scrutiny of the map. There are conflicting accounts of whether or not it was 'rejected' and why. I think the best characterization is that it was an ongoing back-and-forth process of alterations. Both sides were making real progress to and getting close to a finalized agreement. What is crytal clear is that Netanyahu was stanuchly opposed to it, and he scrapped it immediately upon reelection.

There have been no serious efforts at a 2-state solution since then. Netanyahu has accelerated settlements of the west bank. https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/03/human-rights-council-hears-current-israeli-plan-double-settler-population-occupied#:~:text=The%20Human%20Rights%20Council%20this,living%20illegally%20in%20the%20occupied

" Hamas prevent the peace process. Their charter calls for eradicating jews. They cannot be negotiated with. "

• This conflict predates Hamas
• Hamas does present a real securtity threat to Israel. But a charter written decades ago is not an eternal representation of hamas or palestinians. Their original charter is indeed poison. Although they have reformed their charter since then, apparently accepting a 2-state solution, their charter still contains much poison.
• The PNA is the recognized negotuating partner, not Hamas
• Hamas are willing to seek peaceful solutions. Hamas participated in an entire year of peaceful protests (the march of return).
• The PNA have endlessly sought legal solutions through the UN. The US and UK repeatedly block them. The most recent legal challenge was brought only a few months ago. The UK blocked it. We were warned that the situation is gaza is deteriorating rapidly. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/24/uk-seeking-block-icj-ruling-israeli-occupation-palestine
• Radical rhetoric exists on both sides. The netanyahu government is open about wanting to annex the west bank and gaza, and remove arabs from the land. The Netanyahu governemnt denies palestines right to exist
• Radical rhetoric on the Palestinian side is caused by the realization that the Israel government is aiming to annex the west bank and gaza by starving them out.
• Negotiations are not required. You do not need to negotiate with Hamas to stop stealing their water and land. Withdrawal from the west bank does not require negoations with hamas. There are many positive solutions that Israel can implement unilaterally.
• The core issue is the lack of Isreal's political will. The netanyahu government relies on votes from setllers, who have one of the highest birth rates in the world (Haredi jews have 6-7 children per family). It also relies on a coalition with fringe parties.