Further Discussion on Israel and the Middle East (from Facebook)

Deborah Auerbach referred me to Edgar Bronfman’s posting on The Huffington Post: “A Real Two-State Solution” – not necessarily because she agreed with it wholly, but because she thought it contributed additional insights to the discussion.

I posted this with appreciation on my website. Deborah then offered her criticism, which led to another round of comments which I post here:

Deborah Auerbach at 19:32 on 10 June
We all want peace but as Mel Brooks said, Hitler also wants piece, a piece of Poland, a piece of Russia.... The settlements which you causually negate with a wave of the hand are what keeps the rockets far away from the fancy office suites of Tel Aviv.

Lenny Levin at 19:43 on 10 June
"If I am not for me, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, what am I?" The Zionist self-assertion that produced Israel was the necessary Step 1. Now we need to proceed to Step 2: to listen to the other side and engage in constructive dialogue until we achieve a consensus that affirms the legitimate needs and interests of all parties. It's great we have achieved what we have to this point. But the next steps have to be taken in concert, not alone.

Ephraim T. Jerchower at 06:42 on 11 June
The hostility directed at Jews by the other side of the equation will never be abated. It is the essence of being a Jew that inflames the other side. There is no constructive dialogue to be had with those who deny and dismiss one's existence. The dispute was never about borders.

Susan Zwillenberg at 10:12 on 11 June
Unfortunately, in order to have peace one has to talk to one's enemies and establish at least a minimum of trust.

Lenny Levin at 13:12 on 11 June
Ruling those who hate you does not work in the long run--whether they hate you for ruling them, or for who you are (or both). Occupation is a source of security in some respects and of insecurity in others. Disengagement with preservation of security will not be simple, but Rabin thought it was the best course, and I (who know a lot less about these matters than he did) trust his judgment in the matter.

Ephraim T. Jerchower at 00:15 on 12 June
The idea of "ruling those..." that you posit troubles me. I don't see that phenomenon as the case in Israel nor do I accept the notion of Israel as occupiers. Your position pre-supposes the existance of a people, to wit, Palestinians, that, somehow were displaced by the several wars started by their bretheren. In point of fact, there was no "Palestinian people" prior to the '67 war.
I take no issue with Rabin but the hatred of the existence of the Jew and the denial of the Jewish state remains the cornerstone ideology of those folks you believe Israel should disengage from. With the utmost respect, it's not about occupation or borders. It's about what its always been about: anihilation...of Jews.

Lenny Levin at 06:42 on 12 June
(1) As long as "denial of the Jewish state remains [their] cornerstone ideology," they shall have no state. Acceptance of Israel is sine qua non to their getting one (as Obama made clear in his speech). But "they" lumps together Hamas and the other factions-- not quite accurate.
(2) Not occupiers? If all the inhabitants of the West Bank were given the vote and representation in the Knesset, this would regularize their status -- but at the cost of making Israel truly a bi-national state, even more unstable than Czechoslovakia or the USSR, which could not survive the internal dissension of their competing nationalities-- not a good way to go. But as long as Israel maintains right of passage through the territories and other forms of control without enfranchising its inhabitants. this is occupation. You or I wouldn't want to live under the condition of West Bank "Palestinians/Arabs," subject to those controls. We should get out of this business as soon as we can safely do so.