Anna T is Taking Some Heat

[Sunnichick31]

I'm writing the UN to ask them to make PB distribution a war crime. Anyone going to join me in writing them?

[jaelh]

But I would not say that "Palestine" is a country, currently.

What do you mean by "country"? Do you mean "state"?

Or do you mean "nation"?

I think you fail on both counts.

1) Recognition of a state isn't constitutive of whether or not it is a state; merely declarative.

The test for statehood is (at least for the purposes of international law) : (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; © government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states (Montevideo Convention). Recognition might impact that 4th criteria, but it's not actually a criteria in and of itself, and nor does one require recognition as a precursor of being involved in reactions with other states. For example, a number of the states that don't recognize Palestine as a state engage in discussions with Palestinian leadership, *as* the Palestinian leadership. Palestine meets all of those criteria without a problem.

2) Nationhood/people-hood is a little more nebulous but my pref definition (and you can posit your own) is contiguous territory; common language and culture; common normatising mechanisms (laws/cultural practice). Again, since 1967, Palestinians have pretty much functioned as a distinct people (as in, not members of the pan-Arab nation (which died with Sadat anyway))

So yeah - what do you mean by "country"? And what criteria other than recognition are you relying on here to say they aren't a ... whatever it is you mean by country.

[JesusFightClub]

TBH I am backing slowly out of this thread too, having nearly bitten straight through my lip ;)

This is an issue which is profitable to discuss face to face, but not really online, where it is usually just a shouting match.

[sea_gale]

This is interesting. Anna has hinted at being super Zionist in the past, but has always carefully skirted around the issue. I seem to remember her saying that she has had Arab friends, both Christian and Muslim.

[smores]

What do you mean by "country"? Do you mean "state"?

Or do you mean "nation"?

I think you fail on both counts.

1) Recognition of a state isn't constitutive of whether or not it is a state; merely declarative.

The test for statehood is (at least for the purposes of international law) : (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; © government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states (Montevideo Convention). Recognition might impact that 4th criteria, but it's not actually a criteria in and of itself, and nor does one require recognition as a precursor of being involved in reactions with other states. For example, a number of the states that don't recognize Palestine as a state engage in discussions with Palestinian leadership, *as* the Palestinian leadership. Palestine meets all of those criteria without a problem.

2) Nationhood/people-hood is a little more nebulous but my pref definition (and you can posit your own) is contiguous territory; common language and culture; common normatising mechanisms (laws/cultural practice). Again, since 1967, Palestinians have pretty much functioned as a distinct people (as in, not members of the pan-Arab nation (which died with Sadat anyway))

So yeah - what do you mean by "country"? And what criteria other than recognition are you relying on here to say they aren't a ... whatever it is you mean by country.

Thank you! I was beginning to wonder if anyone recognized the difference between state and nation...

[OnceModestTwiceShy]

:mrgreen:

Except that there is such a thing as Arab Jews, regardless of how the predominantly Ashkenazi pro-Israel lobby in the States likes to simplify the situation.

And now I, too, am leaving this thread and never coming back. This is one of those topics I need to stay away from, for the sake of my blood pressure.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I don't see this particular post as snark-worthy.

She's not writing a political blog. She's not saying "Israel should bomb Iran" or "I have the ultimate answer for dealing with the Palestinians".

Instead, she's writing about her reality as a Jewish mother in Israel, and about the constant awareness that there are people who would like nothing more than to kill her children. Sorry if that sounds rude or blunt, but as a Jewish mother myself with children in a Jewish school, that's exactly how I felt when I read about what happened in Toulouse. So, I understand what she's saying. We could hide and avoid living a Jewish life because we are afraid, or we can get up in the morning and kiss our kids as we send them to school and try to ignore the knot in our guts as we wonder if all the security precautions in the world would prevent a Toulouse-style attack from happening here.

I don't know where she lives in Israel, but it's not necessarily in the territories. Two weeks ago, missiles were fired from Gaza, and I know that one of them hit a school in Beersheva (large Israeli city in the Negev). All of that city's schools were closed.

I don't think her terminology is necessarily wrong. The gunman in Toulouse was not Palestinian. The missiles in Gaza are being supplied from non-Palestinian sources, and there are fears as to what happens to security and the peace treaty with Egypt under their new regime. Hezbollah is still a threat, and they aren't Palestinian.

The "why don't you just move to the US" comments that she got were just obnoxious. I don't believe that her husband is an American citizen, and she wouldn't have the means to sponsor him. I know an American-born woman who married an Israeli, and couldn't even get a visitor's visa for him because their income was low and U.S. immigration was worried that he would stay.

As for the political status quo - I guess it's most accurate to say that there is currently a Palestinian Authority, which has control over certain defined areas. Those areas do not include all of the West Bank, and the Palestinian Authority has certainly not agreed to a state limits to just those areas. Even more than the territory issue, the issue of Palestinian refugees has always been a major sticking point. There's no question that Palestinians would have the right to go to a future Palestinian state - the question is whether those that fled during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war would have to the right to return to Israel itself

[Beeks]

Except that there is such a thing as Arab Jews, regardless of how the predominantly Ashkenazi pro-Israel lobby in the States likes to simplify the situation.

And now I, too, am leaving this thread and never coming back. This is one of those topics I need to stay away from, for the sake of my blood pressure.

Ummm, duh. My Israeli family is all technically arab. They are Iraqi Jews for the most part. They do not refer to themselves as arabs - they refer to themselves as Israelis or Jews.

[Beeks]

What do you mean by "country"? Do you mean "state"?

Or do you mean "nation"?

I think you fail on both counts.

1) Recognition of a state isn't constitutive of whether or not it is a state; merely declarative.

The test for statehood is (at least for the purposes of international law) : (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; © government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states (Montevideo Convention). Recognition might impact that 4th criteria, but it's not actually a criteria in and of itself, and nor does one require recognition as a precursor of being involved in reactions with other states. For example, a number of the states that don't recognize Palestine as a state engage in discussions with Palestinian leadership, *as* the Palestinian leadership. Palestine meets all of those criteria without a problem.

2) Nationhood/people-hood is a little more nebulous but my pref definition (and you can posit your own) is contiguous territory; common language and culture; common normatising mechanisms (laws/cultural practice). Again, since 1967, Palestinians have pretty much functioned as a distinct people (as in, not members of the pan-Arab nation (which died with Sadat anyway))

So yeah - what do you mean by "country"? And what criteria other than recognition are you relying on here to say they aren't a ... whatever it is you mean by country.

I think the Palestinians fail on almost every one of the four "criteria" you listed. It's debatable at the very least.

As to the second part, I have no problem with them calling themselves a people or a group in that way.

[fakepigtails73]

TBH I am backing slowly out of this thread too, having nearly bitten straight through my lip ;)

This is an issue which is profitable to discuss face to face, but not really online, where it is usually just a shouting match.

Ditto.

[pomology]

TBH I am backing slowly out of this thread too, having nearly bitten straight through my lip ;)

This is an issue which is profitable to discuss face to face, but not really online, where it is usually just a shouting match.

I'm glad you've had profitable discussions about it face to face, because even in person I find it to be a contentious issue. It's hard being a Jew whose moderate on this issue. AIPAC-types think you're a traitor to your people and pro-Palestinian activists refuse to acknowledge that a Jewish state in the region has any legitimacy and then make comments like throwing rocks is non-violent protest (or at least the pro-Palestinian group at my school did.) And even harder when you're generally a liberal and liberals tend to side with the Palestinians and the only people who side with Israel are batshit crazy right-wing evangelical extremists.

It's such a sad situation, I think, for most Palestinians and for most Israelis. But crazies on both sides act in inflammatory ways instead of trying to solve things and then everybody has high blood pressure.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Ummm, duh. My Israeli family is all technically arab. They are Iraqi Jews for the most part. They do not refer to themselves as arabs - they refer to themselves as Israelis or Jews.

LOL, now I'll have to assume that you are related to my hubby. Is your family in Ramat Gan, by any chance? Or do they ever hang out in Or Yehuda?

I found that the older relatives had a stronger Iraqi identity - they all spoke Arabic with each other, went to Arab markets and restaurants, listened to Arabic radio and watched Iraqi TV.

My FIL is one of the youngest in the family, and came to Israel as a child so he identifies as Israeli first. That said, they were always clear about the fact that they were Jews.

Oddly enough, until 1948, Jews tended to refer to themselves as "Palestinian". I know people who will describe themselves as Palestinian Jews, because their families were there prior to the founding of the state of Israel. The Jerusalem Post used to be known as The Palestine Post.

[YPestis]

The only thing I believe in is the right for self-determination. I think people should all have the right to be have their own homeland and assembly peacefully and be represented by their chosen representatives. Telling me you have right to certain pieces of land because your religion / history says so isn't a good enough reason for me to support you. I find Anna T falls into that territory.

I'm Chinese and I've heard alot of nationalist talk about Taiwan and Tibet from people inside China. I realized it's the same reasoning. Whether it's religion or history of race, it's never an excuse to occupy or take over others' land and it's never an excuse to deny another people their own homeland.

[Beeks]

LOL, now I'll have to assume that you are related to my hubby. Is your family in Ramat Gan, by any chance? Or do they ever hang out in Or Yehuda?

I found that the older relatives had a stronger Iraqi identity - they all spoke Arabic with each other, went to Arab markets and restaurants, listened to Arabic radio and watched Iraqi TV.

My FIL is one of the youngest in the family, and came to Israel as a child so he identifies as Israeli first. That said, they were always clear about the fact that they were Jews.

Oddly enough, until 1948, Jews tended to refer to themselves as "Palestinian". I know people who will describe themselves as Palestinian Jews, because their families were there prior to the founding of the state of Israel. The Jerusalem Post used to be known as The Palestine Post.

Hahaha, no blood relation as these are actually my in-laws (my brother's wife's family....but we are close) They mostly live much further north though, outside Haifa.

And actually you are right. Some of the much older relatives (my SIL's grandparents) still speak arabic. I don't know how they self identify because I don't speak arabic and they don't speak English so I've never had an in-depth discussion with them about it.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Hubby's grandmother had a cousin/mechantanesteh (weird to use Yiddish, but no English equivalent) in Nahariyah, so there could still be a connection.

When you have large families and a very small sub-ethnic group, you have to assume that everyone is massively inbred (as in the "meet my wife's mother, who is also my mother's cousin" intro that I got to the old relative in Nahariyah). I used to teach hubby about it, until I bought a copy of my sister's hubby's family tree, and discovered that they were even MORE inbred. Do I hear duelling fiddles?

[Beeks]

Hubby's grandmother had a cousin/mechantanesteh (weird to use Yiddish, but no English equivalent) in Nahariyah, so there could still be a connection.

When you have large families and a very small sub-ethnic group, you have to assume that everyone is massively inbred (as in the "meet my wife's mother, who is also my mother's cousin" intro that I got to the old relative in Nahariyah). I used to teach hubby about it, until I bought a copy of my sister's hubby's family tree, and discovered that they were even MORE inbred. Do I hear duelling fiddles?

Oh yeah. I'm sure there is a relation (or two or three or four) somewhere along the line between our families. :mrgreen:

[NurseNell]

The only thing I believe in is the right for self-determination. I think people should all have the right to be have their own homeland and assembly peacefully and be represented by their chosen representatives. Telling me you have right to certain pieces of land because your religion / history says so isn't a good enough reason for me to support you. I find Anna T falls into that territory.

I'm Chinese and I've heard alot of nationalist talk about Taiwan and Tibet from people inside China. I realized it's the same reasoning. Whether it's religion or history of race, it's never an excuse to occupy or take over others' land and it's never an excuse to deny another people their own homeland.

This.

[Beeks]

This.

Are you talking about Israel as a whole?

[jaelh]

[

I think the Palestinians fail on almost every one of the four "criteria" you listed. It's debatable at the very least.

The "criteria" form the basis of recognition in law. Which you know, is worth more than whatever forms the basis of recognition in your personal opinion.

Please, if you have a "problem" with the "criteria", please propose others that you feel form a better means of assessing statehood.

XJD: Of the 680 rockets fired from Gaza into Israel in 2011, not one Israeli died. And I have no doubt you know this, even as you write about rockets hitting schools - in the middle of the night.

Look, I have no love for the militant Islam blossoming in Palestine, and I think much of their approach to resolution has been a fools work. BUT...

For the love of all that's good: Israel either needs to annex the territories and make them part of Israel; or give them away. You can't have a democracy where 45% of the population of the territory isn't able to participate in elections for the entity in final control. If Israel wants the territory - good. Annex. Work out what on earth to do with the Palestinian population and be done with it. If not - well... That's the dishonest bit - the current situation cannot be sustained for ever; yet the residency patterns in the WB/Judea are such that Israel is rendering a solution functionally impossible, whatever the Palestinians do.

I mean - what's the going to be? Leave, or not leave? Then damn well do it already. Security arguments are bullshit: the Palestinian's are not getting into Israel proper through the wall; and entry from Gaza and Syria is control-able. The rockets don't hit people, though they make great press. The only reason Israel hasn't pulled out is the land. But the fact that Judaism's sacred sites are in the West Bank isn't the fault of the Palestinian population that lives there. Annex, and cease to be a democracy or negotiate for access. This stasis is a toxic poison to both sides.

[ladyamylynn]

Oh, my! Someone accused her of living in occupied territory, and she did not deny it at all. She pretty much confirmed it without saying so.

At one point she did, in fact, confirm on her blog that they live in Samaria, which is part of the West Bank, and a disputed territory.

ccostello.blogspot.com/2008/07/for-childrens-sake.html

In the above post she talks about it in the comments.

Edited to add link.

[Beeks]

The "criteria" form the basis of recognition in law. Which you know, is worth more than whatever forms the basis of recognition in your personal opinion.

Please, if you have a "problem" with the "criteria", please propose others that you feel form a better means of assessing statehood.

[snip]

I'm not sure what you're upset with in my post - that I put criteria in quotes? I did that so you'd know I was addressing your first definition. I said I don't think they meet the criteria you posted.

[jaelh]

I'm not sure what you're upset with in my post - that I put criteria in quotes? I did that so you'd know I was addressing your first definition. I said I don't think they meet the criteria you posted.

Ok cool, sorry I read it as a snarky thing. Sorry! :) (internet nuance and all of that).

But want to unpack your issues with the criteria? That would be an interesting discussion.

[2xx1xy1JD]

The "criteria" form the basis of recognition in law. Which you know, is worth more than whatever forms the basis of recognition in your personal opinion.

Please, if you have a "problem" with the "criteria", please propose others that you feel form a better means of assessing statehood.

XJD: Of the 680 rockets fired from Gaza into Israel in 2011, not one Israeli died. And I have no doubt you know this, even as you write about rockets hitting schools - in the middle of the night.

Look, I have no love for the militant Islam blossoming in Palestine, and I think much of their approach to resolution has been a fools work. BUT...

For the love of all that's good: Israel either needs to annex the territories and make them part of Israel; or give them away. You can't have a democracy where 45% of the population of the territory isn't able to participate in elections for the entity in final control. If Israel wants the territory - good. Annex. Work out what on earth to do with the Palestinian population and be done with it. If not - well... That's the dishonest bit - the current situation cannot be sustained for ever; yet the residency patterns in the WB/Judea are such that Israel is rendering a solution functionally impossible, whatever the Palestinians do.

I mean - what's the going to be? Leave, or not leave? Then damn well do it already. Security arguments are bullshit: the Palestinian's are not getting into Israel proper through the wall; and entry from Gaza and Syria is control-able. The rockets don't hit people, though they make great press. The only reason Israel hasn't pulled out is the land. But the fact that Judaism's sacred sites are in the West Bank isn't the fault of the Palestinian population that lives there. Annex, and cease to be a democracy or negotiate for access. This stasis is a toxic poison to both sides.

The lack of deaths from missile strikes is more of a reflection of the "Iron Dome" system and warning sirens and bomb shelters than any lack of effort to cause deaths.

I, and the vast majority of Israelis, would agree that the status quo is not good. The whole question has been how to resolve it. Everyone thought that we were on the verge of a final settlement in 2000, but the Palestinians didn't accept it. Unilateral withdrawal won't bring peace - Israel already tried that with Lebanon and Gaza, and ended up with wars in 2006 and 2009. My personal view is that if any Palestinian politician who was able to command popular support ever proposed a settlement along of the lines of what has already been negotiated, with full Palestinian statehood and mutual recognition and normal diplomatic relations and without trying to claim a right of return for Palestinians into Israel (as opposed to the new state of Palestine), it would be damn hard for Israel to refuse. Objectively speaking, the only group who has gained anything from the 2nd Intifada and violence in Gaza are far-right Israelis who are opposed to land for peace under any circumstances.

[Minerva]

Also backing out for the sake of my blood pressure. I am stating this publicly so that I can't change my mind and come back.

[hathorlive]

The only thing I believe in is the right for self-determination. I think people should all have the right to be have their own homeland and assembly peacefully and be represented by their chosen representatives. Telling me you have right to certain pieces of land because your religion / history says so isn't a good enough reason for me to support you. I find Anna T falls into that territory.

This. I don't have the right to tell any group of people that they are or aren't a country. I can only imagine what these people think of the American Revolution. You know, as in having the right to say "we're our own country and get the fuck out" kind of thing?

I have a friend who is a Palestinian Christian and he'd kind of like to have a country to live in and have a say in. So, it's not as black and white as the lobbying groups would try to paint it.

Though I will argue that the current population of Israeli have little to nothing to do with the people who used to live there eons ago. Then again, I've also learned that having a rational conversation about this issue is almost hopeless. I do get annoyed with the United State's "Israeli is always right" policy. No country is ever always right.