Twitter debates on Palestine

Blake Hounshell of Foreign Policy, Marc Lynch (Abu Aardvark) of the Middle East Channel and Yousef Munayyer of The Palestine Center (Avi Mayer chimes in at the end) had the following debate on Twitter the other day which I found to be quite interesting.

abuaardvark:  Zombie peace process might just barely have been revived back in 2009 when Obama tried, but now it’s way too late. On a different track now

blakehounshell:  @abuaardvark I still wonder though if there is value in having a fake peace process, for the sake of stability?

YousefMunayyer: @blakehounshell um, thats always been the game

blakehounshell: @YousefMunayyer touché — but the current vacuum only seems to benefit extremists

YousefMunayyer: @blakehounshell as opposed to ongoing occupation and the guise of a peace process everyone knows is fake?

blakehounshell: @YousefMunayyer What I mean is — sit down in negotiations, string them along, hope for better partner and more favorable circumstances.

YousefMunayyer: @blakehounshell so basically the AD Miller kick the can down the road strategy. I’m pretty sure that’s been tried and failed

blakehounshell: @YousefMunayyer Everything has failed. But how to get a better Israeli government?

YousefMunayyer: @blakehounshell Why should Palestinians have to wait for Israelis, who are only trending right, to come up with a better government?

blakehounshell: @YousefMunayyer Because how else is Israel going to give up the land?

YousefMunayyer: @blakehounshell I think it’s beyond time to start looking past the two-state paradigm

blakehounshell: @YousefMunayyer I don’t see how the one-state solution is any more viable than the two-state solution. I hate you so I want to live w/ you?

YousefMunayyer: @blakehounshell It’s a one state problem. The ethnic hatred thing is so cliche If blacks & whites can live in Alabama & SA Isr/Pal can do it

avimayer: @YousefMunayyer @blakehounshell Not sure how Jewish and Palestinian claims to self-determination can both be satisfied in one state.

YousefMunayyer: @avimayer IMHO nationalism is so last century (and responsible for a remarkable amount of unnecessary deaths)

avimayer: @YousefMunayyer Tell that to Lebanon and Yugoslavia, where multiethnic experimentation has caused its fair share of deaths.

YousefMunayyer: @avimayer fair enough, but im pretty sure nationalistic endeavors have caused far more death and conflict than the opposite

This was a very interesting progression that started with the utility of using dead peace negotiations to stall until Israel changed governments (thus acknowledging that Israel, not Palestine, is the side opposed to a peace deal) and ended with the possibilities of a one state solution to the conflict. Here you have three major American commentators basically saying that Israel is to blame for the lack of peace with Palestine. Even Hounshell, who ‘wonders’ if a farcical peace process is beneficial for stability, admits that the current Israeli government is completely incapable of making peace with its neighbors (or, as I argue here, is unable to pursue a foreign policy that is anything less than antagonistic).

Of course, the discussion over the viability of a one state solution is a long one that should be brought out of Twitter in into the mainstream discourse. Currently, there is no real discussion of one state possibilities by policy makers – perhaps the real price of the dead Oslo Accords was the commitment of all parties to a two state solution even as it has become evident that two states are no longer possible. Yet with the upcoming UN vote on a Palestinian state (not to mention a nearly universal rejection of one state ideas from the Israeli government) there is no reason to believe that there will be any serious discussion of a one state solution outside of the Twitterverse.

—-

This post originally appeared on Chris Keeler’s blog, Notes from Amedinah

Photo Credits: Flickr CC openDemocracy