[marcf]

nyellin wrote:

> We also have our warts...

But you didn't mention the elephant in the room in your comment, which is pretty strange:

Israel also has run a 40+ year occupation that denies non-Jewish residents of rights and freedoms while subsidizing Jewish settlements in and around the disenfranchised non-Jewish population. Many many people, including former Israeli PMs and many respected academics, consider Israel's occupation and its settlement practices to be a form of apartheid or leading to it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analog...

[nyellin]

Because anyone who thinks the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has a simple resolution is likely unaware of all the facts.

Furthermore, this is a conflict between Israelis and Palestinians without Israeli citizenship, not Jews and non-Jews. Obviously the two are related, but the ultimate question is whether Palestinians without Israeli citizenship, living in the West Bank, should be granted citizenship or not. Israeli Arabs living in Jerusalem, Haifa, etc. were granted full rights in '48, or when Israel annexed the area. Israel hasn't annexed the West Bank, so non-Israelis in the West Bank are stuck as citizens of no country.

Calling Israel an apartheid severely downplays the horror of what happened in South Africa. It seems odd to point out that I learn at university alongside Israeli Arabs and ride on buses next to them, because of course I do. Why wouldn't I?

[marcf]

I didn't say there is a simple solution but rather that Israeli permanent occupation has become akin to Apartheid South Africa for the non-citizen Arabs and the citizen Jews living in the West Bank. The fact that you didn't mention this as a wart is pretty big blind spot given that the number of disenfranchised non-Jews living in the West Bank is in the millions and this has been going on for over 40 years.

[nyellin]

It would be equally wrong to allow everyone to settle the West Bank but Jews.

The situation is difficult and the property laws effect everyone who tries to build without permission, which is almost everyone: The Jewish settlement of Ulpana is going to be demolished next month because it was built on illegally acquired land.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gdxs_Qb4k...

[marcf]

The issue is that there is a dual system of rights in place depending on whether you are Jewish or whether you are a Palestinian Arab and that is deeply wrong. I am not in favor of barring Jews from living in the West Bank (which seems to be the topic of your reply) but rather against different rights for different ethnic groups (which is what people mean when they bring up the spectre of Apartheid.)

[pcopley]

Let's stop pretending that the terms "Israeli" and "Jew" are interchangable, because they're not. While it may have at the beginning, I don't think Jewishness or lack thereof has anything to do with the West Bank. At this point it's a dispute over citizenship, property, and human rights.

I say this as an American with no connection to either side.

[makomk]

They're not interchangable, but marcf's comment that you're replying to is correct. The settlements that Israel has (illegally) established within the West Bank are specifically Jewish settlements - Jews are allowed to settle there regardless of whether they previously had Israeli citizenship, whilst other Israeli citizens are not. Likewise for the Jewish-only roads, the different sets of laws and restrictions covering Jews and Arabs, the Israeli government's refusal to grant building permits to Arabs in Jerusalem and the West Bank whilst allowing Jews to build homes on land they don't even own...

There even used to be vast swathes of land within Israel proper that could only be leased to Jews, because the founders of the country had given it to a trust tasked with ensuring it remained in Jewish hands, though I think the supreme court finally put a stop to that a few years ago.