Thread: Now maybe I'm reading this all wrong...

...and admittedly I don't have the context of the quote, but whenever anyone has said that the Middle East problem is akin to RSA prior to the end of apartheid (as numerous academics have) they get jumped on and told there is no comparison. Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

Link

Originally Posted by Nehustan

...and admittedly I don't have the context of the quote, but whenever anyone has said that the Middle East problem is akin to RSA prior to the end of apartheid (as numerous academics have) they get jumped on and told there is no comparison. Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

I think not.

It seems to me to be - at long last - a realisation of the inevitable consequence if a successful 2-state solution is not implemented. Maybe Israel has at last pulled its head out of the sand and is beginning to recognise reality for what it is.

It also suggests that the US has awoken to the fact that it's lost so much influence in the region that it's abilty to shape the outcome (in Israel's favour) is now almost non-existant.

This really reminds me of a moment in 1991 (or was it earlier - need to check my logbook to confirm?) when Mrs T flew to SWA for a secret meeting with FW and hinted that her time was up in the UK and thus there was nobody left to watch RSA's back. FW took the hint and was talking to the ANC within days of how to effect a peaceful transition! It's one of the foreign policy successes that Mrs T has gone completely unrewarded for.

Originally Posted by whitecity

Originally Posted by Nehustan

...and admittedly I don't have the context of the quote, but whenever anyone has said that the Middle East problem is akin to RSA prior to the end of apartheid (as numerous academics have) they get jumped on and told there is no comparison. Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

I think not.

It seems to me to be - at long last - a realisation of the inevitable consequence if a successful 2-state solution is not implemented. Maybe Israel has at last pulled its head out of the sand and is beginning to recognise reality for what it is.

It also suggests that the US has awoken to the fact that it's lost so much influence in the region that it's abilty to shape the outcome (in Israel's favour) is now almost non-existant.

This really reminds me of a moment in 1991 (or was it earlier - need to check my logbook to confirm?) when Mrs T flew to SWA for a secret meeting with FW and hinted that her time was up in the UK and thus there was nobody left to watch RSA's back. FW took the hint and was talking to the ANC within days of how to effect a peaceful transition! It's one of the foreign policy successes that Mrs T has gone completely unrewarded for.

Just had to reboot my system just before I was going to press submit...agggghhhhh.

So to repeat

I follow your logic but two things spring to mind...

1.) for Olmert to say that the RSA model applies rubbishes all the people who have said it didn't.

2.) should things not according to 'Olmert's' plan, the fact he has used the analogy obviously will add creedence to any future accusation.

Originally Posted by Nehustan

... Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

Link

I think you are failing to see this from an Israeli point of view. Given the exploding Palestinian demographics if the Israelis don't manage to rid themselves of the Arab under-mensch the horrible prospect of a smiling Palestinian Mandela ruling over them hooves into view within a few generations. Something over 80% of Israeli Jews regard that as unthinkable. He's tapping into a real Israeli sentiment just as De Gaulle did with the over the very similar and emotive issue of Algérie française. As for the rest of the world, Israelis don't give a stuff about the stupid Goyim and at worst he gets to look like De Clerk without actually yielding a single grain of dusty soil. Rather clever really.

Ok I'm not arguing Alib, and there's that famous Ben Gurion quote that basically says exactly what you're saying. But given the sleek 'totally western' and relevant European language speaking diplomats (i.e. look and speak like your next door neighbour), I can't help thinking that strategically this could turn out be a bit of an own goal. The media war/landscape has certainly changed since the 70s/80s I grew up in in regard to Israel...I'm quite shocked at Olmert's statement to be honest...

Originally Posted by Nehustan

I follow your logic but two things spring to mind...

1.) for Olmert to say that the RSA model applies rubbishes all the people who have said it didn't.

It depends on which 'RSA model' you have in mind.

Are we talking about the apartied model of creating self-governing bantustans (semi-occupied Palestinian territories) or the RSA model where the intl. comm. introduced sanctions against minority rule. There are plenty others to choose from too.

Originally Posted by Nehustan

2.) should things not according to 'Olmert's' plan, the fact he has used the analogy obviously will add creedence to any future accusation.

Could be taking a leaf out of Bush's book (or been told to do it) in confronting possible analogies head on. Remember how Bush introduced the Vietnam paradigm regarding Iraq earlier this year to prevent his opponents using it against him?

Originally Posted by Nehustan

...I'm quite shocked at Olmert's statement to be honest...

This from the man who invaded Lebanon, destroyed the Cedar Revolution and then got the IDFs arse kicked. That's what shocks me. Hardly up there with Condi's "birth pangs of the new Middle East" though that's really pulling God's tadger.

You might be right though in US politics. There's been a great forgetting about how fervently Apartheid was supported in the US and I even sense some revisionist revulsion. Israel's loyal support in the US rests on a much narrower base in the patrician class. Being casually lumped with the drivers of negros may carry a sting amongst the burghers of Manhattan that a Sabra could not conceive of.

The more I think about it, the more I believe that this could be a significant leap forward in the process. Why? Because if these words are to interpreted in the way that I hope they should, it's a sea change in policy from Washington and Tel Aviv.

Originally Posted by alib

Originally Posted by Nehustan

... Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

Link

I think you are failing to see this from an Israeli point of view. Given the exploding Palestinian demographics if the Israelis don't manage to rid themselves of the Arab under-mensch the horrible prospect of a smiling Palestinian Mandela ruling over them hooves into view within a few generations. Something over 80% of Israeli Jews regard that as unthinkable. He's tapping into a real Israeli sentiment just as De Gaulle did with the over the very similar and emotive issue of Algérie française. As for the rest of the world, Israelis don't give a stuff about the stupid Goyim and at worst he gets to look like De Clerk without actually yielding a single grain of dusty soil. Rather clever really.

I'm not as informed about this issue as I would like to be and am following this thread with interest. You make a good point but, really, the quote I've highlighted is unworthy of you, alib.

Originally Posted by wedge35

Originally Posted by alib

Originally Posted by Nehustan

... Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

Link

I think you are failing to see this from an Israeli point of view. Given the exploding Palestinian demographics if the Israelis don't manage to rid themselves of the Arab under-mensch the horrible prospect of a smiling Palestinian Mandela ruling over them hooves into view within a few generations. Something over 80% of Israeli Jews regard that as unthinkable. He's tapping into a real Israeli sentiment just as De Gaulle did with the over the very similar and emotive issue of Algérie française. As for the rest of the world, Israelis don't give a stuff about the stupid Goyim and at worst he gets to look like De Clerk without actually yielding a single grain of dusty soil. Rather clever really.

I'm not as informed about this issue as I would like to be and am following this thread with interest. You make a good point but, really, the quote I've highlighted is unworthy of you, alib.

Unworthy? That's a little subjective. Objectively though it was spot on.

RM

Funny, I know quite a few Israelis and none of them look upon non-Jews as 'stupid goyim'. Perhaps they only do that behind closed doors during their blood-drinking ceremonies, eh?

Anyway, I'm genuinely interested in whether there are any real parallels between apartheid-era South Africa and the State of Israel. Is the West Bank a 'Bantustan'?

Originally Posted by Nehustan

...and admittedly I don't have the context of the quote, but whenever anyone has said that the Middle East problem is akin to RSA prior to the end of apartheid (as numerous academics have) they get jumped on and told there is no comparison. Now Olmert warns of 'of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established.'

Isn't this a bit of a faux pas?

Link

I don't think there is much comparison, whatever happened, which ever way it went whoever the "winners" were going to be in South Africa there was always going to be a South Africa.

With Israel and Palestine one has to go, one has to cease to exist. Either it all becomes Israel or all becomes Palestine.

Guys, I just got up to have a fag...loads of interesting points which I'll try and consider and reply to when I'm in better shape...as the vox procedure states...wait out.

Right it looks like I'm not sleeping, so I'll have a go at bouncing some ideas about....

The Palestinian people would have a better chance if their representatives were not fighting amongst themselves all the time.

However, all tides turn and I'm sure one day the Israelis will be forced into a position where they have to give over large parts of Palestine back to the Palestinians.

The proportion of Arabs living in Israeli land is increasing so the Israeli leaders will have to accomodate them eventually.

A lot depends on the US and how they want it to unfold. Without the US Israel would be up shit creek without a paddle.