Free and prosperous Palestinian state, asset or liability?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by alib, Mar 27, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Asset

    0 vote(s)
  2. Liability

    0 vote(s)
  1. Now let's say Western policy elites get what they wish for. The Palestinians are granted a viable state all of the West bank and there is a deal over sharing Jerusalem. Oh happy day!

    DC is finally free of this huge policy distraction and can get on with the Great Game. The Israelis will be sulking in the corner but eagerly awaiting the huge enduring bung an elated POTUS Barry has promised them.

    Israel makes a peace with the Arabs. The restive populations that cower under the Arab elites we favor would be mollified and that's good for energy security isn't it?

    Will we have drained the swamps of terrorism? Bin Laden hands himself in, Ayman al-Zawahiri endorses gay rights and Mullah Omar retires to farm Pata Negra. Well obviously not. Indeed the first two would be furious and issue a Fatwah against the apostate Pals. Over time we could reasonably expect to have a few less bearded numpties to deal with.

    But what if it all goes pear shaped as I was saying on another thread:
    Freedoms march spreads through the region, but its the wrong kind of freedom. Hostile to DC and backed by Qom. We lose our oil rich Arab client states to angry population mobilized by the Pals example.

    Not saying that's what would happen. Judging by recent behavior the Pals would probably be at each others throats much of the time. But would a Pal state really be a secure bet? A single state solution where the Pals get a fairer shake might actually be a safer goal if even more challenging.
  2. I think that a free and prosperous Palestinian state would be an asset, the problem is that an independent Palestine is likely to be neither free or prosperous.

    By the way, I have long thought that the best solution would be to make the de-facto situation before the 6 day war official, i.e. the West Bank becomes part of Jordan and the Gaza Strip becomes part of Egypt.
  3. Well that would stop the freedoms march problem dead in its tracks.
  4. Given that the best policy Israel seems to have been able to come up with so far is to subjugate and regularly terrorise an entire population in perpetuity and cry 'racism' at any critics, it seems hard to imagine Palestinians being anything other than untermensch in a single state solution. Were this not to be the case, then the clear frailties (largely engineered by Israel), of a Palestine state mean that a single state solution might actually be better. Alternatively, perhaps Israelis could live happily in a Palestinian-run state? Or regularly swap control in some kind of Yugoslavian-type solution?

    PS The whole 'wrong kind of freedom' thing kills me.
  5. Of cause the poor old Palestinians Dilfor.
  6. As the Pals would already outnumber the Jews in a single state solution and are rapidly out breeding them a straightforward democracy means an end to the Jewish racially defined state.

    But actually this isn't an uncommon situation, look at once staunchly Prod Northern Ireland, Maronite Lebanon or Boer South Africa. Defeated Sunni Iraq or white bread California fast turning spicily Latino for that matter also face this problem. A once entirely politically dominant minority group if its lucky finds a constitutional compromise with with the plurality and it may not be so bad for them. The fractious and democratic nature of both Israeli and Pal politics might actually facilitate a lively ethno-sectarian system.

    It seems no more unlikely that this could happen in Israel/Palestine than the spectacle of the chuckle brothers in Stormont would back in the last century.
  7. A frre palestine will happen eventually. Just as long as Israel is confident that it will not be used as a springboard for attacks. They have nearly had it in the past but the dreams have been dashed by a few hapless terrorists. If only there was a sensible woman to emerge as a leader, that would be the answer. :police:
  8. Nobody really likes the palestinians, not even other Arab countries who use the pals as a proxy to attack the hated Jew. Arab countries that have in the past let in large numbers of pals have regretted it and usually had to eject them by force. The Arabs do not in general give the pals sophisticated weapons as the pals would use them against other Arab countries. The pals get millions of dollars in aid which if it wasn't used to buy arms and salted away by corrupt officials would bring the average pals standard of living up condsiderably however a comfortable pal isn't going to be so keen on killing Jews and there is a great publicity value in having pal refugee camps. The West aids pals as they in their own way help stabilise the middle east.

    Isreal is given aid to help keep the pals and the other Arab countries in check and is needed to focus Arab hate. Israel is also useful to the West as it can be relied upon to take robust action when they West won't, they are the West's proxy force. The West aids Isreal as they in their own way help stabilise the middle east.

    I think the pals are the Pikey's of the Arab world and are a liability.
  9. As a foreigner who doesn't belong to the British military I haven't a moral right to vote. However...

    ... however, free and prosperous Palestinian state would significantly improve relations with the Arab countries, with the Muslim World. It would be much easier for Western firms to get lucrative contracts thus creating additional work places. Reliability of oil supplies from the ME would be almost 100%. The Palestinian question is used as an excuse of the terrorism. And eliminating this cause the West would resolve a very important problem.

    What is on the 'liability' side? The West likely would pay big money, for example to fund removing of Jewish settlers from the West Bank. But the final result worths it.

    Can Palestine be a prosperous state? Why not? Nearby Jordan have in fact mostly (75%) Palestinian population. Compare Gaza and Lebanon. Gaza could turn into a lovely resort and financial centre. In theory it is possible. The Arabs have huge money and a resolve to beat the Israelis by economical means.
  10. Utter bollocks.
  11. Much easier than trivially easy? And oil supply reliability from the ME is almost 100% anyway?

    The Arabs are perfectly happy playing politics (badly) with one hand and commerce (really quite well - they've had thousands of years of practice) with the other. Admittedly, the latter is also the bum-wiping hand but, hey, it's cash and soap is cheap :)
  12. A free and prosperous Palestinian state can only be an asset to this country and the world.


    Whilst a Palestinian state is on the cards in the non too distant future, whether it will be allowed to be either free or prosperous must be in doubt. Is it in Hamas' interests to have a content Palestine, where prosperity will be the antipathy of revolution?

    Here is what I see happening when the Palestinian state is born.

    Terrorist attacks from Palestine on Israel will increase dramatically since Hamas will have unfettered access to weapons.

    Israel will retaliate, clamping down on imports from road and sea. Possibly the West and Egypt will place sanctions.

    Hamas will cry foul and incite the Palestinians to greater violence, all the while playing the victim.
  13. You are right. 75% is a wrong number. There is a lot of new immigrants to Jordan (from Iraq, for example). So now we can speak about 60% of Palestinians in Jordan.

  14. Trans-sane

    Trans-sane LE Book Reviewer

    Stop doing this whet. This is now the 2nd post of yours where I agree with every owrd. Most disturbing that...

    But to add my own slant to things, prosperity breeds prosperity and wealth begets wealth. If the Pals had a functioning state of their own that WAS prosperous it would frankly be in everyone's interests commerically. People with money like to spend it on goods and currently the West Bank and the Gazza Strip have zero ability to manufacture consumer electronics of their own. therefore imports. Then there would be such things as healthcare (Greece and the UK being two of the big players in pharmacuitical products etc. in that area of the world).

    Then the prime reason CURRENTLY for the "justification" of radical islamic terrorism would be cut off at the knees. The looneys would find another reason to go nuts and attack the west (or indeed anyone NOT buying into their personal brand of sharia), but much of their grass roots support, funding and recruitment would be gone overnight. Starved of man-power and cash they would be far less of a threat/irritant. And of course the possibility exists that they would then start fighting like cats in a sack...

    At worst a Pal state however would become another pre-2001 Ganners. Hamas controled regime providing a safe haven to the various global jihadiis but with much better infrastructure in terms of information, education and world transport. But as mentioned above this would require Hamas to keep the civ pop in destitue poverty after they get their own state. Can't really see that lastiong for long after "freedom day" TBH.

    So at the risks of short term regional instability couipled to international terrorism against the opening of new markets for good and services and the likelyhood of said international terrorists withering on the vine within a few years... asset
  15. The Arabs used the oil embargo as a political tool previously. And it is possible in the future. So the reliability of oil supplies from the Gulf is not 100% now.

    As for contracts in some Arab countries (as Iraq) then apparently prosperous Palestinian state would make them more realistic for Western firms.

    Look, the Coalition liberated Iraq but who would really get profits?