[Peace-discuss] The Mideast's One-State Solution

Mon Jan 26 17:30:49 CST 2009

David,

First, as far as I can tell, this article came via Truthout as taken from
The International Herald Tribune and not the NYT.  The mis-attribution is
not a big deal; but I did want to make the source clear.

Second,  I cannot and will not speak to any papers choice to publish or not
to publish any specific article in terms of trying to determine their
specific motivations based on the little information that I have at hand. As
I noted, I found it interesting (and I should also have said surprising) in
its tone, content, and author.  I did not suggest anything by way of it's
authenticity (did he really say that in the way it was written or is this
the work of an interpreter and editor?), its historical accuracy, Qaddafi's
motivation for writing or saying what was written or said or what he thought
he would accomplish by putting his name on such a piece (independent of  the
newspapers motivations for publishing it), or what part the various actors
behind the scene enticed him to put his name to an article of this sort or
for what purpose let alone sought to promote its publication.  Nor did I
think that it was to be taken as a serious article or one whose suggestions
were realistic in the short run (I have no way of speculating about the long
run).  Hence my remarks: "Is it the author speaking, the US speaking, or the
syphilis speaking? "  For all I know, the US and/or Israel might have
offered him something as an incentive to get him to make such a statement in
order to (a) doom any future peace talks, solutions, or ceasefires by
inflaming the Arab and Palestinian street, (b) undermine or doom to failure
any one state solutions by suggesting that  this is what the Palestinians
want for ulterior motives since they think that they can get complete
control over such a state by virtue of demographics , or (c) isolate and
alienate Qadddaffi from other Arabs and Muslims so as to make him more
dependent on the US and Israel and make his country's resources more
accessible to the US and Israel.

Thirdly, if it actually is Qaddafi's article, given when and where it is
published, I have to wonder why he is only now making these remarks public
and to what audience he is directing them to as well as why he is addressing
that audience.

>I don't know the basis for saying that the Palestinians would not be
willing to negotiate such a settlement if it secured their rights. 

Is this directed toward something that I said or something in the Qaddafi
article?  If it is addressing my remark ".but I doubt if either side really
wants it or will ever want it in the foreseeable future", I can only say
that I think that the people on the street bring too much baggage, mistrust,
and animosity to the table to be willing to make the hard compromises that
will be necessary from both sides.   With respect to the Palestinians, they
- like the American Indians - have experienced too many broken treaties from
forked- tongued antagonists and their so-called even-handed honest broker
friends like the US and some Western European countries and leaders without
the guaranteeing international agencies being effective in enforcing
negotiated settlements, treaties, and resolutions.

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 1:18 PM
To: LAURIE SOLOMON
Cc: Peace Discuss
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Mideast's One-State Solution

Laurie,

The NYT's publication of Qaddafi's piece was a way of discrediting the idea
of a one-state solution, a kind of twisted black advance designed to
discredit peace rather than promote war. They chose not to publish an
article by a respected source such as Israeli historian Ilan Pappe. I don't
know the basis for saying that the Palestinians would not be willing to
negotiate such a settlement if it secured their rights. 

Moreover, Qaddafi's article was particularly lame at a historical level,
claiming that the Palestinians were not expelled by force in 1948. That's
the part that the NYT wants you to believe, in order to further undermine
Palestinian claims to right of return.

DG

  _____  

From: LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
To: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 12:47:50 PM
Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Mideast's One-State Solution

Interesting considering its tone, content, and author.  Is it the author
speaking, the US speaking, or the syphilis speaking?  It might make sense if
both sides really wanted peace and to live together in equity and fairness;
but I doubt if either side really wants it or will ever want it in the
foreseeable future. And even if they did really want it and seek it, would
the US really allow for such a place unless it was dominated by the US and
served our interests?

Muammar Qaddafi | The Mideast's One-State Solution
http://www.truthout.org/012609K Muammar Qaddafi, The International Herald
Tribune: "The shocking level of the last wave of Israeli-Palestinian
violence, which ended with this weekend's cease-fire, reminds us why a final
resolution to the so-called Middle East crisis is so important. It is vital
not just to break this cycle of destruction and injustice, but also to deny
the religious extremists in the region who feed on the conflict an excuse to
advance their own causes. But everywhere one looks, among the speeches and
the desperate diplomacy, there is no real way forward. A just and lasting
peace between Israel and the Palestinians is possible, but it lies in the
history of the people of this conflicted land, and not in the tired rhetoric
of partition and two-state solutions."

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090126/477fde9f/attachment-0001.html