@jy4m@matapacos.dog > in what respect is Iran a terrorist regime?
-
@jy4m@matapacos.dog
in what respect is Iran a terrorist regime?
It has played a role in basically every single act of regional destabilization in the past 40 years in order to assert its Shia hegemony (just like Israel has done, usually supporting the groups on the opposite side).
It has invested a lot in a nuclear program in order to assert its power.
Plus it’s ruled by a decrepit theocratic class that is well aware that it won’t last long, and it tries to constrain the population as much as it can in the process in order to assert whatever crumble of authority it has left.
The only hope for peace in Palestine is a single, multiethnic state with equal rights for all.
Yeah, I wish that could be the case. But as long as 100-year-old grudge rooted in blood exists on both sides I don’t see that happen. You see how the Arab (and even Christian) minorities are treated in Israel right now, a country where, outside of a short exception, has been ruled by the same Zionist far-right for two decades.
Any prospect of a multiethnic State where the butcher and the victim leave together, and where each other is suspicious of the other gaining too much political and social power, is a pipe dream as of now.
There must be two States, at least for now. And the security of the Palestinian State must be guaranteed by the international community (I would say “by the UN”, if only the role of the UN hadn’t become so increasingly meaningless).
-
R ActivityRelay shared this topic
-
@jy4m@matapacos.dog
in what respect is Iran a terrorist regime?
It has played a role in basically every single act of regional destabilization in the past 40 years in order to assert its Shia hegemony (just like Israel has done, usually supporting the groups on the opposite side).
It has invested a lot in a nuclear program in order to assert its power.
Plus it’s ruled by a decrepit theocratic class that is well aware that it won’t last long, and it tries to constrain the population as much as it can in the process in order to assert whatever crumble of authority it has left.
The only hope for peace in Palestine is a single, multiethnic state with equal rights for all.
Yeah, I wish that could be the case. But as long as 100-year-old grudge rooted in blood exists on both sides I don’t see that happen. You see how the Arab (and even Christian) minorities are treated in Israel right now, a country where, outside of a short exception, has been ruled by the same Zionist far-right for two decades.
Any prospect of a multiethnic State where the butcher and the victim leave together, and where each other is suspicious of the other gaining too much political and social power, is a pipe dream as of now.
There must be two States, at least for now. And the security of the Palestinian State must be guaranteed by the international community (I would say “by the UN”, if only the role of the UN hadn’t become so increasingly meaningless).
@fabio Palestinian hatred of Israel and Israelis isn't merely a grudge. It's based on the ongoing conditions of occupation and dispossession that the state of Israel imposes on the native people of the region. If you're not removing these conditions, then you haven't found a viable solution. Real coexistence is possible, but it requires an end to Israeli dominance, just as coexistence between whites and blacks in South Africa was only possible after the end of white minority rule.
-
@fabio Palestinian hatred of Israel and Israelis isn't merely a grudge. It's based on the ongoing conditions of occupation and dispossession that the state of Israel imposes on the native people of the region. If you're not removing these conditions, then you haven't found a viable solution. Real coexistence is possible, but it requires an end to Israeli dominance, just as coexistence between whites and blacks in South Africa was only possible after the end of white minority rule.
@jy4m@matapacos.dog realistically, Israel is just too powerful for any peaceful transition of power, either voluntary or enforced by the international community, to happen.
Coexistence will still translate on acts of intolerance on both sides.
Extremist fringes of Hamas can still blow things up to make Israel pay for its crimes.
Ben Gvir and his friends will still harass Muslims in mosques (and, even if he’s in jail, there’s a very sizeable share of Israel’s population that still agrees with his points).
Demographics will be a ticking bomb until it blows up - Palestinians have much higher fertility rates than Israelis, which will be seen by the most conservative Israelis as an existential threat of long-term ethnic displacement against them.
The prejudice that many Israelis still hold against non-Jews in their land is still there and alive, and it can translate into large-scale episodes of discrimination that can flare things up.
And I’m only scratching the surface of the medium and long term issues here.
In a nutshell, if you try and put those two people in the same peace of land, you won’t have political and social stability in that piece of land for decades to come.
The two-State solution isn’t easy either (the main question is how to practically connect a State composed of two separate enclaves), but a two-State solution that agrees on the areas assigned by the UN to the respective people in 1967, and confirmed by the Oslo accords, is still the most practical one.
Note that any such deal also means that any settlements built by Israel in those areas are illegal and its occupants must vacate them and give them back to Palestinians. Such a condition may not heal all the wounds, but at least it’d give Palestinians the right to build their State in their assigned territory without fears of being evicted overnight by a lunatic Zionist.
