Opinion
This isn’t about semantics
Giora Eiland
Published: 15.09.10, 11:06
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
23 Talkbacks for this article
1. reports of olmert concessions
alexi   (09.15.10)
more reports of what olmert was conceding part of negev, towns adjacent to gaza and unsupervised route west bank to gaza cutting israel in half. You believe this. Only an enemy and weak hearted could imagine this. And the courts are still protecting him. Israel is not chosen, nor are its people and the word should be stricken from all its books. Olmert is an obnoxious coward and should spend the rest of his life in jail.
2. "Jewish State" is perpetual minority rule
Steve Benassi ,   Silver Bay, MN USA   (09.15.10)
...and domination over the majority Arabs in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank, excluding the millions of native Arab refugees from 1948. Why would the Arabs grant the Jews permission to rule them for eternity?
3. Surely you mean MORE than equal rights
Danny   (09.15.10)
4. Until and unless the Muslim-Arab leadership, local and...
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (09.15.10)
...regional, accepts Israel's legitimacy, its right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people, little can or should be expected in terms of achieving a sustainable accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel. It is high time, very high time the American administration and the European Union understood this and demanded of the Muslim-Arab leadership to state, in Arabic, Hebrew and English it members' newly found conviction, and demonstrated this conviction with deeds.
5. This is total waste of time
Gee ,   Zikron Yaakov   (09.15.10)
The Arabs have announced that regardless of any offers that there will never be peace, nor will the honor any agreements. We have proof of this since Oslo. No to concessions, no to fulfillment of their obligations, no to our existence. Still the same three no's. So why are we still bothering to talk to these terrorists?
6. Mr. Eiland, I respectfully disagree
Steve Klein   (09.15.10)
Just as Mahmoud Abbas insists that Israel can define or "call itself what it pleases," Mahmoud Abbas can call us what he pleases. Let Mr. Abbas and the PA refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Let them say, Israel is a Muslim state, that will one day be ruled by Islam, as they wish it to be. We all know that is what they wish. Let them call us what they wish. Let us keep our land. Mr. Eiland, if you want recongition, fine. Recognition for recognition; peace for peace. We should not accept land for "peace" or land for recognition.
7. Eiland missed the point
Israel Israeli ,   Tel Aviv   (09.15.10)
It is not just semantics, but then Eiland fails to get the point. Eiland missed todays radio interview with Ahmad Tibi who explained the issue clearly. Recognizing Israel as Jewish will mean the end of the "Right of Return", the end of the fake refugee problem, and the end of the Arabs demand to destroy Israel by flooding with foreign Arabs. Recognizing Israel as Jewish will also mean that Arabs living in Israel will no longer have the right to destroy Israel from within. Tibi himself said that these are the two reasons that the Arabs will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state no matter what concessions Israel makes.
8. Fear
M ,   Sydney   (09.15.10)
"If we fail to insist on this now, we may find ourselves within a generation or two in a situation where Arab Israelis demand (possibly through violence) equal national rights." Replace "Arab Israelis" with "Africans" & you get the same idea that made European South Africans cling to power for so long. Problem is, a lot of Israelis would be afraid that anti-Israeli feelings by others could actually be anti-Jewish feelings, and they understandably don't want to relive pre-1945 Europe. That's why a 1 state solution is unthinkable. Yet. Anyway, I would expect a Jewish state would ideally welcome others & afford those of other faiths who live within their borders all the rights their Jewish citizens enjoy. Why should those whose families lived in Israel 50 years ago not be allowed in, yet those whose families lived there 2000 years are? Oh yeah that's right, all the wars and stuff.. Stupid Arabs... Or were the wars because of above? Stupid Israelis...
9. Absolutely need Jewish state. 22 Arab states, 57 Muslim stat
Jae ,   Lynn US   (09.15.10)
states, christian countries, massive chinee, indian states.... and 1 tiny Jewish state is the problem? Racism/anti semitism pure and simple. Give freekin real.
10. Israel as Jewish State
David Kass   (09.15.10)
The arabs are already treated as second class citizens in Israel - kind of like the Jim Crow South of the US. If Israel declares itself the Jewish state, now and forever, the Israeli arabs will fall to third class citizens.
11. 'Jewish State of..' is unacceptable
r cummings ,   london UK   (09.15.10)
and has been from the outset of the Mandate. There is no valid legal or modern historical basis for recognising Israel as a Jewish state, but the Jewish people do not seem to see that the request itself is offensive. Forget the propaganda and historical revisionism from the religious right, the facts are plain and they should be set out and understood. (1) Balfour wrote ‘the establishment IN Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people’. He didn’t write the establishment OF Palestine AS THE national STATE OF THE Jewish people, as Chaim Weizmann wanted. Why not? The phrase "national home" was intentionally used instead of "state" because of opposition to the Zionist program within the British Cabinet. “In the final text, the word that was replaced with in to avoid committing the entirety of Palestine to the Jews”. So there was no intent. (2) That was accepted by the Zionist Organization at the Paris Peace Conference. Their future President said "... It is still being obstinately repeated by anti-Zionists again and again, that Zionism aims at the creation of an independent "Jewish State".
12. More Israeli hypocrisy
Mikesailor ,   Miami, FL   (09.15.10)
The US does not regognize Israel as a 'Jewish state. Neither does the rest of the world. According to international law, a state is a state is a state. You can call it whatever you want internally, yet nobody has the right to impose upon others recognition of a state as ethnically or religiously pure. Did anyone recognize Germany as an 'Aryan' state prior to WWII? Stop whining!
13. Ynet, like it or not,
Salma ,   Palestine   (09.15.10)
I JUST TELL THE TRUTH! OPEN YOUR HEART TO MY OPINION :(
14. "Why Israel has the RIGHT to exist...?" Because:
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (09.15.10)
1) The Jews, of course, constitute a people whose origin and the origin of its civilization is Judea, hence the name, some 4,000 years ago, and whose capital city has always been Jerusalem or Zion. 2) Historically, the Jewish people has never totally left the land and has always kept its affinity to the country and to Jerusalem at its center. 3) Ethically, the Jewish people is entitled, as all other peoples, to national self-determination and independence which it has exercised in its ancestral homeland of Ertz Israel (Land of Israel) 4) Legally, the Jewish people's nation-state of Israel exists based on the Balfour Declaration, 1917; The San Remo Conference Decisions, 1920; the League of Nations decisions, 1922; and the United Nations resolutions, 1947 and 1949. Thus, Israel is by RIGHT - historic, ethical and legal - the nation-state of the Jewish people and singling out the Jewish people and only this people to be denied of its RIGHT is nothing short of racism, anti-Jewish racism.
15. Who is a Jew?
Daoud Kuttab ,   Jerusalem   (09.15.10)
It is ironic that Palestinians are demanded to recognise Israel as a Jewish state and yet Israel has not answered the simple question of who is a Jew? The article has a contradiction, on the one hand the writer says that Israel is a state for its citizens and then wants to bar some of these citizens from wanting to make any changes. The author also doesn't answer the question of what would stop Israel as a Jewish state from re demanding Palestinian lands (and maybe Jordanian lands) based on some Jewish claim to them.
16. Steve Benassi #2: Question
Steve Klein   (09.15.10)
Steve, how many American Indian states do you think Clinton and Obama would be willing to establish in the US on lands the American Indian's possessed before they were dispossessed by white European colonialists and settlers? Would you be willing to give Texas back to Mexico? California? Are you aware American Inidan tribes - Lakota Sioux for example - are suing the US government for the return of their lands due to repeated US government treaty violations? Would you be willing to give North and South Carolina, Georgia back to the Cherokee Inidians from whom it was expropriated? What are you willing to return to her "rightful" owners?
17. An attempt to put lipstick on a pig.
Chaim ,   Israel   (09.15.10)
The argument about how to create a "stable peace agreement" with the P.A. is an attempt to put lipstick on a pig. Any "peace agreement" with the P.A. would render Israel indefensible. Let alone unstable. How could an 8 mile waist increase Israel's stability? How could constant rocket attacks increase Israel's stability? How could a massive influx of hostile Arabs increase Israel's stability? The obvious truth is that any "peace agreement" Israel reaches with the P.A. would be existentially detrimental to Israel.
18. No. 14 Thanks for the explanation. Now it makes sense to me.
Daniela ,   Ottawa, ON Canada   (09.15.10)
19. #11; r. cummings, the old and tired revision
Mark from Georgia ,   USA   (09.15.10)
This is that old and tired revisionism of history, nitpicking the words of the Balfour Declaration. At the time it was well understood it was a Jewish Nation. "National home" was meant as nation. For instance President Wilson endorsing the Balfour Declaration stated: March 3, 1919: The allied nations with the fullest concurrence of our government and people are agreed that in Palestine shall be laid the foundations of a Jewish Commonwealth. The word Commonwealth means: 1. The people of a nation or state; the body politic. 2. A nation or state governed by the people; a republic. Furthermore at the Paris Peace Conference February 3, 1919 The Zionist Organization submitted its draft and I quote: "1. The High Contracting Parties recognize the historic title of the Jewish people to Palestine and the right of Jews to reconstitute in Palestine their National Home. 2. The boundaries of Palestine shall be as declared in the Schedule annexed hereto. " "Palestine shall be placed under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment there of the Jewish National Home, and ultimately render possible the creation of an autonomous Commonwealth, " As you can see boundaries were being discussed and term Commonwealth used again. The point is simple the "National Homeland" was interchangeable with a "Country". But the the words were picked cautiously because of the competing of the National interests of the Jewish people and Arab Nationalism. The Super Powers of that time were seeking not to start problems, but it was understood what was meant, a Jewish Country.
20. This isn't about semantics.
David ,   San Francisco, USA   (09.15.10)
Mark from Georgia is correct. Just read: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" by Howard Grief. Grief's book puts to rest all the disinformation and lies about the Jews right to the land of Etzel Israel.
21. Wow according to #2 moron 80% is a minority
Gee ,   Zikron Yaakov   (09.15.10)
Not only that but the percentage is increasing every year. Then we look at the UK which also has a state religion. That is of course the Church of England, which constitutes about 22% of the population. That means that the UK has a perpetual minority rule, especially considering their percentage is falling very fast every year. Just a few facts for the resident morons.
22. IF THIS IS TRUE -
(09.16.10)
23. How come?
Uzi Avner ,   Eilat   (09.17.10)
How come no one mention that the term "Jewish State" already appeared 29 times in the UN resolution 181 (29.10.1947)? If the international community recognized Israel as a Jewish national state 63 years ago, why having it now as a subject for negotiation? Why don't our leaders, journalists, commentators and others remind ourselves, the arabs and the rest of the world this point every day? The results of the Arabs' refusal to accept the UN resolution is well known. How come do we allow them and too many others in the world to ignore it? Is there any reason not to mention this fact? Or, Is it just another typical failure of Israel to explain itself?
Back to article