Lieberman: I have international support
Yigal Walt
Published: 23.03.06, 20:57
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
42 Talkbacks for this article
1. Let the Israeli Arab Towns join their Pal Brethren GOOD IDEA
Alan ,   South Africa   (03.23.06)
2. while handing over Arab-Israeli towns to the Palestinian Aut
we must hold all territory and handover nothing
3. Would he give these Israeli Arabs
Michael Steiner ,   EU   (03.23.06)
the option of relocating elsewhere to Israel? If not, then his plan IS an attempt to remove Israel's Arab citizens and is as such racist and utterly reprehensible.
4. That is an excellent plan
MARK ,   USA   (03.23.06)
Israel does need those villages towns and cities which are all or mostly Arab. The demographic problem is solved. The Galilee is mostly Arabs. It is good for Arabs and Jews. Why does Israel want Israeli Arab towns any way? Israel will not have to constantly finance the Arab Israelis who are on welfare . They are not loyal citizens. They are loyal to destroying Israel.
5. Israel Beggardly Desperation for International Support
Marcel ,   Florida   (03.23.06)
Always begging ,always desperate for support from the nations. This is the god Israel bows before and seeks approval from. When will Israel put their God above their lust for approval from the nations ????? When will they seek His approval as much as they seek the blessing ,the O.K from the nations ????
6. Be realistic!
Billy ,   Burlington, Canada   (03.23.06)
This is really insane! 1st, to strip citizens (whether Arab or otherwise) from their citizenship is against international law unless they chose to go for it by a referendum or so. Secondly, Israel is already a tiny country & creating PA pockets inside it will create allot of havocs. Practically, it's impossible. Ethically, it's wrong. Shames on those who're keeping mutilating the image of Israel & Israelis! Either they are insane or stupid. G-d blesses Israel.
7. Intersting
Human ,   Nablus, West Bank   (03.23.06)
As much as I think Liberiman is a facsiest and crazy evil person, his plan would make sense in the following cases The borders can be redrawn so that Israel keeps Ariel, Gosh Es\tizion and MAile Adomiem , evactute all rest, and the annex all teh PAlestinian triangle area including the City of Nazseerha and Shakneen are to teh Palestinain state , alsdo include the areas of Shafa Amro, Tiabia, Kufor Qasem, andmost of the northen Galilie that is populated by arabs , also parts of teh Nagav where teh bodweians and Rahat are. In that way their will be more land -population Blanance, instead of the APlestinian state formed on teh west bank and Gaza which is 22%of PAlestine, and may be only about 18-20% after Israel takes the main Stettilements, it will be fair to add 10-15% more of the Palestinain land to the Palestinian state. Again if he is talking about a Palestinanin independent state , that makes sense, if he is talking about the Palestinian authroity , then Lieberman Kiss my a$$
8. we should give them the same pachage as the people from Gush
Gedaliah   (03.23.06)
9. Lieberman has the best politician ever!
yosef menagen ,   israel, Himmelfarb.   (03.23.06)
he is the only person in the KNESSET who really has ideology and he also practical.. BIBY has a wonderful ideology but its never becoming into implementation.. OLMART doesn't has enything - no ideology and no experience..if in the end of the elections he will be elected its going to be a big disaster.. yosef menagen
10. Great Idea
Seth ,   Washington, DC   (03.23.06)
It's not a new idea but makes sense. In the past, Israeli Arab towns have fought this idea since they know they will go from the first world to the third world in services, freedom, etc.
11. Well this is what you wanted, two state solution
Caligula's Horse   (03.23.06)
How is it fair for the Palestinian state to be homogenicly Arab and Judenrine and for the Jewish one to include 20% Arabs? Is that a two states for two nations solution? Isent it more close to a two states for one nation solution? (and that one nation being that Arab one, of course). Da Liberman! (not Russian)
12. Culturally different points of view, Billy and Michael
Shai ,   Israel   (03.23.06)
First, you pulled it out of your tuches that there is an international law against stripping somebody of their citizenship. I find this surprising. Maybe you can define "international law", tell us how it is enforced in similar situations, provide us a citation so we can see the precise wording, and tell us whether all countries are bound by this law, or whether it's just a "suggestion". Second, if PA pockets are a problem, we have no problem if the Palestinians want to be under Jordanian or Egyptian rule. It's none of our business. But there's nothing that requires we incorporate them into our state, and if we don't have to we shouldn't. The refusal to stand up for the national anthem, and the constant abuse we get from Arab MK's, is evidence enough that they don't want to be part of our state anyway. Third, practically it's quite possible and has been done in other places, as Liberman has said. It may not be practical for Billy of Canada, but it's quite practical for us, certainly no less difficult than expelling Jews from Gaza against their will, as Liberman said. Ethically, there's nothing wrong with it at all. From a secular perspective, democracy requires a body politic without disparate national narratives. to survive. Watch Iraq fail because it doesn't have it. The US had to be a melting pot for a century before it could be a mosaic, because otherwise it could never have build the common foundation that makes it a stable society today. Same with Europe. Otherwise, with disparate national narratives under the same democracy, the democracy is not stable, as Kissinger is quoted as saying. It cannot ever agree on what basic rights each citizen is entitled to without obliterating each other's national narrative. Ethically therefore, it's preferable that they be under Arab rule in a Palestinian ruled state, rather than under Jewish rule. Also, Jewish culture has always seen group membership as flowing from the exercise of an obligation, not a right. Therefore, a Jewish state will naturally have a cultural affinity to value those who take upon themselves obligations for the good of the whole, rather than stressing primarily their rights and not taking upon themselves obligations, a description that typifies the viewpoint of Arab MK's. That's the cultural context we live in, Billy. It's not Canadian culture, and Michael Steiner, it's not EU culture. We have no obligation to be like you, to take your values and to think like you. There's nothing intrinsically "right" about your view for our situation. Just like the Arabs are entitled to their flavor of democracy that suits their own needs, so are we. This is the one we choose. That said, there will be many hundreds of thousands of Arabs in Israel even if Leiberman's plan goes into effect. The ones who will become PA citizens are largely those who only have residency permits and not actual citizenship anyway (that is, they can't vote in national elections but can vote in local elections), and cities like Um El Fachem and Kfar Kassem. I've heard Berakeh and Tibi express many times that "Israeli citizenship was forced on us". Well, pardon us, we'll just rectify this error with a smile. We don't like having unhappy customers, and would rather direct you to our competition. Lastly, Michael we've taken tens of thousands of Palestinians into Israel "proper" over the last decade and made them Israeli citizens. Your claim that we are "reprehensible" for making the land swap is rediculous. We have rights, too and when they conflict, we have the right to choose which right trumps.
13. Lieberman Is NOT A Rightwinger
Adina kutnicki ,   US   (03.23.06)
To call Lieberman rightwing is nuts. No rightwing person would ever cave into these kind of suicidal concessions in order to create a Hamas terror state. Think about it. Many enclaves in the US have overwhelmingly Hispanic populations. What would the US do if all of a sudden Mexico decided they wanted the Hispanic towns, or otherwise they would wage jihad? The rightwing answer is NOT to give them Israeli towns, but to either offer them (forced) compensation plans like they imposed on Jewish ! citizens, or let them know that if they act in a seditious manner they will pay a heavy price. That is the way a proud, true zionist would behave. Lieberman is full of hot air.
14. Killers for neighbors?
Shoshana ,   Nokem   (03.23.06)
Only fools would be in favor of inviting killers to share our communities. Ynet should publish the hamas covenant but I doubt it would.
15. to 13, 14
Yariv ,   Tel Aviv   (03.23.06)
Lieberman is a centrist/left-winger. He is similar to Aba Eban who suggested that Israel will give Egypt some land and keep Yamit. Yanet wouldn't publish Hamas position or even Olmert's bio.
16. Response to terrorism!
Ram ,   London   (03.24.06)
I totally agree with the response to terrorism he suggests. It should be total!
17. Cyprus? What borders
Doron Katz ,   Sydney, Australia   (03.24.06)
What is that idiot talking about. There are no borders in Cyprus, its one island. I find it ironic that he would not support giving the west bank, yet support Turkey's invasion of Cyprus
18. Good in theory...
Daniel ,   Australia   (03.24.06)
yet, do you actually think this will ever be put into practice? Olmert would never have the balls to implement such a plan. I doubt very much that the international community would support such actions. Forced removal of Arabs by Jews? C'mon!! Gimme a break. Maybe if there were Jews removing Jews, then the support will be there. The Israeli-Arabs have it too good in Israel...why on earth would they want to live under Hamas? Do you honestly think they arent gonna leave without a real fight?
19. to Shai, Israel/ talkback #12
Billy ,   Burlington, Canada   (03.24.06)
Hello Shai, Thanks for your reply & the very valid points that you've brought. Actually I do agree with part of your opinion, which is generally very well written. The definition of international law is: "a body of rules that control or affect the rights of nations in their relations with each other." Civil and Political Rights under International Human Rights is to considered part of the international law in this respect. We have to be careful to differentiate between 1948 borders & occupied territories. The applicable law governing the west bank & Gaza (until the Israeli withdrawal) is that of international armed conflict and occupation, which is different from what we're talking about. We're considering the Israeli citizens of non-Jewish faith. As per General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 amendment on 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49: "All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development." Which leads to a direct conclusion that you cannot just strip a citizen from her/his nationality without her/his consent. I do agree with you, though, that those citizens (regardless of religion) who are despising their own country and citizenship & refuse to serve their flag should be treated differently. In my opinion, they should be brought to courts of justice which will decide what will be the verdict. I think the problem here is that you consider non-Jewish Israelis as non-Israelis! They were borne as Israelis, grown up & lived in Israel, have Israeli passports & like other Israelis, Israel is the only country they know & lived in. How can you just decide collectively to strip away their identity? Again, those who don't consider themselves Israelis should be treated differently. The same treatment as if they‘re traitors or spies. Simply, because they are! This is not politician’s job, it belongs to justice system & mechanism. On the other hand, with all respect to Henry Kissinger, he was the one behind returning back Sinai to Egypt in the seventies of last century & he was the one who prevented turning Egyptian victory in Yom Kippur war into a big defeat. Thanks.
See "Israel Asks: Has Ahmed Tibi Become A Racist?" at:
21. Time for a trade~!
Arie   (03.24.06)
The "Israeli Arab" triangle is composed of Arabs that want it both way - they scream for the terrorist muHAMedans o lead them, and scream even louder when Israel says OK! Well, time to give them what they wish for-transfer the Arab Triangle to a future Palestinian entity, and absorb and annex the Jewish settlements in exchange. Let the Arabs have what thy have been begging for: anarchy, violence,honour killings,Shaaria,rule under terror,dead economy,no healthcare, no food, abject poverty. That is what they have wished for - give i to them. Time to let them see they CAN'T have ot both ways.
22. Herr Steiner
dana ,   us   (03.24.06)
To cal Liebermans plan racist is utter ignorance. Was the Franco-Prussian war racist. Was it racist for the Czechs to expel the Sudetan Germans. Was it racist for the Russians and Poles to expel the Prussians? No !!!. Because all those groups are the same race as are Jews and Arabs. Before you throw terms like "racism " around get out a dictionary and learn what it means. Meanwhile waste your time on a nazi veterans web site.
23. Mussolini meets Dr. Strangelove
a ginsburg   (03.24.06)
Mel brooks couldn't have cast it better! Our own home grown fascist and Richard Nixon's house Jew....
24. Lieberman's ideas
marc vernick ,   westfield usa   (03.24.06)
While Lieberman's ideas have some merit, where do you stop? What do we do with other areas of Israel that over ten or twenty years may tilt towards an arab majority. Israel could theoretically be whittled down to less than nothing. I therefore support Benny Elons plan of allowing the palestinians and arabs living west of the jordan river to remain in Israeli territory with palestinian citizenship. I am not advocating ethnic cleansing or population transfer. Just transfer of citizenship. I feel that Jordan is the true palestinian state, with 70 percent of its citizens palestinian anyway. The british mandate of palestine up until 1922 included both sides of the jordan as the mandate of palestine. The non jews who could not live peacefully would be expelled over the river to the palestinian state. What does everyone think of the elon plan? If you are not familiar with it, you can go to
25. #3
kipkipod   (03.24.06)
most arabs wouldn't move to other towns in israel because they don't recognize israeli sovereignty. you see, most arab israelis as we call them actually see themselves as "arabs of 48", meaning they live in israel and continue to take advantage of the country's social and welfare system while at the same time refusing to recognize the state. of course not all arabs are like that but most are and we have to accept this. most arabs constantly complain about how shit their lives are in israel. what liberman is suggesting is a realistic solution to re-unite these "arabs of 48" with their paleostinian brothers. these arab towns in israel are mostly arab anyway, no jews live there as the arabs don't want them. most of these arabs will never accept israel as they see the whole state as illegitimate, let alone a return to 67 lines.
26. What's "racist" in letting Arabs keep their settlements?
Tahl ,   Israel   (03.24.06)
Though I am not a supporter of Lieberman, this plan actually makes sense. I fail to see what is "racist" in the plan to redraw the borders of Israel and the future Palestinian state, so that they both be more homogeneous? After all, it's not like we would be evacuating Arabs from their homes and villages forcefully, like we did to the Jews of Gush Katif - on the contrary! Today's Israeli Arabs, of such places like Taibeh, Baka al Garbiye, and Um El Fahm, would not get moved an inch, they get to keep their homes! No transfer, no nothing! And instead of living under the "racist" Israeli state, (in their own words), they get to live with their Palestinian brothers, whom they've always identified with. What's so bad and "racist" about this idea? Israel stands to gain many things from this: 1. A greater percentage of Jews in the country, and a major alleviation of the demographic threat, 2. The tranfer of Arab territories to Palestine, would give Israel legitimate right over important settlements and strategic territories in the West Bank like Ariel, Gush Etzion, the Jordan valley, the Dead Sea (which are currently not seen favorably in the world)- because this is an even and fair exchange of territories. Now the annexation of all these territories would gain worldwide legitimacy. 3. An Arab population who has experienced Israel's democracy (even if it was limited, in their eyes), and relative quality of life, would strive to achieve the same for their new state, Palestine. 4. The declaration from the Palestinians, and subsequently all Arabs, about the ending of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict! This plan does make sense, and I do not think it is racist.
27. Lieberman more humane than Sharon
Ilan ,   Ariel   (03.24.06)
Apart from out right killing someone, taking their property, homes and means of making a living is the worse thing that one can do to another human being. That the transfer of last Summer is still so celebrated is more a testimony of the sad state of Israeli society. 50 years from now you will find people denying their knowledge of what was done in their names, just as you find in Eastern Europe and Germany of today. Lieberman suggests that citizens that are unwilling to show loyalty to the state to which they are citizens to become citizens of a state that they can show loyalty towards. I would prefer to see Arabs as loyal, IDF serving citizens and I still hold out hope for that day.
28. didn't work for India and Pakistan
alan ,   frisco   (03.24.06)
Despite huge population exchanges in 1948 when Hindus in the West went East and Mulsims in the East went West, there still existed for 50 years terrible conflicts between India and Pakistan. The real solution to the border is total VICTORY against Islamic extremism by radical Muslims. Total Military victory is the only long term solution. Another half baked election throw away by a desperate politician. Why would the 25% of Israel that is Arab want to be part of a corrupt, theocratically orientated enterprize in the West Bank and Gaza. Poll after poll shows Israeli Arabs do not want to stay in a democratic, pluralistic Israel
29. Agree with #10
Eytan ,   Amsterdam, Holland   (03.24.06)
I have to agree with the idea postulated in this article. It is not a new idea and it had great international support in the time that Clinton was president of the US. In fact, Clinton himself presented this idea in one of his peace proposals! But: The method how to organize this trade should include a referendum amongst the designated Arab-Israeli cities.
30. Send the arabs away, G-d gave this land to the JEWS.
Bunnie Meyer ,   Santa Monica, CA   (03.24.06)
Next talkbacks
Back to article