Thanks Kieran. I try to avoid the news because, although they sell, they seldom help to understand deeper problems.
I feel this one is different. It’s a deep problem, very linked to psychology and geopolitics, which also surfaces other important problems. What is moral? Where is the world going?
Glad I can she’s some light on the issue, and learn with you all along the way.
This is the first time I've seen the term "Three state solution" and it would be the ideal solution, but we'll have to wait for the messiah.
I have always though that a Palestinian state in the West Bank is feasible, but a state of "Gaza" is not as long as Hamas exists. Israel says they must "win" the war with Hamas but I haven't seen anyone who can explain what that means. Replacing Hamas with the Palestinian authority is not much of an improvement as they are thoroughly corrupt and they no longer have the support of the Palestinian "street".
Unfortunately when the current war ends most likely scenario will be no change of the status of the West Bank or Gaza. There is no leadership to fill the vacuum in Gaza and the no leadership in the West Bank to replace the Palestinian Authority and when Abbas dies the leadership battle will be ugly. The only change in the region will be the end of the Netanyahu government.
I live in Oregon and can totally relate to the urban/rural divide. We have the prosperous fertile Willamette Valley--the Interstate corridor--where half of the state lives and is controlled by Democrats. I imagine this would have been where the Jews would have purchased land if it were Mandated Palestine.
Then we have the rugged Oregon Coast on the one side, and drier, rural Eastern Oregon on the other, where Republicans try their darndest to counter woke Progressives edicts. It has been proposed that Eastern Oregon join Idaho because it's more aligned politically. It'll never happen. I consider this a good thing because it means a constant battle of ideas, instead of a one-sided monopoly of ways to govern.
Logistically, the simplest solution is to give the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt. Of course it's not a simple solution, because neither nations want these people. But, like Oregon, maybe this is a good thing. A tunnel connecting the two would force a Palestine nation to consider different ways of thinking.
Am also looking forward to the solution... (insert hopeful/doubtful/thinking emoji here). Though with much of politics even in the developed West being divisive & broken, I have little hope of progress in the Levant this decade... I DO hope to be proven wrong!
This is the first time I've seen the term "Three state solution" and it would be the ideal solution, but we'll have to wait for the messiah.
I have always though that a Palestinian state in the West Bank is feasible, but a state of "Gaza" is not as long as Hamas exists. Israel says they must "win" the war with Hamas but I haven't seen anyone who can explain what that means. Replacing Hamas with the Palestinian authority is not much of an improvement as they are thoroughly corrupt and they no longer have the support of the Palestinian "street".
Unfortunately when the current war ends most likely scenario will be no change of the status of the West Bank or Gaza. There is no leadership to fill the vacuum in Gaza and the no leadership in the West Bank to replace the Palestinian Authority and when Abbas dies the leadership battle will be ugly. The only change in the region will be the end of the Netanyahu government.
The articles are very helpful and illustrative to understand the depth of the problem... I just wonder how these articles (and your suggested solution) can get to the people in State Dept of the US and Israel.
I tend to agree with Tomas that most problems are solvable. We need to ask ourselves why the problem hasn't been solved. Sometimes the solution is there but people can't see it, sometimes they don't have the skills/power to implement it, and sometimes it is because those who do have the power don't want the problem to be solved...
The key to solving problems is problem definition, which is what Tomas is doing in this series of articles. Once you define the problem clearly, the possible solutions become much more obvious. Problems are difficult to solve when we treat them as one issue when in fact there are multiple issues all mixed together. One of the steps is to clarify whose problem it is. If those in power don’t want to solve a problem it is because they don’t see the issue as being a problem for them!
The solution to that type of problem is either to persuade those in power that the issue is in fact a problem for them, or to change the people in power. As has happened throughout history, this can be democratically, by peaceful forms of protest, by internal violence or external violence. The next generation of young people will always see the world differently to their parents and even dictators don’t live forever.
Noah Smith made the same proposal a few weeks ago (https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/a-three-state-solution-is-the-only). I think he basically has it right when he says that this would be a nice solution if the parties involved didn't care about the things that they do, in fact, care about.
The solution then is that they have to compromise and give up at least some of the things they care about. Given that there are 8 billion humans on the planet and a few other species as well, the same question is going to keep coming up: can we compromise or do we just fight it out to the bitter end?
I completely agree with your reasoning. The first step should be to install a new leadership in Gaza that is not based on the corrupt and unpopular Fatah. This way the peace process could progress independently for Gaza and the West Bank. Israel could cede a bit of land near Gaza as a concession, as was planned in some of the suggested land swaps anyway.
I feel that the big questions is “How to root out Hamas from Gaza?”. This is pretty much the starting point of any moving forward. Current options I am hearing about recently (target killing, Israeli invasion of Gaza) are all very problematic. Was wondering if you are investigating this issue.
For years I've read that Gaza could become a "seaside-resort focused on tourism". This seems to make sense until you consider that a seaside-resort needs tourists bringing in outside money to flourish. Who in their right mind is going to visit a place with such a history of constant war and destruction?
The key difference between Gaza and countries such as Turkey or Mexico is that in those countries the tourist resorts are a very long way from areas with local conflict/security issues. In Gaza no hotel company is going to invest in a new resort with rockets being launched/landing 5 minutes down the road.
I hereby nominate footnote 5 for the Awards of the best footnote 2023 :)
You can find humor in the most unsuspecting places.
Like in Footnote 5.
i think this series of articles are among the most valuable you've produced. thank you for them.
Thanks Kieran. I try to avoid the news because, although they sell, they seldom help to understand deeper problems.
I feel this one is different. It’s a deep problem, very linked to psychology and geopolitics, which also surfaces other important problems. What is moral? Where is the world going?
Glad I can she’s some light on the issue, and learn with you all along the way.
This is the first time I've seen the term "Three state solution" and it would be the ideal solution, but we'll have to wait for the messiah.
I have always though that a Palestinian state in the West Bank is feasible, but a state of "Gaza" is not as long as Hamas exists. Israel says they must "win" the war with Hamas but I haven't seen anyone who can explain what that means. Replacing Hamas with the Palestinian authority is not much of an improvement as they are thoroughly corrupt and they no longer have the support of the Palestinian "street".
Unfortunately when the current war ends most likely scenario will be no change of the status of the West Bank or Gaza. There is no leadership to fill the vacuum in Gaza and the no leadership in the West Bank to replace the Palestinian Authority and when Abbas dies the leadership battle will be ugly. The only change in the region will be the end of the Netanyahu government.
This is a serious problem. I have one potential solution for it
Tomas, do you have a system for gifting subscriptions?
You know, you’re the first to ever ask me this. Thank you! I just figured this out, I didn’t know before: follow this link
http://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/gift
I live in Oregon and can totally relate to the urban/rural divide. We have the prosperous fertile Willamette Valley--the Interstate corridor--where half of the state lives and is controlled by Democrats. I imagine this would have been where the Jews would have purchased land if it were Mandated Palestine.
Then we have the rugged Oregon Coast on the one side, and drier, rural Eastern Oregon on the other, where Republicans try their darndest to counter woke Progressives edicts. It has been proposed that Eastern Oregon join Idaho because it's more aligned politically. It'll never happen. I consider this a good thing because it means a constant battle of ideas, instead of a one-sided monopoly of ways to govern.
Logistically, the simplest solution is to give the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt. Of course it's not a simple solution, because neither nations want these people. But, like Oregon, maybe this is a good thing. A tunnel connecting the two would force a Palestine nation to consider different ways of thinking.
Interesting analogy
Yes, geography does determine many things...
Am also looking forward to the solution... (insert hopeful/doubtful/thinking emoji here). Though with much of politics even in the developed West being divisive & broken, I have little hope of progress in the Levant this decade... I DO hope to be proven wrong!
Maybe not this decade
:-(
In fact I fear any solution would need several
brilliant assessment Tomas. Keep up the great work.
This is the first time I've seen the term "Three state solution" and it would be the ideal solution, but we'll have to wait for the messiah.
I have always though that a Palestinian state in the West Bank is feasible, but a state of "Gaza" is not as long as Hamas exists. Israel says they must "win" the war with Hamas but I haven't seen anyone who can explain what that means. Replacing Hamas with the Palestinian authority is not much of an improvement as they are thoroughly corrupt and they no longer have the support of the Palestinian "street".
Unfortunately when the current war ends most likely scenario will be no change of the status of the West Bank or Gaza. There is no leadership to fill the vacuum in Gaza and the no leadership in the West Bank to replace the Palestinian Authority and when Abbas dies the leadership battle will be ugly. The only change in the region will be the end of the Netanyahu government.
This is a true, fundamental problem
Looking forward to the solution.....thanks Tomas
I’m building up to it. I’m finishing the next 2 articles, and it will come after that
The articles are very helpful and illustrative to understand the depth of the problem... I just wonder how these articles (and your suggested solution) can get to the people in State Dept of the US and Israel.
Most of them know most of this
I do think they’re missing the core issue, which I should publish in 10 days
Great description.......as you already imply, v difficult to implement.
...there are some problems which are not solvable ...is this one of them?
Most problems are solvable, and this is one of them! I'll talk about that in the future.
Maybe another way to convey the idea of this article: There are more degrees of freedom in this problem than most of us realize
I tend to agree with Tomas that most problems are solvable. We need to ask ourselves why the problem hasn't been solved. Sometimes the solution is there but people can't see it, sometimes they don't have the skills/power to implement it, and sometimes it is because those who do have the power don't want the problem to be solved...
Exactly
So if those who have power don’t want to solve the problem it becomes “unsolvable “.
The key to solving problems is problem definition, which is what Tomas is doing in this series of articles. Once you define the problem clearly, the possible solutions become much more obvious. Problems are difficult to solve when we treat them as one issue when in fact there are multiple issues all mixed together. One of the steps is to clarify whose problem it is. If those in power don’t want to solve a problem it is because they don’t see the issue as being a problem for them!
The solution to that type of problem is either to persuade those in power that the issue is in fact a problem for them, or to change the people in power. As has happened throughout history, this can be democratically, by peaceful forms of protest, by internal violence or external violence. The next generation of young people will always see the world differently to their parents and even dictators don’t live forever.
Great information Thomas. Much needed.
Footnote 5 made me snort laugh. Thanks for that.
Noah Smith made the same proposal a few weeks ago (https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/a-three-state-solution-is-the-only). I think he basically has it right when he says that this would be a nice solution if the parties involved didn't care about the things that they do, in fact, care about.
The solution then is that they have to compromise and give up at least some of the things they care about. Given that there are 8 billion humans on the planet and a few other species as well, the same question is going to keep coming up: can we compromise or do we just fight it out to the bitter end?
I completely agree with your reasoning. The first step should be to install a new leadership in Gaza that is not based on the corrupt and unpopular Fatah. This way the peace process could progress independently for Gaza and the West Bank. Israel could cede a bit of land near Gaza as a concession, as was planned in some of the suggested land swaps anyway.
I feel that the big questions is “How to root out Hamas from Gaza?”. This is pretty much the starting point of any moving forward. Current options I am hearing about recently (target killing, Israeli invasion of Gaza) are all very problematic. Was wondering if you are investigating this issue.
For years I've read that Gaza could become a "seaside-resort focused on tourism". This seems to make sense until you consider that a seaside-resort needs tourists bringing in outside money to flourish. Who in their right mind is going to visit a place with such a history of constant war and destruction?
The key difference between Gaza and countries such as Turkey or Mexico is that in those countries the tourist resorts are a very long way from areas with local conflict/security issues. In Gaza no hotel company is going to invest in a new resort with rockets being launched/landing 5 minutes down the road.