FAQs

How to Join

Links

PC of London says:

There are many people on both sides of the Palestine/Israel conflict, and elsewhere, who nowadays support the "two-state solution". They want to "put the past behind them", "recognise the realities on the ground" and find a compromise that gives the measure of justice to the Palestinians that the Zionist Israeli state can live with.

But let's not fool ourselves and others, because if we look honestly at present day reality, no such accommodation is being offered to the Palestinians and there is no sign that the present Israeli state will ever offer it. Ideologically, to concede any Palestinian state in any part of the "historic land of Israel" would undermine the whole reactionary religious justification for the existence of the state of Israel. The whole thing would simply start to unravel.

All that this state can ever offer the Palestinians is an extended refugee camp, with the worst of the West Bank land, limited autonomy, constant threat of invasion and nothing done to alleviate the truly appalling conditions of the refugee camps in Gaza, or give the right of return to those Palestinians living in exile.

What is good for the capitalist Israeli state - a dictatorial and militarised state, the only one in the Middle East with nuclear weapons - is not the same as what is good for the Israeli people. It is with this in mind that socialists continue to argue for the formation of a democratic secular state of Palestine where Jews and Arabs can live at peace with their neighbours.

The alternative is not only the illegal occupation of territory, arbitrary arrests and torture but the threat to removal of the limited rights of the Arab population of Israel itself to vote and elect members to the Israeli Parliament.

I have not here said anything about the Palestinian side of the issue, because it is the Israeli people who must take responsibility for the state they live in. And of course the Palestinians have every right to decide to participate in talks, sign up to agreements and do everything in their power to alleviate the conditions of their people. But only a major social change in Israel itself can achieve the peace yearned for by both Israelis and Palestinians.

Declan says:

I would agree with a lot of the points that have been raised. In that the only credible way forward for Israel is to become a genuinely inclusive state. The two state theory will only perpetuate the racism of the present Israeli leadership clique and generate its polar opposite in the form of the militant Islamic groups. South Africa offers an example of how to go about such a solution without 'race wars'.

Tim says:

Sadly, once successful, human beings continue to cling to their old habits long after their behaviour pattern has failed so badly they self-destruct.

Israel was born out of terrorism against British Mandate soldiers. It has yet to mature from thuggery into a responsible modern state which respects the Human Declaration of Human Rights and could submit its citizens to the International Criminal Court.

Palestine is effectively in the same parlous state. Being weaker, it could, in theory at least, resolve matters, were it to heed the wisdom of the Quran rather than the merely retaliate in kind.

An eye for an eye was just the first step in limiting the destructive power of vengeful feuds. Later, people were denied vengance, which was assigned to God. About the time of the common epoch, judges demanded enemies to love each other. 400 years later this idea, central to Christianity, was developed further within Islam.

Palestine may lack water, land and money, but equally Israel lacks skilled manpower and a sustainable birthrate. Both need each other. Both fail to see the enormous mutual advantage which would flow from the adoption and enforcement of international law. But then both nations have tasted success through brutality despite their religious claims. Both feel threatened and fearful.

On the ground, given the chance, many ordinary Isralis and Palistinians already do work together. Both nations have to take control of their leaders, but who will show leadership in achieving that? Might that be a role for the Europeans? If not us, then who? If not now, then when?....

Jonathan says:

while I agree that the state-system, the division of humans into groups based upon geographical location, is fundamentally flawed, and destructive, I cannot envision the Isrealis providing palaestinians with basic human rights any time in the near future. any attempt to merge Palestinians into the exisitng isreal will be very difficult, and chances are they will continue to be exploited and oppressed.

I have wondered what the effect of economic support and independance might have upon the peace process? For example, many of the causes of the current conflict come from the daily oppression of the Palestinians, if they had access to sanitation, water, markets for their products etc free from the roads blocks and destruction of the Isreali army, then life would surely improve for the majority of people. as living standards rise the hopelessness and desperation that drives young people to become suicide bombers may lessen, a small step perhaps, but a step towards peace.

I do not see further fragmentation and states as a solution to the worlds problems, but an end to the occupation, and the establishment of a free palastine, may bring a lessoning of tension. Are there many UN observers in Occupied Palestine? is it feasable to massively increase their numbers- though obviously not with american or british troops.

Matt says:

Whilst i think it is understandable that some in the plo leadership have taken to the two states line - as Trotsky well understood with his theory of 'permanent revolution' and Lenin did albeit in a slightly different way- the national state can only be 'independent' in name unless it is constructed by the masses in struggle - a single state Palestine next to Israel, as well as not being particularly economically viable, would not be able to take a truly independent course like a democratic, secular Palestine. http://communities.msn.co.uk/mattsleftofcentrepage

The Right to Self-Determination

Includes new material on the history of the Soviet Union and the north Caucasus. From Kurdistan to Palestine, Chechnya, East Timor and Tibet, oppressed peoples are struggling for their independence. This pamphlet sets out a concrete, partisan and principled attitude to the right to self-determination. Lenin's analysis of the economic foundation of national movements is outlined, and studied in relation to his logical method. The theoretical origins of the disastrous "two-stage" theory are shown. A special section about Chechnya and the North Caucasus draws on recent research by the Minority Rights Group and historical sources recently made available in the former Soviet Union.

£2.00 including postage. Please send cheques made out to MSF, PO Box 942, London, SW1V 2AR