zlacker

Settlements are of course wrong, but I don't really see any concrete action that Israel could take other than removing settlements. Even if they did that the fundamental facts on the ground wouldn't change. I don't see how they lift the blockade and any 2 state solution seems a nonstarter.

>>sabarn+(OP)
The Israeli govt can and should halt establishing new settlements or expanding existing settlements, especially when expansion is zero-sum with further displacement (e.g. Hebron). It can also enforce the criminality of extrajudicial settler violence.

Agreed any real solutions are a nonstarter in current situation, but a lack of imagination or will about how to move forward just further normalizes the illegality of it all.

>>sabarn+(OP)
> Settlements are of course wrong, but I don't really see any concrete action that Israel could take other than removing settlements.

It could do a lot in the West Bank (where the fully or partially PA administered territory is divided into 166 non-contiguous regions), and anything there xould be done in a way that it looks like a win for the Fatah-led PA, weakening the perception that Hamas and its violence is the only entity capable of delivering for the Palestinian people, undermining Hamas politically.

OTOH, the whole reason Israel fostered Hamas during the direct occupation of Gaza was to create an Islamist competitor for the more secular and sympathetic to non-Muslim states PLO, and the reason they've (and government ministers have said this explicitly) continued to support them in between periods of active conflict is to deflect pressure for peace and a two-state solution, so there’s zero chance of the Netanyahu government doing this.

>>dragon+67
I think I agree with that. Which is the PA should be boosted and rewarded with increased freedom and autonomy as a counter example to Gaza. As it stands right now Israel is almost rewarding being more intransigent.

>>dragon+67
International "Support" should be clear that settlements in the West Bank are a deal breaker, and that a sovereign West Bank should be recognized internationally. I can only hope Israel ousts Bibi after this, as it's clear evidence that occasional violence in Gaza is NOT a workable system, and the settlements in the West Bank by groups of people that are largely considered extreme right and have not a lot of sympathy from most other Israel citizens aren't helping either.

>>sabarn+Y8
> As it stands right now Israel is almost rewarding being more intransigent.

Not almost. The far right Israel factions (Netanyahu, Likud, etc.) have actually repeatedly encouraged and cultivated Hamas. They benefit far more from the polarization that Hamas brings than a mild and moderate PA who is willing to work diplomatically, because then that increases pressure on those far right Israelis to also be more temperate, which goes against their goals.

>>sabarn+Y8
The PA have no legitimacy with the majority of Palestinians especially in Gaza. Israel tried to ignore the vote that brought Hamas's political wing into power in Democratic elections in Gaza, and supported what was essentially a coup by the PA. But, the Palestinians rose up against the PA and its Israeli backers and reclaimed control of Gaza.

Funny since Israel originally supported (including arming) Hamas* hoping the religious Hamas would split the populations support for more secular nationalist movements in Palestine. But, you can be both religious and nationalist.

*Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood; Hamas grew out of the Muslim Brotherhood.

>>dragon+67
Agree Israel could do a lot more in the West Bank (or maybe try just not being there...), but the present conflict is the result of attacks launched from Gaza, the area Israel fully withdrew from in the early 2000s. Gazans freely voted for Hamas for the first time shortly afterwards (which was the last time Hamas permitted them to vote). Ironically, polls for the time suggest that many of the Gazan voters who switched to Hamas did so as a protest against corruption and authoritarian trends in their Fatah govt and believed Hamas should have changed its core position to actually consider negotiating a peace settlement with Israel, but it's a pretty clear example that even drastic unilateral Israeli action (they did remove their settlements in that area... after the changes of government necessary to force it through) need not lead to peaceful outcomes.

Israel and especially its present governing coalition is not blameless for the situation (and nor are Palestinian factions and some of their supposed allies blameless for Israel's tendency to keep electing governing coalitions more interested in projecting power than continuing peace processes), but it's a lot more complicated than Israeli govts wanting Hamas to be a thing and nobody else in the region having agency. Undoing tacit support for an Islamist alternative to the PLO in the 1970s isn't really a policy option (if it is, someone should give the undo button to the US for Afghanistan!), that happened because there was open conflict long before Hamas and Netanyahu, and apparent diplomatic wins for the PLO did them absolutely no good in the noughties when Palestinians could still choose whether or not to vote for therm

>>sillys+4x
They are arguing for rewarding the West Bank, not for supporting the PA in Gaza.