zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. skissa+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-12-09 04:04:57
> If Israel and the Palestinian territories were to become combined into a single state, it would no longer have a strong Jewish majority and would also cease to have its strong secular minority. It would cease to be Israel.

> Even though the current Israeli government may be more conservative than the ones previous, I see few possibilities for a more socially liberal government if Israel were to combine with the more-conservative majority-Muslim Palestinian states

According to some forecasts, roughly 50% of all Israeli children born in 2065 will be Haredi. [0] If that's right, Israel could well end this century with a majority of the population being Haredi, and Haredi parties in control of the Knesset and Israeli government. I doubt a socially liberal Israeli government could be possible in that circumstance; whatever remains of the secular minority may not be "strong", it may be politically weakened, demoralised, and increasingly diminished by emigration and a low birth rate.

And all that's assuming there is no change to the relationship with the Palestinians. So maybe a change won't do as much as you think – it might just hasten the inevitable.

[0] https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023-05-22/ty-article-opinio...

replies(1): >>candio+eA
2. candio+eA[view] [source] 2023-12-09 10:48:44
>>skissa+(OP)
> And all that's assuming there is no change to the relationship with the Palestinians. So maybe a change won't do as much as you think – it might just hasten the inevitable.

So destruction now or destruction some time after 2065? I know what I'd pick ...

replies(1): >>skissa+hB
◧◩
3. skissa+hB[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-12-09 10:58:24
>>candio+eA
> So destruction now or destruction some time after 2065? I know what I'd pick ...

Well, realistically, no big change is likely to happen to the relationship with the Palestinians in the near future. Maybe in another 20-40 years. So the time gap between the two scenarios may be smaller than you suggest.

replies(1): >>candio+xi3
◧◩◪
4. candio+xi3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-12-10 12:40:55
>>skissa+hB
My of the situation is different: Hamas is a business model. Dead Palestinians (and a show of killing Jews/Israeli, the superiority of islam/repressed people) for a LOT of money. It worked for the PLO, but it seems Abu Mazen suddenly decided he cares about human beings (AFTER becoming a billionnaire this way)
replies(1): >>skissa+Fa7
◧◩◪◨
5. skissa+Fa7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-12-11 21:52:29
>>candio+xi3
I don’t think Hamas has a clear strategy going forward. October 7 only happened because Israel was caught off-guard, that isn’t going to happen again. So what does Hamas do next? They will try to get as much leverage as they can out of the hostages; but they only have so many hostages, so that strategy can only take them so far. Then what do they do?

October 7 was calculated to derail the peace negotiations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, and in the short-to-medium term it succeeded. But, I expect that (privately) MbS is really angry at Hamas for doing that, and I think most other Arab governments likely feel similarly. That doesn’t bode well for Hamas in the long-run.

replies(1): >>candio+Yu7
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. candio+Yu7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-12-12 00:07:18
>>skissa+Fa7
I think it's telling that Putin visited Saudi Arabia ... landed ... and nothing. Clearly he came with an offer MbS couldn't refuse, and MbS refused it.

It also shows, of course, that Arab countries have not changed and have zero interest or respect for the ICC or the UN. But they do seem to respect that Iran wants to destroy them. And if stopping Iran requires war in Gaza, then they're perfectly ok with that. They have barely denounced Israel over it, in fact most haven't done that at all.

[go to top]