By Jim Miles
Yesterday I read a comment under an article on Israel on the website Russia Insider describing actions around Israel’s intrusion and military action into Syrian airspace.
The comment read, paraphrased, nuke the Israeli terrorists and give the land back to Palestine.
I realized instantly that this was not only a rather poorly considered radical solution, it was no solution: if Israel is nuked, then Palestine is also nuked. But it did tie into thoughts concerning ideas about what the future may hold for Israel/Palestine.
Israel exists at this point in time as a de facto united apartheid state. The two-state solution is simply a well-known has been.
In 2015, F.W. De Klerk argued against the definition of apartheid by not recognizing many simple truths. He said in part,
“you have Palestinians living in Israel with full political rights,” and “you don’t have discriminatory laws against them, I mean not letting them swim on certain beaches or anything like that.”
“there will come in Israel a turning point where if the main obstacles of the moment which exist for a successful two-state solution are not removed, the two-state solution will become impossible,” 
The first quote has not truths in it, and the second excerpt does contain truth. Those “obstacles” remain, and yes, the two-state solution is impossible, dead in spite of constant attempts by the west at cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Existing now as a highly-militarized apartheid state, which direction will it take? There are three general trends that might occur.
The first direction is simply the status quo.
This implies increased settlement activity, ongoing militarized restrictions on West Bank Palestinians, open air prison treatment of Gaza Palestinians with occasional attacks and slaughters to keep the populace unsettled and on the brink of starvation, and second class “obedience” for Palestinians in Israel ‘proper’.
To maintain this, the status quo of the Greater Middle East will have to either remain chaotic (the empire always needs good enemies) or finally give in to Israeli/U.S. desires for the Arab nations to become docile and subordinate to whatever demands are placed upon them.
With the current government in Israel, with the current bizarre trends with the new government in the U.S., apartheid may well continue for several decades. But global sentiment is in decline against the U.S. as more and more recognize that it is the U.S. deep state controlling events for the empire, a state that comprises the neocon oligarchy, the corporations, the financial racketeers of Wall Street, and the military-industrial complex.
At the same time, Israel’s status globally is also on the decline, resulting from their own hubris, military attacks, and all events concerning the maintenance of the apartheid state.
While apartheid can continue under these conditions, different pressures may turn Israel towards other solutions.
The most drastic action, the most severe action would be that of continuing the long-held policy of ethnic cleansing. This will go on under an apartheid system until the Bantustan-style areas are well secured and essentially imprisoned, life being “normalized” as wage slaves to Israeli businesses.
But at some point, given the chaos in the Great Middle East, perhaps under the guise of a broader regional war, or as a response to a successful insurgent attack, Israel is very capable of removing all the Palestinians from Eretz Israel, either by physically forcing them into other Arab countries, or under worst case scenarios to accompany the eviction, simply murdering some or many and creating another full-blown refugee crisis.
Neither is beyond the morality of the Israeli state and its military. In spite of their motto of “never again” that is to be considered only as it applies to Jews and not to other inferior races. This does not require any great change within the currents of Israeli colonial-settler thinking.
Another consideration is some form of binational state, implying a rather radical change in Israeli thinking, but with ongoing chaos and the negative effects of apartheid on domestic life and economics, there is the slim possibility that this could occur. That combined with increasing external pressures from allied states perhaps recognizing that ongoing chaos and support of a militarized apartheid state is not in their best interests may provide the impetus towards a binational state.
This again requires a rather radical change, not so much in thought as in action.
Israel already considers itself a democracy, although the many military and religious restrictions on the Palestinian population oppose this. The western nations (EU, NATO, U.S., Canada) maintain the facade of Israel’s democracy, claiming it to be a model for the Middle East (and elsewhere).
So the thought could remain, but the action of allowing the Palestinians full democratic, political, social, civic (et al) rights would dramatically change the structure of the state itself, an end that Israel wishes to avoid at all costs.
But perhaps the costs of doing otherwise may become too great to maintain the status quo, if BDS becomes increasingly successful, if global trends continue to turn away from a unipolar U.S. centric world to a multipolar world.
Radical unforeseen events may occur that necessitate or make possible a binational or unitary democratic state, but under current circumstances, as bizarre as the global situation is, apartheid will more than likely remain the forward political arrangement. Settlements will continue, land annexation will continue, different laws for Palestinians under both military and civic governance will remain and be reinforced, and ‘life’ will go on, steadfast.
Another bizarre idea occurred while reading the Russia Insider comment: Israel maintaining apartheid provides it with a form of military hostage taking. The correspondent first quoted was apparently ignorant of the situation in Palestine or was simply expressing his opinion as an absurdity, a hyperbolic statement.
Regardless, keeping millions of Palestinians hostage within the greater boundaries of Israel does suggest that perhaps the Israeli people and military are hiding behind the Palestinian civilians as hostages to their demands from the rest of the world.
A most moral army? A most moral people? A light upon the hill? Which way you goin’ Israel?
(1) “De Klerk: ‘Odious’ to compare Issrael to apartheid South Africa.” The Times of Israel, June 21, 2015.
– Jim Miles is a Canadian educator and a regular contributor and columnist of opinion pieces and book reviews for The Palestine Chronicle. Miles’ work is also presented globally through other alternative websites and news publications. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com.