Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

What's happening in your world? Discuss it here.
Forum rules
Play nice. We will be watching

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby A Combustible Lemon » Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:46 pm

Marcuse wrote:


Because at a time when Trump has caused riots and worldwide condemnation with his unilateral statement that he'd move the US embassy to Jerusalem, even he stopped short of describing this as an "undivided" capital. This resolution, passed unanimously by the US Senate, states:

“Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected,”


Which while it also calls for other groups to be protected, maintains an assertion that even Donald Trump didn't have the stones to make. Avi pointed out that Israel has made several offers to cede Arab areas of Jerusalem to a Palestinian state, so it's not even a position that Israel itself appears to hold in a practical sense. So given the context and the statement made, it's a development in an ongoing situation which may be relevant and at the very least is something people might want to know about.


Uh Marc, he means how is the Trump thing news. The bill passed in June.
  • 2



WE ARE ALL FLOATING IN THE WINDS OF TIME. BUT YOUR CANDLE WILL FLICKER FOR SOME TIME BEFORE IT GOES OUT -- A LITTLE REWARD FOR A LIFE WELL LIVED. FOR I CAN SEE THE BALANCE AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE WORLD MUCH BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT, AND IF YOU ASK ME, said Death, NOBODY COULD DO ANY BETTER THAN THAT...
User avatar
A Combustible Lemon
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 7:25 pm
Location: The Internet, India
Show rep
Title: Grenadier

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby Marcuse » Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:47 pm

A Combustible Lemon wrote:
Marcuse wrote:


Because at a time when Trump has caused riots and worldwide condemnation with his unilateral statement that he'd move the US embassy to Jerusalem, even he stopped short of describing this as an "undivided" capital. This resolution, passed unanimously by the US Senate, states:

“Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected,”


Which while it also calls for other groups to be protected, maintains an assertion that even Donald Trump didn't have the stones to make. Avi pointed out that Israel has made several offers to cede Arab areas of Jerusalem to a Palestinian state, so it's not even a position that Israel itself appears to hold in a practical sense. So given the context and the statement made, it's a development in an ongoing situation which may be relevant and at the very least is something people might want to know about.


Uh Marc, he means how is the Trump thing news. The bill passed in June.


Fair enough. Guess that's what happens when people post a single line of text and a link with no context. Ho hum.
  • 7

User avatar
Marcuse
TCS Sithlord
TCS Sithlord
 
Posts: 6513
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:00 pm
Show rep

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby A Combustible Lemon » Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:06 pm

also
No, it's because Trump's actions are going to have - and in fact already have had - a significantly larger negative impact on the peace process than some pointless commemorative bill passing through Congress


What exactly are the particulars of this peace process? It's just a euphemism for maintaining the status quo. If not recognizing the capital of Israel is how you maintain peace, your opponents are basically holding peace hostage. They're arguing in bad faith. And as Yemen shows, if the middle east could have eliminated Israel, they would have.

Bills passing through congress are also pretty damn important. You know, since the congress is the actual government, not some subordinate government to Trump.

Putting the embassy in Tel Aviv is the pragmatic choice, but Trump did nothing wrong here except do something not-pragmatic. Nothing more, nothing less. He's not a bad actor just because people violently resisted calling the capital of Israel the capital of Israel.

The problem is absolutely not just that Trump is pro-Israel - that was actually common knowledge anyway, and half the people who've been criticising what he's done are probably pro-Israel too. Even the stupid commemoration of reunification bill claimed it wanted peace as the ultimate outcome, but Trump's actions don't seem to have had a peaceful resolution in mind, and have certainly damaged the chances of one.


Fun fact, this actually is the reason. Israeli support in congress is basically bipartisan but as long as the president pretends to be neutral no one cares.
  • 0



WE ARE ALL FLOATING IN THE WINDS OF TIME. BUT YOUR CANDLE WILL FLICKER FOR SOME TIME BEFORE IT GOES OUT -- A LITTLE REWARD FOR A LIFE WELL LIVED. FOR I CAN SEE THE BALANCE AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE WORLD MUCH BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT, AND IF YOU ASK ME, said Death, NOBODY COULD DO ANY BETTER THAN THAT...
User avatar
A Combustible Lemon
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 7:25 pm
Location: The Internet, India
Show rep
Title: Grenadier

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby gisambards » Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:02 pm

A Combustible Lemon wrote:What exactly are the particulars of this peace process? It's just a euphemism for maintaining the status quo.

Peace in this particular instance is going to take a very long time, to the point where it does sometimes seem like maintaining the status quo. Regardless, even if all it was was maintaining the status quo, that's still better than actively trying to raise tensions.

A Combustible Lemon wrote:If not recognizing the capital of Israel is how you maintain peace, your opponents are basically holding peace hostage.

This is how negotiations work. Both sides have certain demands, and the point is to try and negotiate a resolution through which both sides are happy. Ideally, a settlement would be reached whereby the Palestinians are amenable to Jerusalem being recognised as the capital of Israel. However, simply forcing it is not going to accomplish anything other than raise tensions further.

A Combustible Lemon wrote:Bills passing through congress are also pretty damn important. You know, since the congress is the actual government, not some subordinate government to Trump.

You actually nearly made it a half a post before resorting to insulting the intelligence of someone who disagrees with you. Progress. Regardless, not every bill is important. The bill in question was not. It was just an affirmation of Congress' support for Israel, which shouldn't surprise anyone and has no practical ramifications.

A Combustible Lemon wrote:Putting the embassy in Tel Aviv is the pragmatic choice, but Trump did nothing wrong here except do something not-pragmatic. Nothing more, nothing less. He's not a bad actor just because people violently resisted calling the capital of Israel the capital of Israel.

He's a bad actor because he knew it would do nothing except cause violence and did it anyway. If you knowingly do something you know people will respond to violently, you are in part responsible for the violence they carry out. Yes, they shouldn't be violent, and yes, they should be condemned for being violent. But Trump knew they would be, and so the violence is still partly his responsibility. Particularly in this instance, where is there is absolutely no tangible benefit whatsoever to what he's done.
  • 9

User avatar
gisambards
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby A Combustible Lemon » Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:40 pm

gisambards wrote:
A Combustible Lemon wrote:What exactly are the particulars of this peace process? It's just a euphemism for maintaining the status quo.

Peace in this particular instance is going to take a very long time, to the point where it does sometimes seem like maintaining the status quo. Regardless, even if all it was was maintaining the status quo, that's still better than actively trying to raise tensions.


Absent: any particulars whatsoever about this peace process.

By this same measure, people can pretend Pakistan and India aren't in a state of open violence and haven't been for the last ten years since the Mumbai attacks. We're just sending in tactical strikes to wipe out terrorist cells on their side of the border for funzies.
  • 0



WE ARE ALL FLOATING IN THE WINDS OF TIME. BUT YOUR CANDLE WILL FLICKER FOR SOME TIME BEFORE IT GOES OUT -- A LITTLE REWARD FOR A LIFE WELL LIVED. FOR I CAN SEE THE BALANCE AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE WORLD MUCH BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT, AND IF YOU ASK ME, said Death, NOBODY COULD DO ANY BETTER THAN THAT...
User avatar
A Combustible Lemon
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 7:25 pm
Location: The Internet, India
Show rep
Title: Grenadier

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby gisambards » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:14 pm

Well I'm not actually sure what the relevance the particulars of the peace process have. The point is that it is ongoing and blatantly hostile actions will not help it.
I don't understand your point regarding India/Pakistan relations at all. Saying there's a peace process doesn't mean that Israel and Palestine are considered to be at peace - quite the opposite, it means that there is an ongoing effort to achieve peace there (albeit one that often doesn't seem to get anywhere).
  • 3

User avatar
gisambards
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby A Combustible Lemon » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:24 pm

You don't see how asking the particulars of the peace process is relevant to dismissing my claim that there isn't one?

And the comparision with the India Pakistan thing is that you can call that a peace process, when really it's two nuclear nations literally sending troops into each others territory right now. In any reasonable description, that'd be open hostility. This is what Palestine has with Israel, open hostility. The actual peace process is waiting for Palestinian integration to proceed to the level of them no longer believing in the eradication of Israel. Which isn't being helped by forcing Israel to be less formal about its own capital. It'd be MORE beneficial to the peace process that they be convinced Israel isn't a fifty year historical blip in the radar, which is their current position. Formal recognition of its capital could very well actually help in that.

Obviously it won't when it's motivated by antisemitism, a North Korea like hostage situation, support of the Muslim block in the UN, daily rejection of zionism by more and more people in the left wing.

But really, what Trump did is not obviously wrong. It's a choice he made. And only history will be able to tell if it's worth it.

If in 3 years, the US hasn't moved the capital back to Tel Aviv, then yeah, lasting good has come of it, despite the deaths.
  • 0



WE ARE ALL FLOATING IN THE WINDS OF TIME. BUT YOUR CANDLE WILL FLICKER FOR SOME TIME BEFORE IT GOES OUT -- A LITTLE REWARD FOR A LIFE WELL LIVED. FOR I CAN SEE THE BALANCE AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE WORLD MUCH BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT, AND IF YOU ASK ME, said Death, NOBODY COULD DO ANY BETTER THAN THAT...
User avatar
A Combustible Lemon
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 7:25 pm
Location: The Internet, India
Show rep
Title: Grenadier

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby aviel » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:43 pm

A Combustible Lemon wrote:What exactly are the particulars of this peace process?

I'm not sure what you're asking with this question. The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has arguably been going on in some form since the beginning of the 20th century, and has been going on in more or less its present form since the 1990s, so there are a lot of "particulars". Are you trying to assess the likelihood that peace will be attained? Or the steps necessary to attain it? Or the steps that parties are currently undertaking to attain it?

As for the bill recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's undivided capital: this is one of the areas in which Congress has essentially no formal power. The President has the unilateral authority to recognize Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem, or any part thereof, whatever Congress says. Zivotofsky v. Kerry, 135 S.Ct. 2076 (2015).
  • 5

Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Click for a Limerick
OrangeEyebrows wrote:There once was a guy, Aviel,
whose arguments no one could quell.
He tested with Turing,
his circuits fried during,
and now we'll have peace for a spell.
User avatar
aviel
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9858
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Permanently in the wrong
Show rep
Title: Auditor of Reality

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby A Combustible Lemon » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:49 pm

aviel wrote:Are you trying to assess the likelihood that peace will be attained? Or the steps necessary to attain it? Or the steps that parties are currently undertaking to attain it?


All three. A peace process would involve both parties intending to come to peace, listing steps for its attainment that can actually be followed meaningfully, and the likelihood that both parties will, in the end, be at peace.

Points of contention will exist, obviously, but the magnitude of that contention is essential. The right of one of the states to self-determine isn't a point of contention, it's a declaration of hostile intent.

Also your court case 404s. Looking at it, though, I don't see how "the president has to pretend to be neutral on the jerusalem question" isn't an accurate summary of why the original bill isn't news but this is.
  • 1



WE ARE ALL FLOATING IN THE WINDS OF TIME. BUT YOUR CANDLE WILL FLICKER FOR SOME TIME BEFORE IT GOES OUT -- A LITTLE REWARD FOR A LIFE WELL LIVED. FOR I CAN SEE THE BALANCE AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE WORLD MUCH BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT, AND IF YOU ASK ME, said Death, NOBODY COULD DO ANY BETTER THAN THAT...
User avatar
A Combustible Lemon
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 7:25 pm
Location: The Internet, India
Show rep
Title: Grenadier

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby gisambards » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:06 pm

A Combustible Lemon wrote:All three. A peace process would involve both parties intending to come to peace, listing steps for its attainment that can actually be followed meaningfully, and the likelihood that both parties will, in the end, be at peace.

This simply isn't true. A peace process merely means that someone - not necessarily even either of the warring parties - is making attempts to broker peace.

A Combustible Lemon wrote:Points of contention will exist, obviously, but the magnitude of that contention is essential. The right of one of the states to self-determine isn't a point of contention, it's a declaration of hostile intent.

And thus a key part of the peace process will be persuading the Arab world to recognise Israel's legitimacy as a nation. Hostility does not deny the existence of a peace process - it is in fact necessary for the peace process to exist. It's exactly why the peace process is needed.

You don't see how asking the particulars of the peace process is relevant to dismissing my claim that there isn't one?


Firstly, I wasn't trying to dismiss your claim about anything. I was explaining why I disagree with you, and I think I provided a perfectly reasonable argument for the claim that there is a peace process. I don't think it's necessary to go into any more detail.

A Combustible Lemon wrote:It'd be MORE beneficial to the peace process that they be convinced Israel isn't a fifty year historical blip in the radar, which is their current position. Formal recognition of its capital could very well actually help in that.

Not in the ridiculously provocative manner it's been done, it won't. If anything, that will just make Palestine - and others internationally who aren't fans of Israel - more determined to never grant that concession.

But really, what Trump did is not obviously wrong. It's a choice he made. And only history will be able to tell if it's worth it.

I disagree. I think we are perfectly able to judge decisions at the time at which they are made - particularly in this instance, where I've yet to see anyone provide a remotely sensible argument in favour of what Trump's done, but already there have been easily predictable deaths as a result of it.

If in 3 years, the US hasn't moved the capital back to Tel Aviv, then yeah, lasting good has come of it, despite the deaths.

What lasting good could possibly come from this that outweighs the deaths? It's a purely ceremonial victory for right-wing Israelis, which they didn't even earn themselves. And real people are already dying because of it. There is nothing good about what Trump's done, and a lot of bad, and that won't have changed three years from now.
  • 6

User avatar
gisambards
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby aviel » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:32 pm

A Combustible Lemon wrote:All three. A peace process would involve both parties intending to come to peace, listing steps for its attainment that can actually be followed meaningfully, and the likelihood that both parties will, in the end, be at peace.

It's varied somewhat over time, but to some extent we have or have had all of these components. We've had multiple rounds of bilateral negotiations in which at least some of the time I think both parties have been making some kind of an effort.

The steps necessary for the attainment of peace have actually been known for some time, and a number of them have even been taken. The Oslo Accords were a major step, and previous final status discussions have involved several more steps. The process just usually stalls partway through, and we have to start over again.

People disagree pretty strongly about the likelihood of the attainment of peace, but while I'm pessimistic in the short term about such a likelihood, I'm optimistic in the long term. Various developments decried as the end of a two-state solution haven't shaped up to be. The Second Intifada didn't make a two-state solution impossible, nor did the E-1 plan, nor did the split with Gaza, nor did anything else. In the absence of alternate solutions, it's probably going to happen sooner or (more likely) later.

Also your court case 404s. Looking at it, though, I don't see how "the president has to pretend to be neutral on the jerusalem question" isn't an accurate summary of why the original bill isn't news but this is.

The link works for me, but you can alternately try this link to the slip opinion. And I wasn't trying to criticize your summary, just trying to clarify what effect the bill actually has, as there seemed to be some debate over the importance of Congress in this process.

GisambardS wrote:I've yet to see anyone provide a remotely sensible argument in favour of what Trump's done

I don't know if this argument is ultimately correct, but I think such an argument would go something like this:

a hypothetical argument
Jerusalem is Israel's capital; as a factual matter, that's beyond serious dispute. Palestinians nevertheless dispute it, in an attempt to strengthen their position when negotiating for the creation of a Palestinian state. Unfortunately, the stances of Israel and Palestine on a two-state solution don't currently overlap, and so an agreement cannot be reached. This can be solved either by moving the Israeli position, or by moving the Palestinian position.

Trump is trying to move the Palestinian position, by signaling to them that their territorial claims to Jerusalem, particularly any claim they might assert towards western Jerusalem, will not be taken seriously. If the Palestinians drop any insistence that Jerusalem is not Israel's capital, then that brings their position closer to Israel's, and makes peace more likely. Even if there's a violent reaction now, the total amount of violence might be reduced if this announcement results in peace.


There are some parts of that argument that I think are reasonable, and other parts that I think miss the mark. As a general matter, I think it has historically been true that the blame for the failure of previous final status negotiations rests on Palestinian refusal to accept reasonable offers. Although the international community has often attempted to achieve peace by pressuring Israel to make more concessions, Israel isn't the problem. For peace to be achieved, Israel can maintain its historical negotiating position, but Palestine has to drop some of its more unreasonable demands. Trying to do things the other way around wouldn't result in a workable solution.

That said, if this announcement is supposed be justified by a strategy that puts pressure on Palestine, I'm not sure that this is the place on which pressure should be put. Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital is more symbolic than concrete, and I don't think it gets at the issues that have historically been the strongest barriers to peace. It seems like it would be more effective to tell Palestinians that they should stop complaining about Israeli settlement construction in places like Modi'in Illit or Ma'ale Adumim that are definitely going to become a part of Israel in any agreement; or that they should recognize that not every one of the 4.5 million Palestinian refugees and descendants of Palestinian refugees will be allowed to immigrate to Israel.

There's some historical precedent for this kind of strategy working. Although Egypt and Jordan initially insisted that no Jewish state should exist at all, this position became increasingly untenable after they repeatedly failed to destroy Israel. Once they realized that they had to abandon their more extreme position, they were able to negotiate agreements with Israel. Of course, the strategy doesn't always work. Syria took part in every conventional war against Israel, and still hasn't made any serious movement towards a peace agreement, even though such an agreement would likely result in the return of most of the Golan.

I don't know, however, what will happen in this case; I think we will have to wait and see.
  • 4

Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Click for a Limerick
OrangeEyebrows wrote:There once was a guy, Aviel,
whose arguments no one could quell.
He tested with Turing,
his circuits fried during,
and now we'll have peace for a spell.
User avatar
aviel
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9858
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Permanently in the wrong
Show rep
Title: Auditor of Reality

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby gisambards » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:58 pm

I think the major reason I just can't see it working in this case is that I think to do it like this can only be taken as a provocation. Part of the problem here is Trump himself - I think the international community will find it a lot harder to entertain the thought of any positive motivations behind this, simply because of the image he's already created for himself, and so it will make the Arab world much less willing to accept the legitimacy of the move.
  • 5

User avatar
gisambards
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby satan_n_stuff » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:45 pm

aviel wrote:I’m a little torn. I think the ultimate blame for violence in response to this news rests on those being violent. On the other hand, I think that a President should take into account a predictable violent reaction when saying something likely to provoke it. But back on the first hand, I don’t think the correct way to take that consideration into account is to continue to insist on something that isn’t true.

So what options remain? I’m not sure, and it’s possible there weren’t any good ones. In that case, I’m disinclined to fault previous presidents for wanting to avoid a violent reaction, and I’m also disinclined to fault the current president for saying something true.

Truth has very little to do with diplomacy. If it did Israel would have long ago officially declared themselves a nuclear power and the whole mess of conflicts in the middle east would by now be a mutually assured destruction scenario.
  • 4

Image
"edit: satan_n_stuff beat me to it " was also the entry god made in his journal after "tomorrow I'll make animals for Australia" - Flotze
"But you're beautiful Satan. You can do modeling or porn or something." - cmsellers
User avatar
satan_n_stuff
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:24 pm
Show rep
Title: The Dark One

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby cmsellers » Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:56 pm

Aquila89 wrote:
Some outside confidants, including billionaire Tom Barrack, urged Trump to hold off, worried that the move would deepen regional tensions caused by Saudi Arabia’s political shake-up and Iran’s growing reach.

Clearly some fool told him "Barrack thinks this is a bad idea" and he went ahead out of spite.
  • 1

User avatar
cmsellers
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 8402
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Three miles from the bat bridge
Show rep
Title: The Bad Bart of Ruddigore

Re: Violence in Israel after Trump's Jerusalem move

Postby Windy » Mon Jan 01, 2018 11:55 pm

How dare this Nazi president recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, he should kick all the Jews out of their homes and give it to the Palestinians to show how much of a not-nazi he is
  • 0

User avatar
Windy
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3064
Joined: Fri May 29, 2015 11:41 am
Show rep

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests