Thread
1/13: @PeterBeinart has generated an important debate about Israel/Palestine, where things are headed, and what choices will be faced. This thread reflects my thoughts about the piece and the reactions to it so far: https://jewishcurrents.org/yavne-a-jewish-case-for-equality-in-israel-palestine/

2/13: I am not in a position to address liberal Zionism’s true aims, or how Jewish identity does or should inform those who hold it, so I will not address objections directed at Beinart from these angles, important as they are to a key intended audience.

3/13: Beinart has made many people, especially liberal Zionists, uncomfortable in part because much of what he has said about the present and its likely trajectory sounds right.

4/13: It’s become almost impossible to make credible argument that two states – including a truly sovereign Palestinian state in contiguous territories on bulk of WB and Gaza – remain viable. My sense is if one polls Middle East experts, most would say this isn't viable anymore.

5/13: Of course, it’s still theoretically possible to have two states. But if one reviews the history of Israeli occupation since 1967, the trajectory has moved against this outcome, and the prospects look even bleaker now, with the US blessing annexation of 40% of the West Bank.

6/13: One can keep hoping for two states, but there are costs to hoping with toothless actions. The biggest is pretending that occupation is temporary, thus leading to complacency. It’s been 53 years, with over 90% of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza born under occupation.

7/13: If one reaches conclusion that two states are no longer possible -- as many have, and many more have warned would be the case if Israel annexes parts of the WB – It would be best to describe the emerging reality as one state without equality, or worse as an apartheid state.

8/13: This conclusion would lead to rejection, including in the US where two thirds, including 81% of Dems, say they would choose a democratic Israel with full equality over a Jewish state without democracy. Certainly, Palestinians would resist, and violence would likely erupt.

9/13: The tide among Jews in Israel has been in favor of Jewishness over democracy, with 79% percent, per Pew study, saying Jews deserve special treatment over others, and 48% favoring expelling Palestinians. If violence escalates, this possibility is hardly out of the question.

10/13: Where does one come out? Israeli Jews likely would resist a one-state with equality, jeopardizing Jewish majority, pushing toward either apartheid or expulsion, absent external brakes; this, whether one pushes for one state or allows one-state reality to unfold on its own.

11/13: Which leaves one at the point of moral choice. What to embrace if choice is between a Jewish state without equality (apartheid state, or expulsion), and a democratic state that's not Jewish? Some may believe it's not time to choose yet, but, at a minimum, it's on the way.

12/13: Those who reject a single binational state, or think it’s unrealistic, cannot simply hide behind theoretical possibility of 2 states while ignoring reality and trajectory rendering outcome increasingly implausible and ignoring the injustice Palestinians continue to endure.

13/13: At a minimum, taking a moral stand, whatever its prospects, serves as a warning: Inequality and apartheid in the name of protecting Israel’s Jewishness are unacceptable; the more forceful this message, the better. Thank you, @peterbeinart for forcing this necessary debate.