Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: About 20% of Israel is Arab. Would it be a tragedy if 10% of future Palestine is Jewish?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574446931027154794.html?mod=djemEditorialPage#printMode
The Ugly Premise of 'Settlement' Opponents
About 20% of Israel is Arab. Would it be a tragedy if 10% of future 
Palestine is Jewish?
     * Article
     * Comments (62)
more in Opinion »
     * Email
     * Printer
       Friendly
     * Share:
       facebook ↓ More
           o StumbleUpon
           o Digg
           o Twitter
           o Yahoo! Buzz
           o Fark
           o Reddit
           o LinkedIn
           o 
del.icio.us
           o MySpace
     *
       Save This ↓ More
     * smaller Text larger
By R. JAMES WOOLSEY
At the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival this past July, Salam Fayyad, 
acting prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, spoke 
enthusiastically about the rule of law in a future Palestine. I asked 
him whether the same rights would be available to Jewish citizens of a 
Palestinian state that are available to the over one million Arab 
citizens of Israel. Could they enjoy freedom of religion and speech, and 
be able to vote for real representatives in a real legislature? Most 
importantly, would they be able to sleep at night without worrying that 
someone might kick down the door and kill them?
Mr. Fayyad responded: "I'm not someone who will say that they would or 
should be treated differently than Israeli Arabs are treated in Israel. 
In fact, the kind of state that we want to have, that we aspire to have, 
is one that would definitely espouse high values of tolerance, 
coexistence, mutual respect and deference to all cultures, religions. No 
discrimination whatsoever, on any basis whatsoever. Jews, to the extent 
they choose to stay and live in the state of Palestine, will enjoy those 
rights and certainly will not enjoy any less rights than Israeli Arabs 
enjoy now in the state of Israel."
Such a policy would mark a substantial change from the Palestinian 
Authority's first law adopted in 1994: the death penalty for any 
Palestinian who sells land to Jews. Over 100 Palestinians have died, 
under sentence or extrajudicially, for such sales in the last 15 years, 
including one last May. The Fatah (Mr. Fayyad's party) charter foresees 
a Palestine that is free of Jews. And recently Fatah demanded that 
Israel give up all of Jerusalem before it would begin negotiations on a 
two-state solution.
But suppose Mr. Fayyad's statement marks a tentative turn away from 
these positions?
The Obama administration seems determined to discourage any such shift. 
It remains committed to stopping growth of any kind in all Jewish 
settlements in the West Bank. This policy implies acquiescence in the 
banning of Jews from a future Palestinian state.
Why? The administration's fixation on preventing even minor construction 
internal to a settlement assumes that Jewish settlers are on the verge 
of taking over the entire West Bank. This is fanciful: There are about 
200,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank, and 2.5 million Palestinians 
in the West Bank and Gaza. The settlers live on about 1.5% of the West 
Bank, and the very substantial majority are in four major settlement 
blocs around Jerusalem.
In the two previous administrations, the U.S. had accepted that in any 
reasonable peace agreement these four blocs would remain under Israeli 
control, and that some Israeli land would be transferred to the new 
Palestinian state. This was the assumption in the parameters that 
President Clinton proposed to Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat in January 2001.
The Obama administration, on the other hand, seems quite opposed to any 
such small land adjustments. The president said on Sept. 23 at the U.N. 
that "America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli 
settlements" and that our goal was to end "the occupation that began in 
1967."
It's still unclear why the administration has a problem with Jews living 
in the West Bank. Even if every settlement and its residents were 
transferred to Palestinian sovereignty, Jews would still comprise under 
10% of the population of the new Palestinian state. Arabs, 
overwhelmingly Muslim, would continue to comprise nearly 20% of Israel's 
population. Why should such a Jewish minority be forbidden in Mr. 
Fayyad's Palestine?
It would of course take some time for his hopes to become reality. It is 
also clear that without American support for religious and political 
freedom in Palestine, there is no chance that Palestinian leaders will 
decide to make their country one in which Jews can feel safe. Yet rather 
than promoting the rule of law in a future Palestine, the Obama 
administration essentially urges us to accept that, because Palestinians 
will kill unprotected Jews, Jews cannot be permitted in a Palestinian state.
This is what the late New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan called 
"defining deviancy down." Will it provide the basis for peace in the 
Middle East for us to define deviancy for Palestinians in such a way 
that essentially accepts Fatah's goal of a Jew-free Palestine? As Mr. 
Moynihan once wryly understated it, such a move would simply be our 
deciding to "get used to a lot of behavior that is not good for us"—let 
alone for Israelis and Palestinians.

 Palestine is Jewish?
vaglielo a spiegare ai coloni che saranno cittadini
palestinesi...ROTFL

 Palestine is Jewish?
Una popolazione musulmana di dieci per cento non mai rimane a solo
dieci per cento, si chieda all'India.