Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Sergio della Pergola a proposito di Lieberman

E ora vediamo se i rossobruni continueranno ad ammirare
l'intellettuale che dice verità scomode per l'establishment neo con
sbroc sbroc
Avigdor Lieberman’s electoral success has been a cause of alarm in
Israel and abroad. Lieberman’s critics are justifiably concerned by
his often inflammatory rhetoric, as well as his demand that the right
to vote be made contingent upon citizens taking a loyalty oath — a
policy totally unacceptable in a democratic society.
One of Lieberman’s more controversial proposals is his call to
surrender Israeli Arab population centers to eventual Palestinian
sovereignty as part of a land swap. Within the framework of an
eventual Israeli withdrawal from parts of the West Bank, he advocates
annexing major Israeli settlement blocs and in exchange handing over
to the Palestinians Israel’s Triangle region, an almost entirely Arab-
populated strip of land just inside the 1967 Green Line, extending
from the city of Umm al-Fahm in the north down to Kafr Qassem in the
south.
Many view this proposal as part and parcel of what they see as
Lieberman’s xenophobic agenda. But his critics should not be so quick
to write off this idea simply because of the political leanings of its
most prominent supporter. Such a land swap may even be necessary to
ensure Israel’s long-term political and demographic stability.
While Lieberman is often labeled a far-rightist, the notion of
swapping sovereignty over the Triangle is not a far-right idea. On the
left, former deputy defense minister Ephraim Sneh, a committed dove
and until recently a prominent member of the Labor Party, has been an
advocate of this very notion. And in 2002 Ehud Barak said that “such
an exchange makes demographic sense and is not inconceivable” (though
he cautioned that it “could only be done by agreement”). Indeed,
underlying this idea is a principle that has long been championed by
the left and is today supported by a majority of Israelis: the concept
of two states for two peoples.
Most Israelis know that Israel must withdraw from the West Bank if it
is to remain both a Jewish and a democratic state. But even if Israel
does so, the underlying demographic dynamic will continue to yield a
constant erosion of Israel’s Jewish majority.
In 2008, Arabs comprised 21% of the inhabitants of Israel (including
East Jerusalem but not West Bank Palestinians). Because of higher Arab
fertility rates, however, 25% of all births in Israel are to Arab
families. Moreover, because of a much younger age composition, Arabs
account for only 10% of all deaths in Israel. Thus, in 2008, excluding
international migration, 30% of Israel’s natural population increase
was in the Arab sector.
The present trend generates a steady growth of the Arab share of
Israel’s population. Israel’s Arab population is expected to reach 23%
in 2020 and 27% in 2050, while the share of Arabs among children
younger than 15 will likely be 30% by 2020.
These numbers point toward a bi-national state, not to the Jewish
state that most Israelis prefer. With two small adjustments to the
Green Line, however, this demographic outlook can be radically
transformed.
The Triangle region has an Arab population of some 250,000; another
250,000 Arabs reside in East Jerusalem. Together these two areas cover
about 3% of Israel’s territory but are home to more than a third of
Israel’s 1.4 million Arabs. By redrawing the frontier between Israel
and the West Bank to place the Triangle and East Jerusalem’s Arab
neighborhoods under Palestinian control, the Jewish proportion of the
Israeli population would increase from the current 79% to 87%.
Under this scenario, the Jewish share of the population would remain
well above 80% into the 2030s and beyond. Concern about Israel’s
demographic composition would be postponed to a distant future, by
which time the respective growth rates of the Jewish and Arab
populations may well have converged.
True, this proposal has not been greeted warmly by the Triangle’s Arab
residents. Israeli Arabs know that becoming citizens of a Palestinian
state would involve a trade-off: Gains in the realm of national
identity would likely be accompanied by losses in the areas of civil
liberties, democratic rights and standard of living. As a result, for
many Arabs remaining Israeli citizens while fighting for a separate
identity within Israel — and, for some, demanding an alteration of the
core identity of the Jewish state — seems like a better option. But it
is also a recipe for heightened tensions and ongoing strife within
Israeli society.
It is worth remembering that the text of United Nations General
Assembly Resolution 181, adopted on November 29, 1947, called for the
partition of British Mandate Palestine into an Arab state and a Jewish
state — not an Israeli state and a Palestinian state. This solution
was intended to solve a complicated conflict by recognizing the
relevance and legitimacy of two distinct identities. Division along
ethno-religious lines, possibly followed by economic cooperation, was
the right solution back in 1947, and it still might be the only viable
one now.
http://www.forward.com/articles/104053/

 E ora vediamo se i rossobruni
quello che dice un essere senza dignità che parla di miseria
palestinese causata dagli arabi è irrilevante

  senza dignità
giovannino, ma tu pensi davvero di scrivere roba che merita risposta?


lo stai facendo, PIRLA!