| Revision as of 19:20, 25 May 2019 view sourceTitodutta (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators156,709 editsm clean upTag: AWB← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:28, 8 June 2019 view source Gidonb (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users95,662 edits →top: fmtNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{pp-30-500|small=yes}} | {{pp-30-500|small=yes}} | ||
| {{Israel-Palestinian peace process}} | {{Israel-Palestinian peace process}} | ||
| In the context of the ], a 'zero-state solution', based on a proposal by the ] (ACPR), assumes that there is no unique Palestinian identity and that the ] in the ] should get "restoration of ]ian ]" while Egypt should have responsibility for the ]. ] thus has no reason to agree to assimilate them or provide them with a state, since they were part of those countries until their territory was captured in the 1967 ]. This proposal is very similar to the ] advocated by some commentators. | In the context of the ], a '''zero-state solution''', based on a proposal by the ] (ACPR), assumes that there is no unique Palestinian identity and that the ] in the ] should get "restoration of ]ian ]" while Egypt should have responsibility for the ]. ] thus has no reason to agree to assimilate them or provide them with a state, since they were part of those countries until their territory was captured in the 1967 ]. This proposal is very similar to the ] advocated by some commentators. | ||
| A very different alternative interpretation of a 'zero-state solution' has been presented by the ] Network, a few years prior to the ACPR proposal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://isocracy.org/content/country-palestine-zero-state-solution |title= The Country of Palestine: A Zero State Solution|first=Lev|last=Lafayette|date=10 July 2010|publisher=|via=isocracy.org}}</ref> This anarchist perspective is more similar to the ], with the exception that instead of priorities of States, the concrete and visceral rights of individuals are given priority. The Isocracy 'zero-state solution' argues that the oft-suggested ] is not a plausible option, 'there is next to no chance that the half million Israeli settlers are going to move from East Jerusalem or the West Bank. There is next to no chance that a Palestinian state without contiguous borders would ever be viable.' | A very different alternative interpretation of a 'zero-state solution' has been presented by the ] Network, a few years prior to the ACPR proposal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://isocracy.org/content/country-palestine-zero-state-solution |title= The Country of Palestine: A Zero State Solution|first=Lev|last=Lafayette|date=10 July 2010|publisher=|via=isocracy.org}}</ref> This anarchist perspective is more similar to the ], with the exception that instead of priorities of States, the concrete and visceral rights of individuals are given priority. The Isocracy 'zero-state solution' argues that the oft-suggested ] is not a plausible option, 'there is next to no chance that the half million Israeli settlers are going to move from East Jerusalem or the West Bank. There is next to no chance that a Palestinian state without contiguous borders would ever be viable.' | ||
Revision as of 00:28, 8 June 2019
| Part of a series on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Israeli–Palestinian peace process | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
History
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary concerns | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary concerns | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| International brokers | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proposals | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Projects / groups / NGOs | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, a zero-state solution, based on a proposal by the Ariel Center for Policy Research (ACPR), assumes that there is no unique Palestinian identity and that the Palestinians in the West Bank should get "restoration of Jordanian citizenship" while Egypt should have responsibility for the Gaza Strip. Israel thus has no reason to agree to assimilate them or provide them with a state, since they were part of those countries until their territory was captured in the 1967 Six-Day War. This proposal is very similar to the three-state solution advocated by some commentators.
A very different alternative interpretation of a 'zero-state solution' has been presented by the Isocracy Network, a few years prior to the ACPR proposal. This anarchist perspective is more similar to the one-state solution, with the exception that instead of priorities of States, the concrete and visceral rights of individuals are given priority. The Isocracy 'zero-state solution' argues that the oft-suggested two-state solution is not a plausible option, 'there is next to no chance that the half million Israeli settlers are going to move from East Jerusalem or the West Bank. There is next to no chance that a Palestinian state without contiguous borders would ever be viable.'
Overview (ACPR)
The approach generally assumes that Israel will expand to fill the territories occupied in 1967. Specific proposals differ as whether the present Palestinians can remain where they are, as non-citizens of Israel, or are expected to return to the territory of their national identity.
There has been opposition to this plan from Palestinians, Jordanians and Egyptians.
The proposal by ACPR, the "Framework Proposal for a National Strategy Regarding Judea and Samaria and the Issue of Eretz Israel Arabs", describes an objective of "Consolidating a political proposal with the intention of halting Israel's defeatist campaign that is manifest in its most extreme form in the conduct of the Olmert Government". It assumes that there is no unique Palestinian identity and that the Palestinians in the West Bank should get "restoration of Jordanian citizenship" while Egypt should have responsibility for the Gaza Strip. It proposes a unilateral solution because it does not believe Arab states will accept:
- Extending Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank
- "Jordan is Palestine" and restoration of Jordanian citizenship to the Arabs in Judea and Samaria
- Municipal autonomy for the Arabs of Judea and Samaria (on the basis of the Camp David Accords) accompanied by a total disarmament of the autonomous areas
- The areas of Arab settlements located on private property (the Mosaic Program by Dr. Yuval Arnon Ohanna)
- Military liquidation of the military infrastructure in Gaza and according responsibility for the area to Egypt
- Israeli Arabs: Equal rights in exchange for equal obligations
Overview (Isocracy)
Whereas the ACPR proposal essentially means one state for Israel, zero states for the Palestinians, the argument from the Isocracy Network is the abolition of States in general. In this particular context it argues that all individuals in the country of historic Palestine are deserving of equal rights and liberties regardless of the governing authority that they live under. Specifically, the Isocracy version of the "Zero-State" solution argues that:
- Governance would be secular and democratic.
- There would be no special benefits on the basis of nationalities, real or imagined, or religious affiliation that were separate from the rights of all citizens.
- The region would be a Jewish homeland, rather than a Jewish state (as with any other religion).
- Land would be held as a public good without discrimination in leasing rights.
- There would be no standing armies, only reserve militia and emergency services for the purpose of local defense and civil order, not invasive war.
See also
References
- Lafayette, Lev (10 July 2010). "The Country of Palestine: A Zero State Solution" – via isocracy.org.
- Slackman, Michael (16 December 2017). "Gaza Crisis Imperils 2-State Solution" – via NYTimes.com.
This article incorporates material from the Citizendium article "Zero-state solution", which is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License but not under the GFDL.