Barbarians at the Gate

Hamas’ war on Israel shows there is no hope for either a one-state or two-state solution.

By
182
A police officer walks near a police station that was destroyed after a battle between Israeli troops and Hamas militants that have take the station on October 8, 2023, in Sderot, Israel. (Footage by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

The barbarians came at dawn and destroyed everything in their path. They murdered indiscriminately. They brutalized the elderly and the children, taking them away as hostages. They raped the women and executed them. Afterward, they paraded the defiled corpses in the streets, and proudly exhibited mutilated body parts as trophies. They left no doubt as to who they are: monsters from what the free world delusionally believed is a bygone age. There can be no coexistence.

And yet a long-held assumption in Middle East policy circles is that Israelis and Palestinians can share one land, either in mutually recognized sovereign, independent states, or joined in a binational state where they live and rule together. How can you live side by side and share power with those who pledge to drink the blood of your kin?

The raging battle in Gaza will postpone a reckoning with the above for some time. But soon, after Hamas is dealt with, a stark reality will emerge, one ignored for too long. The long-touted dilemma, laid out by Israeli historian Benny Morris in his seminal book One State, Two States between a two-state solution—Israel and Palestine, living side by side independently and in peace—and a binational state where the two nations peacefully share power over the land and its resources, is over. Neither option is viable.

Supporters of one or the other idea will protest that the Palestinians were denied the chance to have their own state and prove themselves ready for coexistence. It’s all about the occupation, they’ll say. Lifting the occupation is what they need to act as peaceful neighbors on equal footing. It’s a farrago of lies. 

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
182
By
Comments (182)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Seth

    It is obvious that Gaza's destiny is to be restored to Egypt which administered it from 1948 to 1967. Egyptians should receive a great deal of money for again taking on the burden of living with their troublesome Gazan cousins. The Palestinians in the W. Bank can accept the current status quo or they can become Jordanians. 2 state solution? RIP.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Israel should accept nothing less than unconditional surrender by the Palestinians. They should execute every single member of Hamas.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Mandy B.

    Hear, hear!

    Collapse
  4. Bob Cherichella

    Amen, Amen I say to thee!
    I believe Israel will avoid an all out assault and blockade Gaza. When the animals are out of food & water and screaming for the world to have Israel relent, the friends of Israel must stand by the total destruction of Hamas.

    Collapse
  5. True Northerner

    Thank you. The elephant in the room has always been the hatred of Jews per se, regardless of where they live and whether they are "secular" or observant.

    Collapse
  6. Samuelyesnik

    The article outlines the problem but doesn't offer any solution. Here's my suggestion for the US and Israel: first of course defeat Hamas, then ask Egypt to take Gaza or part of it, and help pay for its reconstruction. Plan for all remaining territory, such as the west bank, to become part of Israel, offering a path to Israeli citizenship for Palestinians who swear to support Israel and giving citizenship to everyone born there starting now, while also offering money to Palestinians who move to surrounding countries and offer incentives to those countries to accept them.

    This would cost the US and Israel some money, but could make a one state solution possible without Arabs outnumbering Jews in Israel.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Walter.Sobchak.Esq

    Num.33 [51] "Say to the people of Israel, When you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan, [52] then you shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, ...
    [53] and you shall take possession of the land and settle in it, for I have given the land to you to possess it. ... [55] But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those of them whom you let remain shall be as pricks in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and they shall trouble you in the land where you dwell. [56] And I will do to you as I thought to do to them."

    Collapse
    1. Mathias

      Yep. There was a rabbi in Israel back in the '80s who advocated paying the Arabs to find homes in other countries. (Despite what you may hear, that was all he advocated for; not violence against civilians, not war crimes, not even forced evictions. Just taking steps to make Israel majority-Jewish. Oh, and Jewish self-defense.) His name was Meir Kahane. He was called a terrorist and his (increasingly popular) political party was banned in Israel. He himself was assassinated in NYC in 1991, by a Palestinian Arab acting under the orders of a man named Osama bin Laden.

      But it seems that in the end, our only hope of survival is to remove the foreign enemies from our soil. And by 'foreign', I mean that they are non-indigenous Arabs who mostly immigrated from Syria or Jordan in the twentieth century, and they originated of course in Arabia in the seventh century, where some of them seem to think they are still living. And by 'enemies', I mean that they have never reconciled themselves to the existence of Israel and Jews in general, and their fondest wish is to dance over our bodies in a bloody orgy of butchery, and that they teach their kindergartners to desire the same.

      They must go. If they're nice, maybe they can leave on their feet instead of in body bags. But go they must.

      Collapse
  8. Nordic_man

    The barbarians must be vanquished. Carthage must be destroyed, and a new political paradigm must arise from its rubble—one where the notion that, if given the chance to govern themselves, the Palestinians can choose peace over war, is forever disabused.

    So... how exactly do you do this without warcrimes?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Thomas Grimmer

      You don't. But show me a war without war crimes. Especially not when one side is genocidal.

      Collapse
      1. Nordic_man

        So why didn't this columnest stop juuuust short of saying the quiet part out loud... If the answer is let the rivers run red with their blood by all means argue for it, just don't try to pretend you aren't.

        Collapse
        1. Mathias

          Okay, I'll argue for it. Of course, if anybody surrenders to us, then they are free to leave and go to another country and we won't lay a finger on them. But there will be enough Hamas terrorists and their flunkies and sycophants who voted them into power to make the rivers run more than pink for a while.

          Collapse
    2. Lowedj

      The Carthage reference is not intended to suggest that the Israeli plan is to burn down all Gaza towns, enslave the population and scatter salt on the land so crops will not grow.

      The analogy properly understood is that Rome eliminated Carthage to prevent the political entity of Carthage from ever threatening Rome again. The author is suggesting that Hamas as an entity needs to be destroyed and its power severely curtailed so as to never threaten Israel again. The “political paradigm” must arise from the Hamas “rubble” - which is talking about the eradication of Hamas and some other political and security arrangement put in place. This historical metaphor is not advocating war crimes, but the elimination of a terrorist organization.

      Meanwhile, the author is understandably expressing her opinion that Palestinian self rule in Gaza - given their horrendous track record of terrorism, murdering political opponents, bombing innocent civilians, raping women, and using international humanitarian aid to develop methods to kill Israelis - is not currently a reasonable option. Are all Palestinians at “fault”? Certainly no. But the current cultural and political environment that enables such wide scale barbarism calls into question in the short to intermediate term the ability for civilized self rule in Gaza by a Palestinian government.

      And please remember, the Palestinian terrorists will hide among Palestinian women and children so that these innocent noncombatants are put in harms way. They will cynically broadcast these casualties to the world as a part of their propaganda program. In essence part of the Hamas plan is to encourage the killing of their own people which in itself is a war crime.

      Collapse
      1. CB76

        "Are all Palestinians at “fault”?"

        No. But nevertheless, they all must die. Is what you are saying.

        Collapse
        1. Mathias

          Not all. Most. Probably. Unless they surrender and leave Gaza without resistance.

          Collapse
        2. Lowedj

          How could you reasonably interpret that from what I wrote? Please don’t be silly.

          Collapse
      2. Nordic_man

        So if the people are at fault then simply dismantling the ruling government isn't going to do it. Neither is expanding the legal territory of israel to include gaza and it's inhabitants as citizens. What exactly is left here? Mass internment?

        Collapse
        1. Lowedj

          I wrote “…. the current cultural and political environment that enables such wide scale barbarism calls into question in the short to intermediate term the ability for civilized self rule in Gaza by a Palestinian government.” So … yes …. dismantling the existing government “isn’t going to do it.” Are the “people at fault”? Well, most are not, but a number of them are and they are dragging down their families, friends and neighbors with them.

          I expect that when Israel moves into Gaza, it will take time to find the Hamas weapons caches, missies sites, arms manufacturing facilities, tunnels into Israel and to hunt down the Hamas barbarians.

          Then there will need to be an occupation. It will be most likely be for a long time. Israeli forces obviously occupy first - who knows if any other countries will want to take over via an international force. After all, Palestinian terrorists - of which some will still remain - will certainly kill some of the peacekeepers. It will be an arduous affair.

          Beyond that any attempts to speculate on long term options at this point is quite difficult.

          Collapse
          1. Nordic_man

            So we are back to a semi permanent occupation with no willingness to extend both borders and citizenship into gaza because that would wreck the concept of a jewish state. Essentially enforced internment. Like I said, maybe this is the answer, most people (including the author here) doesn't seem to be all that willing to say it out loud, which is a problem. If you have to hide your solutions behind euphemisms, or by saying "we have to do SOMETHING, now let me tell you why all the other options are bad without endorsing an actual solution", then you have a problem.

            Collapse
        2. CB76

          Genocide, clearly, is the answer being embraced by a lot of people here.

          Collapse
          1. Mathias

            Nope. Genocide is trying to get rid of a particular genome (or ethnicity, more broadly). Fighting a suicidal enemy who won't stop throwing himself at you, and continuing the fight until every enemy fighter is dead, is not genocide. Relocating a bunch of women and children out of the war zone once all the fighting men are dead is not genocide either. It's just mass migration; it's happened thousands of times in history. We'll be nice to them; we'll give them blankets and food and probably some seed money to start over in their new homes. Not genocide. Also not letting them stay in our territory or anywhere near it.

            Collapse
          2. Lowedj

            “Clearly “ it is not. (At least not by most of commenters.)

            Israel should and will invade Gaza and will attempt to destroy Hamas Hamas will hide behind woman, children, old people and other noncombatants. When they use these innocent people deliberately as shields and they are killed, then the Hamas propaganda machine will kick into action blaming Israel.

            Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      ScoopJackson'76

      WWII style against Germany. Declare war. Invade. Overthrow.

      Collapse
      1. Nordic_man

        But the author straight up says it isn't JUST the government but a majority of the people too. He literally says a self governing gaza would end up exactly the same. If the issue is the people, then quite clearly, and just beyond the article, the answer is genocide.

        Collapse
        1. Rossknode

          Dude. It's the belief systems, not the "people". Just like how it was the Nazi beliefs, not the German people that was the problem. You challenge the belief systems. Most of the Gazans are also captive to what Hamas lets them see. They don't have nearly close to the amount of information we do.

          Collapse
          1. Nordic_man

            So...reeducation camps it is then?

            Collapse
  9. James Morphew

    We continue to read that Hamas is no longer popular with many Palestinians. If this is so, those peaceful Palestinians that reject the Hamas destruction could remain; what would be needed would be a political structure, and that might be simply as citizens of Israel. If, as our author mentions, the Palestinian people in total reject the existence of the Israeli state, then they will have to depart from any community that accommodates Israel.

    Collapse
    1. Mathias

      Yes, that plan seems fair, I think. But 'remain' where? I would say they should be dispersed so as not to put too much strain on any one region, and to prevent clan dynamics from setting in and relapsing them into bad habits. Wherever they end up, it shouldn't be Gaza. It's an unhealthy place for them, with too many bad memories that are too easy to imitate.

      Collapse
  10. Samuel Mpona

    "one where the notion that, if given the chance to govern themselves, the Palestinians can choose peace over war, is forever disabused."

    So if I understand correctly, the author want us to believe that all Palestinians are unable to choose peace? That they are unable to live peacefully?

    How is that different that claiming that all jews are criminal unfit to live in peace. This is blatant anti arab racism, and a not so veiled call for Palestinian genocide. How can the Dispatch publish such trash!

    I hope to soon read a repudiation of this kind of garbage and an apology. Or maybe I should not patronize the Dispatch....

    Collapse
    1. Mathias

      They have chosen not to live in peace. Whether metaphysically they retain their birthright of human free will is irrelevant. They have chosen war. So we have no obligation to treat them as people interested in peace.

      And I won't say "all". But I will say a majority. A large majority. A 93% majority of Palestinians in Gaza see themselves as foes of Israel, whatever they may think of Hamas. Massage the numbers a bit to account for misunderstandings and changes of heart, and you're still left with what amounts to near-unanimity of animosity. And we are not obligated to treat our avowed enemies as people with whom we can or will make peace.

      Collapse
    2. Aaron

      An analogy (of course just an analogy, not remotely an equation). The most extreme voices in the republican party are a minority but have have hijacked the party. The more reasonable people are unable / unwilling to eject them even though there is a democratic process.

      Collapse
    3. Besht2003

      How about enough Palestinians have consistently showed that they reject living with a Jewish state, or even with Jews who are not subservient, to make impractical an arrangement where Palestinians and Israelis share political power with mutual authority and respect. May I remind you that Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority recently gave a speech in which he stated that Hitler was justified in killing Jews. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-66741336 A direct quote: "They say that Hitler killed the Jews for being Jews, and that Europe hated the Jews because they were Jews. No. It was clearly explained that they fought them because of their social role and not their religion," The BBC adds: "Later, he specifies that he was referring to the role of Jews involving "usury, money and so on". So it is the Palestinians who are actually proclaiming that the Jews are criminals until to live in peace, justifying genocide, and Hamas is now attempting to carry it out.

      Collapse
      1. Nordic_man

        So what exactly is the actual answer here? I keep seeing people come right up to “the Palestinian people, either through Hamas or some other elected government will choose genocide” they then stop short of suggesting a solution. It’s like they are unwilling to say “let’s do genocide” instead “let me prove while all other options won’t work and then not say genocide because that makes me feel bad”

        I have more respect for people who want genocide when they actually say it (granted in both cases the level of respect is practically 0)

        Collapse
        1. Besht2003

          fyi the charter of Hamas is to commit genocide but on the Jews. Fatah openly expresses admiration for Hitler's genocide of European Jews and founders of the Palestinian political programs up and down the line collaborated with the German foreign office before and during World War II. Israeli Jews did not structure the current conflicts into zero-sum games. If you sincerely cared about peace though you could be suggesting to your Nordic beautiful Aryan friends that they petition the European Nordic peoples to actively move to remove the Hamas leadership from Gaza and structure some kind of interim trusteeship. Your respect has the value it deserves.

          Collapse
          1. Nordic_man

            I mean yes. The issue I have is that if you read the article, and half the comments they go beyond Hamas, which I have 0 problem decapitating and removing from the earth whole cloth. They go “yeah well if we did that the Palestinian people would just create Hamas 2.0 later” under that assumption what solution is there exactly?

            Collapse
    4. Jackgre

      Good idea. See ya. Come back when you read the words rather than your bias.

      Collapse
    5. Avatar photo
      Patrick

      I don’t think you understood correctly. There’s no call for genocide here. I’m not going to try to type it all out, but there are plenty of comments here that could help clarify this article for you.

      Collapse
      1. Nordic_man

        There are a lot of comments, and the article that goes on to fully go through every other major option and then show how that won’t work. Going as far to say that if we deleted Hamas from the face of the earth that the Palestinians would just make another one shifting blame from a regime to a people. What options are left if the problem is the people (who are straight up called barbarians in the last chunk of the article)

        Collapse
    6. Dlwondercheck

      Nice try, moving the goal posts there.

      Collapse
Load More