RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Cole writes: "Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has pledged that the Palestinians will have no such rights as along as he is prime minister. So what is Trump going to do about this human rights travesty?"

U.S. president Donald Trump (R) and Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu hold a joint news conference at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 15, 2017. (photo: Carlos Barria/Reuters)
U.S. president Donald Trump (R) and Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu hold a joint news conference at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 15, 2017. (photo: Carlos Barria/Reuters)

Trump Plots to Keep Palestinians Stateless Forever

By Juan Cole, Informed Comment

16 February 17


he Trump-Netanyahu Show on Wednesday was par for the course in American and right wing Israeli discourse about the Palestinians.

Nobody brought up that the British colonialists conquered Palestine during World War I and instead of preparing it for statehood, as they promised the League of Nations they would do, they set the Palestinians up for destruction as a people. These actions contrast with Iraq, e.g., which the British did bequeath to the Iraqi nation.

No one brought up that 60% of Palestinian families were kicked out of their homes in 1948 by militant European Jewish colonialists brought there by colonial Britain, and that these families are still homeless and stateless whereas the Israeli perpetrators have never paid a dime in reparations for the billions of dollars worth of property they stole from the Palestinian people.

No one brought up that Europeans who committed the Holocaust have not borne the cost of that monstrous crime against humanity but rather the innocent Palestinians have.

The fact is that by about 1300 AD there were virtually no Jews in Palestine. And yes, there was a Palestine– a recognized geographical concept, coins with “Filistin” written on them, diaries of Palestinian travelers who said they missed ‘Palestine;’ and a distinctive Palestinian dialect of Arabic. The people who lived there were almost all Christians and Muslims, 1300-1850. My recollection is that the French found about 3,000 Jews there in 1799 when Bonaparte invaded, when the general population must have been around 200,000.

(photo: Informed Comment)

No one brought up that the Palestinians are the largest stateless group in the world, lacking basic human rights and lacking rights of citizenship. Their private property is daily and brazenly stolen from them by Jewish squatters coming over into Palestine from Israel proper. This grand larceny on a cosmic scale is secretly encouraged and sometimes even funded by the Israeli government. Militant armed settlers have murdered dozens of Palestinians and routinely commit sabotage against their olive orchards and crops.

Israeli propaganda depicts Palestinians as violent, but Israelis killed nearly 7,000 Palestinians 2000-2014 whereas Palestinians in that period were responsible for about 1,000 Jewish deaths. Given what is being done to the Palestinians by the far right wing squatters, they have reacted with amazing forbearance and peacefulness.

The only resolution of the conflict is for Palestinians to attain the rights of citizenship in a state and the right firmly to own property and to control their land, air and water.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has pledged that the Palestinians will have no such rights as along as he is prime minister.

So what is Trump going to do about this human rights travesty?

Here is what he said:

TRUMP: As far as settlements, I’d like to see you hold back on settlements for a little bit. We’ll work something out but I would like to see a deal be made, I think a deal will be made. I know that every president would like to — most of them have not started till late because they never thought it was possible and it was impossible because they didn’t do it but Bibi and I’ve known each other a long time.

Smart man, great negotiator, and I think we’re going to make a deal. It might be a bigger and better deal than people in this room even understand. That’s a possibility so let’s see what we do.

I predict that Netanyahu will not in fact pause land theft by the Israeli squatters. I also predict that Netanyahu will keep his campaign promise to keep the Palestinians stateless and little better than prisoners in their own land. The only deal to be had from Netanyahu is to screw the Palestinians over even harder than ever before.

Then a journalist posed a question:


Thank you very much. Mr. President, in your vision for the new Middle East peace, are you ready to give up of the notion of two-state solution that was adopted by previous administration? And will you be willing to hear different ideas from the prime ministers as some of his partners are asking him to do, for example, annexation of parts of the West Bank and unrestricted settlement constructions? . . . And Mr. Prime Minister, did you come here tonight to tell Mr. — the president that you’re backing off the two-state solution? Thank you.


So, I’m looking at two-state and one-state and I like the one that both parties like. I’m very happy with the one that both parties like. I can live with either one. I thought for a while the two-state looked like it may be the easier of the two but honestly, if Bibi and if the Palestinians — if Israel and the Palestinians are happy, I’m happy with the one they like the best.

We know that Netanyahu, who has boasted about destroying the Oslo Peace accords and has pledged no Palestinian state, does not actually want a two-state solution.

But Netanyahu does not want a one-state solution in the sense of having to give Palestinians citizenship rights in Israel.

He wants a continuation and expansion of the status quo, with the Palestinians under the Israeli jackboot and helpless and stateless. So for Palestinians, a ‘no-state solution.’ I.e. he wants Apartheid. Just as the white nationalists of South Africa took citizenship rights away from the Black African majority and tried to consign them to artificial Bantustans, so Netanyahu wants to keep Palestinians in Bantustans.

In offering to relinquish a two-state solution, Trump shredded decades of American policy. But since there isn’t going to be a two-state solution, it is just as well. Realistically, there is no place to put a Palestinian state any more.

What Trump was really offering was some polite fiction where the Palestinians could be parceled out to Jordan, Egypt and Israel itself, even as they remain stateless, and economic investments would seek to depoliticize them and improve their per capita GDP. The white nationalists in South Africa tried something like that with their Black African population. It didn’t last.

In other words, it would be Apartheid, but an attempt would be made to implicate Egypt and Jordan in it. I predict failure in that regard.

Later on, the Israeli prime minister said this:


“I told you what are the conditions that I believe are necessary for an agreement. It’s the recognition of the Jewish state and Israel’s — Israel’s security control of the entire area. Otherwise, we’re just fantasizing. Otherwise, we’ll get another failed state, another terrorist Islamist dictatorship that will not work for peace, but work to destroy us, but also destroy any hope for a peaceful future for our people.”

So there you have it. Netanyahu insists on Israeli security control of neighboring Palestine, insists that the Palestinians be kept stateless, and even goes so far in typically racist fashion to allege that Palestinians are congenitally incapable of erecting a state.

And since Trump seems to believe whatever the last person he talked to alleged, likely Netanyahu will win out.

The only problem is that there is no scenario in which millions of Palestinians are kept under martial law and deprived basic citizenship rights and go on being stolen from– there is no scenario in which this story ends well.

Juan Cole your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+6 # Radscal 2017-02-16 19:19
For any who still had doubts, this proves why the right-wing Zionists worked so hard to get Trump elected and why the propaganda about Trump/Bannon being "anti-Semitic,” "white supremacists" was malarky.

Sure, HRC was willing to give Netanyahu most anything he wanted, but Trump somehow got the US Evangelical Christian Zionists behind him, and so can grease the skids for Israel to "Finish 1948” to the cheers of the brainwashed “conservative” USians.

Yes, we’ve been played, and I fell for much of it, too. Breitbart News was formulated in occupied Jerusalem in a meeting with Bibi Netanyahu and Andrew Breitbart. Donald Trump has appointed the most Zionist-laden Administration in US history.

And particularly heartbreaking for me, Trump is fully onboard to complete Donald Rumsfeld’s September, 2001 plan to destroy 7 Muslim-majority countries with his threats against Iran.

He already backpedaled some on his alleged support to work with Russia against the terrorists and normalize relations with Russia, when he muttered that Russia “probably did” hack and try to flip the election.

Now that he’s fired General Flynn (a monster of a man), somehow due to Flynn’s normal discussions between an Administration- elect and the Russian Ambassador after the election, he can finish his “evolution” and come out as an opponent to Putin and Russia (just like the right-wing Zionists want).
+3 # Kootenay Coyote 2017-02-17 09:30
'...Trump/Banno n being "anti-Semitic,” "white supremacists" was malarky.... '

Only if you forget that Palestinians are Semites too.
+2 # Radscal 2017-02-17 18:57
Yep. That's why I always put the term in quote marks.
+1 # lfeuille 2017-02-17 18:44
I think there are many people who are both anti-Semitic at home and pro Israel in foreign affairs. It is not so much the specific religion, but right wing religion in general and the accompanying autocratic indifference to those who don't share the chosen religion. There is a definite affinity between right wing Christians who are often anti-Semitic and right wing Jews.

I don't know how Trump himself fits into this scenario. I think he is more opportunist that religious fanatic, but I'm sure Bannon does.
+7 # Radscal 2017-02-16 19:24
And Trump's coming hard-line against Russia will have the HRC-Democrats cheering him, or at least breathing a sigh of relief. Schumer will probably even take personal credit for “The Resistance” forcing Trump to abandon his peaceable relations with Russia.

And even as Herr Drumpf and ZioNazi Netanyahu were holding their press conference, the Pentagon leaked out that they’re developing plans to send US troops into Syria (we already have at least a couple hundred there, so this must be a major escalation to warrant this notice).

I am ashamed of myself for not having seen this all clearly much earlier. When Loren Bliss first suggested that the PTB might be playing us with the goal of putting Trump in the White House, and not actually backing HRC as they made it appear, it took me a couple days to see that as even possible.

Now it's become apparent. Sure, the 0.01% would have settled for HRC (that's why they bumped off Sanders), but Trump was almost assuredly their choice before most of us were even discussing possible candidates.
0 # librarian1984 2017-02-17 10:24
I greatly respect you and loren, but I still don't believe Trump was the goal. That's not to say TPTB won't/didn't have him on board eventually, but imo he was too unexpected to be the original plan. I think they wanted Clinton and thought DT was the only guy she could defeat.

The oligarchs don't have enough of a sense of humor to plan a Trump, and they can't be pleased to watch him break their belongings -- but no doubt they will eventually have him under their thumb, one way or another.
0 # lfeuille 2017-02-17 18:50
I agree. The whole thing got away from them early on. All the billionaires had their own favorite candidate who that bought and paid for. Unregulated money allow them to each keep their pet candidate in the game much longer than in the past, so opposition to Trump, who was financing himself in the early days, didn't settle on one candidate early enough to stop him. And Clinton was just to lousy a candidate to get the job done. Now they are just trying to see how much they can get out of the turmoil.
+1 # Radscal 2017-02-17 19:17
" imo he was too unexpected to be the original plan. I think they wanted Clinton and thought DT was the only guy she could defeat."

That is most certainly the impression the corporate media gave us, and the one I believed until I dug deeper, and then started seeing the results of a President Trump.

Here's just one cognitively dissonant "alternative fact." Donna Brazille was fired from CNN for giving HRC questions before debates with Sanders. You may have seen Cuomo and someone else on CNN saying on air they were doing "everything possible" to get HRC elected.... in 2014!

So clearly CNN wanted HRC to get the Democratic Nomination. And of course, HRC was the most hated and mistrusted Democratic nominee in history.

And also, Trump has specified CNN as "the opposition" and his war with CNN is "common knowledge."

But CNN's CEO, Jeff Zucker, has said he is “utterly devoted to Israel.” And as I wrote, it should now be clear to all that the candidate most beloved by Eretz Israel is Trump.
+1 # librarian1984 2017-02-18 00:45
But do you think Clinton would have been much different from Trump in regard to Israel? I'd imagine she would be quite appease-y to Likud plans and goals.

The biggest difference between the two was their attitude toward Russia and militarism. TPTB clearly want to escalate tensions with Russia and Hillary was all over that, whereas Trump (said he) wanted to be friendly with Russia and reduce American interventionism.

If Trump reverses those two stances one could make the case TPTB used him as a stealth candidate, but if he does improve relations with Russia I'd say it supports the idea that Hillary was the oligarchs' choice.

Then again, perhaps we needn't bother about their motivations and intentions. Either way we were screwed.

Now, another interesting question -- if you and Loren are right, and Trump WAS the intended, do you think Hillary knew?
+1 # Radscal 2017-02-18 16:40
Yeah, as I wrote, HRC would likely have given Netanyahu most anything he wanted. But she didn't have the Christian Zionists behind her, and her Democratic voters still see the "Two State Solution."

So, under her, the Zionist Colonial Project would have progressed much as it has for the past 1/2 century.

Trump is much more likely to help Israel "complete 1948" and annex all of Palestine (and more) in short order.

And you might recall that I've been concerned that the Zionists see world opinion shifting against their brutal, rogue nation actions, and so would speed up their plans so as to create reality "on the ground."

I can't find anyone in Trump's Administration calling for detente with Russia. Every single one I've heard mention Russia did so by demonizing Putin and Russia and insisting they are the major threat.

And yes, I would suspect that, if this is true and Trump was the goal from the start, that the Clintons were in on it. That would explain why she seemed to go out of her way to alienate the progressives, and refused to even campaign in the "rust belt" "battleground states."

Now, if things had gone differently, and enough people voted for the most hated and mistrusted Democratic candidate in history to overcome Republican election fraud, most of the powers that be would have settled for HRC, and she surely would have enjoyed the increasing wealth and power.

But, she's apparently not being indicted, so seems happy enough.
+12 # sashapyle 2017-02-16 23:28
I have been trying to figure out whether there is one charadter flaw, one loathsome human trait, that this so-called president does not exemplify on the daily basis. This is NOT a rhetorical question! Can you think of one failing he does not have?
And that's even excluding obvious mental illness. The vast majority of mentally ill people can't hold a candle to his destructiveness , because they haven't combined their ailments with the malevolence, cluelessness and sheer sadism that he embraces. He and his cabinet spent their childhoods tearing the wings off of houseflies to feel powerful.
0 # Radscal 2017-02-17 19:20
He apparently never drank or did drugs. The world might be a better place if he had.
+3 # Bruce Gruber 2017-02-17 07:22
Clear and logical description of the process of Empire as practiced and proven in the seldom admitted history of the Americas. A commendable and reasoned description that will be carefully parsed, denied and misdirected by the Dershowitz clan of faux-intelligen ce and nuclear bully, mini-empire.
+2 # RussellB 2017-02-17 08:13
Excellent, very well stated. I'm going to forward this to all my friends.
+3 # Misterioso 2017-02-17 10:28
America went to sleep and a self-adoring moron became president.

The Trump/Netanyahu meeting/confab was essentially meaningless, all packaging and no definitive content.

To wit: 
U.N. Envoy Says U.S. Still Backs Palestinian State
FEB. 16, 2017

UNITED NATIONS — “Twenty-four hours after President Trump swatted away at a broad international consensus on how to achieve peace between Israelis and Palestinians, his United Nations envoy sought to assure the world on Thursday that his administration supports Palestinian statehood but wants a ‘thinking out of the box’ approach.”

“‘We absolutely support a two-state solution,’ the American ambassador, Nikki R. Haley, said in answer to a question after a United Nations Security Council meeting devoted to the Israeli-Palesti nian conflict.”

Israel will rue the day it jumped in bed with Trump. "Lie down with dogs and you'll get fleas."
+2 # Radscal 2017-02-17 19:27
If the "One State Solution" really was to allow all the families driven out by the creation and expansion of the Jewish State of Israel in the Levant, and then granting them all full citizenship and rights in that One State, then I'd agree.

But it looks to me like Trump is supporting the Likud Party plan to annex all of former Palestine and squeeze any remaining non-Jews into cantons surrounded by high walls and Israeli military.

Given that Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia (and probably Turkey) are apparently all fine with that, and Lebanon and Syria are barely hanging on, how would Israel regret promoting Trump?
+1 # Femihumanist 2017-02-17 17:41
I. There's an error. Cole says the Palestinians were kicked out by "militant European Jewish colonialists. That phrase does not, in any way, describe the Jews who came to Palestine from Europe after WWII.

To some extent, it describes the Jews who were already in Palestine. They saw to it that the land was bulldozed so the people who came, who tended to be poorly educated and had been desperately traumatized would believe that no-one lived there. I don't believe that most of them would have done to others what had been done to them, if they had known. The obnoxiousness developed the longer they lived as humans.

After the war, the Jews were ethnically cleansed out of Europe and resettled in Palestine, probably with the hope that the Jews and Arabs would all kill each other. If Jews were to be given their own state, they should have been given part of Germany. However, they were happy to go.

You can't blame desperate people for not trying to get the real facts about the effect on other people. My parents, who had lived in the US about 30 years by that point, believed that there were no indigenous population except for Nomads, who lived in tents. My parents weren't desperate at that time.
+3 # Femihumanist 2017-02-17 17:46
II. It is very unlikely that the majority of Askhenazim (European) Jews descended from the original Hebrews of the Bible. It is more likely that today's Palestinians were the descendants of the Ancient Hebrews, having converted to save their lives when the Christians took over and converting again for the same reasons when the Muslims came.

The European Jews, especially from Eastern Europe were likely the descendants of other European tribes that converted to Judaism for business reasons; primarily to act as traders between the Christians and Muslims who lived in the area but wouldn't deal directly with each other.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.