Image description: meme with the “so true” soyjak meme format.
Panel one: flag of zionist entity, soyjak who represents trans people, the pride flag, Palestine maoists?, Sockdems, Ieland says: Fuck off! I don’t believe in this zionist imperialist nonsense.
Panel two: kurdish flag, same soy from earlier: omg! Wholesome “indigenous” self determination!
There are a lot of places which might deserve similar treatment. I don’t see a reason to deprive Palestinians of their most important city. I also worry this argument plays into the idea that without international oversight, people in Palestine can’t get along with each other. They did before our interference, and they will do so again once real justice has been done. Just my two cents.
I never did say that this should only apply to Jerusalem, I would be perfectly willing to extend this idea to other massively important cultural sites.
Also I’m not saying that the city would be completely independent of Palestine, or that it would be treated like a separate country, but moreso that the city basically becomes an “Open city” not divided up, controlled by any one faith, or used as a political bargaining chip, and that it’s ultimately authority would be a third party non-beholden to its own biases or agendas. (I just use the UN as an example, I wish there was a better choice)
I’m not saying that conflict is sure to happen and, that it’s impossible for Palestine to figure it out, but why risk it? It’s an extremely hot issue that can lead to a lot of extreme conflict, so why not try to stem that before it has a chance to occur?
What would be the difference between being part of a free and fair Palestine and this “open city” idea of yours? Because the concept of a free and fair Palestine is built on the foundation that people are treated equally regardless of their faith.
Because millennia of religious conflict and friction between communities is not going to magically disappear even in the goal of a free and fair Palestine. It would be a process. You can’t just say “Everyone is free and fair now”, and expect everyone to shake hands and go about their day. People are still beholden to their own biases, that is not a risk that we should be willing to take. All it takes is one person or group to become “aspirational”, and you end up back at square one.
There will be opportunists, seditionists, religious extremists, and many others attempting to take advantage of the situation, in the wake of the creation of a Palestinian free state. That can be prevented and mitigated with a third party, if only for a time.
Think of it like a GDR scenario. The Soviet Union didn’t leave the GDR up to its own devices the second the war was over, because that would have been disastrous. They monitored and kept watch over the situation for several years until tensions had decreased and the GDR could be established. Jerusalem would be an extreme hotbed of hostility as everyone would try and make their move. That can be avoided.
Just because you say everyone is free and fair, doesn’t mean that that’ll automatically be the case. That is idealist, especially in the immediate aftermath of the destruction of the Israeli regime.