Re “Spain clamors for a ‘two-state solution’ — but not in Catalonia” (Opinion, Oct. 25): Equating the aspirations for self-determination of Catalans, Kurds, and Tibetans with those of Palestinians is not so much like ignoring the distinctions between apples and oranges as it is like ignoring the distinctions between apples and orangutans.
Ethnic and cultural considerations notwithstanding, national states have always vehemently opposed the division of their land and sovereignty, such as is sought by Catalans, Kurds, and Tibetans. In stark contrast, the Palestinians seek to move from having no state to having one, dividing no pre-existing land or sovereignty. That change only occasions the moniker “two-state” in light of the unwelcome involvement of Israel in the affairs of the Palestinian population.
Israel already has a contentious relationship with the Palestinian Authority. There is no reason it could not cope with a contentious relationship with a Palestinian state, except for the fact that then it could no longer incrementally annex with impunity parcels of Palestinian land. Israel’s West Bank policies impose loss and misery on stateless Palestinian people in order that individual Israeli citizens might secure gain and comfort.
If Israel, or any other country, tried to annex seriatim small parcels of Spain, Iraq, or China to accommodate a growing population, war would break out. The issue of Palestinian statehood has nothing in common with various separatist movements in other countries.
I concur with Jeff Jacoby that Spain, like many countries, has a double standard when it comes to the Middle East (“Spain clamors for a ‘two-state solution’ — but not in Catalonia”). However, there are so many differences in the two situations, especially when it comes to Israel. I am not opposed to a one-state solution, nor do I embrace a two-state solution with a terrorist-friendly government, such as the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, in charge. Neither option will bring peace and stability. We must look for a third option that gives Palestinian Arabs more control of their own lives and Israel the peace and security it deserves.
The Kurds deserve a nation of their own, but Kurdistan encompasses several countries, all opposed to an independent nation for the Kurds. It is hypocritical for the world to insist on Palestinian statehood and ignore the rights of Kurds to manage their own destiny.
One logical reason for this duplicity is that, with the Palestinian cause, Israel can be made out to be the bad guy, but people are unwilling to criticize Turkey and Arab nations when it comes to self-determination for the Kurdish people.
A Globe editorial argued that the EPA should regulate water pollution, but some say the state should take the lead.Continue reading »
Mayor Walsh is widely assumed to have a stealth pro-development agenda, and remarks Wednesday made that explicit.Continue reading »
The prosperity that Denmark, Sweden, and Norway enjoy today was built with free-market reforms in the past.Continue reading »
This is more than just another travel ban. It is a geopolitical spectacle unique in modern history.Continue reading »
The next time you are in a public place, look around you and consider: These are the last people on earth who are going to die.Continue reading »
The cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq seems invisible to politicians and the public.Continue reading »
We must proactively and thoughtfully reinvent the future of work.Continue reading »
Placing soldiers and veterans on this kind of pedestal is a relatively new phenomenon.Continue reading »
Xi Jinping means to restore Chinese dominance in Asia.Continue reading »