Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says his country supports a democratic solution for the Palestinian- Israeli conflict.

“Now imagine the most cruel person of our time, the child-murderer prime minister of the Zionist Regime [Benjamin Netanyahu] goes to Europe and plays innocent, saying Iran wants to destroy them,” said Ayatollah Khamenei during his meeting with A group of university professors and researchers on June 10, 2018.

Who Wanted to Throw Israelis into the Sea?

“They are truly pioneers in oppression and cruelty throughout history. The European addressee listens and shakes his head, without mentioning their [Israel’s] crimes in Gaza and Quds,” he said adding: “The Islamic Republic acts logically on all matters. On the matter of the Zionist Regime, [Egypt’s late President] Jamal Abdul-Nasser proclaimed they would throw the Jewish people into the sea. We never made such remarks.”

“From day one, we announced a plan. We said, today democracy is a modern method that the entire world’s population agrees on. We said, for decision making on the historical country of Palestine, refer to the Palestinian people. This plan is registered with the United Nations as the statement of the Islamic Republic.”

“Those who are true Palestinians and have been living in Palestine over a hundred years ago–Muslims, Christians and Jews–where ever they are, either in the occupied lands or outside of them. They should be surveyed. Their vote should be applied.”

“Is this a bad opinion?” he asked adding: “The Europeans refuse to understand this. Then, that child-murderer, vicious oppressor plays innocent, saying Iran wants to kill several million people out of their population.”

What is Iran’s plan for Palestinian Issue?
Iran officially announced its proposed solution in 2012 during the 16th Non-Aligned Summit in Tehran.
Iran suggests that all current and former inhabitants of the Palestinian territory should participate in a referendum and decide about their fate and future. Iran’s leader described the country’s suggestion in his Inaugural Speech at the 16th Non-Aligned Summit.

“All the Palestinians – both the current citizens of Palestine and those who have been forced to immigrate to other countries but have preserved their Palestinian identity, including Muslims, Christians and Jews – should take part in a carefully supervised and confidence-building referendum and chose the political system of their country, and all the Palestinians who have suffered from years of exile should return to their country and take part in this referendum and then help draft a Constitution and hold elections. Peace will then be established,” he said during his speech in 2012.
Read Iran’s View’s detailed report about the solutions for the Palestinian- Israeli conflict suggested by different parties.

The post Israeli- Palestinian Conflict: Iran Offers a Practical, Democratic Solution first appeared on .

In an interview with IransView, Peled said he supported the Palestinian resistance and argued that contrary to what the media tries to depict, “Palestinians were always willing to compromise” and “[their resistance] has been mostly non violent resistance, even they were always attacked with violence by Israel.”

When asked how he as an Israeli began to learn about the facts on the Palestinian issue and became a peace activist he said “It begins at home.” Peled explained that advocating for the rights of Palestinians and criticizing the Israeli regime has been rooted in the family. In 1948, his mother refused to live in a house that belonged to an exiled Palestinian family as it was “the house of another mother”. His father too, was a proponent of complete withdrawal from the Occupied Territories. “My father, after he retired from the Israeli army as a general in 1968 became an advocate for Palestinians. He said Israel must allow the Palestinians to establish a state in the West Bank and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital,” Peled noted.

But he recalled that it was after the death of her niece in the 1997 Ben Yehuda Street suicide attack in Jerusalem that he decided to get involved in the issue. Peled said that sister held the Israeli regime responsible of the death of her daughter. “The two young men who did this terrible thing, took their own lives and the life of my daughter and other innocent people with them, because we, the Israelis brought them to such despair and hopelessness. When we take away people’s land and destroy their homes, and put their fathers in prison and kill their younger brothers and sisters in their schools, when we deny them a future and hope, this is what happens. I hold the Israeli government responsible for my daughter’s death,” he quoted her sister Nurit.

Excerpts from the interview follow:

– On the effectiveness of the peace initiatives during the last six decades and the role of the US and Britain

The US and Britain are complicit in the crimes against Palestine. The peace efforts failed because they were not peace efforts, they were efforts to bring the Palestinians to surrender, and they would not.

No peace efforts will succeed as long as Israel is part of the effort, because Israel and Zionism are opposed to peace. Zionism claims that Palestine is the Land of Israel, that it belongs to the Jewish people and no one else. So they cannot and will not compromise. Peace can only come without a Jewish state, but a democracy with equal rights that respects human rights and civil rights of all people who live in Palestine/Israel. I hope to see a transformation of the Zionist state to a democracy, without violence, like apartheid fell in South Africa.

– On Iran’s leader proposal for the Palestine – Israel issue that calls for a referendum in which all of current and former residents of Palestine including Jews, Muslims and Christians will take part and decide for their own fate and future

I agree, it is the idea that all must be equal and all must enjoy respect for human rights and civil rights and decide as a democracy. I think it actually means turning Israel into a democracy and I agree. This will only work when Zionism, like apartheid is removed from power.

– On the two-state solution

I don’t think it was a good idea and I don’t think it ever had a chance to succeed. You cannot have a Jewish state in an Arab country (Palestine), with half of the people not Jewish unless it is a brutal regime with racist laws, like Israel.

I think the two-state solution was possible for a short time and as expected, it was killed by Israel. Israel wants all the land with no Palestinians and Israel will never compromise. That is why it failed. You cannot have an agreement if one side will not agree.

-On the activities to raise awareness on the Palestinian issue and how they help the resistance

Hundreds of university campuses in the US hold events like “Palestine Week” etc., and thousands of students take part. This is very effective resistance and many Jewish Americans take part and support this as well.

Then, there is also the BDS movement that calls for boycott divestment and sanctions against Israel.

All of these are excellent forms of resistance and I support them completely. I think they will be successful in bringing justice and peace to Palestine.

– His message to the Iranian people

I know that Iranian people are suffering because of the sanctions and because of the threat of an Israeli attack. This is a terrible thing and I can only hope it will end soon. Israel and the US are wrong about Iran.

I don’t believe that Israel will never attack Iran, because Israeli the government wants to keep the threat alive. Israel is using the “Iranian threat” as a smoke screen so people will not talk about Israeli crimes in Palestine.

I wish Iranian people well. If I had the chance I would gladly visit Iran, I know it is a beautiful country with a rich history and culture and I would love to see it.

The post Son of an Israeli General: ‘Peace can only come without a Jewish state’ first appeared on .

More than 130 years has passed since the beginning of the tensions between the Arabs living in Palestine and the Jews who immigrated to the land under the support of the Zionist movements. The establishment of an Israeli regime in Palestine in 1948 led to wars that spread tensions all over west Asian region and in some cases evoked terror and trans-regional operations.

With continuation of bloodshed and the incidence of 11 wars between Israelis and Palestinians during the past 64 years, different people and countries proposed solutions to end the conflicts rising from the occupation of Palestine. Many believe an end to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict would also be the key to solve other issues and conflicts in the region.

In the past years, there were over twenty resolutions, negotiations, and solutions to end the conflict temporarily in certain cases. However, comprehensive solutions also have been proposed that fall into four categories:

1-      Urging Israel to return to the 1967 borders and establishing a Palestinian state

2-      Authorizing Israel to take over all the Palestinian land including the non-occupied parts.

3-      Calling for the establishment of two independent states (an Israeli and a Palestinian)

4-      Calling for the establishment of an independent state to rule all over Palestine

Although the 1967 borders give Palestinians only 23 percent of their land (including the West Bank, East al-Qods, and Gaza Strip), many Palestinian groups and Muslim countries approve the first category solutions and agree to give up the rest of the land to Israel.  Such solutions had no results as the Zionists have so far refused to divide al-Qods.

The second category is vividly unreachable as all Palestinians and Islamic states oppose it. The third category of solutions for the Palestinian issue, the two-state solution has been discussed and argued upon for years, having the support of world powers including the US and Russia.

The two-state solution first was proposed at the initial stages of the crisis and quarrels.  In fact, a year before the establishment of the Israeli state, a resolution was passed at the UN that divided Palestine into three zones, one for Jews, one for Muslims, and one zone to be under international control.

The UN document, ” The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem: 1917-1988″ that was published in 1990, described the results of the UN 1947 resolution known as the “Partition resolution”:

“The United Nations partition resolution did not provide a solution to the Palestine problem, and violence increased. In protest against the partition of their country, the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee called for a general strike…  The Security Council could not take any effective decision after discussing General Assembly resolution 181 (II) (the partition resolution) in December 1947. In March 1948 the United States draft proposal to enable the Council to act on the partition resolution failed, and the Council only called for an end to the violence in Palestine.” [i]

Also in 1976, The UN Security Council tried to pass resolutions supporting the two-state solution, all vetoed by the US due to Israel’s disagreement with the suggested borders. [ii]

Due to such disagreements over the borders, different solutions suggested by the US over the past years for the establishment of two independent states led to no results.

The two-state solution, despite being supported by the UN, the EU, the US, Russia, and many states and international figures, has failed because of the disagreements over the ways al-Qods and the “Haram al-Sharif” complex (or The Noble Sanctuary) were suggested to be divided. Neither the Palestinians nor Israelis agree to forsake this complex. Even the suggestion by former US president Bill Clinton who called for dividing the “holy site” into different parts was not accepted by any of the two sides of the conflict and yielded no results.[iii]

In fact this approach has had no progress since 66 years ago when the Partition resolution was passed and the efforts for establishing two independent states began.

Joe Walsh, a republican member of the US Parliament, criticized this approach in an article in The Washington Times.

“[The struggle to implement a “two-state solution] reminds me of the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. By that definition, everyone who continues to cling to the delusion of a two-state solution is insane. There is no such thing as a two-state solution. It cannot work, it has not worked, and it will not work.”[iv]

But the division of the Haram al-Sharif is not the only obstacle for the two-state solution. So far, all suggestions for the division of territory, including the return to the 1967 borders, have defined that the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and part of al-Qods belong to the Palestinian state. This is while the West Bank and Gaza Strip are far from each other geographically and thus it is not clear how a Palestinian state can be established in separate lands at the same time. Besides, the difference between political powers governing in the West Bank and in Gaza Strip is an issue not addressed in the two-state solutions.

The actions and behaviors of the Israeli regime during the past decades also shows the regime not only continues its occupation of the West Bank territory  but also continues to destroy the houses of Palestinians and make new Israeli settlements despite international statements and laws.

With the failure of the three solutions discussed above, there remains only the forth solution that demands the establishment of one sovereign state. It suggests that an independent state be established in the whole Palestinian territory where Muslims, Jews, and Christians must live and be considered as equal citizens with equal rights.

Different polls and studies also suggest that there is an increasing tendency towards this solution among Muslim and non-Muslim inhabitants of the land. According to a poll conducted in 2010 by the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center, the support for the establishment of an independent state increased by 14 percent while the favorability of the two-state solution decreased noticeably.[v]

The most important issue and the main problem in the way of the one-state solution is that what should the political system of the state’s government be. Some western observers suggest the establishment of a secular state which is clearly not suitable for the most religious conflict of the time.  Another suggestion is to establish a federal state, but considering the history of the cultural and boundary disputes this suggestion cannot maintain the stability and sovereignty of an independent country either.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Republic of Iran has proposed a solution that not only addresses all the problems and issues in other solutions, but also is fair and democratic.

Iran suggests that all current and former inhabitants of the Palestinian territory should participate in a referendum and decide about their fate and future. Iran’s leader described the country’s suggestion in his Inaugural Speech at the 16th Non-Aligned Summit:

“All the Palestinians – both the current citizens of Palestine and those who have been forced to immigrate to other countries but have preserved their Palestinian identity, including Muslims, Christians and Jews – should take part in a carefully supervised and confidence-building referendum and chose the political system of their country, and all the Palestinians who have suffered from years of exile should return to their country and take part in this referendum and then help draft a Constitution and hold elections. Peace will then be established.”[vi]

This solution suggests that the Palestinians themselves- and not other countries and people- should decide for their future. Deciding over the political system of government and holding elections by Palestinians themselves decreases the disagreements, and problems like dividing the land and boundaries would no longer exist, leaving the whole Palestine for its current and former inhabitants.

This solution is too clear to need any further explanation, yet it is not clear why the UN, the Security Council, and especially the US refuse to accept it as a low-cost solution for the Palestinian issue.

So far no reason or argumentation has proved this solution inefficient.  Even when the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon was asked about the solution proposed by Iran’s leader, he insisted on the two-state solution without giving any reason or analysis to reject Iran’s suggestion.

Now that this solution has been proposed by one of the most important countries in the West Asia, world public opinion is waiting to see how the Western countries, and particularly the US as the country who claims to support democracy, are going to react to it.

Ignoring this suggestion certainly is not going to solve any problem but further raises the questions and doubts about the goodwill of the different sides involved in the Palestinian issue. On the contrary, discussing and reviewing this suggestion as the only remaining political solution for the Palestinian issue would help reach a consensus over an ultimate solution for the conflict that has lasted for over six decades.

We try to discuss this solution further and bring the ideas of experts and political figures about it later in other articles.

The post Has the Road to a Political Solution for the Palestinian Crisis Reached a Dead-end? first appeared on .