In a highly unusual statement today, Likud’s MK (and Speaker of Knesset) Reuben Rivlin said he prefers Israel as one unified nation to two-state solution – even if it means giving citizenship to all Palestinians:
Referring to the possibility that such an agreement could be reached, Rivlin said: “I would rather Palestinians as citizens of this country over dividing the land up.”
Late last year, Rivlin said in a Jerusalem address that Israel’s Arab population was “an inseparable part of this country. It is a group with a highly defined shared national identity, and which will forever be, as a collective, an important and integral part of Israeli society.”
THE SURPRISING PART of the statement is that it somewhat correlates to wishes of Palestinians themselves. While Mahmoud Abbas and the Hamas would be willing to establish a Palestinian state within 1967 borders, the preferred option would be one of state for all people – that is, a non-Jewish state. Not only wouldn’t such a state solve a problem of Jewish-Arab conflict – it would likely worsen it by much.
First comes the issue of the Jewish state. Additional population of almost 3 million Palestinians would bring several dozens of new, pro-Palestinian representatives into Israeli Knesset. Hatred-filled and brainwashed, the new citizen of Israel would fight Jews’ claims of heritage in Israeli, similar to how now Palestinians deny findings of Jewish presence on the Temple Mount. It is likely that Palestinian “holidays” such as the Naqba – the day when the Jewish state was established – would be proclaimed as a national day of mourning – just as it is now in the Palestinian Autonomy.
Then come the population clashes. The Palestinians, while hard working, would contribute little to economic stability of Israel. They are willing to work – and work hard – but with Palestinian economy years behind that of Israel, the State’s economy would suffer an immediate blow, receiving little extra taxes but having the need to accommodate millions of new citizens. This would likely spark tensions between the Arabs and the Jews – particularly the Arabs, who would see themselves entitled to everything the Jews have.
Also, it is not likely the Muslims would agree to Jewish rule on them. With Islam willing to accommodate foreigners, but only as dhimmis, harsh clashes would ensue with the Arabs unwilling to be part of a State based on Jewish religion.
Such an offer also does not solve the issue of Palestinian terrorism: organizations such as Hamas and few others, do not accept the idea of a Jewish state. Thus, even if Israel manages to accept 3 millions of Palestinians under it rules, war would still be waged against the Israelis – but this time, from within Israel, making combating extremists that much harder.
Last, but not least, is the issue of Palestinian refugees. In case of establishment of the Palestinian state, that state could accept over 4 million people scattered around the Middle East and now considered refugees (with most being descendants of the original refugees). If Israel would control the entire geographical area from the Mediterranean to the Jordan river, demands would be made to accept the refugees. With much higher Palestinian representation in the Knesset, such option would be a viable one. As soon as the refugees would start arriving, it is possible a revolt would take place, with Arabs actively fighting the Jews for control of the State.