Recent Comments:

Let's not forget that Zionism is nationalist movement in the mold of 19th Century European nationalisms. From a position of weakness in the British Mandate of Palestine it appeared as a separatist movement but ultimately it is essentialist and irredentist.

Faced with the prospect of remaining a minority in greater Palestine, the Jewish Agency Executive decided that partition was the only way out of the impasse.[6] The principle of partition was placed on the agenda of the Twentieth Zionist Congress. In a 15 July 1937 editorial, David Ben Gurion implied that partition could never be an acceptable long-term solution: 'The Jewish people have always regarded, and will continue to regard Palestine as a whole, as a single country which is theirs in a national sense and will become theirs once again. No Jew will accept partition as a just and rightful solution.'

(source: Wikipedia)

The project consists essentially of reversing the Diaspora and establishing a Jewish-only state in (initially a part, ultimately the whole) Palestine. That Zionism is incompatible with coexistence has been in full display since at least the 1930s. Thus, it is incompatible with a single-state solution unless the single state is Jewish only and Arabs are either expelled or given second-class status.

I note that you haven't responded to any of the questions asked in comments to your previous diary.

Sharing Jerusalem: the condominium solution by John V. Whitbeck - Common Ground News Service

Israelis concerned about their future might well look back at the vision for Jerusalem of Theodor Herzl, the founding father of Zionism: "We'll simply extraterritorialize Jerusalem, which will then belong to nobody and yet to everybody, the holy place common to the adherents of all faiths, the great condominium of culture and morality." Herzl's dream of a Jewish State was wildly impractical at the time, but it existed half a century later. Whether its people ever enjoy peace and security may well depend on whether they can grasp the visionary practicality of Herzl's own recognition that what neither people of the Holy Land could ever relinquish or renounce must therefore be shared.

President Yasser Arafat clearly recognized this principle when, in a speech delivered at Harvard University in 1995, he asked: " Why not Jerusalem as the capital of two states, with no Berlin Wall? United, open, coexistence, living together." The audience rose for a standing ovation.

If Herzl and Arafat could agree on the potential of the "condominium" solution, shouldn't this potential key to peace be explored and developed by those who still believe that peace is possible and who recognize that it is urgent?

This is the road I am going down.

A Jerusalem Partnership as a Condominium is one thing; an Israel Partnership covering all Israel, Gaza, West Bank etc is quite another.

The land would be held in perpetuity in the Joint Ownership of a "Custodian" entity.

Then within an "Open Corporate" partnership-based consensual protocol the bundle of rights of occupation, and the fruits of occupation, are shared by mutual agreement.

One of the desirable side effects is that there would be no further private freehold ownership or mortgage finance possible.

I don't know enough about Judaism to know whether or not it is (or was) believed (as it is under Islam) that absolute ownership of Land is God's alone?

 

The Palestinians were "external" refugees in Lebanon and we saw how that ended.

Some very interesting points raised and an enjoyable piece. Two points I would raise, however.  First is that Putin may be less powerless and more complicit in these shenanigans than you imply. Second and more interesting would be an estimate of how much Ukranian gas was distributed elsewhere within the Soviet Union pre 1990, when of course things were very different politically but this still has relevance to Ukraine's "theft" of current Russian gas if this can be seen as some form of restitution.

Jerome,

just saw your comment reprinted by BNE, you are making rounds. Congratulations!

How interesting. Commuter railways are the most heavily subsidised in the country because of the unbalanced anture of the load, which means that hte South East receives the overwhelming majority of govt money.

Now, either the economist knows this, which they should, and are lying. Or they don't know it and reveal themselves to be not just ideologically blind, but incapable of basic fact checking.

http://www.sockandawe.com/

Throw shoes at Bush.

La mort du juge d'instruction projetée par Nicolas Sarkozy		Sarkozy suggests the end of the inquisitorial judge
PARIS - Dans le cadre d'une réforme de la procédure pénale, Nicolas Sarkozy devrait proposer de supprimer la fonction du juge d'instruction pour confier les enquêtes judiciaires aux procureurs.		Within the reform of the penal procedure, Sakorzy could propose to end the function of inquisitorial judge, giving judiciary inquiries to attorneys
L'Union syndicale des magistrats (USM, majoritaire) a qualifié ce projet de "scandale", jugeant qu'il visait à placer le système judiciaire sous contrôle.		The Union of Magistrated (USM, majoritary, centerish) qualified this project as a "scandal", considering it aims to put the judiciary system under control

The thing is, currently attorneys are emphatically not independent from political power, and Sarkozy has no ambitions to change that. He is using a couple "scandals" concerning failures of the inquisitorial judge - mostly Outreau - to achieve an even weaker justice system.

And an even more worrying part of this reform is the fact that now the head of French public television will be directly named by the president of the Republic - losing any pretense of independence...

More importantly, it's pretty much a €200 million gift to his pal Bouygues, TF1 owner, who will be able to rise the prices of its ads by a lot.

To be compared with the proportion of Arab Israelis. Unless of course pollsters don't even poll them.

Sure, here is the link:

http://www.icty.org/x/cases/gotovina/tord/en/080916.pdf

The Trial Chamber issued an order to Croatia to intensify its search.  Within the Order, the Chamber noted at paragraph 13 that, "Based on the submissions of the Prosecution and Croatia, the Chamber is not in a position to draw any conclusion as to whether the requested documents do exist.  In particular, the Chamber considers that the aforementioned general statements of Croatia in the report dated 14 July 2008 are not sufficient, without further facts or documents to substantiate them, to establish that they do not exist."

Accordingly, there is no proof one way or the other whether such documents exist.  Croatia has not proven that the documents don't exist, but Brammertz hasn't convinced the Court that they do exist, either.  Accordingly, it is reckless of Brammertz (or else intentionally misleading) to suggest that people are "hiding incriminating evidence against Gotovina" when Brammertz cannnot even prove to the Court that the documents exist in the first place.

Well, people should note that the West Bank was under Jordanian control and therefore the Palestinians were technically internal refugees. They didn't come from outside though they did "swell the refugee population" in a reduced geographical area.

The legal claims on the West Bank are a little more complex than that, though. This is the Middle East after all:

Allied powers allocated the area to the British Mandate of Palestine. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War saw the establishment of Israel in parts of the former Mandate, while the West Bank was captured and annexed by Jordan. The 1949 Armistice Agreements defined its interim boundary. From 1948 until 1967, the area was under Jordanian rule, and Jordan did not officially relinquish its claim to the area until 1988. Jordan's claim was never recognized by the international community, with the exception of the United Kingdom. The West Bank was captured by Israel during the Six-Day War in June, 1967. With the exception of East Jerusalem, the West Bank was not annexed by Israel.

(Source: Wikipedia)

You are ignoring the fact that no one in the region wants the solution that you propose. A two state solution is something on which there is only disagreement on the details.

Matthew Yglesias » Bolton in Fantasyland

For his latest offering, Bolton puts forward what he calls a "three state" approach to the Palestinian problem, in which "Gaza is returned to Egyptian control and the West Bank in some configuration reverts to Jordanian sovereignty." Matt Duss offers some response. Marc Lynch further observes that this idea is opposed by the government of Egypt, opposed by the government of Jordan, and opposed by the Palestinians. It's a total non-starter.

Second, both the Tribunal Court and the Croatian government have ruled that there is no convincing proof that the "evidence"  Brammerts says was "hidden,"  ever exited in the first place.

This is not to imply that what you say isn't true, but do you have a link to document that ruling of the Tribunal?

Biofuel Development Shifting From Soil To Sea, Specifically To Marine Algae

Today, the most fervent attention in biofuel development has shifted from soil to the sea, and specifically to marine algae. Scientists at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego, along with researchers at UCSD's Division of Biological Sciences, are part of an emerging algal biofuel consortium that includes academic collaborators, CleanTECH San Diego, regional industry representatives, and public and private partners.

Scripps scientists see algae as a "green bullet," science and society's best hope for a clean bioenergy source that will help loosen broad dependence on fossil fuel, counteract climate warming, and power the vehicles of the future.

[...]

Marine algae, as Mitchell is quick to point out to anyone who asks, are the most efficient organisms on Earth for absorbing light energy and converting it into a natural biomass oil product, the biofuel equivalent of crude oil.

"Algae yields five to 10 times more bioenergy molecules per area, per time, than any terrestrial plant," said Mitchell, a native of oil-rich Houston, Texas. "Nothing else comes close."

From a sustainability perspective, algae hold the upper hand against other biofuel candidates, such as corn and soybeans. Algae can be grown on barren desert land using salt water, averting competition with agricultural cropland and the need for large amounts of precious fresh water for irrigation.

Since they require carbon dioxide for growth, algae are inherently carbon neutral, and they can suck up CO2 directly from industrial pollution sources. Furthermore, algae can feed off the nutrients in discarded wastewater. Adding yet another layer to their allure, the rich protein left over from algae harvests can be converted to animal feed.

Yes, I know, another magic bullet story...

Yes, 2 million refugees on a population that was about the same size, or smaller. Comparisons to integration in the US are really... well, an advanced form of cultural myopia.

Last week's economist calls UK rail (or at least plans for a new North-South line) a subsidy by poor Southerners to rich Northerners...