In the 2000 Camp David summit, where Clinton presented a peace plan and the establishment of a Palestinian state, the negotiator on the Israeli side was then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and on the Palestinian side, Yasser Arafat. That peace plan received the approval of several Arab countries in addition to Israel. Among other things, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem was entirely transferred to Palestine (I have never understood this, but that’s how it is). But Arafat then tried to extract further concessions and demanded, among other things, that the Wailing Wall be divided between Israel and Palestine. Anyone who seeks accurate information should read, among other things, Clinton’s memoirs. They reveal, among other things, that Arafat did not genuinely desire an agreement. Arafat thus thwarted the creation of a Palestinian state at that time. I won’t argue about this further; everyone can research the topic themselves, information is readily available.
It is true that the phrase ‘the State of Israel must be destroyed’ is specifically in Hamas’s charter. But Palestine has been led and is still led by Hamas. Of course, in my opinion, Israel’s actions are now disproportionate. But Hamas still holds innocent Israeli civilians hostage in its tunnels. Israel wants to destroy Hamas, not civilians. Hamas hides among civilians and makes the situation difficult, without sparing the lives of its own people. Therefore, Hamas could release the hostages and lay down its arms. Then peace would return.
Recognizing Hamas’s Palestine now would not solve anything or would make the situation even more difficult. In Salman Rushdie’s words, “A free Palestine would be a state like the Taliban. Does the progressive movement of the Western left want to create that?” Now, even here, the SDP has taken this issue of recognizing Palestine as its hobbyhorse in its attempts to overthrow the government, very short-sightedly and selfishly.
The historical Middle East, the Holy Land, and holy wars. Perhaps the most controversial region in world history, where a universally pleasing consensus has never been reached, it understandably divides opinions and stirs emotions. Some view the situation perhaps more from a human rights perspective, while for others, it’s clear to distinguish between good and evil. However, views on the roles of the parties seem surprisingly divided.
With my writing, I am not trying to justify everything Israel has done in the territories. I know that atrocities have occurred on both sides throughout the existence of the State of Israel. I have also heard stories about this since I was a small child. However, I feel it is my duty to open up a perspective from the standpoint of Israel and the Jewish people.
At the heart of the entire conflict are religious ideologies and an impossibly long and violent history. Both Jews and Arabs have always lived in the region. Previously, people spoke of Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs.
I understand that not everyone can internalize (or remember?) that one party has countless times openly stated its goal is the destruction of Jews from the world (not just from Israel) and that they will not recognize the State of Israel. The goal of the other party is and has been, throughout its existence, simply to defend itself, surrounded by very violent Islamist terrorist organizations and hostile states. Therefore, do not make claims that the war will end if Israel stops defending itself and withdraws (again) from the Gaza Strip.
Supporting the two-state solution is currently utopian nonsense when an internationally recognized terrorist organization holds power. However, this seems to be forgotten by the majority when the two-state solution and the “from the river to the sea” mantra are trumpeted from the same camp. Palestinian Arabs (under the leadership of the PLO) once recognized Israel’s right to exist in connection with the Oslo peace process, but the terrorist organization currently holding power in Gaza has not done so, even though this idea is liked in Western countries. Nor has the Fatah party, which holds power in the West Bank, done so.
Below is a summary of a few topics,
If it is still unclear to anyone, the starting point is that Israel does not want to wage war in the Middle East but is forced into it. Whereas the terrorist organization Hamas and its predecessors PLO and Fatah (and many other attacking entities) have openly and numerous times stated that they want to eliminate Jews from the world. Hamas’s predecessor, the PLO, was also responsible for, for example, the attack on Westerners at the Munich Olympics in 1972, but no one remembers these anymore.
Personal analysis is often lacking when repeating figures reported by Gaza’s health authority (=terrorist organization Hamas). Hamas calls these people “useful Western idiots”. Although the number of casualties is enormous and extremely regrettable, these “accidentally” misreported figures have been corrected numerous times afterwards, even by Hamas itself. Have you considered how many soldiers of the terrorist organization have died since October 7, 2023? So have I, but you won’t read much about this in our mainstream media. Link
About West Bank settlements. This is often spoken of as one single entity, but in reality, an agreement was reached in the Oslo process, and the area was tentatively divided into three zones (A, B, and C), of which Zone C covers most of the West Bank and is an area fully controlled by Israel. Discussions on the territorial divisions were originally intended to continue, but negotiations broke down, and this situation remained “in effect”. Link 1,Link 2,Link 3
A hypothetical question. What would you want the Finnish state to do if the Sámi people (apologies to the Sámi for the analogy) were led by a Russian-backed, internationally recognized terrorist organization that paid “pay-for-slay” compensation to families if a family member had killed Finns? This system is still in use by the “more moderate” Fatah, which leads the West Bank. Link 1, Link 2
The UN as the world’s (or Israel’s?) watchdog. How many have stopped to think more deeply about the UN resolutions condemning Israel and understand the situation? Against the only democratic state in the Middle East, 154 resolutions were passed against Israel in the UN General Assembly between 2015-2023, while the combined number for all other countries was 71(!). By the UN Human Rights Council, 108 (!) resolutions were passed against it between 2006-2024, whereas, for example, Iran had 15, Syria 45, and Russia 10 opposing resolutions. At the same time, Iran has served, among other things, on the UN Commission on the Status of Women, from which it was fortunately removed in 2022. As a reward, however, about a year later, Iran was appointed to chair the UN Human Rights Forum in 2023. Link 1, Link 2, Link 3
I hope people understand that no one who supports Israel imagines that terrible things are not happening on both sides in a terrible war. On the contrary, this is known, and that is why the current measures are such that they would no longer happen or would at least be minimized. Israelis do not enjoy these measures, whereas there are countless videos of ordinary-looking Palestinian Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank celebrating the atrocities that occurred on October 7, 2023; perhaps human memory is just remarkably short? Above, an excellent news story about Hamas’s strategy was linked. This is good to keep in mind.
In Finland, there has been a heated debate recently about recognizing the state of Palestine. Party-wise, the situation is that all others support recognition to some extent, except for the Christian Democrats (KD) and the Finns Party (Persut), who fundamentally oppose it.
Common sense makes it seem strange to recognize a state that does not yet exist and probably won’t in the coming decades. Nevertheless, the two-state solution is Finland’s official stance, even though the project is pure utopia.
One absolutely essential question is, where could an independent Palestinian state be established?
The first thought is, of course, the West Bank. But it is full of Israeli settlements, which are not going anywhere and are constantly being built more. An independent state in the middle of Israeli settlements, without the possibility to even move from one city to another without entering the territory of a foreign state, is completely absurd. For security reasons, Israel will also not give up its military presence in the West Bank.
Gaza, on the other hand, has been destroyed, and Israel will under no scenario allow Palestinians to establish their own state there.
Can Palestine be established somewhere else? Even in the Sinai desert? Well, Egypt is unlikely to agree to that, and on the other hand, the Palestinians themselves do not want to go “into exile” either; both moderate and radical factions demand the right to return to their homeland in historical Palestine, i.e., the territory of the current state of Israel.
The mere location of the Palestinian state is an issue for which there is no solution that would suit Israel, the Palestinians, and neighboring countries. The only solution that guarantees some kind of peace is what Israel is apparently trying now. That is, the most war-crazed individuals from the opposing side are killed, and the rest are forcibly relocated entirely from the area. It is certainly not a beautiful sight, but perhaps Netanyahu will be remembered in Israel 50 years from now as a hero who put an end to Palestinian terror.
Based on that Helsingin Sanomat article, the parties seem to be on sensible lines: Palestine will be recognized once the hostages are freed, war criminals brought to justice, Hamas removed, a ceasefire implemented, humanitarian aid flowing, and the peace process advancing. In practice, this will only begin to unravel when Hamas ceases to exist. I myself would still not consider the two-state solution an impossibility. When one sees the kind of passion that the sovereignty of Jerusalem arouses even here in relatively secular Finland, it’s hard to see the expulsion of Palestinians leading to a very long-lasting peace. That’s how seriously those Arab countries take their religion and its holy places.
Wow, the history of Islam is fascinating. I started wondering why Jerusalem is a holy place for Muslims. It’s confusing that Muhammad never visited it, and it’s not mentioned by name in the Quran. In the Old Testament, it’s mentioned 660 times, and of course, David was king there about 1600 years before Muhammad was born. When the Arabs conquered Jerusalem in 638 AD, after Muhammad’s death, they established a mosque there, and have interpreted that when Muhammad spoke of making a journey in a dream to a distant mosque, it meant Jerusalem, so then a mosque had to be built there.
And of course, Muhammad told Jews and Christians that he was the last prophet, who would restore them to the true faith, and would speak the so-called Last Word on everything, and then told stories that included all the prophets and heroes that Jews had spoken and written about for thousands of years. In these stories, however, the events and plot twists were very different. The Jews in Medina apparently did not accept Muhammad as a credible prophet, which I don’t wonder about.
Unfortunately, Muhammad’s “people of the book” fandom ended abruptly, and Muhammad massacred three Jewish communities, and warfare became Muhammad’s trademark and a way to powerfully convey why he is the last prophet and others have lied.
I don’t mean to drag the discussion into religions, but this background (which is often forgotten) is quite important when trying to understand, with common sense, how there are dozens of extremist Islamic armed organizations in the world, with hundreds of thousands of active members combined, who seek to destroy and kill Jews, Christians, or both.
Fortunately for the world, the vast majority of Muslims would not want to live like Muhammad lived, but want to live in peace. This majority should still speak out against terrorism and extremist Islam more often. But I understand that it requires a lot of courage.
You summarize well why at least Abrahamic religions should be kept far from any kind of decision-making. Because if you go to ask the views of Häme bear worshippers about the Great Commission of the New Testament, then the views are likely very similar to those of Israelis regarding Islam.
This national myth about Israel’s need to fight defensive battles for survival recurs surprisingly often. It was certainly entirely true for the first couple of decades, when Jews were tried to be pushed into the sea by Arabs, but since then, the country has been in the driver’s seat and has sought to expand as much as it can. Even in the area of present-day Egypt, settlements for hundreds of thousands of inhabitants were actively planned, so if neighboring states had given any leeway, the state of Israel would look like this today:
Once upon a time, in the Soviet Union, schools taught the national myth that Russia is a peaceful state that has never attacked any neighbor, but has been forced to wage defensive wars against Mongols, English, French, and Germans, and if it has expanded a little in the process, it has only been a just compensation for good military success. In this spirit, in the last year alone, Israel has been forced to defend itself and fight a battle for survival not only in Gaza but also in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen. It is, of course, possible that some country was still missing from this list, as I have focused on following the war in Ukraine and have certainly missed local news.
It is clear that the neighboring states are angry and seek condemning statements in the UN, but the first step towards peaceful relations would surely be for this routine use of force to cease and for Israel to focus on its internal affairs. Surely, a sense of security should be found when the country has the most technologically advanced, effective army in the region and the almost limitless support and security guarantees of the superpower United States.
Strangely, in these hypothetical scenarios, Finns are never the smaller ethnic group attacking a larger state. Fortunately, we don’t have to ask a hypothetical question, because we have our own personal experience of supporting terrorists:
In 1918, Mannerheim, the commander-in-chief of the newly independent state, swore to fight with Soviet Russia indefinitely until Finland’s borders were at the White Sea and the Russians were expelled from the area:
We do not need to accept as a gift the land that already belongs to us by ties of blood, and I swear in the name of our Finnish peasant army, whose commander-in-chief I have the honor to be, that I will not sheathe my sword until lawful order prevails in the country, until all fortifications are in our hands, until every last soldier and hooligan of Lenin has been expelled from both Finland and White Karelia. Trusting in our righteous, noble cause, trusting in our brave men and self-sacrificing women, we will now create a mighty, great Finland.
To this spiritually important land area for the nation, which Mannerheim later famously described as ‘blood-soaked, sacred land’, all kinds of ‘tribal warriors’ and ‘forest guerrillas’ constantly crossed the border. Although it is understandably nicer for us to talk about them as ‘activists’ who engaged in ‘adventure politics’, in internet discussions using current terminology, they could very well be called terrorists. It was certainly not traditional warfare, and Finland did not even admit to being a party, even though it supported, both financially and militarily, the attacks of troops with questionable military discipline across the border.
Mannerheim’s dream at the time was to attack St. Petersburg (then Petrograd), and he and other chief ideologists of Greater Finland strongly pushed for it, hoping to return the area to the control of the Ingrian Finns. Less known is that Mannerheim even prepared a military coup in Finland if the attack could not be carried out otherwise. This project (and also some of the Kinship Wars) ultimately failed, especially due to active British opposition. According to Lenin’s contemporary assessment, if Finland had attacked St. Petersburg at that time, Soviet Russia would have lost the city.
Years later, as the security situation escalated, the Soviet Union again felt anguish that Finland would once again exploit the unrest and attack the area, especially St. Petersburg, which was a stone’s throw from the Finnish border. Negotiations with Finland for peaceful territorial exchanges failed, and Finnish military forces were still strongly under Mannerheim’s control.
Now, given these starting points, did the Soviet Union have any other option than to declare the Winter War for defensive reasons against a deeply ideologically hostile state that might join the fight in a major war and wipe Russia’s second-largest and one of Europe’s largest cities off the map?When it is said that Hamas’s stated goals make any kind of peace impossible, this is a remarkably historically uninformed claim. Even we, after a multi-generational cycle of violence, several very painful and traumatic wars, the Great Wrath (isoviha), and even the genocide of Ingrian Finns by the Soviet Union, have managed to leave the past behind and live in peace for 80 years. It has never been easy, but peace has been maintained when both parties have respected the border and stayed on their own side. This is how peace is currently maintained between North Korea and South Korea, between Greece and Turkey, and between many other states that are fundamentally deeply hostile to each other.
The impossible goals presented by leaders involved in war are not exceptional even today. Both Putin and Zelenskyy have publicly presented completely unrealistic, broadly painted goals for what their ideal world would look like after the war, where the opposing side’s influence in the war-affected area has been practically eradicated entirely. Extreme interpretations in peace negotiations usually inevitably soften, and when peace has lasted long enough, the threshold for starting a war increases year by year. Gaza has never truly had peace since the Second World War. Even a long-lasting ceasefire is only a superficial peace that changes nothing; the conflict must be resolved permanently by establishing permanent borders between sovereign states, which will never again be violated in the future. Now these have been missing, so violence between peoples continues.
This “national myth” comment was probably some kind of sarcasm, as throughout the 21st century, in addition to Hamas, many groups have launched rocket attacks on Israel. Such as:
Of course, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is behind many as a sponsor and supporter, but there are indeed plenty of these mythical threats.
On the other hand, for example, in Britain, 3/4 of Muslims do not believe that Hamas even murdered or raped anyone in Israel in October 2023, so for them, the threat experienced by Israel is indeed just a delusion and a national myth.
Many simply cannot believe that Jew-hatred is a real phenomenon. It was the same during Nazi Germany. Many bystanders thought that dragging Jews onto trains and into gas chambers did not happen “in a vacuum,” but was perhaps always just a consequence of something unpleasant that Jews had done.
None of these terrorist organizations you listed can realistically threaten Israel’s existence.
As for the tens of thousands of rockets, 33 people have died from them since 2001.
As my own observation, the only reason why the October 2023 terrorist attack was even possible from HAMAS was because the IDF and the Israeli government did not consider HAMAS a threat.
For the preceding 20 years, HAMAS had been a harmless caged animal that could be bombed regularly, and in response, rockets would be received, which could then be used to justify state terror occurring in the West Bank.
[quote=“Pohjolan_Eka, post:1213, topic:43455”]
Years later, as the security situation escalated in the Soviet Union, there was again anguish that Finland would once again exploit the unrest and attack the area, especially St. Petersburg, which was a stone’s throw from the Finnish border. Negotiations with Finland for peaceful territorial exchanges failed, and Finnish military forces were still strongly under Mannerheim’s control.
[/quote].
Of course, the situation in Europe influenced the outbreak of the Winter War.
But with your writing, you make it sound as if the Soviet Union’s attack was our own fault, or at least that the Soviet Union supposedly had no other option. You are now understanding our neighbor a little too well.
Even if there had been some skirmishes around the turn of the 1920s, Finland was no threat, nor an aggressor. Mannerheim had mostly been traveling. And we had no allies; we were mainly a neutral, fresh, poor Nordic state that lacked the funds to procure defense supplies, which then backfired when the Soviet Union attacked Finland.
For example, in the Battle of Raate Road in Suomussalmi, not everyone initially had clothes or guns. Some soldiers were initially in their own clothes. We were poorly equipped, and war was not believed in, even though it was feared. It was a direct miracle, as we all know, that Finland repelled the Soviet Union’s numerically superior army. The Soviet Union had crossed our borders (then Sweden’s) before, since the Middle Ages. No borders helped then, nor do they now.
It came when it wanted to.
[quote=“Pohjolan_Eka, post:1213, topic:43455”]
Even a long-lasting ceasefire is only a superficial peace that changes nothing; the conflict must be resolved definitively by establishing permanent borders between sovereign states that will never again be violated in the future. Now they have been missing, so violence between nations continues.
[/quote].
Those borders don’t always hold when the starting point is different tribes in the same area. As in Europe with Yugoslavia and now between Russia and Ukraine.
The difficulty in this Israel-Gaza situation is with whom to establish any borders and make peace as long as the terrorist organization Hamas rules.
Our so eagerly progressive left sometimes completely loses sight of what Hamas is. Condemning the terrorist organization Hamas has been somehow difficult.
More prominent has been Marxist religious criticism against Israel.
This issue of recognizing Palestine has just been pushed forward blindly, as if the matter would be resolved that way.
In Hamas’s Palestine, its dictatorship and subjugation of its own people, as well as new armament against Israel, would only continue.
That is not a solution.
Indeed, these are Israeli terrorist organizations aiming to destroy Israel, and, relative to the number of rockets fired, they have not yet caused significant damage in Israel. However, I still do not underestimate their capabilities. When Iran’s Revolutionary Guard fired 300 ballistic missiles at Israel in one night, large-scale destruction targeting the civilian population was quite close to materializing. However, interception barely succeeded, and it has required billions of dollars in annual support from the USA for air defense.
Since they cannot achieve much more with weapons alone at the moment, the anti-Israel coalition is apparently very actively trying to reduce or cut off all external support for Israel. If that were to succeed, it would, by all appearances, mean Israel’s rapid destruction. Various activists in Finland are also pushing for this.
I see a contradiction in your statement that the October 2023 attack was only possible because Israel did not consider Hamas a threat, and now you apparently believe that no one “realistically” poses a threat to Israel. Wasn’t this, in your opinion, precisely the mindset that enables the worst?
Hamas and other terrorist organizations are a threat to Israelis, but they do not threaten Israel’s existence. Yes, they succeed in carrying out individual terrorist attacks.
Israel and Iran are geographically so far apart that a full-scale war between them is quite unlikely. And if Israel’s existence were truly threatened, they would probably use their nuclear weapons against the threat, caring no more about civilians than they do in Gaza.
Israel continues its purposeful occupation of the West Bank by establishing significantly more illegal settlements. Israel has shown that no statements or international laws made so far have any meaning to the chosen people.
The emptying of Gaza has been justified by the threat of Hamas, but security concerns do not quite fit the occupation of the West Bank due to the moderation of Fatah’s policy.
An IDF spokesperson issued an announcement like that, saying it’s time to play Minesweeper again and that the population should, for their own well-being, move to safer areas. I can’t really think of any other choice of words, but it’s quite dystopian how the residents of the area are constantly moved from one place to another, and probably despite that, the IDF still bombs both areas. It then remains to be seen what happens to those more permanent forced displacement plans, which were already a subject of speculation here over a year ago.
Israel has armed a criminal gang operating in Gaza, with the aim of making Palestinians fight among themselves. Hamas has publicly condemned the Abu Shabab group as traitors, and apparently assassinations have been carried out, so the goal has likely been achieved in that regard.
In Israel, this revelation has sparked strong criticism. Everyone knows what followed when Israel once supported Hamas.
The friendship between Trump and Netanyahu has always seemed artificial to me; both have supported each other for tactical reasons. This artificial friendship might be coming to an end. https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1932357907556794383
“According to Haaretz, during last night’s phone call, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu requested that U.S. President Donald J. Trump put an end to the ongoing nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, allowing Israel to take “necessary military action” against nuclear sites inside Iran. In response, President Trump is said to have told Netanyahu he would not be giving Israel the green light to strike Iranian nuclear facilities “in the near future” and asked that he stop publicly discussing the possibility of a military strike against Iran.”
I had to take another look at what’s happening with the Gaza operation. A new announcement about the troops’ advance came out a while ago from the IDF spokesperson. Apparently, someone had previously leaked that other situation map online, or what the actual source of the image might have been. It has not been confirmed by official sources.
#Urgent To all those present in the northern Gaza Strip, specifically in the neighborhoods of Al-Karamah, Abd al-Rahman, Al-Nahda, and Jabalia Camp in Blocks 975, 979, 980, 982, 983, and 1814 The IDF is operating with extreme force in the areas where you are located to destroy the capabilities of terrorist organizations. The IDF will respond firmly to every terrorist operation or rocket launch. For your own safety, evacuate immediately south to known shelters in Gaza City. Returning to combat zones poses a danger to your lives.
(1) President Trump hosts a Camp David meeting on Iran with military leaders present.
(2) After, President Trump speaks with Israel’s prime minister, who convenes a security cabinet session afterwards.
(3) UKMTO issues a maritime warning of increased tensions for Strait of Hormuz, Persian Gulf, and Gulf of Oman.
(4) U.S. issuing an ordered evacuation of the American embassy in Iraq. Non-essential staff and their family members at embassies in Bahrain and Kuwait to evacuate as well.
(5) This week is the end of the 2 month deadline for a deal with Iran that President Trump laid down (although how hard or soft this deadline ever was remains unclear)
(6) IAEA BoG poised to pass a censure resolution finding Iran out of compliance with its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years this week. Iran preparing to retaliate. Snapback deadline looming in October.
These developments can mean many things but there are some noteworthy ones here worth keeping an eye on. There have been reports President Trump wants to give the talks some more time, while Netanyahu argues the Iranians are stalling. Yet President Trump’s tone towards the talks has turned downcast compared with his previous optimism. And things can quickly change after the next negotiating session. The Iranians will try their best to prevent the talks from collapsing because it is their lifeline.
Some potential scenarios: Israel and/or the U.S. could also aim for a limited strike on Iran’s nuclear program to build a credible military threat to aid further talks. There could of course be a much larger strike being considered.
Iran may also be eyeing targeting the U.S. in the region to pressure them in the talks, especially after IAEA action this week, and U.S. and allied intelligence may be picking up these signals.
One can never be certain, but this style of communication can be interpreted, for example, as preparation for a ‘media space’. Public support is being shown, and that we are no longer holding back. After a couple of months, we haven’t heard of any deal from the negotiations, other than Iran boasting that enrichment will continue and the USA saying that it will not continue up to a nuclear weapon.
Based on previous indications, Israel will indeed win this contest. We’ll see.
The IDF is operating with extreme force in the areas where you are located to destroy the capabilities of terrorist organizations.
