264
What went wrong in Israel? A genocide scholar examines ‘what Zionism became’
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2026
264 points (100.0% liked)
World News
55775 readers
1385 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Egypt cannot possibly govern the West Bank, it is too far from the Egyptian heartland and it is also physically separated from the rest of country. Egypt has already tried governing Gaza before and that went horribly wrong.
Jordan and the West Bank are physically connected and they're the same culturally, therefore it makes sense for them to be together in that sense, but with that being said, Jordan also tried to rule the West Bank before and that went pretty poorly.
The biggest hurdle here is why would Egypt or Jordan participate? What would they get out of it. They would be getting a big headache in exchange for a lot of strategic land (Egypt giving the Sinai also means giving up one side of the Suez Canal and that's a big no no in geopolitics). Not to mention, that the West Bank already has well over 700,000 settlers. Even if we exclude East Jerusalem, that's still over 500k settlers. That's a loooot of people, and they're also some of most unhinged zealots you'll find anywhere in the world. That's even bigger headache than the Palestinians that they'll have to take on. I just don't see this as a realistic proposal.
Egypt would be giving up some up the Sinai not all of it. The US governs Alaska and Hawaii despite not being physically connected. Egypt will get peace at its borders. Also, fighting in Gaza and the West Bank could push Palestinian refugees into Egypt.
It's not the same. The US has unrestricted air and ocean access to both Alaska and Hawaii, Egypt won't have that. Not to mention, Egypt gains nothing from this deal. The Sinai is more strategically important to them
As part of the deal, Egypt could be given permission to access its new land through a specific land corridor. Egypt would gain peace on its borders. Continual fighting between Israel and Palestinian could cause a flood of migrants into Egypt.
Egypt already has peace with Israel and they're already blocking any potential wave of Palestinian migrants and have been for decades now. Egypt doesn't benefit from such a deal
They will have to go somewhere. Under my proposal they will stay in the West Bank, but it will be controlled by Egypt. There will be no humanitarian crisis.
You're missing the point. Your proposal makes zero sense for any of the parties involved. Your reasoning is not sound, your claimed benefits aren't real, and the compromise is incoherent.
It makes zero sense for Egypt to give the Sinai. That's very strategic land that keeps the Suez Canal firmly in Egyptian control while also acting as a buffer between Israel/Palestine and the Egyptian heartland.
It makes zero sense for Israel to over the Sinai as it's just a massive patch of desert. They already controlled it once before and they gave it up in exchange for recognition. That's how worthless it was to Israel. The West Bank, unlike the Sinai is actually habitable, fertile land that solves one Israel's biggest geopolitical problems, which is that the current core of the Israeli heartland is too thin and exposed.
It makes zero sense for the Palestinians in the West Bank to be ruled by Egypt which is not similar to them culturally nor is it connected to them physically. They'll just end up being a neglected after thought by the government in Cairo.
Your proposal does not answer the question of what will happen to the 700k+ settlers in the West Bank, or how any of the parties would feel about them leaving/staying. It doesn't answer how the relocation of the 2 million Gazans is going to go. It doesn't answer how the West Bank is going to absorb the 2 million Gazans, when the West Bank only has a population of 2.5 million itself, meaning that the population would literally double.
Like it's just a flawed proposal all around. I'm not sure why you're doubling down on it when you could easily come up with a better proposal.
Egypt is not giving up the entire Sinai, only a part of it.
Israel can build desalination plants. The Sinai being a desert is a selling point because Egypt will does not have the technology to develop it. In exchange for desert, Egypt will be given fertile land.
It's preferable for Palestinians to live under Egypt than under Israel.
The Palestinians in the West Bank will stay. The West Bank will be enlarged by land equivalent to Gaza since that will go to Israel. The Palestinians in Gaza will move there.