Israel/Palestine Issue: Where are ex-Muslims standing?

Ex-Muslims encompass diverse perspectives, and individual opinions are respected. However, a prevailing viewpoint among ex-Muslims is as follows:

The Initial Issue: Recognition of Israel

When colonial powers relinquished control over their colonies, they often fragmented larger colonies (which had previously existed as unified states before being colonized) into smaller countries based on religious, racial, or linguistic divisions. This was frequently done without the consent of the ENTIRE local population.

For instance, the British colonial power did not seek the consent of the entire population of the Indian subcontinent (where Hindus constituted the majority) when creating Pakistan. This decision resulted in immense suffering, displacement, and refugees. The people of united India suffered similarly to the Palestinians.

If Palestinians acknowledge Pakistan's right to exist as a country, they should, by the same logic, recognize Israel's right to exist as well.

The real issue is, accepting the UN resolution. Israel has a right to exist, and the Palestinian people have to accept it. 

Not 100% JUSTICE was done in the past. Muslims changed demographies of many countries by force.

For instance, during the colonial era, Iran annexed the Armenian region of Nagorno-Karabakh, changing its demographics and integrating it into Azerbaijan. Despite Armenians still being the majority in Nagorno-Karabakh, the colonial powers' actions ultimately made it part of Azerbaijan. Palestinians, for their part, officially recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as Azerbaijani territory due to the UN resolution.

Consider Turkey's annexation of Western Armenia, which it absorbed into what is now part of Anatolia. Today, very few Armenians remain in the region. Yet, Palestinians do not challenge this demographic change or Turkey's claim to the area and accepted the UN resolution.

Thus, if Palestinians do not acknowledge Israel's right to exist, these situations reveal a double standard.

Moreover, Palestinians currently seek refuge from Israeli bombardment under the same UN's protection. To be consistent, they would first need to reject the UN and its support. Why, then, this double standard?

Moreover, another issue should also be clear, there should exist no Iran or Taliban type Muslim Palestinian State under the influence of Hamas, where non-Muslims have to live under fear and have no equal rights to preach their religion and convert people to their religion and to criticize Islam. Where LGBT members are thrown down from high buildings while they also don't have any rights to exist. Where ex-Muslims are lynched and killed brutally for their crime of leaving Islam. Why should we ever support such oppressive Islamic states? Why should we not criticize the double standards of Muslims where they are quick to demand equal rights to preach Islam and convert people to Islam in non-Muslim countries, but are not ready to give us the same human rights?

Muslims want to talk about Islamophobia and invasion by Jews, then let us also talk about double standards and homophobia and Murtadphobia (i.e. Apostatephobia) and Kafirophobia of Muslims.

The Secondary Issue: Illegal Israeli Settlements:

The second issue revolves around Israeli illegal settlements, coupled with a mindset among some Israelis that claims a birthright to the entire land based on a divine promise for Greater Israel. Unfortunately, this issue receives less attention due to the overarching problem of Palestinian non-recognition and support for Hamas and its suicide bombings and Islamic Jihad.

Radical Jews believe that their God promised them the entire "Greater Israel", thus it is their birthright to capture the whole of Palestine. The illegal settlements are only a part of it, while their claim goes beyond this (i.e. to the formation of the Greater Israel). They cite the history of Jews (which happened thousands of years ago) and use it as an argument for illegal settlements and expulsion of Palestinians from their land. Religious Jews will not settle on the present borders of Israel, but they will go for Greater Israel, as it is their birthright in their opinion. At the moment, the UN does not recognize this birthright of Jews for Greater Israel (or even for illegal settlements) in the name of thousands of old history of Jews in this land. 

On the other hand, radical Muslims also consider the entire land as their birthright, while their Allah promised them the entire world. Their opinion is they have a birthright to attack any land in the world, capture it, and impose Islamic Sharia there. 

The Full Solution:

Despite Israel's heavy influence, no Western country officially endorses illegal settlements. Significant opposition exists, even in the USA.

Even within Israel, there are secularists who seek a peaceful solution. Unfortunately, suicide bombing in the name of Islamic Jihad of Hamas weakened these secular forces and they started losing their popularity in Israel. Consequently, extremist Zionist forces gained popularity in Israel and seized power.

We are not living in a 100% perfect world. Justice is not immediately served and positive changes take time (sometimes decades or centuries) to develop. But we can learn a lesson from the peaceful resistance in South Africa. This peaceful resistance took decades, but in the end, it gave time to the remaining world to get united against the illegal settlements.  

Palestinians and Hamas are urged to adopt a similar approach. Only peaceful resistance unites the world against illegal Israeli settlements and garners support for the Palestinian cause. It may take some time, but this is the only solution. 

Western countries deserve credit here that they didn't recognise illegal settlements, although Israel has a lot of influence there. But, if Hamas keep on attacking instead, then only EXTREMIST powers will gain popularity and the secularist forces will become weaker and weaker. We have already seen how the Trump administration started recognising illegal settlements in favour of Israel. 

The suggested steps are clear:

1. Palestinians (at least their majority) must acknowledge Israel's right to exist.

2. Secondly, Hamas should be eliminated (or otherwise, Hamas agrees to give up its stance to expel all Jews and recognise Israel's right to exist). 

3. Protest illegal Israeli settlements, initiate boycotts, impose sanctions (like it happened in the case of apartheid South Africa), and hope for a shift in power toward secular Israelis advocating a peaceful solution.

4. Even a peaceful resistance may take a longer time, but it can produce the best results in today's world as we saw in the case of South Africa. 

Pro Hamas Argument: International law gives legitimacy to violent resistance against Israel:

A Palestinian hardliner wrote:

I would argue that the violence perpetrated by the South African resistance was a big part of the reason that the South African government was willing to negotiate. If there had been no violence at all, Nelson Mandela likely would've died of old age in prison.

Response: 

Peaceful resistance under the first Intifada indeed played a huge role in pressurizing Israel and bringing it to Oslo Accord finally.

Another difference is, the South African Resistance Movement (both peaceful and violent) got 100% International legitimacy.

But in case of Palestine/Israel issue, only the peaceful resistance got legitimacy, while the violent resistance by Hamas has not got full legitimacy as it does not recognize Israel's right to exist. This violent Hamas resistance is not about defending a land for Palestinians according to Internationally recognized borders, but it is about killing and expelling all Israelis from Israel. 

Actually, this violent Hamas resistance gives only Israeli counteroffensive legitimacy. 

Pro Israel Argument: Israeli settlements are legal as Jordan gave up this land

An Israeli hardliner wrote:

Prior to 1967 the West Bank was a Jordan territory and all West Bank residents had Jordanian passports. After 67 war, Jordan gave up claim to this land. Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel which did not include giving back the West Bank. Who should Israel give the West Bank to?

Response: 

Israel should give it back to people who are living in the West Bank, as they never gave their land to Israel.

Once again, the UNO had already approved that piece of land as Palestine (separate from Jordan) in 1948 along with Israel. It does not matter if they still used Jordanian passport or not. It is not a business of Israel which passport they used.

Another person wrote:

Palestinians and Israel should solve this issue mutually with negotiations. The rest of the world should keep out of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian people, so that they can come up with a peace solution that works for them. In the case of South Africa too, the world didn't impose anything upon them. No, they all stepped back and allowed South Africans to work it out for themselves.

Response: 

This is never going to work. Israel is only then going to BLACKMAIL the weaker party (i.e. Palestinians) into surrendering more and more of their land for illegal settlements. The only justified solution is possible when the International community steps in and pressurize Israel to accept the International borders (only after Hamas accepts the right of Israel to exist).

In the case of South Africa, the negotiations between them were not on core primary issues, but on secondary issues. Both of them already accepted that apartheid government and system should end.

In the Israel/Palestine situation, the primary issue is the illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, which should not be up for negotiation.

Yes, negotiations can be done on secondary issues like how to hand it over to Palestine in steps.