Some people are saying that since Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are a non-starter, the settlements are continuing, and the international community seems to be unable to jump-start the peace process (President Obama’s preoccupied with the elections, and the Europeans with the fate of the Euro-zone), the two-state solution is dead and we–who believe in the necessity of an end to the occupation and a non-violent political resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict–should begin to explore alternative solutions: Like a Palestinian state in the West Bank with provisional borders, a unilateral Israeli “convergence” (disengagement), a confederation of Israel-Palestine-Jordan, or a bi-national one state solution.
Anyone who doubts the importance of the international community in the achievement of progress, or who challenges the Palestinian application for membership in the UN, would do well to recall that the basis for the legitimacy of the State of Israel was UNGA Resolution 181, otherwise known as the Partition Plan. That served as the basis for Ben-Gurion’s declaration of the independent State of Israel. Thus the international community played a key role in the establishment of the state.
The Partition Plan called for the establishment of a Jewish and an Arab state in place of the British Mandate. The State of Israel was established, fulfilling one half of the call, and unfortunately for all of us, the Arab state was not established. There are many reasons why the Palestinians and the Arab world were incapable of accepting the idea that only 45% of the land was to become an Arab state in 1947. Today there are senior Palestinians who regret this, and explain why they were incapable of doing it at the time.
What is happening now, still, is an attempt by the Palestinians, the Arab World and the international community, to belatedly realize the fulfillment of the second half of the Partition Plan, naming the aforementioned “Arab state” as the Palestinian state, under much worse conditions – 78% of the land for the Jewish state (Israel), and only 22% of the land for the Arab state (Palestine), of course with mutually agreed upon land swaps.
What Hashomer Hatzair, Meretz, Peace Now and all of the mainstream of the Israeli peace movement is saying today, is that the establishment of that Palestinian state is in the best interests of Israel, to ensure it’s future, and yes also, a deserved right of the Palestinian people – otherwise known as the mutual right to self-determination.
As for alternative proposals like that of Yossi Alpher and others, of a convergence or a partial agreement, as promoted by Shaul Mofaz who is running for the leadership of Kadima against Tzipi Livni — we had a discussion in the Political Committee of the Israeli Peace NGO Forum two weeks ago (an umbrella for 60 mainstream peace and human rights organizations), started by the chair of the committee Prof. Dan Jacobson, about whether we, as the Zionist peace movement should begin to raise alternatives to the 2 state solution. Everyone who spoke said, in one manner or another, that as long as the official position of the Palestinian leadership and the international community is in favor of a two-state solution, we of all people should not be the ones to in any way legitimize alternatives.
If the day comes when the continuation of Israeli settlement activity and the lack of initiative on the part of the international community towards helping to resolve the problem leads the Palestinian leadership to change their position, and to come out in favor of a bi-national one man/woman one vote solution, we will have to seek alternatives. That day may be drawing near, but it has not yet arrived; we still have a window of opportunity – particularly as long as the Arab Peace Initiative remains on the table, in which the whole Arab and Moslem world declared that it would accept the State of Israel and normalize relations with it in exchange for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state based on the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem (an offer that may yet be removed), and if President Obama will be reelected to a second term.
We could always get Gingrich and his “invented Palestinian people”. Romney is not much better.
Hillel Schenker
Co-Editor
PO Box 19839, Jerusalem
972-2-6282115
972-(0)528-321830
Hillel,
The problem with your approach to this issue is that it assumes the legitimacy of Abbas/PLO as the leaders of the Palestinians. A lot of Palestinians are questioning that. To accept only 22% of the land, demilitarized and a whole bunch of other limitations on their “State”, the Palestinians would have to have a leadership that had true legitimacy among its own people.
Given that we liberal Zionists like Abbas, we feel like we have a partner, doesn’t confer upon him credibility or authenticity as a leader of his own people.