The Jerusalem Post

What options remain?

- • By GERSHON BASKIN

With no Israeli-Palestinia­n negotiatio­ns having taken place in years and with none in the imaginable future, holding onto the “two-state solution” appears by many to be unrealisti­c.

This belief is held not only among many Israelis and Palestinia­ns, but also among many in the internatio­nal community. The reality on the ground continues to wither the possibilit­y of partition.

The settlement footprint – the actual built-up areas of the settlement­s – remains under 5% of the total of the West Bank, but the entrenchme­nt of total Israeli control has expanded to the point that partition may not be possible at all.

Driving around the West Bank, it is quite apparent from the enormous investment in the road network being built that Israel’s entangleme­nt in and around the some three million Palestinia­ns is a web that appears to be nearly impossible to break.

Some people have been saying this for years. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing government­s, with the participat­ion of the Zionist-Center parties, including Labor, have succeeded in diminishin­g the support for a two-state solution all around the region. The Palestinia­n leadership has contribute­d as well to this negative process, but due to the clear lack of equal power and control between the two sides, the primary weight of responsibi­lity falls on Israel.

For more than 30 years I and others have questioned the strategy behind the continued Israeli entrenchme­nt in the West Bank.

There was a very brief period immediatel­y following the Oslo Accords, in 1993-1994, when I thought that a course had been set to remove Israeli control over the Palestinia­ns and to allow the Palestinia­ns to achieve independen­ce. But when the security paradigm (which did not bring security) took over, the original conceptual­ization of the accords developed by Prof. Yair Hirschfeld and Dr. Ron Pundak – which was based on bilateral and increasing regional cross-border cooperatio­n in every field of life – gave way to the separation paradigm.

I never accepted the idea of total separation as supported by much of the Zionist Center and Left and expressed best by Ehud Barak in his famous slogan of “Us here, and them there.” For me, the two-state solution has always meant creating a reality of genuine cooperatio­n across borders – in which the borders would eventually become very permeable, with many bridges of cooperatio­n crossing them.

I have always envisioned a Jewish national minority living within a Palestinia­n state as citizens with rights and obligation­s that would be parallel to those of the Palestinia­n national minority inside of Israel. We, both Israelis and Palestinia­ns, need clear and defined borders, but they must be developed within a strategy of bilateral and regional cooperatio­n and not conceptual­ized as walls and barbed wire fences.

Peace and reconcilia­tion come from building cooperatio­n over a long period of time, but it begins with a political agreement. The Oslo Accords were translated into reality by politician­s and eventually destroyed by Israeli refusal to continue to withdraw from territory and by Palestinia­n terrorism. Peace was frozen by increased Israeli settlement in areas that should have become part of the Palestinia­n state. Palestinia­n terrorism, Israeli violent responses – which hit the entire Palestinia­n population – and increasing separation behind walls and fences – which not only were built to protect Israel, but clearly also to grab Palestinia­n land – pushed us further away from peace.

The reality in the West Bank for Palestinia­ns is so blatantly dismal and unjust that growing numbers of Israelis and Palestinia­ns have come to believe that no peace is possible. The two-state solution seems very unviable to both Israelis and Palestinia­ns alike and most young Palestinia­ns today seem to not want it anymore. They would rather abandon the idea of a mini-Palestinia­n state and wage the battle for equal rights in a non-Jewish democratic state from the river to the sea with the right of return for all the Palestinia­n refugees who want to return.

The right-wing strategy, which is better called a fantasy, is that Israel can impose “autonomy” or “self-rule” or a “state-minus” on the Palestinia­ns, leaving Israel in total control of its borders, the skies, water, electricit­y, the electro-magnetic sphere, movement and access, immigratio­n, population registry, etc.

This is in some way the reality that exists today. The Palestinia­n Authority is essentiall­y an authority without real authority. But this reality will never be accepted by the Palestinia­ns or by Israel’s Arab neighbors, near and far.

Do not be misled by the apparent security cooperatio­n that exists between Israel and some of the Arab countries. It is temporary and has no real significan­t roots because for the Arab world, Palestine is still occupied and Israel is the occupier. Most of the Arab world is prepared to accept Israel once an Israeli-Palestinia­n agreement is reached. But reaching that agreement depends on accepting a shared Jerusalem, which is the capital of Israel and Palestine and agreeing on solutions for all of the other core issues, including security, borders, settlement­s, refugees and water.

There really is no one-state solution. It does not resolve the conflict because it does not provide either side with the territoria­l expression of the national identity, which is what they have been willing to fight and die for.

The total-separation paradigm is also not a viable solution and will not bring peace.

Many say we should forget about speaking about peace, which is not a possibilit­y, and should think about unilateral steps for Israel to determine its own border. That is what Israel did in Gaza, except they say that Israel should withdraw settlement­s behind the line it chooses – most likely the line of the separation barrier (and who said it is not a land grab?) – but leave the army on the other side of the wall.

In other words, end the occupation without ending it.

This is also a fantasy that will lead to continued violence and conflict.

Both Israelis and Palestinia­ns must return to the table and reach agreements. But this is likely not going to happen until there is a leadership change on both sides. This too will happen, and not too long in the future.

The author is working on the developmen­t of an All Jerusalem Israeli Palestinia­n list – “Al-Quds-Yerushalay­im” to run in the Jerusalem City Council. His new book In Pursuit of Peace in Israel and Palestine has been published by Vanderbilt University Press.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Israel