Israeli/Palestinian resolution must be based on mutual sovereignty

As the Gaza war enters its fourth month, it’s become abundantly clear that Israel’s massive military response and the assassinations campaign have failed to defeat Hamas or to end the Israel Palestine conflict. The killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians and the destruction of the infrastructure in Gaza have not forced Hamas to surrender or concede defeat.

Hamas’ governing structure over Gaza might be dismantled because of the Israeli offensive, but the miserable realities on the ground that gave rise to Hamas in the first place will likely beget another militant group if the current conditions prevail.

Although the Palestinians and Israelis will have the right to select their own governments in the post-Gaza world, the current leaders of Hamas, the Netanyahu government, and the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah cannot be part of the solution.

Dozens of pronouncements have been made by U.S. government officials, including the president and the secretary of state, about the need for a two-state solution as the only way forward once the Gaza war ends. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has also stated that Palestinians should not be displaced out of Gaza and that the Israeli military and political control cannot be reimposed on Gaza. Sadly, much of this rhetoric is just that, especially as the Netanyahu right-wing government opposes any form of a Palestinian state.

One possible path to resolve this eight-decade conflict is through a combined political and economic paradigm. But before that happens, the Gaza war must come to a halt, and the Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners, including Marwan Barghouti, must be released.

The political path

Whether two states, one state, or a confederated state, a workable political solution must be based on the principle of sovereignty for both peoples. This means that two sovereign peoples live between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea in Palestine/Israel with a legitimate right to life, freedom, personal and collective security, and economic and cultural well-being.

The two-state paradigm has been the aspirational magic bullet for solving the conflict for over half a century. The “State of Palestine” has been recognized by 72% of the UN member states, including two permanent members of the UN Security Council, but not the United States.

How can the United States retain its credibility in the region without recognizing the State of Palestine as most of the United Nations members have done?

Successive Israeli governments over the years, including the current Netanyahu government, have rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza. The most that some Israeli leaders, including the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, have accepted was a rump state or a political entity based on a flimsy concept of sovereignty.

In the past decade, several American academics have rejected the two-state paradigm. They have argued that the concept should be shifted to people’s sovereignty with a focus on individual political, human and civil rights, equality under the law, economic opportunity, freedom of movement, and cultural identity.

The two-state concept is no longer tenable. Nearly 700,000 settlers now reside in the West Bank. Israel controls most facets of the West Bank economy and commerce, regulates the movement of Palestinians in and out of the Occupied Territories, and effectively controls the power grid and the water systems in the territories, including Gaza.

The Biden administration should begin to think seriously about an alternative political arrangement that guarantees political sovereignty equally for Israelis and Palestinians. To avoid the charge of hypocrisy, Washington should realize that the two-state useless rhetoric is no substitute for a true policy toward Palestine.

The economic path

No political arrangement will succeed without massive economic development projects that will benefit, and be run by, the two peoples. As I wrote in 1988, following field research in Gaza, “(If) the Israelis and the Palestinians hope to live in the Middle East peacefully and to enjoy their legitimate political rights as individuals and as political communities, they must be willing to recognize each other’s reality, suffering, dignity, and place in the sun. After much struggle, the Jews were able to escape their shtetels and live in freedom; it’s time for the Palestinians to do the same.”