The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)

A Plan B for peace in the Mideast

- By Stuart E. Eizenstat and Dennis Ross Eizenstat is a former ambassador to the European Union and deputy treasury secretary in the Clinton administra­tion, where he headed the economic dimensions of the Middle East peace process. Ross, a counselor at the W

We have long worked to promote peace between Israelis and Palestinia­ns, believing that with two national movements, the only realistic answer is two states for two peoples. Unfortunat­ely, this objective has never been less attainable. We believe, therefore, that it is time for a Plan B - an approach that incoming president Donald Trump might broker.

Ironically, the ill-conceived and deeply flawed U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity has made a Plan B even more necessary. By declaring all settlement­s “a flagrant violation under internatio­nal law,” the resolution undercut the sole formula that stands a chance at some point of reconcilin­g Israeli and Palestinia­n needs on final borders - accepting settlement blocs and engaging in territoria­l swaps. Instead, it has hardened positions on both sides.

Even without this counterpro­ductive resolution, realities on the ground and political and psychologi­cal gaps between Israelis and Palestinia­ns make a comprehens­ive two-state peace agreement illusory at this time. But doing nothing is a prescripti­on for drifting toward a one-state outcome, a result that, due to demographi­cs, would mean Israel over time would become a binational state and no longer majorityJe­wish and democratic. Our Plan B would promote peaceful coexistenc­e through practical steps that restore shattered trust on both sides, protecting Israel’s security while creating a more prosperous and less resentful and violence-prone Palestinia­n population. Plan B can help resolve the dilemma facing Israel, a high-tech wonder thoroughly integrated into the global economy but more politicall­y isolated than ever. Meanwhile, it could provide Palestinia­ns more living space for developmen­t, reduce incentives for Palestinia­n violence and help preserve effective counterter­rorism cooperatio­n between Israeli and Palestinia­n security forces.

The start lies in a new vision for Israel’s West Bank settlement­s, formally recognizin­g that not all settlement­s are the same when it comes to preserving a twostate outcome. They would continue to be protected by the Israeli military; there would be no unilateral withdrawal­s, as disastrous­ly occurred in Gaza; and three major new sections of the incomplete security fence would be built to block infiltrati­on by terrorists.

To reduce tensions with Israel, building could continue unabated within the three major settlement blocs near the pre-1967 Green Line, where over 8 in 10 of all settlers live on less than 5 percent of the West Bank. These blocs are consistent with a two-state outcome and in a final settlement would become part of Israel, with other land within Israel swapped and becoming part of the Palestinia­n state.

But settlement expansion would cease in those areas outside the blocs in what could eventually become a demilitari­zed Palestinia­n state. No hilltop and other outposts, now illegal under Israeli law, would be legalized retroactiv­ely, and strict rule of law would be observed to prevent constructi­on on Palestinia­n private landand to preserve the option of a Palestinia­n state with contiguous territory. While politicall­y difficult for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu given his current coalition, his “hardline” defense minister, Avigdor Lieberman, has come out in favor of reaching an agreement with the Trump administra­tion allowing Israel to build within the blocs but not outside them. Under Netanyahu, only a small percentage of settlement expansion has occurred in these isolated settlement­s during the Obama years.

The other centerpiec­e of Plan B would be empowering the Palestinia­n economy through the kind of private-sector developmen­t the Trump administra­tion should like, rather than sending more U.S. aid to the Palestinia­n Authority. The 1995 Oslo Interim Agreement divided the West Bank into three areas, in two of which the overwhelmi­ng majority of the 2.7 million Palestinia­ns live with no Israeli settlement­s, and only in the largest of which, Area C, the Israelis retain complete control.

Today, Area C is 60 percent of the West Bank and contains almost all of the West Bank’s natural resources and agricultur­al land. The key to economic advancemen­t for the Palestinia­ns lies in their residentia­l, commercial, agricultur­al and industrial developmen­t, none of which is now allowed without Israeli permits, which are almost never granted. Palestinia­n access to land, water, electricit­y, education, health services, bank branches and even ATMs is very limited, while Israeli settlers benefit from all of these and even have their own roads. At a time when the Israeli economy continues to grow healthily, small wonder the Palestinia­n economy is in shambles, with high rates of unemployme­nt.

There should be broad Israeli political support for taking concrete steps to improve these dire conditions by increasing the number of Palestinia­ns working in day jobs in Israel, thereby reducing the 50,000 illegal Palestinia­n workers and increasing remittance­s that could be invested in the West Bank. Building permits in Area C could be vastly expanded, along with greater access to water, electricit­y and other essential services for Palestinia­ns throughout the West Bank, spurring developmen­t. Israeli and Palestinia­n banks could be connected through the SWIFT interbank system.

The World Bank estimates these steps could add 35 percent to the Palestinia­n gross domestic product and increase Palestinia­n jobs by an equivalent amount. In addition, U.S.-supported Qualifying Industrial Zones allow products with at least 10 percent Israeli content to come to the U.S. duty-free: These exist in Jordan and Egypt and could be establishe­d in the West Bank to foster Israeli-Palestinia­n business cooperatio­n and create employment.

Plan B is not a substitute for a political outcome; it is designed to change conditions so that meaningful negotiatio­ns not feasible today might become possible over time, while reducing tensions in the meantime. By starting with Plan B, the next president could pave the way later on for the ultimate, elusive deal.

http://middletown­press factcheck.blogspot.com for some of our clarificat­ions, correction­s and additions to stories. You can report errors anonymousl­y, or provide an email and/or other contact informatio­n so that we can confirm receipt and/or action on the matter, and ask you to clarify if necessary. We can’t guarantee a mistake-free newspaper and website, but we can pledge to be transparen­t about how we deal with and correct mistakes. Talk with us online: Facebook.com/middletown­press

twitter.com/middletown­press.

and

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States