Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Opinion: Our World: The Israeli Solution - Caroline Glick

The two-state solution is no longer viable, concludes the Israeli right. But their "future vision" is the polar opposite of the one-state solution....

The Jerusalem Post, February 2, 2009 - ....These reassessments have led three leading conservative thinkers - former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton, Middle East Forum president Daniel Pipes, and Efraim Inbar, director of Bar-Ilan University's Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies - to all publish articles over the past month rejecting the two-state solution.

Bolton, Pipes and Inbar not only agree that the two-state paradigm has failed, they also agree on what must be done now to "solve" the Palestinian conflict. [Notice the framing -- it is no longer even an "Israeli-Palestinian conflict. - Ed.] In their view the failed "two-state solution" should be replaced with what Bolton refers to as the "three-state solution." All three analysts begin their analyses with the assertion that Israel is uninterested in controlling Gaza, Judea and Samaria. Since the Palestinians have shown they cannot be trusted with sovereignty, the three argue that the best thing to do is to return the situation to what it was from 1949 to 1967: Egypt should reassert its control over Gaza and Jordan should reassert its control over Judea and Samaria....

If the current situation is preferable to the "three-state solution" and if the current situation itself is unsustainable, the question again arises, what should be done? What new policy paradigm should replace the failed two-state solution?

The best way to move forward is to reject the calls for a solution and concentrate instead on stabilization. With rockets and mortars launched from Gaza continuing to pummel the South despite Operation Cast Lead, and with the international community's refusal to enforce UN Security Council resolutions barring Iran from exporting weapons, it is clear that Gaza will remain an Iranian-sponsored, Hamas-controlled area for as long as Hamas retains control over the international border with Egypt.

So Israel must reassert control over the border.

It is also clear that Hamas and its terrorist partners in Fatah and Islamic Jihad will continue to target the South for as long as they can.

So Israel needs to establish a security zone inside of Gaza wide enough to remove the South from rocket and mortar range....

As for Judea and Samaria, Israel should continue its military control over the areas in order to ensure its national security. It should also apply its law to the areas of Judea and Samaria that are within the domestic consensus. These areas include the Etzion, Adumim, Adam, Ofra and Ariel settlement blocs and the Jordan Valley.

Israel should end its support for the PLO-Fatah-led PA, and support the empowerment of non-jihadist elements of Palestinian society to lead a new autonomous authority in the areas. These new leaders, who may be the traditional leaders of local clans, should be encouraged to either integrate within Israel or seek civil confederation with Jordan....

1 comment:

potomac.house said...

This is a terrible suggestion! Without a long range objective, we are flying blind. "Stabilizing the situation" will only give more time for everything to get worse. The 2-state solution has failed. It is time to move to a one-state solution. Yes, it will be very difficult to achieve but it is the only solution that could hold up over the long-term. What would a one-state solution look like? Think of the United States of Palestine with 3 states: Israel, Gaza and the West Bank and Jerusalem the capital of the USP. Yes, all the rest of the issues have to be resolved fairly: refugee return, Jewish homeland, water, security, etc. But this is the only framework that can accommodate the needs and desires of everyone. The only answer is for Palestinians and Israelis to learn to live together peacefully. If they share a county, they at least will have the organization to fight things out peacefully.