Page 3 - Kol Bogrei Habonim - February 14

ONE STATE -
A CREDIBLE ALTERNATIVE
DANIEL GAVRON, MOTZA ILLIT
D states. True, it would be less satisfactory for the
uring most of history, human beings
have existed without federations and
confederations. For that matter, how
long has the nation-state been around? And we
haven’t even mentioned democracy. A little
ingenuity should enable us to come up with a new
version of sovereignty that would enable Jews and
Arabs — and Druze, Circassians, Christians,
Samaritans and others — to live side by side in
peace and harmony in the small territory between
the Mediterranean and the River Jordan.
Before we get to that though, it should be noted
that a two-state solution is a perfectly reasonable
possibility—and it wouldn’t need nine months of
negotiations: nine hours should be more than
enough. The outline is available from the
multitude of documents and protocols that already
exist. It will involve an amended version of the
1967 borders, according to the “Clinton
parameters,” with “settlement blocks” and “land
swaps” to leave a majority of the Jewish West
Bank settlers in Israel, Jerusalem would be a
“shared capital,” with an “international”
administration for the Temple Mount/Noble
Sanctuary. Up to 100,000 Palestinian refugees
would return to the Palestinian state; a “symbolic”
number would return to Israel; the remainder
would be compensated and re-settled.
The above outline is admittedly complicated to
implement on the ground, but it is a solution with
which all the parties could live. It is fair—or at
least not too unfair—logical, pragmatic, and
sensible. It would be a marvellous outcome for
Israel, consolidating its position in the region,
based on eventual agreements with all the Arab
states and acceptance by the non-Arab Muslim
3
Palestinians, but a great deal better than what they
near future.
have at present or can realistically expect in the
There is just one problem: it isn’t going to happen.
It isn’t going to happen because there is no
conceivable Israeli government that will accept
it—let alone implement it—and no conceivable
Palestinian leadership could possibly accept less.
One can only admire the patience and tenacity of
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry but, unless he
is backed by an administration and congress ready
to exert the necessary pressure on Israel, he cannot
succeed. Can anyone honestly predict that, even if
President Barack Obama or his successor were
prepared to exert such pressure, he or she would
have the requisite backing of the Senate and the
House of Representatives?
So, bearing in mind that the two-state solution is
not going to come about, why is there this
compulsion to rubbish a one-state solution? The
dedicated two-state advocates propose Israel and
Palestine living side-by-side, cooperating on
security, the environment, water, tourism, finance,
economics, and labour. The more daring among
them even talk about federation or confederation,
possibly including the Kingdom of Jordan.
Is their model really so different from one state
with religious, cultural, and educational autonomy
for its various communities?
Many two-state advocates are afraid that the idea
of a single state will weaken the resolve to
establish two states. In fact there are strong
indications that putting it on the table serves as a