DOCSLIB.ORG

The End of a Two-State Settlement? WP Alternatives and Priorities for Settling the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The End of a Two-State Settlement? WP Alternatives and Priorities for Settling the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Introduction Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Comments The End of a Two-State Settlement? WP Alternatives and Priorities for Settling the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Muriel Asseburg and Jan Busse S On the occasion of their joint government consultations in February 2016, Prime Minis- ter Benjamin Netanyahu and Chancellor Angela Merkel stressed that this was not the time for making major progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, given the in- stability in the Middle East. However, merely adhering to a two-state settlement as a mantra without taking any concrete steps to implement it effectively reinforces the one-state reality under Israeli dominance. Ultimately, this will make settling the con- flict impossible. Popular support for a two-state solution is waning on both sides. While at present alternative one-state or confederate models have even slimmer chances of being realized, Germany and the EU should nevertheless explore the creative and con- structive aspects of these models, which would enable the two sides to maintain their national identities as well as realize their individual and collective rights. Their priority, however, should be to alter the cost-benefit calculation of the parties to the conflict, so as to generate the political will for bringing about a settlement at all. Since the 1947 UN partition resolution, Security Council in February 2011. They large parts of the international community comprise a territorial settlement on the as well as the most important representa- basis of the 1967 borders, with agreed land tives of the parties to the conflict and their swaps; security arrangements that take into populations have come to adopt the two- account the needs of both sides; a solution state paradigm as their preferred option to the refugee issue that is both just and for lastingly settling the Israeli-Palestinian acceptable to the conflict parties and the conflict. The UN Security Council explicitly main host nations; and Jerusalem as the confirmed this approach in its Resolution capital of both states. The 1993 Israeli-Pales- 1397 of March 2002. tinian Declaration of Principles (or Oslo I) The cornerstones of a two-state settle- were a decisive step in that the Palestine ment have long been defined. US President Liberation Organisation (PLO) formally Barack Obama formulated them in his first recognized the State of Israel. In turn, Israel speech to the UN General Assembly in Sep- formally recognized not a Palestinian state, tember 2009; the E3 (Germany, France, but at least the PLO – and thus the Pales- United Kingdom) presented them to the UN tinians’ right to self-determination. Since Dr. Muriel Asseburg is a Senior Fellow in SWP’s Middle East and Africa Division. SWP Comments 24 Jan Busse is a lecturer and research fellow in the Department of International Politics and Conflict Research at the April 2016 Universität der Bundeswehr Munich. This SWP Comments is based in part on a chapter of their forthcoming book, Der Nahostkonflikt: Geschichte, Positionen, Perspektiven (C. H. Beck, August 2016). 1 then, Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and the fact that these were only meant to be unofficial talks have worked out detailed valid for a five-year interim period leading approaches for settling all areas of conflict. to an independent Palestinian State. The Yet today, the positions of the parties are Accords essentially limit the PA to self- far apart on all final-status issues – notice- adminsitration and keeping internal order ably further apart than in previous nego- in the largely unconnected Areas A and B tiations. Under international pressure, (enclaves totalling around 38 percent of Prime Minister Netanyahu did commit in the West Bank). Since the Second Intifada, principle to a two-state solution in a 2009 Israel has also reserved the right to carry speech at Bar Ilan University. In his 2015 out its own military operations and arrests electoral campaign, however, he explicitly in Area A. In Area C of the West Bank promised his voters that no Palestinian (around 62 percent), the Accords provide State would be created during his mandate. for extensive Israeli control over security; His government has yet to commit itself civil order; and construction as well as to a two-state approach; several ministers land and resource use (see also the map in reject it explicitly and demand Israeli sover- UNOCHA, Humanitarian Atlas 2015, http:// eignty over at least parts of the occupied www.ochaopt.org/documents/atlas_2015_ Palestinian territories. They put forward web.pdf, p. 4). At the same time, the Oslo not only security reasons, but also histori- Accords give Israel control over the Pales- cally and religiously based claims to “Judea tinian territories’ air space and sea and land and Samaria”. borders during the interim period. This is By contrast, the leadership in Ramallah still the case today. Israel only gave up has adhered to its quest for Palestinian control over the border between the Gaza statehood and the two-state approach. Strip and Egypt in mid-2007. Last but not Whenever Palestinian politicians have re- least, the Oslo Accords cemented Israel’s ferred to dissolving the Palestinian Author- dominance over Jerusalem and the Pales- ity (PA) and instead campaigning for equal tinian economy, especially trade, currency citizens’ rights in one state, should no and access to resources. progress be made in the peace process, this Moreover, throughout the Oslo process has merely been a threatening gesture. all Israeli governments – regardless of their Even so, like their Israeli counterparts, they political affiliations – forged ahead with no longer expect bilateral negotiations to building settlements in the Palestinian ter- lead to an acceptable conflict settlement. ritories. In summer 2005, the Sharon gov- Both conflict parties therefore rely first and ernment only evacuated the settlements in foremost on unilateral steps to realize their the resource-poor and ideologically insig- respective interests and only maintain a nificant Gaza Strip – which is not consid- minimum level of cooperation in managing ered part of the historic homeland of the the conflict. Jewish people. As a result, around 350,000 settlers now live in about 125 settlements among some 2.89 million Palestinians in Consolidation of a one-state reality the West Bank. In East Jerusalem, there are Meanwhile, a one-state reality has long taken some 200,000 settlers in 12 settlements. An shape in the area of the former British additional 10,000 settlers live in about 100 Mandate of Palestine (for details see SWP outposts. These are illegal under Israeli law Comments 21/2014). Israel might only have as well, but they are increasingly legalized annexed a part of the Palestinian territories retroactively, removed only temporarily, that it occupies – East Jerusalem – but it or else rebuilt on a different site after being also has extensive control over the rest. The removed. foundations for this situation were laid in A complex system has thus evolved be- the Oslo Accords of 1993 to 1995, despite tween the Mediterranean Sea and the river SWP Comments 24 April 2016 2 Jordan, under which inhabitants enjoy – or state settlement was rejected by a majority are deprived of – different rights depending (51 percent) of the Palestinians surveyed for on their citizenship, place of residence the first time. By December 2015, the rejec- (Israel, West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusa- tion rate had reached 54 percent. In addi- lem) and ethno-religious identity. Today, tion, two-thirds of those surveyed no longer the area controlled by Israel no longer has a thought the approach viable because of Jewish majority. Of the around 12.6 million settlement construction. The same trend people living there, around 6.2 million are has been shown among the Israeli popula- Jews and 6.3 million Arabs (Palestinians and tion. According to a poll by the Harry S. other Arab minorities). In the coming years, Truman Institute of the Hebrew University demographics are likely to change further in Jerusalem, support in Israel for a two- in favour of the Arab share, especially as state settlement stood at 51 percent in June large waves of Jewish immigration, as were 2015. A year earlier, it had been at 62 per- seen in the 1980s and 1990s, are not to be cent. Clearly, many Israelis share the assess- expected. ment that a two-state settlement is no longer realistic. They also do not expect it to bring about peace. Waning support In both societies, frustration over the A two-state settlement is becoming increas- failure of the peace process is also accom- ingly unlikely. The financial and political panied by seeing one’s own side (only) as a costs of implementing it rise with every victim, by demonizing the other side, by settlement unit needing to be demolished becoming increasingly radical and by en- and with every settler needing to be evacu- dorsing violence. This finds expression in ated and compensated. At the same time, concrete acts of violence, such as the (knife) the occupation and the construction of attacks by Palestinian perpetrators and the settlements are increasingly fragmenting so-called price-tag attacks by Israeli settlers the Palestinian territories – and thus the (attacks meant to signal that measures run- territory that would be available for a Pales- ning contrary to settler interests have a tinian state. Other factors contribute to the price). Around 30 Israelis and 150 Palestin- problem: the construction of settlement ians have died in the latest escalation of infrastructure and the separation barrier; violence from October 2015 to the end of the isolation of East Jerusalem and the March 2016. Even though this escalation – blockade of the Gaza Strip; and a complex described by many observers as a “third system of checkpoints, separated streets intifada” – has so far not assumed the shape and permits.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strateg Ic a Ssessmen T
    Strategic Assessment Assessment Strategic Volume 19 | No. 4 | January 2017 Volume 19 Volume The Prime Minister and “Smart Power”: The Role of the Israeli Prime Minister in the 21st Century Yair Lapid The Israeli-Palestinian Political Process: Back to the Process Approach | No. 4 No. Udi Dekel and Emma Petrack Who’s Afraid of BDS? Economic and Academic Boycotts and the Threat to Israel | January 2017 Amit Efrati Israel’s Warming Ties with Regional Powers: Is Turkey Next? Ari Heistein Hezbollah as an Army Yiftah S. Shapir The Modi Government’s Policy on Israel: The Rhetoric and Reality of De-hyphenation Vinay Kaura India-Israel Relations: Perceptions and Prospects Manoj Kumar The Trump Effect in Eastern Europe: Heightened Risks of NATO-Russia Miscalculations Sarah Fainberg Negotiating Global Nuclear Disarmament: Between “Fairness” and Strategic Realities Emily B. Landau and Ephraim Asculai Strategic ASSESSMENT Volume 19 | No. 4 | January 2017 Abstracts | 3 The Prime Minister and “Smart Power”: The Role of the Israeli Prime Minister in the 21st Century | 9 Yair Lapid The Israeli-Palestinian Political Process: Back to the Process Approach | 29 Udi Dekel and Emma Petrack Who’s Afraid of BDS? Economic and Academic Boycotts and the Threat to Israel | 43 Amit Efrati Israel’s Warming Ties with Regional Powers: Is Turkey Next? | 57 Ari Heistein Hezbollah as an Army | 67 Yiftah S. Shapir The Modi Government’s Policy on Israel: The Rhetoric and Reality of De-hyphenation | 79 Vinay Kaura India-Israel Relations: Perceptions and Prospects | 93 Manoj Kumar The Trump Effect in Eastern Europe: Heightened Risks of NATO-Russia Miscalculations | 103 Sarah Fainberg Negotiating Global Nuclear Disarmament: Between “Fairness” and Strategic Realities | 117 Emily B.
    [Show full text]
  • Ian S. Lustick
    MIDDLE EAST POLICY, VOL. XV, NO. 3, FALL 2008 ABANDONING THE IRON WALL: ISRAEL AND “THE MIDDLE EASTERN MUCK” Ian S. Lustick Dr. Lustick is the Bess W. Heyman Chair of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania and the author of Trapped in the War on Terror. ionists arrived in Palestine in the the question of whether Israel and Israelis 1880s, and within several de- can remain in the Middle East without cades the movement’s leadership becoming part of it. Zrealized it faced a terrible pre- At first, Zionist settlers, land buyers, dicament. To create a permanent Jewish propagandists and emissaries negotiating political presence in the Middle East, with the Great Powers sought to avoid the Zionism needed peace. But day-to-day intractable and demoralizing subject of experience and their own nationalist Arab opposition to Zionism. Publicly, ideology gave Zionist leaders no reason to movement representatives promulgated expect Muslim Middle Easterners, and false images of Arab acceptance of especially the inhabitants of Palestine, to Zionism or of Palestinian Arab opportuni- greet the building of the Jewish National ties to secure a better life thanks to the Home with anything but intransigent and creation of the Jewish National Home. violent opposition. The solution to this Privately, they recognized the unbridgeable predicament was the Iron Wall — the gulf between their image of the country’s systematic but calibrated use of force to future and the images and interests of the teach Arabs that Israel, the Jewish “state- overwhelming majority of its inhabitants.1 on-the-way,” was ineradicable, regardless With no solution of their own to the “Arab of whether it was perceived by them to be problem,” they demanded that Britain and just.
    [Show full text]
  • Jerusalem (Bus, Both Guides)
    Multi-perspective Pilgrimage to Israel & Palestine January 4-13, 2021 frederickuu.org/pilgrimage Covenant • Use “I” statements: speak your truth in ways that respect the truth of others. • Share the airtime: “take/make space” depending on your relative frequency of participation. • Incline toward “identifying in”: noticing what you agree with & appreciate about a person, place, or idea at least as much as what you disagree with (“identifying out”) to counterbalance our brain’s “negativity bias.” • Turn to curiosity & wonder if the going gets rough Covenant • Practice “both/and” thinking • Take new ideas for a test drive even if they don’t end up fitting you long term. • Ok to “agree to disagree,” but not to shame another person. • Ok to ask a clarifying question in the spirit of curiosity. • Practice consent culture: you always have the right to “pass.” (Listen to your emotions & your conscience.) Focal Themes Pilgrimage: “A tourist passes through a place, a pilgrim allows a place to pass through them.” Perspectives: • Israel means at least the modern State of Israel and the historic Land of Israel. • Palestine means both a historic region in the Middle East as well as modern state recognized by 138 of the 193 United Nations members. (The United States does not recognize the State of Palestine.) Peace: “The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all” (UU Sixth Principle). Day 3 (of 10): Geopolitical Jerusalem (Bus, Both Guides) • Discuss the rise of early Zionism in the 19th century as you head toward Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust Memorial (guided tour).
    [Show full text]
  • Schlaglicht Israel Nr. 09/14 Aktuelles Aus Israelischen Tageszeitungen
    Schlaglicht Israel Nr. 09/14 Aktuelles aus israelischen Tageszeitungen 29. April – 10. Mai 2014 1. Doppelte Kritik an price tag Attacken Zuhair Bahloul, JED 01.05.14 In den vergangenen zwei Wochen sind vermehrt Is Israel facing a war between religions? öffentliche Gebäude und Privatgeschäfte in “The Arab public − particularly the youth − israelisch-arabischen sowie palästinensischen suspiciously wonders on social media why law Ortschaften mit Graffiti beschmiert worden. Die enforcement’s resourcefulness and speed disappear sogenannten "price tag" Attacken werden von when it comes to Jewish terror. [...] It seems the israelischen Siedlern und extrem rechten Aktivisten Jewish public is unaware of the dangers of a ausgeführt, um Druck auf die Regierung auszuüben, negligent law enforcement authority. The ongoing keine weiteren Zugeständnisse im Westjordanland Palestinian frustration in light of the waves of racism zu machen. and indifference among law enforcement could bring Der anti-arabische Vandalismus inkludierte das about religious war. A few of the thousand or so Aufstechen von Autoreifen, das Einwerfen von people who demonstrated recently at Umm al-Fahm Fensterscheiben und das Sprühen von "Tod den Junction held signs that read, ‘The Israeli Arabern" auf ein drusisches Schaufenster. Eine government is abandoning us, we will defend our weitere Eskalation war der Vandalismus in der holy sites ourselves.’ A law-abiding Muslim or israelisch-arabischen Kleinstadt Fureidis am 29. Christian who sees Israeli law enforcement does April, bei dem Graffitis auf eine Moschee gesprüht nothing to bring justice to lawbreakers could decide wurden. Die Stadt liegt im Norden Israels und gilt als the best way to prevent harassment is to adopt nicht radikal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Labor Party and the Peace Camp
    The Labor Party and the Peace Camp By Uzi Baram In contemporary Israeli public discourse, the preoccupation with ideology has died down markedly, to the point that even releasing a political platform as part of elections campaigns has become superfluous. Politicians from across the political spectrum are focused on distinguishing themselves from other contenders by labeling themselves and their rivals as right, left and center, while floating around in the air are slogans such as “political left,” social left,” “soft right,” “new right,” and “mainstream right.” Yet what do “left” and “right” mean in Israel, and to what extent do these slogans as well as the political division in today’s Israel correlate with the political traditions of the various parties? Is the Labor Party the obvious and natural heir of The Workers Party of the Land of Israel (Mapai)? Did the historical Mapai under the stewardship of Ben Gurion view itself as a left-wing party? Did Menachem Begin’s Herut Party see itself as a right-wing party? The Zionist Left and the Soviet Union As far-fetched as it may seem in the eyes of today’s onlooker, during the first years after the establishment of the state, the position vis-à-vis the Soviet Union was the litmus test of the left camp, which was then called “the workers’ camp.” This camp viewed the centrist liberal “General Zionists” party, which was identified with European liberal and middle-class beliefs in private property and capitalism, as its chief ideological rival (and with which the heads of major cities such as Tel Aviv and Ramat Gan were affiliated)­.
    [Show full text]
  • AVRAHAM BURG in Conversation with OMER BARTOV
    AVRAHAM BURG in conversation with OMER BARTOV The Holocaust Is Over: We Must Rise From Its Ashes December 1, 2008 South Court Auditorium LIVE from the New York Public Library www.nypl.org/live PAUL HOLDENGRÄBER: Good evening. My name is Paul Holdengräber and I’m the Director of Public Programs at the New York Public Library, now known as LIVE from the New York Public Library. Tonight it is my pleasure to present to you Avraham Burg in conversation or debating Omer Bartov. A few announcements and some thank-yous, as well. 192 Books is as always with us tonight— the fabulous independent bookstore. After the discussions, Avraham Burg will sign his new LIVE Bartov/Burg 12.1.08 Transcript 1 book, The Holocaust Is Over. We also will have Omer Bartov’s book Hitler’s Army, which I’m sure he will be happy to sign as well. So thank you very much, 192 Books. Thank you also to Metro. They are our media sponsor. Wonderful to have our events announced boldly in their pages. I would also like to thank our wine sponsor, Oriel. Please consider joining the Library; become a Friend. In these times of economic crisis, the Library needs you more than ever. Certainly LIVE does. For just forty dollars, you can become a Friend of the New York Public Library. If you ask me, that’s a fairly cheap date, so please consider joining tonight. LIVE is thrilled to announce that the discussion does not end when this program ends in about a hundred and fifty-one minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Avraham Burg Controversy
    The Avraham Burg Controversy A journalist friend of Meretz USA, Doug Chandler, reported on an appearance by Avraham Burg in New York the other week. I first saw Burg — the son of the late National Religious Party leader and perennial government minister, Yosef Burg — being interviewed on Israeli television as a leader of Peace Now in the early 1980s. He was young, charismatic, impassioned and unusual as a peacenik who was also a kippa-wearing Orthodox Jew. I’ve had the experience of seeing him in person in the mid to late ’90s when he chaired the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency and I attended the World Zionist Congress. His deep monotone in moderately-accented English and his large frame reminded me of an Arnold Schwartzenegger movie character intoning, “I’ll be back.” A few years later, he came very close to winning the chairmanship of the Labor party — so close that he was initially declared the victor and therefore almost a contender for prime minister. A year or two after that, he wrote an opinion article that became a widely quoted moral outcry against the excesses and failings of the Israeli government (then headed by Ariel Sharon). This soon became twinned with a somewhat less publicized article addressing the moral failings of the Palestinian national movement and appealing for peace. At around that time, he resigned from public service. He was falsely rumored to have moved to France. An interview with him in Haaretz a couple of years ago created a sensation in challenging his views, seen by many, including some Israeli liberals, as increasingly anti-Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations Forum on the Question of Palestine
    UNITED NATIONS FORUM ON THE QUESTION OF PALESTINE 70 Years after 1948 – Lessons to Achieve a Sustainable Peace 17 and 18 May 2018 Trusteeship Council Chamber, United Nations Headquarters, New York KEYNOTE PRESENTATION HANAN ASHRAWI Member of PLO Executive Committee Hanan Ashrawi is a Palestinian legislator, activist, and scholar. She is a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee. Dr. Ashrawi served as a member of the Leadership Committee and as an official spokesperson of the Palestinian delegation to the Middle East peace process, beginning with the Madrid Peace Conference of 1991. She was elected to the Palestinian Legislative Council representing Jerusalem in 1996. She then headed the Legislative Reform Committee between 2000 and 2005. In 2006, she was again elected to the Palestinian Legislative Council representing the list called The Third Way. In 2009, she was elected as member of the Executive Committee of the PLO, making history as the first woman to hold a seat in the highest executive body in Palestine. As a civil society activist, Dr. Ashrawi has founded and headed many organizations and institutions such as the Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR), the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH) and the Coalition for Accountability and Integrity (AMAN). She has also won numerous prizes and medals, including the Sydney Peace Prize in 2003, the UNESCO’s Mahatma Gandhi Medal in 2005, and the French Commandeur de l’Ordre National du Mérite in 2016. She is the author of several books, articles, poems and short stories on Palestinian politics, culture and literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Is It Anti-Semitic to Defend Palestinian Human Rights?
    Is It Anti-Semitic to Defend Palestinian Human Rights? Conclusion Press, Philadelphia, 1990) is a history of the Council during the period just before the creation of the “Jewish state.” By Edward C. Corrigan After Israel's spectacular success in the 1967 1943, a group of 92 Reform Arab Israeli war, however, a change in the policy rabbis, and many other prominent Ameri- towards Zionism occurred in the Council, which can Jews, created the Ameri- softened its strict anti-Zionist position. can Council for Judaism, with A separate organization was subse- In quently established in 1969 called the express intent of combating Zion- ism. Included in the Council’s leader- American Jewish Alternatives to Zion- ship were Rabbi Morris S. Lazaron of ism (AJAZ). The new group, which was Baltimore; Lessing J. Rosenwald, the based in New York, continued the origi- former chairman of Sears, Roebuck & nal anti Zionist tradition of the Ameri- Company, who became president of the can Council for Judaism. Rabbi Elmer Council; Rabbi Elmer Berger, who Berger served as president of AJAZ and became its executive director; Arthur also editor of its publication, the AJAZ Hays Sulzberger, publisher of The New Report, until shortly before his death in York Times; and Sidney Wallach of the 1996. The American Council for American Jewish Committee. Judaism is still in existence. It is non- An example of their views on Zionism Zionist rather than anti-Zionist, but is “Palestine,” a pamphlet published by highly critical of Israel’s policies toward the Council in 1944, which stated as the Palestinians.
    [Show full text]
  • Mizrahi Feminism and the Question of Palestine
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232271667 Mizrahi Feminism and the Question of Palestine Article in Journal of Middle East Women s Studies · April 2011 DOI: 10.2979/jmiddeastwomstud.7.2.56 CITATIONS READS 22 814 1 author: Smadar Lavie University of California, Davis 34 PUBLICATIONS 398 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Crossing Borders Staying Put View project All content following this page was uploaded by Smadar Lavie on 30 May 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Access Provided by University of Minnesota -Twin Cities Libraries at 04/21/11 1:30AM GMT 56 mn JOURNAL OF MIDDLE EAST WOMEN’S STUDIES 7:2 MIZRAHI FEMINISM AND THE QUESTION OF PALESTINE Smadar Lavie mn ABSTRACT This paper analyzes the failure of Israel’s Ashkenazi (Jewish, of Eu- ropean, Yiddish-speaking origin) feminist peace movement to work within the context of Middle East demographics, cultures, and histo- ries and, alternately, the inabilities of the Mizrahi (Oriental) feminist movement to weave itself into the feminist fabric of the Arab world. Although Ashkenazi elite feminists in Israel are known for their peace activism and human rights work, from the Mizrahi perspective their critique and activism are limited, if not counterproductive. The Ash- kenazi feminists have strategically chosen to focus on what Edward Said called the Question of Palestine—a well funded agenda that enables them to avoid addressing the community-based concerns of the disenfranchised Mizrahim. Mizrahi communities, however, silence their own feminists as these activists attempt to challenge the regime or engage in discourse on the Question of Palestine.
    [Show full text]
  • Avraham Burg: Apostate Or Avatar?
    Published by Americans for The Link Middle East Understanding, Inc. Volume 40, Issue 4 Link Archives: www.ameu.org October-November 2007 Avraham Burg: Apostate or Avatar? BY JOHN MAHONEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMEU vraham Burg is the author of a new book, A “Defeating Hitler,” and the subject of a recent— and provocative—article in The New Yorker magazine. In these publications Burg announces the end of the Zionist enterprise. Want to know, he asks fellow Israelis, why Palestinians blow themselves up in our restaurants? Look at how we treat them. Think our dependence on U.S. dollars and weapons is good? Think again. Want to keep a Jewish majority in our country? No problem. Ex- pel the Arabs or wall them up into Bantustans. These pronouncements have triggered condemnation all across the Israeli political spectrum and have stirred controversy in the American-Jewish media. His critique, to be sure, does represent something new. But the new- ness lies not in what he says. As we shall see, other Jews, Israeli and American, have expressed similar viewpoints. (Continued on Page 2.) The Link Page 2 AMEU Board (Continued from Page 1.) of Directors Jane Adas (Vice President) Future of the Zionist Nation State Hugh D. Auchincloss, Jr. How might a Catholic feel were the pope to announce he We are already dead. We haven’t re- Elizabeth D. Barlow was turning Protestant, moving ceived the news yet, but we are dead. It Edward Dillon to Germany, and writing a book doesn’t work anymore. It doesn’t work. called “Luther Won”? John Goelet —Avraham Burg, Ha’aretz Richard Hobson That, say some Israelis, is Weekend Magazine, June 6, 2007 how they feel about Avraham Anne R.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle East Peace Process Could Two Become One?
    The Middle East peace process Could two become one? Israel’s right, frustrated Palestinians and assorted idealistic outsiders are talking of futures that do not feature a separate Palestinian state. It is a mistake Mar 16th 2013 | GAZA AND JERUSALEM | From the print edition IN 1942, as the Holocaust in Europe was entering its most horrific phase, a pacifist American rabbi called Judah Magnes helped found a political party in Palestine called Ihud. Not the best analogy Hebrew for unity, Ihud argued for a single binational state in the Holy Land to be shared by Jews and Arabs. Its efforts —and those of like-minded idealists—came to naught. Bitterly opposed to the partition of Palestine, Magnes died in 1948 just as the state of Israel—the naqba, or catastrophe, to Palestinians—was being born. Decades of strife were to follow. At the United Nations, in the White House and around the world, there is a strong belief that any solution ending that strife must be based on two separate states, with a mainly Jewish one called Israel sitting alongside a mainly Arab one called Palestine. The border between them would be based on the one that existed before the 1967 war—known as the “green line”—with some adjustments and land swaps to reflect the world as it is. Jerusalem would be a shared but divided capital. In the face of the manifold obstacles facing such a solution, however, something like Magnes’s one-state variant has been coming back into vogue, both in left-wing Western (and Jewish) circles and among a growing minority of Palestinians.
    [Show full text]