An American friend called my attention to a recent article by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/opinion/28friedman.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
Friedman writes about a 5-state solution for Palestine. It consists of money from Saudi Arabia, and cooperation between that country, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel to meet the needs of Palestine.
Friedman continues his obsession with Jewish settlements in the West Bank as the key to peace, even while he has moved beyond a simplistic view of unilateral withdrawal. He recognizes that Israelis are not enthusiastic about dismantling settlements after years of rocket attacks following their departure from Gaza. Now he is proposing a phased withdrawal, along with inch-for-inch land swaps for land that Israel retains in the case of its largest settlements.
The greatest oddity of the piece is that Friedman writes it in the name of the Saudi king, Abdullah II. He concedes that the king has not agreed to be interviewed. Friedman writes as if he is reading Abdullah's mind.
Friedman's idea will have some support in Israel. It resembles the "Saudi plan," muted in 2002, and viewed by reasonable Israelis as the point at which negotiations might begin.
One problem is that the Saudis themselves, other Arabs and the Palestinians appear to view the plan as "take it or leave it," without room for modification. The Saudi plan leaves vague the issue of Palestinian refugees. Friedman does not mention them. Palestinians have not given up the demand that refugees and their descendants return to their homes in Israel.
Since the Saudis presented their proposal in 2002, the future of Palestine has been confused by a civil war, intense antagonism between Gaza and the West Bank, and whatever will result from Israel's recent operation in Gaza.
Rather than Friedman's proposal that relies on reading the mind of a king who will not speak with him, it is time to consider the possibility that those leading the Palestinians have adopted the model of suicide bombers. They have killed the idea of Palestine state, without significant damage to their Israeli target.
The question that remains is one of disposal. What to do with the people living in the deceased entity? Neither Israel, Jordan, nor Egypt want them.
I have no solution.
For the time being, however, which may last for many years, they will continue in something like local autonomy. Palestinian institutions will provide social services, but without the features associated with states, such as recognized sovereignty, full control of borders, or an army. From all indications, the West Bank and Gaza will remain separate. Jordan, Egypt, and Israel will provide access to those areas for civilian needs, and try to keep out munitions beyond those needed for local policing.
Can something like this be institutionalized in formal agreements?
No chance. The self-serving demands of all those Muslim states will prevent it. For more than 60 years they have been fanning the idea of Palestine rather than using resources to serve their people, and they are not about to stop. Western governments will continue to bankroll Palestinian institutions. The United Nations will feed and educate many of the Palestinians, and do what it can to keep alive the idea of Palestine.
The hope is that Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others will accept the fiction of a prolonged coma, perhaps while continuing their rhetoric in behalf of Palestine and against Israel.
In other words, the body is starting to smell, but the neighbors cannot agree to a funeral.
I welcome comments sent to my e-mail address below.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Dept of Political Science
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
msira@mscc.huji.ac.il
Tel: +972-2-532-2725
Fax: +972-2-582-9144