Officials of the European Union have threatened the prospective government of Benyamin Netanyahu that serious consequences will occur if Israel abandons the idea of a two-state solution: Palestine alongside Israel. The warning is vague, perhaps reflecting views that the Palestinians are not ready for a real place in the sun. A Palestinian official has chimed in, adding to Europe's specifications. He says that Israel must recognize a Palestinian state with the borders of 1967.
Bibi has not ruled out a Palestinian state. He has said that the Palestinians must demonstrate a capacity to govern themselves. Better than working immediately toward a state, in his view, is economic enhancement that gives to the Palestinians reason to be patient with whatever steps evolve toward their future.
Prominent among those who quarrel with that are international figures who cannot stand to have their mantra challenged for first place on the agenda. They adhere to the slogan of a "two-state solution" despite the dismal character of Palestinian authorities in the West Bank, and the reprehensible character of those in Gaza.
"Moderate" Palestinians insist on turning back history to the point in time that has international credence, i.e., 1967. 1880 is preferred by Palestinians who want as much as they can get. 1947 is mentioned by Palestinians who want to deny their own earlier rejection of a United Nations decision, as well as by officials of the Vatican still hoping for control over the Holy Places, or maybe all of Jerusalem.
Why not 2009, preferred by Israelis who want to keep all they have settled and wherever they are building additional housing for Jews?
Politics works by slogans. They appeal to the folk, and organize priorities for officials needing a simple anchor in a complex world with many actors, conflicting goals, and no end of studies that point this way or that way.
A Palestinian state has been at the center of on-again, off-again negotiations since 1993, without significant progress. One can blame Palestinian intransigence, their internal disputes and violence, continuing Palestinian violence against Israel, or Israeli machinations. In seeing where we are and how we may go further, it does not matter who is at fault. The idea of a Palestinian state produces a great deal of noise even as it remains in neutral, without traction on the road to the future.
Bibi speaks at volume in flowing sentences, in Hebrew or English, with the magnetism of a demagogue. He also picks up subtle cues and overt demands from those with significant power, and acts more wisely than he speaks. In the past he has caved in to international realities, despite his later denials that he ever did what he did.
Now he has included in his government a left of center and secular Labor Party, whose Defense Minister designate acted on several occasions to give peace a chance in Lebanon and Gaza. His Foreign Minister designate, with a large constituency of Russian immigrants, insulted the president of Egypt and is damned as a racist by Arabs and others. His ultra-Orthodox Interior Minister designate (with authority over population registration) is likely to complicate the lives of several hundred thousand Russian immigrants not recognized as Jewish by the Rabbinate, and wishing to marry who they choose, where they choose.
All this will produce continued excitement for those who marvel at how the Jews, with traditions of faith, morality, and pragmatism developed over two and one-half millennia in many places governed by others, seek to apply what they acquired in a state they must govern.
I welcome comments sent to my e-mail address, below.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University
Jerusalem, Israel
Tel: +972-2-532-2725
email: msira@mscc.huji.ac.il