Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada.
A new conventional wisdom is rapidly taking shape that the United States can resolve the 130-year-old conflict in Palestine by advancing its own peace plan. Former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and former US Congressman Stephen Solarz outlined such a plan in The Washington Post recently, and argued that President Obama could boost its prospects with a "bold gesture" -- a trip, to Jerusalem and Ramallah in the company of Arab and other leaders to unveil it ("To achieve Mideast peace, Obama must make a bold Mideast trip," 11 April 2010).
Strong supporters of Israel have pushed back that "imposing peace" would not work, but few Palestinian voices have been heard. Indeed, from a Palestinian perspective, this idea is dangerously simplistic, and more likely to deepen festering injustices and fuel, rather than resolve conflict.
The "comprehensive solution" Brzezinski and Solarz propose is nothing of the kind because the conflict cannot be reduced to a mere border dispute between Israel and a putative Palestinian state. They propose for example "a territorial settlement based on the 1967 borders, with mutual and equal adjustments to allow the incorporation of the largest West Bank settlements into Israel."
TGIA, what are your thoughts on a final settlement?
ReplyDeleteI see three options:
-extend Israeli citizenship to all Palestinians
-two states based on the 1948 UN partition plan with territorial exchanges of equal quality. Ideally many dual citizens in both countries. Palestine retains a large Israeli citizen minority. Israel retains a large Palestinian citizen minority.
-two states based on 1967 borders with territorial exchanges of equal quality. Ideally many dual citizens in both countries. Palestine retains a large Israeli citizen minority. Israel retains a large Palestinian citizen minority.