Mezvinsky: It’s one state now and smart Israelis must cast away their Zionism and work for equal rights

Lifton cites and seems to suggest that Netanyahu’s statement about the Fateh-Hamas agreement is a “hard blow to the peace process.” In actuality there is presently no peace process, and without a unified Palestinian leadership there can be no hope whatsoever for the development of a peace process. Lifton also maintains that both Hamas and Fateh must recognize Israel’s “right to exist.” Lifton neglects to mention that the Netanyahu government has gone much further in its demand that Palestinians and other Arabs must recognize and accept Israel’s legitimate right to exist as a Jewish state. The meaning of Jewish state here is a Zionist state. The great majority of Palestinians and other Arabs have already recognized the existence of the state of Israel. Palestinians and other Arabs, however, should not be expected to, nor will they, accept Israel’s legitimate right to exist as a Jewish state in the Zionist sense. To do so would be to undermine even more the national aspirations of the Palestinian people and endorse the anti-democratic principle of a state’s granting certain rights and privileges to one group of people not granted to others.

From the early 1970s until recently Ziad Abu Zayyad, a distinguished Palestinian editor and writer from Jerusalem had, favored a two state solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. In his May 5, 2011 lecture at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC he stated that he finally realized he had been wrong. The creation of a viable fair and just Palestinian state in the foreseeable future in his opinion was not to be. Palestinians, he insisted, should instead concentrate on opposing Israeli occupation. Zayyad emphasized the need to put political and economic pressure upon Israel, which could conceivably over a period of time bring an end to occupation. Although an advocate of peaceful resolution of conflict, he did not rule out what he termed the “blood” alternative, i.e. the use of violent means, if all else failed. Zayyad’s analysis was honest and realistic. It provides an introduction for my own analysis.

Zayyad underlined that as a political maneuvering device the Palestinian political leadership, which presently consists of Fateh and Hamas, intends to propose a resolution to the General Assembly of the United Nations in September, 2011 calling for the recognition of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. It is unclear at this time if the resolution will specify pre-June, 1967 borders or some adjustment thereof. Israel and the United States currently oppose the submission of such a unilateral resolution prior to a negotiated agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Both Israel and the United States will presumably vote against such a resolution if it is proposed in the General Assembly. President Obama may try to derail the proposal of such a resolution by announcing an American sponsored plan to start another round of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Israeli Prime Minister Natanyahu has already balked at negotiating with Hamas as a constituent part of the Palestinian side.

The Israeli government and Israelis generally are worried about a unilateral resolution being submitted and possibly passed by a majority vote in the General Assembly. The Obama administration is also worried. The passage of such a resolution would most likely exert some pressure upon Israel and create a few more problems for the United States government. The over-all effect would, nevertheless, be minimal. The resolution would almost certainly not be enforced. Regardless of such a resolution, the Israeli government will continue to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank, to build the separation wall and to extend its control over Palestinians. The Obama administration may utter a few statements but for a myriad of domestic, political reasons do little or nothing to deter the Israeli government from doing what it wishes to do. The likelihood is that with or without this resolution the situation for Palestinians in the occupied territories will continue to worsen; in addition Palestinian citizens of Israel may increasingly be threatened.

The reality is that one state of Israel exists. The territories, taken by Israel in the 1967 war, are with the exception of the Sinai a part of this one state. For Palestinians this one state is a disaster. Israel denies Palestinians in varying degrees human rights and continues to confiscate Palestinian land. This oppression stems from the nature of Zionism and the Zionist state. The creation in the foreseeable future of a sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza is unrealistic. Israel, backed and supported by the United States, is sufficiently strong to prevent the creation of such a state. There is not yet near sufficient evidence to indicate that the unrest and revolution in parts of the Arab Middle East will have a negative effect upon Israel and will help the Palestinians.

At sometime in the future the situation in Israel-Palestine will change. Israeli Jews need to realize that they must cast away their Zionism and with Palestinians create a more democratic state. The United States will most likely not always be there or be able to save the Zionist state. The size and place of Israel in the Middle East and the demography, combined with the anti-democratic and oppressive nature of the Zionist state, will, unless changes are made, ultimately doom that state and unfortunately most of its Jewish population. One hopeful sign is that some Israeli Jews, although the number is still small, understand this and are attempting to bring about change.

Palestinians in the meantime will probably continue to suffer. They may be able to help themselves and to make the one state better more quickly by emphasizing human rights and opposing in non-violent ways violations of their human rights….

I do not now write to debate Robert Lifton, but rather to add to the discussion. Be assured that I would like the Palestinian – Israeli situation to change for the better as soon as possible. Being realistic, however, and considering carefully the history since and even before 1948 as well as the facts of today, I think it obvious that the creation in the near future of a viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza is a dead letter. Israel, backed by the United States, will not allow such a state to be created. Israel gives every indication that it intends to expand settlements and to increase the already large number of Jewish settlers in the West Bank. Israel will insist upon retaining sovereignty over the territory, occupied since June, 1967, with the exception of the Sinai and will continue building the separation wall in order to confiscate more land. Israel may allow Palestinians in the West Bank to have limited autonomous rule in certain designated areas but with its superior force will stop the development or furtherance of what it does not like. The over four million Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza, who are the indigenous population, will, as they have been since 1967, be denied the possibility of citizenship, and the majority of them will continue to be oppressed in numerous other ways. The 1.4 million Palestinian citizens of Israel will remain second-class citizens without being granted all the rights and privileges granted to Jewish citizens. All of this is part of the character and nature of the Zionist state.(I personally oppose the Israeli-Zionist oppression of Palestinians firstly as a human being and secondly as a Jew who, to cite a Robert Lifton phrase, refuses to separate himself from his Jewish origins and connections. I reject the notion that – in what I consider to be the correct spirit of Judaism – Israel is a Jewish state.)

To reiterate I suggest that Palestinians should emphasize the violations of their human rights and in non-violent ways oppose those violations. Such opposition could attract increased attention in Israel, the United States and around the world. Outside pressure might force violations to be rescinded slowly. This could make the one state that exists a better place for both Palestinians and Jews. It, for example, would be intriguing and would certainly attract attention, if the over four million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza began to argue that, as the indigenous population of the area, who since 1967 have only been allowed to be residents of the state of Israel, they should be given citizenship. No Zionist Israeli government would grant such a demand but by refusing would have a more difficult time calling Israel a democratic state.

Emphasizing human rights will not reverse the bad situation for Palestinians overnight, but it could initiate improvements. This kind of emphasis and activity is a practical approach as opposed to the impractical approach of talking about a near term myth of a fair, independent, viable, sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. The human rights approach could in time result in replacing the Zionist state with a reasonably democratic state for both Jews and Palestinians Without such a change Jews, as I previously wrote, most likely will face disaster at sometime in the future. Until then the Palestinian disaster will continue. Dreaming a seemingly impossible dream, as I believe Robert Lifton is doing, will not avoid disaster for both people.