This is part of Marc H. Ellis’s “Exile and the Prophetic” feature for Mondoweiss. To read the entire series visit the archive page.
One State advocates are having a field day. They deserve it. After standing in the Two State shadow for decades, the mainstream media is running opinion pieces on the need for Israel/Palestine to become one democratic secular state for all its citizens, Jewish and Arab alike.
The recent prominent writings are by Ian Lustick, a professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, and Yousef Munayyer who directs the Jerusalem Fund in Washington, D.C., and its educational program, the Palestine Center. Lustick’s ambivalence about whether the best solution is one or two states sounds like a John Kerry alarm. Time is running out for Israel to choose the Two State solution. Israel is surrounded by hostile forces and, with Palestinians and the world up in arms over Israel’s behavior, the recipe for catastrophe is undeniable. Munayyer is less ambivalent. He favors the One State option for a host of reasons but focuses primarily on the rights and needs of Palestinians to be free in their own homeland.
Left out of the discussion is the position presented by Danny Danon, a member of the Knesset and the Deputy Defense Minister of Israel, in an Op-Ed that appeared in the Saturday Times. He leads with the provocative title: “Israel Should Annul the Oslo Accords.”
Even while disagreeing with Danon’s argument, one can appreciate his caustic manner. Referring to the possible fallout of Israel annulling the Oslo Accords, Danon lambasts the peace process “industry”: “Little impact would be felt by average Israelis and Palestinians. Those who would suffer most would be full-time negotiators like Martin S. Indyk and Saeb Erekat, who would find themselves out of a job after 20 years of gainful employment in the peace process industry.”
Aside from some much needed criticism of the peace process and those who benefit from it, Danon is to the point. Oslo was a poorly conceived and thinly disguised arrangement between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization that was bound to fail. What should replace it? Danon pulls no punches:
We should implement what I have called a “three-state solution.” In the future, the final status of the Palestinians will be determined in a regional agreement involving Jordan and Egypt, when the latter has been restabilized. All the region’s states must participate in the process of creating a long-term solution for the Palestinian problem.
Danon also has a short term plan:
In the short term, the Palestinians will continue to have autonomy over their civilian lives while Israel remains in charge of security throughout Judea and Samaria, commonly referred to as the West Bank. Following an initial period, the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria could continue to develop their society as part of an agreement involving Israel and Jordan. Similarly, Gaza residents could work with Israel and Egypt to create a society that granted them full civil authority over their lives in a manner that was acceptable to all sides.
Danon’s language and thinking is paternalistic. He writes from the victor’s point of view. The use of Judea and Samaria is Judeo-centric. Referring to the “Palestinian problem” others the Palestinians. Danon’s watchword is autonomy. Palestinians don’t merit anything more.
Many in the One State and Two State camps will have little time for Danon’s proposed Three State solution. With the window on the Two State solution already closed, the Three State solution seems absurd. After the laughter subsides, though, take a look at the geopolitics in the evolving Middle East.
Israel and its Middle East allies – yes, that’s right, Israel and its Middle East allies. With regard to Palestinians, Israel’s allies include Egypt and Jordan as Danon indicates but likewise Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey. They’re the most obvious. A disciplined Syria and nuclear-free Iran will also join in the effort to contain Palestinians, if they haven’t already. With Syria soon to be in a new Russian-American political framework and Iran begging for the US sanctions against it to be lifted, Hezbollah will be on the hot seat. If all goes as planned, watch as Lebanon joins the ranks of Israel’s Middle East allies in the next decade.
The Three State solution. Get ready to acknowledge the political reality. Danon’s vision has already arrived.
I don’t like Danon.
Too much talk and kindergarten politics without any real substance.
Just in case anyone buys the 2SS Shtick
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.548368
“In wake of shooting that killed Israeli soldier near Hebron, (Israeli) prime minister pledges to ‘strengthen settlement’ in West Bank’
Danon is like one of those Eastern European satellite country communist ideologues from the 1960s. A General Jaruzelski with a kippa.
Of course the ideology is forever . The force of my personality assures it. If you don’t like it the torture chambers are to the left.
His proposal is neat for a sociopathic bot who is committed to the extermination of all traces of the Palestinians in the so called holy land of the Jewish people but ignores how unstable the neighbours are.
I don’t really see how the allegedly 3 state solution differs from the status quo. Both the Palestinian entities have a degree of ‘civil autonomy’ now, neither have anything approaching sovereignty and it is clearly not intended that they become part of the sovereign territory of Jordan or Israel.
Is the plan is that there would definitely be no more expansion of the settlements? That is not mentioned as far as I can see. Without that point we would be very much with the status quo.
I think the real intention is the gradual export of the Palestinian population to Jordan and Egypt or to anywhere else that will take them. That always has been the plan, surely. Humane and generously funded relocation schemes (or that will be the terminology, sick as it will make some of us) will be created, though the bill will be attached to the foot of a carrier pigeon that flies west.
The trouble with this plan has been that it has never really succeeded in persuading the Palestinians to leave, so that they are now the river-to-sea majority, or nearly so. Also that when the carrier pigeon flies to western treasuries it will find them rather empty and their guardians much less ready than they once were to attach cheques to the pigeon’s foot for the return journey.
I think you are going a little over the top here Marc, these Israeli allies comprise for the most part dictators who do not reflect the views of their populations, it is too soon to say how [short of a regional war] the countries surrounding Israel will align themselves, I would think if those countries reflected in any way majority opinion, an alliance with Israel would be out of the question, as for Danon’s thoughts surely he has transfer in mind, at least of the Palestinians in the West Bank, together with some exotic political arrangement with those Palestinians who will not go quietly into the night, and a solution which ultimately confers Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank, the Raison D’etre of Danon and his ilk, together with shunting 1.6 million Palestinians in Gaza, plus the territory to Egyptian control, the Egyptians have repudiated any such deal in the past. In my opinion a two state solution based on International law can satisfy more people than the dreamers advocating a one state or three state solution, which would create more problems than they would solve.
Danon’s plan is another gimmick to perpetuate the failed Oslo because it’s been very good for Israel. Don’t believe anything he says about the Oslo having been bad for Israel; thanks to the initial Oslo gimmick, 600,000 immovable settlers planted like bad weeds on the West Bank is not bad at all for Israel. I see where he’s headed with bringing in Egypt and Jordan. He’d have Egypt assume control of Gaza and Jordan to annex Israel’s leftovers of the West Bank. He brought Saudi Arabia into the equation to fund the 2 takeovers. The guy’s a snake.