Naftali Bennett is Israel's minister of economy and the leader of the Jewish Home Party, a major component of the current Israeli government. He is widely seen as a potential successor to Binyamin Netanyahu as prime minister after the next Israeli elections. On 6 November, the International New York Timespublished an important opinion piece by Bennett under the headline “For Israel, two-state is no solution.” In the article, Bennett writes, “For its security, Israel cannot withdraw from more territory and cannot allow for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank.” He goes on to propose his own “four-step plan” for peace. His “peace plan” notably includes Israel's unilateral annexation of Area C, approximately 61 per cent of the West Bank, so as to “reduce the scope of the territory in dispute, making it easier to reach a long-term agreement in the future.” In his vision of peace, any “Palestinian entity” on residual ink spots of Areas A and B of the West Bank “will be short of a state. It will not control its own borders and will not be allowed to have an army.” As for Gaza, according to Bennett, “It cannot be a party to any agreement.” Bennett concludes: “I am aware that the world will not immediately accept this proposal. It seems to go against everything Israel, the Palestinians and the international community have worked toward over the last 20 years. But I will work to make this plan government policy because there is a new realty in the Middle East, which has brought an end to the viability of the Oslo peace process.” One may hope that Bennett's blast of honesty will blow away any residual illusions within those Western governments that have for decades been blocking the realisation of a Palestinian state by arguing that a Palestinian state can only exist, even on a purely legal level, as a result of negotiations with Israel. After almost half a century of belligerent occupation, the Palestinians are to gain their independence only with the prior consent of the occupying power. One may also hope that Bennett's honesty will help Western governments to recognise the urgent necessity of saving the two-state solution by one or, ideally, both of the only two conceivable courses of action to do so. The first is that the United States not veto an application by the State of Palestine for full member-state status at the United Nations and, thereby, allow it to happen. The second is to build on the virtuous example of Sweden with a tsunami of diplomatic recognitions of the State of Palestine by the 19 European Union states that have not yet done so. This should be followed by a clear and coherent programme for intensifying EU sanctions until Israel complies with international law and relevant UN resolutions by withdrawing fully from the occupied State of Palestine. In a world that still professes formal respect for international law and the UN Charter, the occupation of a UN member state by a neighbouring state cannot be permitted to endure indefinitely. Europe is Israel's principal trading partner and cultural homeland, with Israel enjoying special privileges that give it many of the advantages of virtual EU membership. Either course of action would represent a constructive reality check for Israeli society and render the end of the occupation a question of when rather than whether or not it should ever occur. It appears that the legislatures of France and Spain are on track to vote to recognise the State of Palestine before the end of the year.Neither vote, however, would be binding on their respective governments. This is also the case with the overwhelming favourable vote in the British House of Commons and the unanimous favourable vote in the Irish Senate. If the US government were to allow the State of Palestine to become a UN member state there is good reason to believe that there would be a wave of diplomatic recognitions by EU states, which have traditionally deferred to the United States on all matters relating to Israel, Palestine and the so-called “peace process”. There is also some reason for hope that the Republican Party's new total control of the US Congress, which rules out any domestic achievement for President Obama in his final two years in office, will focus the Nobel Peace Prize laureate's attention on leaving a legacy of historic foreign policy achievements that remain within his power to achieve. If, however, neither of these two courses of action is taken by mid-2015 the Palestinian people and leadership, as well as all decent people who truly seek peace with some measure of justice in Israel/Palestine, should consign the “two-state solution” and the current “two-state legality” to the trash heap of history. They must accept the current “one-state reality” and embark upon a principled, long-term, anti-apartheid-style struggle for equal rights and human dignity in a single state for all who live in the former Mandate Palestine. The writer is an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team on negotiations with Israel.
