As the Jewish New Year begins, as the Muslim month of Ramadan draws to a close, and as Israeli, Palestinian, and American negotiators prepare for another round of talks, this is as good a time as any to reflect on what is possible, what is desirable, and what we are willing to do to write a new and beneficent chapter in the long history of Christians, Muslims, and Jews in the Middle East. What needs to change so that Israelis and Palestinians can make peace? The two most often heard answers point in very different directions. From one point of view, the needed change is for Palestinians to accept the legitimacy and permanence of a Jewish state in Palestine, along with the security measures necessary to insure Israel's continued safety and survival. Once Palestinians clearly and unequivocally demonstrate their acceptance and appreciation of these basics, peace becomes possible. From the opposite viewpoint, the change must occur on the Israeli side. Israelis need to accept the Palestinian right to self-determination, exercised through the establishment of a truly sovereign state, based on the pre-1967 borders, consisting of Gaza and the West Bank, with east Jerusalem as its capital. Furthermore, Israel must follow international law and U.N resolutions in support of that division of the land and in support of the Palestinians' right of return. The primary test of Israeli sincerity is the cessation of construction beyond the green line. Both viewpoints have some give in them. Accepting the green line as the basis for the border leaves a bit of room for land swaps. Palestinian acceptance of Israel as a Jewish state can probably be verbally fudged, as can an Israeli acknowledgment of a Palestinian right of return, in principle if not in practice. Building only within areas that both sides agree will remain Israeli might provide a temporary fix to get past the late September deadline for lifting the semi-moratorium. Yet neither side trusts that the other has made the fundamental mental shift to accept its long-time adversary as a permanent sovereign neighbor. Indeed, there are reasons for each not to accept the other. Contrary to the conclusion reached by the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations that the only conceivable solution is for two states to live side by side, alternative futures for the Middle East can be imagined and developed which do not include either or both a state of Israel and a state of Palestine. A two-state solution is not inevitable, nor is one state. The demands of justice, security, survival, or even the fulfillment of Jewish and Muslim religious and historical aspirations do not necessarily lead towards one and only one conclusion. While moving forward with negotiations for a two-state solution, we should keep our minds open to other options. Perhaps two states cannot share the land or not as we currently envision. Economic and technological developments or demographic changes may close some political doors and open others. After all, there is rarely only one solution to organizational problems. As most pundits have pointed out, the likelihood of success is slim for the Obama-Netanyahu-Abbas talks. If these talks fail, it does not mean that no talks can succeed. If these talks succeed, it does not mean that all will be well. In either case, there is much work to be done. Some of that work involves thinking and re-thinking how best to deal with the two peoples' problematic relations and recurring issues – issues for which the gap between the two sides remains vast. Much of the work requires engaging in conversations with current political adversaries, whether those adversaries are religious or secular, Israeli or Palestinian. The Arabs in Gaza are part of the Palestinian people. The Jews in the West Bank are part of the Israeli people. If a political settlement is to be reached, neither group can be ignored, and neither group should be demonized. One can only hope that the coming months will bring us all closer to a future in which Arabs and Jews can find a way to co-exist. ** Read more from Michael Lame on his Re-think Middle East blog BM
