This weekend JStreet, the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement, held their second national conference. Panels focused on hot topics like a nuclear Iran, the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement (BDS) and the recent American veto of the UN resolution to condemn settlements. Speakers stressed that the two-state solution is at a critical crossroads citing the collapse of the most recent peace negotiations, the twenty year anniversary of the Madrid Conference, the upcoming Palestinian elections and of course, the Arab Democratic Revolution that is sweeping the Middle East.
While JStreet is progressive in relation to AIPAC, it is behind when it comes to supporting a viable solution to the Israeli / Palestinian conflict. "The two state solution is JStreet's redline," said Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of JStreet. "There's no such thing as a one state solution. One state is a nightmare... a prescription for ongoing bloodshed and fighting and non-resolution of the conflict." Ben-Ami made it clear that no matter what Israelis and Palestinians want, JStreet will only support a two-state solution.
In the past year, alternatives to the land-for-peace, two-state solution have become more prominent and it has become clear that Palestinians are pursuing new paths to statehood in one last push to make the two-state solution work.
In September 2009, Saed Erekat, a Palestinian chief negotiator, warned that the growth of settlements -- which Israel has refused to stop -- has made the two-state solution impossible. Several Israelis have voiced this opinion as well and as a result MK Reuven Rivlin (Likkud) and MK Tzipi Hotovely have started a campaign to grant Palestinians Israeli citizenship.
Several speakers at JStreet's conference, Israeli and Palestinian alike, stressed the need to think beyond the traditional two-state solution, to look at the one-state solution, or bi-national, bi-ethnic models. "The Palestinians seek freedom first and statehood secondly," said Maen Areikat, Chief Representative, PLO Delegation to the U.S. "Even though the two-state solution continues to be our strategic option, we are hearing more and more people calling for a bi-national state."
Amjad Atallah, the New America Foundations' co-director of the Middle East Task Force, spoke about a new two-state solution, or the creation of a multi-ethnic state, which he and Mickey Bergman proposed in an article published in Foreign Policy which urged readers to "forget the old two-state solution".
Oded Na'aman, a member of Breaking the Silence and the New Israeli Left -- one of the most popular panels this weekend -- characterized the new Israeli Left as willing to accept either a one state or a two state solutions -- their concerns are more rooted in human rights than Zionism.
In 2010, a public opinion survey conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research and the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem found that the majority of Palestinians and Israelis prefer a two-state solution to the conflict, but Palestinian public opinion is trending towards a bi-national state: 24 percent of Israelis and 29 percent of Palestinians were found to support a bi-national state, and 30 percent of Israelis and 26 percent of Palestinians supported a confederation.
If JStreet does not have the capacity to now or in the future acknowledge that the two-state solution based on land-for-peace is no longer a solution, will the "pro-Israel, pro-peace" organization really be able to support the future peace process? When it comes to choosing between maintaining a Zionist state for the Jews or granting basic civil and human rights to all people in Israel/Palestine will JStreet draw the "red line"?
Follow Alison Avigayil Ramer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/alisonavigayil
"When I was in high school, everyday I was coming home and telling my mom that I wanted to go to the airport, to make aliyah. I was making friends only with those who spoke Hebrew. But frankly, I feel very disenfranchised by the Israeli government and Israeli public voting for such a government. I think I would feel pretty uncomfortable to live with a group that holds such views," he said, explaining why he is still today in the U.S. "
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/focus-u-s-a/israel-will-have-to-deal-with-j-street-sooner-or-later-1.346373
There is another option outside of the 2 state options; reattachment. Reattach Gaza to Egypt, from whom it was conquered, and reattach the west bank to Jordan. 22 Arab countries are enough, a 23rd won't make the miserable Arab world any happier and the Palestinians have shown they don't have the capacity to govern themselves. You can forget about the Arab dream of destroying Israel by forcing a 1 state solution. The Israelis have no interest in becoming a minority in their own country, and they see from the Kurds to the Copts to the Shiites how well minorities are treated in the Arab world.
Sorry it J Street hasn't signed on to your new concept for destroying Israel. I have many disagreements with them, but they aren't there to help you eliminate Israel.
I couldn't agree more. Underneath all the warm and fuzzy, JStreet is just a sugar coated version of AIPAC. They oppose the settlements, but oppose any suggestion of punitive measures taken to achieve the end of settlements.
On top of that:
They oppose BDS
They rejected the Goldstone Report.
They won't even discuss a single state outcome referring to it as a single state delusion, which in complete denial over the fact that the 2SS was dead long ago.
Palestinian concessions are so enormous that they even agreed after final settlement to limit number of rockets flying to Israel to no more than 1000 per year
That is a good word, and one we need to hear more often in this context (instead of the stale, inaccurate 'peace' - as if there was a war): Freedom.
Why is this an either/or question, Ms. Ramer? Do you note believe that a Palestinian state could offer basic civil and human rights to its citizens? If not, why should the Jews be punished for it?
Also, do you believe that self-determination is a basic human right?
And how did that answer any of my questions?
"J Street is so open minded that their brains have fallen out"
"On May 22, 2008, Gary Ackerman submitted the controversial resolution H. Con. Res. 362 which opponents call a declaration of war against Iran.
On January 12, 2009, Gary Ackerman admitted to arranging a visit between Israeli officials and a defense contractor at the same time he was investing in that contractor.[9] Although the visit did not result in any official deal between the parties, questions regarding his ethics were raised."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Ackerman
Oh I get it - you need to discredit him Ackerman now because he's dropped his support of the anti Israel lobby J Street.
There were 280 co sponsors and nothing in this Resolution was related to, mentioned, suggested or was remotely connected to "war"
Opponents of Congressional Resolutions etc often use "over the top" language to (mis)characterize Bills they oppose.
"On January 12, 2009, Gary Ackerman admitted to arranging a visit between Israeli officials and a defense contractor at the same time he was investing in that contractor.[9] Although the visit did not result in any official deal"
"Although the visit did not result in any official deal"
"Ackerman is the Ranking Member and the most recent Democrat to Chair the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. The subcommittee, a key panel of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has jurisdiction over United States policy towards all countries in the Middle East and South Asia"
nothing other then the appearance of a conflict but no harm no foul. Nothing occurred that was inappropriate.
Nothing here Avi that descredits Ackerman
Prediction - by the end of the Obama administration there will no longer be a J Street.
Does it make sense for someone outside the scene to insist upon his own plan? If those directly involved in the situation can figure out how to make a one state solution work, is he still going to stubbornly fight against that?
Isn't that what every American president does? Isn't that what every person with an opinion on this site who doesn't live in either of the two nations does?
These European/American/Russian Zionist Jews
who are NOT Middle-Eastern are in the Middle-East
deciding the FUTURE of the Middle-east...
those who are in America deciding the FUTURE of the Middle-East
should be arrested for interfering in the Foreign affairs of other countries thus setting a PRECEDENT for FOREIGN Countries to interfere in our USA!
They are just like the British Colonials and the CRUSADERS.....
http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/29/forget_the_old_two_state_solution_tackling_the_hard_stuff_in_israeli_palestinian_ne
Are you talking about the link embedded in this paragraph?
"Amjad Atallah, the New America Foundations' co-director of the Middle East Task Force, spoke about a new two-state solution, or the creation of a multi-ethnic state, which he and Mickey Bergman proposed in an article published in Foreign Policy which urged readers to "forget the old two-state solution."
1. The settlers, with very rare exceptions, are not actual or potential neighbors. At best, they are foreign inserts who live next to, but completely apart from, Palestinian society, whose language and customs are completely alien to them. At worst, they are fanatical, violent racist *expletive deleted*s whose continued presence in the Palestinian state would lead to violence. Is Israel going to look on when Palestinian security forces quell those settlers' uprisings like Israel itself likes to quell Palestinian uprisings? Not likely - so you have the seeds of conflict between the two states from the get-go.
2. Land and water distribution are not a minor matter. This does not just concern privately owned Palestinian land, which is a huge problem in itself. The distribution of 'state land' in the West Bank is also heavily biased in favor of the settler communities. In short words, if these resources were distributed evenly among Jews and Palestinians in the area, the settlements would cease to exist in their current form.