The collapse of the coalition negotiations between Likud Leader Benjamin Netanyahu and Kadima's Tzipi Livni over Netanyahu's refusal to commit to the two-state solution may force him to form a narrow-based right-of-centre government. Such a government is likely to impede any progress or end up disintegrating under domestic and American pressure to make important concessions for the peace process. The Obama administration must remain unequivocal in its pursuit of the two-state solution to prevent a further escalation of the conflict with unpredictable regional implications.
Ms. Livni was absolutely correct in turning down Netanyahu's "generous" offer to join his government, where her party would be granted important portfolios in the coalition but denied any sound assurance that the peace negotiations would continue. Indeed, an Israeli government which is not committed to the two-state solution is sewing the seeds for incessant terror and violence that will do nothing but set the Israelis and Palestinians further apart. A narrow centre-right government is a recipe for paralysis as most of Netanyahu's coalition partners condition their joining the government on continuing the expansion of settlements. Netanyahu's slogan that Israel must first obtain security before peace is simply unrealistic, as only peace will in turn provide Israel with the ultimate security. By pursuing this policy, Israel is de-legitimizing its right of self-defense with its continued settlement expansion, while Hamas is strengthening its political position as the true defender of Palestinian rights. As a result, Israel is dangerously eroding its moral standing and losing international sympathy as it is the Palestinians and not the Israelis who are seen as the beleaguered people.
After Operation Cast Lead, the international community responded by sending throngs of official delegations and visitors to Gaza. The foreign ministers of France, Canada, Turkey, Sweden and Norway all made visits to the war torn strip, as well as Britain's Tony Blair, Javier Solana on behalf of the EU, and John Kerry representing the U.S. Senate. Even more telling is the 75 countries and organizations who participated in the February donor's conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, pledging over 5 billion in aid to rebuild Gaza. Between the state visits, donor commitments, and media reaction after the Gaza war, the general sympathy for the Palestinian citizens has been overwhelming, and far outnumbers any sentiment toward the Israeli side. Hamas, while damaged, has come out of this war claiming victory by virtue of merely surviving the Israeli onslaught and becoming somewhat recognized as a force that must be reckoned with, either directly or indirectly in peace negotiations.
The Obama administration ought to make it abundantly clear to Israel that settlement expansion runs contradictory to peace, and linking the settlements to national security is nothing but a smokescreen. Taking into full consideration Israel's legitimate national security concerns, the Obama administration must state firmly that America's strategic interest in the Middle East is directly linked to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Delaying the peace negotiations that could lead to a two-state solution is not acceptable. Moreover, it would be impossible to effectively address Iran's nuclear program in isolation. Only by preventing Iran from exploiting the Arab-Israeli conflict and isolating Hamas and Hezbollah from Tehran, will progress be made on the Israeli-Palestinian front. The recent overture to Syria by the Obama administration is a prudent move and it must be seen as a part and parcel of the new American strategy to deal not just with the Arab-Israeli conflict but to contain Iran's regional maneuverability.
Concerned Israelis must ask themselves the question as to what will happen in 10 to 15 years from now if there is no solution to the conflict with the Palestinians. The status quo is pushing both Israelis Palestinians further into extremism and creating conditions in both camps that raise an ominous prospect for the future. The Palestinians are growing increasingly more hopeless and as many are left with no choice but to resort to violent resistance. More than seven out of every 10 Palestinians has been born under occupation. They do not dwell on who is right and who is wrong, they know only one thing: occupation in any form is intolerable and they are bent on ending it. They watch the usurpation of their land day in and day out while laboring under the humiliation of occupation in every turn they make. For Israel to use Hamas and violence as an excuse without trying to deal with the root cause will no longer resonate, as the reaction of the international community to the Israeli onslaught in Gaza has demonstrated. The only way the Sunni Arab states led by Saudi Arabia can put real pressure on Hamas and other extremist groups is if the Israeli government suspends the expansion of settlements, dismantles all illegal outposts and enters in earnest the peace negotiations with the objective of reaching a two state solution.
One would hope that Mr. Netanyahu would moderate his views once he assumes the responsibility of prime minister. Should he however form a right-of-centre government, he may not be able to modify his position without risking its collapse. It was during his last tenure as Prime Minister in the late nineties that Netanyahu emphasized the three no's: no withdrawal from the Golan Heights, no discussion of the Palestinian's claim to Jerusalem, and no negotiations while under preconditions. The Obama administration must not let this ideology take hold yet again, and he must have clear vision and a realistic strategy about the peace process to push it through. This will not only bring an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but safeguard Israel's ultimate national security.
The settlements only HARM Israel's security, and they inspire terror against both Israel and the US.
Why should we fund something that we condemn, that inspires terror against us, and which serves no positive purpose?
If Israel removes the Idf and all settlers behind 67 borders, there could very easily be a 2 state solution. This must happen FIRST, and it could be assisted by the presence of a UN based, mostly arab peace keeoing force, which is working well in lebanon.
Any other path is CLEARLY NOT a peace process, but rather, a settlement expansion process masquerading as a peace process.
Israel holds the West Bank and the Golan, which we cannot give up. The two provided the strategic depth necessary for the IDF to rregroup and to counter attack in 1973. Without them Israel would have been destroyed. And one item is not negotiable, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and will be forever.
Your own words portray Israel as a military conqueror that must expand or die. To keep our border safe, we must take the land beyond and move the border. To keep our border safe, we must take the land beyond and move the border. To keep our border safe...
One notes Israel has only ever contracted because of pressures on its military by international situations. Israel has never come to the table out of good faith and given back land without getting something in return. In the case of the Sinai, it was a promise that the Americans would neutralize Egypt by buying them off.
The only feasible solution is to create from Israel and Palestine a single secular democratic state with equal rights for all. this outcome is not only feasible, it's inevitable, short of genocide.
http://gazasolidarity.blogspot.com/2009/03/cia-predicts-collapse-of-israeli-state.html
A look at a map of the West Bank shows how hopelessly the two populations are intermixed. And there' isn't any way, short of something catastrophic, for the Israelis to move either of these populations.