If there was one consistent theme that dominated the Herzliya conference today, it was the argument, made time and again by Israeli political and military leaders to a largely cautious audience, that a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is in Israel's interest.
"Israel must be part of the pragmatic camp" in the Middle East said leader of the opposition Tzipi Livni.
"We have to have a real plan to implement the two state solution" said former Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz.
"80% of Israelis support a two state solution..." and "...we must implement both a bottoms-up and top-down approach (to the conflict) now" said Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor.
Not surprisingly, these strong pronouncements did not inspire the crowd to jump to its feet.
Of course, there is much more on the agenda here, as Israel's top political-military leaders, thinkers, strategists, and officials networked with a diverse set of American, European, Asian, and Arab leaders. Discussions about the global economy, climate change, Israel's public image, and the waning influence of the U.S. dominated. Permeating through almost every discussion was the backdrop of the looming danger posed by Iran, creating a sense of seriousness and concern.
And everyone made sure to make nice about the Obama administration.
The most powerful speaker, for my money, was Tzipi Livni. She delivered a forceful keynote early in the morning, barely looking at her notes and armed with a honed, strategic analysis. Critical of the current Israeli government, yet mindful of the need to be diplomatic, she demonstrated big league skills.
Dan Meridor too looked like a calm, reasonable voice. Sober and intelligent, he spoke of the broader strategic challenges, even bluntly stating that Israel made a mistake by not making more of an effort with Syria.
And the Americans showed their best, with Dan Kurtzer and Elliott Abrams engaging in a vigorous debate about the peace process. Abrams argued that the only year in the last 20 that didn't have Israeli-Palestinian negotiations was the past one, implying that Obama has failed at peacemaking and that seeking a political deal for a state was the wrong approach. He also argued that the Palestinians should focus instead on creating the trappings of a state now, and wait for a political deal for an actual state later. Kurtzer countered that yes, 20 years of negotiations had failed to produce a state, either on the ground or at the political level, but instead spoke about how it was time to be more aggressive, not less. He also reminded the audience that Abrams' recommendation of a bottoms-up only approach had been tried many times before, producing neither an improvement on the ground nor an actual state.
Interestingly, an early morning panel with Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations Executive Vice Chairman Malcolm Hoenlein, American Ambassador to Israel Jim Cunningham, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, and former U.S. Ambassador Alfred Moses entitled "Still Special: US-Israel Relations?" was nearly unanimous in its declarations that the relationship has never been better. Of course, it only took a few questions to notice that several of the panelists had real concerns, but they were all at great pains to show that relations are in top shape, handing a symbolic victory to President Obama after a tough year.
So overall, the strategic clarity expressed by the Israelis about the need for a Palestinian state -- none of whom declared this for sentimental reasons -- was striking. Approaches on how to get there differed widely. The rationale was often based on cold calculation related to consolidating relations with the Arabs against Iran. No one seemed particularly optimistic about the prospects of this goal even being achieved. But it was clear that this was a message that met the audience head-on, knocking them off balance.
There may not yet either be peace, or even a clear way to get there, but this day may well have granted Obama a subtle victory, as the broad political recognition in Israel of the importance of a two-state solution was made urgently clear.
I can't wait to hear Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak discuss this issue together tomorrow night.
Follow Joel Rubin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JoelMartinRubin
I suspect that many of the delegates have had foreigners whispering in their ears "Sort this out or there WILL be consequences, We are cheesed off, and, though we have done nothing in the past, if YOU do not sort this mess out, and sort it out NOW, believe me, WE will, and very soon".
I suspect that they have had not just one foreigner, but several, uttering the same whispers.
I suspect that the international community might, just, be so fed up with it all that it has chosen to ally and speak with the same message.
I also suspect that (despite the bravura from posters here) the state of Israel realises it needs the support of that community (I heard, for example, that 2/3rds of its exported farm produce ends up in the UK).
In many ways I feel sorry for Israel. Despite my criticisms of it (which are many) I fully endorse its right to exist as a state,
It has dug itself a whacking great big hole in which it has found itself having to try to find a way to dig out, and no-one forced it to do that.
And YES, I do recognise that the Palestinians have a lot to answer for.
This led to creation of many nation-states through the world. Including: Israel, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Czechoslovakia, Germany etc.
Many above states were formed from the remains of British, Russian, Ottoman and French Empires.
Along with many European, Asian, African and American nations, a Jewish state was created by the immigrants to the Ottoman and British Empires.
There was much chaos and population movement along ethnic and religious lines.
Unfortunately, part of Palestine was given to Hashemite kings by the British.
On the other part, the residents were to be given an opportunity for self determination--U./N. Partition plan.
The Jewish Palestinians immediately accepted
Arab Palestinians rejected self-determination and chose the way of the conquest with help of other co-religionist neighbors.
And thus ended up the losers in empire- dividing game.
It was easy to from a state in the post WW2 chaos. Later, as the states in the area coalesced and matured, the opportunities have dwindled.
What Palestinians could've had for the asking in 40s- 70s is not as easy now.
Fair or unfair, Palestinians now MUST prove to their neighbors their peaceful intentions and ability to co exist before they are given the privilege to form their own state by their neighbors-- realpolitik.
Germany on the other hand was a nation before it was a unified state.
Anyway, the end of your post is completely true and accurate.
Nonetheless, m y point that "Many above states were formed from the remains of British, Russian, Ottoman and French Empires" stands.
Certainly, there is some resemblance between Germany as a nation-state and Israel.
It can be argued that both Germany and Israel are nation-states. Especially in their view on diaspora Germans and Jews, respectively.
Great post though, squiems.
Post more. The site needs more rationality.
Afterall, PLO retreated from their revanchist stance only after decisive defeats in Jordan, Lebanon and withdrawal of petro-dollar support due to collaborationist activities in occupied Kuwait.
Commitment to a 2 state solution is open ended.
So until then - well we'll just have to go on with an eternal occupation.
Win win eh?
Did the oh so impressive officers tellyou that was theie real preference for the '2 state solution'?
Please answer my question; for the life of me I cannot imagine a good answer.
Your take is rubbish.
It is not clear that this is the case with Palestinians.
Certainly election of Hamas, an organization which adamantly opposes two-state solution in favor of Jihad proves it.
And once again proved to the world ( even the Arab world) utter lack of political maturity of Palestinian masses.
Look, Israelis actually voted for Kadima but due to the lovely rockets raining down daily from Gaza, Likkud caught up and made it a close enough election that it was decided that Bibi was the one who could form the coalition gov't and he was made PM.
The problem in a nutshell is there is not enough contiguous, usable land available for a Palestinian state.
There are over 500,000 Israelis squatting on the land that is needed for Palestine and there is absolutely no one in Israel with both the will and the military might to move those people off the land. The Negev has no water nor soil suitable for farming nor any other resources. Will Israeli tax payers pay to make the Negev livable? I doubt it.
So if Israel can not evict the squatters and can not make some usable land and water available, how can there be a two-state solution, so any more talk of a two-state solution is just hot air.
What are Israel's REALISTIC options about what to do with 5 MILLION+ Arabs they don't want? There are not many and most involve lots of Israelis deaths.
The only solution with minimal deaths is a One-State solution where the Arabs are equal citizens and can vote in an Arab replacement for Bibi. This will make Israel just like Iran except the Jewish minority in Israel will be bigger.
Israelis have obviously not thought through the consequences of letting 500,000 people squat on land they had no right to be on. Now Israel can not figure out how to undo the mess without having a civil war.
Israeli electorate ( Jewish, Christin and Muslim) wants nothing to do with Palestinains.
They have!
Next subject...
Not at this point. Neither Israel, nor Jordan or Egypt would consent to Palestinians controlling borders and/or airports without strict control from the above three nations.
based on actions of the lasd 30 years from Events of "Black September" and culminating in installing Iranian puppt, Hamass in power, these three states will nto allow Palestinain ctronl until; some level of political maturity is reached.
After Pope Benedict XVI's comments on Islam in September 2006, five churches, among them two Greek Orthodox churches - as such, not affiliated with either Catholicism or the Pope - were firebombed and shot at in the West Bank and Gaza. No one was hurt and no one claimed responsibility.[18] Former Palestinian Prime Minister and current Hamas leader Ismail Haniya condemned the attacks and police presence was elevated in Bethlehem, which has a sizable Christian community.[19]
Armenians in Jerusalem, identified as Palestinian Christians, have also been attacked and received threats from Israeli and Jewish extremists. In September, two Armenian Christian clergy were expelled after protesting against Jewish extremists for spitting on holy Christian objects.[20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Christians
But you will only bash the Muslims, right?
But people are not deceived. The world is well familiar with the history of ehhhh... tolerance displayed by M-lim fundamentalists throughout the world.
Good reading.