I'm coming out of the closet as a fan of David Makovsky.
Makovsky is the Ziegler Distinguished Fellow and Director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy -- and for the last couple of years, he has been quietly agitating to get people involved in the Middle East peace business to understand that "sequencing" matters more than anything else right now in the peace process.
Makovsky -- with whom I respectfully disagree on his dismissal of linkage between Iran's growing power and the I/P ulcer -- has been arguing for some time that the best way to actually achieve progress in Israel/Palestine negotiations yielding a safe and secure Israel and a viable and hopefully prosperous Palestine is to definitively resolve "borders" and "security" first.
Makovsky's formula is startling for its simplicity and brilliance -- as it subordinates two of the thorniest problems in the peace process: settlement expansion and Hamas. I believe that Hamas eventually must be a part of the equation, but right now a sensible security formula that pushes two states forward can mitigate the threats that come from Hamas.
And as settlers go, once the lines are decided -- those on one side of the line will know they are in Israel, and those on the other will know that they'll be living in Palestine.
What interests me -- and gives me some reason for optimism right now -- is that in the power DC holiday party circuit ranging from parties thrown both by Hillary Clinton and Joe & Jill Biden respectively last night, or at Politico's party at the Corcoran, or at the reception given by Barack and Michelle Obama for White House correspondents -- there is side chatter going on about a borders/security portal back into Israel/Palestine negotiations. Admittedly, there is chatter going on about Lady Gaga, the life and impact of Richard Holbrooke, and the snowstorm on its way, too -- but Israel/Palestine has not been neglected in cocktail discussions around Christmas trees and menorahs.
And get this:
1. J Street has also been pushing a borders and security first frame.
2. Daniel Levy of the New America Foundation's Middle East Task Force is also about to release a new report that emphasizes borders and security.
3. Martin Indyk who is the foreign policy czar at Brookings has written an important op-ed in the Financial Times endorsing this approach for the most part.
4. The so-called "Elders" of Desmond Tutu, Martti Ahtisaari, Kofi Annan, Lakhdar Brahimi, Gro Brundtland, Graca Machel, Ela Bhatt, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Jimmy Carter, and Mary Robinson have also suggested in point 3 of their recent letter on the Israel/Palestine standoff that "the remaining final status issues can be addressed more effectively once there is an agreement on borders and security."
5. WINEP's David Makovsky has been calling for the same borders and security first strategy before any of the others.
6. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seems to be channeling Richard Holbrooke's tenacious focus on results -- and realizing that the current game is not working and that an approach that involves US-suggested "bridging proposals" that include borders and security may be the way forward.
Clinton recently stated at the 2010 Brookings Saban Forum:
Now, it is no secret that the parties have a long way to go and that they have not yet made the difficult decisions that peace requires. And like many of you, I regret that we have not gotten farther faster in our recent efforts. That is why yesterday and today I met with Israeli and Palestinian negotiators and underscored our seriousness about moving forward with refocused goals and expectations.It is time to grapple with the core issues of the conflict on borders and security; settlements, water and refugees; and on Jerusalem itself. And starting with my meetings this week, that is exactly what we are doing. We will also deepen our strong commitment to supporting the state-building work of the Palestinian Authority and continue to urge the states of the region to develop the content of the Arab Peace Initiative and to work toward implementing its vision.
There is a consensus brewing among progressives in America, big-name foreign policy hands overseas, some neoconservatives, and foreign policy progressive realists that a borders/security strategy is a way to leapfrog over the current impediments to progress.
The formula could be relatively simple - to delineate a border for a Palestinian state that is based on the 67 lines and that allows for landswaps that are equal in size and value to accommodate some of those settlements. A border would of course have to include Jerusalem, but the most sensitive area of the Old City would only be addressed with the other outstanding permanent status issues.
One of the things that really impresses me after a few meetings with Makovsky is his genuine interest in resolving this dispute and getting to two states. Some pretend to be interested in this or that approach to Israel-Palestine negotiations in ways that assure failure. But that is not Makovsky.
The White House should invite David Makovsky and perhaps a few others of the aforementioned in for a talk about sequencing and what it buys for the process. It would be an hour well spent.
Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note. Clemons can be followed on Twitter @SCClemons
Follow Steve Clemons on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SCClemons
Rory Stewart: Midnight Moments: Exposing the Truth and Taking Full Responsibility for Afghanistan
Ben S. Cohen: The PA's Choice: Palestinian State or Palestinian Cause
Osamah Khalil: The Return of "Plan B" and the Death of the Peace Process
At least 700,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes in 1948, at least half of them before the declaration of the Jewish State and before any Arab forces entered Palestine. They and their descendants have never been considered for either repatriation or compensation.
Palestinian resistance has coalesced around this issue. That is why Hamas is the dominant political force in Palestine - it has pledged that the rights of these people, guaranteed by the U.N. and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights will never be negotiated out of existence.
Any public figure who signs on to an agreement that ignores this fundamental truth has no claim to a belief in Justice.
Middle Eastern people have long memories.
BBC report:"It seems unlikely that Mr Arafat, now heading for Greece by ship, will find another Arab government willing to take him in after the calamitous effect of his stay in Lebanon. Large areas of the once beautiful and prosperous city have been reduced to rubble by seven years of unrest and civil war sparked by Mr Arafat's presence. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/17/newsid_2519000/2519637.stm
Lebanese remember Palestinian betrayals. Jordanians remember Palestinian betrayals. Egyptian and even Syrians do too.
Kuwait will NEVER forget Palestinian ingratitude and support of Hussein.
Israelis remember Arafat's betrayal of the negotiations in favor of attacks on buses, schools and restaurants.
Anyone unfamiliar with that sordid history should look up:
Palestinian militant attempt to take over Jordan. ( Black September). Evicted.
Palestinian invasion of Lebanon; displacement of hundreds of thousand of Lebanese. Despite written promises not to invade Lebanon. Evicted.
Betrayal of Oslo. Return to terrorism instead of continued negotiations after Camp David.
All Jews evicted from Gaza. Instead of building Gaza as model for future state-- Palestinians elect Iranian puppet and Israel's archenemy knowing full well it'll lead to war. They got it.
A state? Certainly, as soon as Palestinians become politically mature to handle one.
It is also understandable that Palestinians, after decades of dispossession might gladly embrace any ideology or political leader who supports their cause.
As far as Oslo is concerned, Israel's negotiator, Ben Ami, is on record asserting that he would never have accepted the deal offered to Arafat.
What is ignored in your post is what I have elucidated upon above. None of the events you describe would have occurred should the Palestinians have been granted the justice that is their right under International Law.
(1) There seems to be an attitude that every problem on planet earth is because of the conflict between Palestine and Israel. I do not think that the original Iranian Revolution had much to do with Israel, do you? And somehow the Wikileaks documents actually disprove this point, if anything and
(2) The author blathers on as though "borders and security" was some brilliant new idea. Were we all just born yesterday? We go around and around and around with this nonsense, but nothing is really NEW in this discussion, is it?
We must NOT re-invent the wheel. This situation can be solved as it was in South Africa, with a full re-integration and a Democratic referendum.
As for a Jewish identity, I propose a Secular Jewish Identity, in line with the Christian identity of "secular" America. We'll let their democracy handle how much religion they want to put into their laws, but the constitution must obviously be modeled to exemplify co-existence such that the religious rights of one party (whether majority/minority) do not trump the other. Protection of minority interests, as in America during our civil reintegration, is crucial.
it's not the case of majority/minority; they are about 50/50 now
there has to be dual identity melded together or switzerland
Perfectly compatible marriage.
The marriage between Jordanian Palestinian and W, Bank Palestinains worked so beautifully from 1948--1967.
They're compatible culturally, economically, ethnically, religiously,developmentally,
Let's give it another chance.
Mazl Tov.
Indeed, under the current Israeli trajectory, there's no way Israel will agree to a fully sovereign, co-existing Palestinian State, with all the natural rights included like choosing your trading partners and diplomatic allies. The proposal is then that the current land divisions are just made more permanent, and it made official that anyone encroaching on the new, fixed Israeli border is an intruder and not a refugee.
The fact is that the ONLY way to solve this problem is one state, one vote for each individual. The racism in Israel is getting worse by the day. 100,000 Charedim took to the streets to protest an integration ruling by the Supreme Court because they didn't want their children to go to school with fellow Sephardic Jews. There will be no easing in tensions by creating a sovereign Palestinian State along this hostility.
(Cont. about my proposal for a Secular Jewish Identity)
I agree.
One state solution is great idea.
Jordan, part of historical Palestine, with its majority Palestinian population had a peaceful and successful relationship with W. Bank Palestinians for 19 years.
Jordan and W. Bank of Jordan are extremely compatible-- culturally, economically, ethnically, and religiously.
A marriage made in Paradise.
I am sure W. Bank could again thrive as a autonomous part of Jordanian Commonwealth.
Perhaps one sunny day Gaza Emirate can join in.
Reviving the idea of Jordian-W. Bank federation has considerable appeal among common P-nians thirsty for calm and stability. It worked for 19 years from 1948-1967. It can work again now.
Few. if any. can be solved becuase Palestinian are in de facto state of civil war with each other.
Hamas and PA cannot even agree on a meeting!!! And neither has the capacity to carry out provisions of any signed deal.
Furthermore, Hamas paymasters,, Iran and Syria absolutely uninterested in resolving of this conflict.
That's reality.
One day or a year, or a decade Palestinians will get their political house in order, And then, and only then a deal should be inked. Not before.
Fatah and Hamas formed a "unity" government a few years ago. And Israel and the US conspired to subvert that government!
Yes. At the time they were waging a fully fledged gurilla warfare on children and women of Israel. How special of them.
If the world keeps pressing Israel on this, I suspect they will create their own "two state" solution: wall off what they want of the West Bank, leave the rest, and bomb it if the rockets don't stop. That wouldn't bode well for the region.
Now it is Palestinian Arabs turn to show some political maturity. Instead of flip--flopping from one pre-condition to another and ad infinitum.
The 2002 Beirut Arab Summit Initiative has been formally accepted by the ‘supreme leader’ of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei. Furthermore, Lebanese Arab Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has made it clear that Hezbollah would also accept such an agreement if it is accepted by Palestinians.
The writer overlooks far too many issues.
More to the point, he thinks problems are solved at insider Washington parties, where frankly I think more problems are made and no problems are solved.
Israel condemns Norway's upgrade of Palestinian standing in Oslo to 'diplomatic delegation
Foreign Ministry official warns that Palestinians won't want to renew peace talks with Israel if they start attaining political goals without negotiations.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-condemns-norway-s-upgrade-of-palestinian-standing-in-oslo-to-diplomatic-delegation-1.330976
A) Makovsky doesn't include Occupied East Jerusalem in his 'resolution' of borders discussion which is a deal killer for Palestinians.
B) All settlements are illegal (which Makovsky ignores) -- including those in East Jerusalem. There is virtually not a single human rights org, country or international body that says otherwise.
Fanned.