Caveats for the Palestinian Perspective
In my 3-STATE-PROPOSAL I aim to thread the needle between two irreconcilable positions. The only honest way to do this is to “piss off” both sides somewhat. Here I explain why I think this proposal is still a good deal for the Palestinians despite being a significant compromise.
TWO PHASE — All paths to Palestinian freedom must go through a two-stage process.
(1) Safety. In the first phase, somehow, a large percentage (>70%) of Israeli citizens must come to feel safe with the idea that Palestinian self-rule can still ensure Israeli safety. It does not matter if you think they would be safe, they must believe this. This will require a decade-plus of Palestinians actively demonstrating a deep capacity for self monitoring, performed by a group shouting from the mountain tops how committed they are to Israeli safety. Nothing less will be believed.
(2) Pressure. The second phase will involve pressure both from outside and inside Israel to reward this demonstrated safety with freedom. Freedom will be given slowly, especially in the beginning. History shows that the hawk/dove political balance carefully tracks the threat of violence; it will take years for the balance to shift back. There is little point in adding pressure to Israel now to take actions that will make many citizens feel unsafe. Even at significant economic cost, they will resist taking any action that they believe makes them unsafe. Safety must come first, period!
NOT FAIR — The most common reaction from pro-Palestinian folks is: “Hey, your plan is not fair!! Why should Palestinians be asked to make all the compromises upfront while Israelis only make few; plus there is no certainty this path will ultimately lead to freedom?”
I agree with this complaint. Still the present path has yielded 70 years of imprisonment, and the next 200 years look to be more of the same. We need to ask different questions: (1) Do we have another better path that is politically workable? If not, then ask (2) is this proposal a modest improvement upon Gaza’s life today (or even as it was in 2023)?
Taking small steps forward is better than no step at all.
Militarily, Israel is in the driver’s seat, and there is no political will anywhere on the planet ready to challenge this; thus, we must satisfy Israel first. Or we can do nothing for a few more generations and hope this fixes itself…
NEVER WORK — Often, I hear that this will never work. Israelis will never bend. Perhaps. Still, even if true, making life better in Gaza and the West Bank is worth doing, so we can follow this plan towards that lesser goal. But I also reject this “never” claim. There has never been a Palestinian gov that could credibly control its population; this requires notable coordination and will. AND there have been moments when Israel was willing to give much more than they are willing to give today. So we should not say “Never,” instead we should incrementally move towards more safety and more freedom, and see where this takes us.
PROVING IT — Finally don’t underestimate the value of simply demonstrating that many/most Palestinians would gladly trade safety for Israel in return for true freedom and true prosperity for Palestinians. This is likely already obvious to you, but I promise it is NOT obvious to most Israelis and many others around the world today. Proving this to be true would remove a prime ‘excuse’ used to maintain the status quo today.
Let’s remove that excuse!
These comments are intended as a pro-Palestinian response for my 3-state proposal. Please read it here.
