Peace with Arab states has traditionally been done piece-meal, state by state. No one expected Israel to make peace with Egypt and Jordan at the same time, because they are two separate states. Rather, peace was made -successfully- with each state separately. To demand that Israel wait to make peace with Egypt until it was ready to make peace with Jordan, would have been ridiculous, and prolonged a cycle of violence.
The same approach should be taken to peace between Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank, pursuant to fact 2: Namely, that Gaza and the West Bank are de facto separate states already. One of those states, Gaza, continues to condone violence and not recognize Israel's right to exist, while the other state, the West Bank, is making tentative steps towards providing security, and recognizes Israel's right to exist. Thus, to force Israel to make peace with the West Bank only when it is ready to also make peace with Gaza, is merely to prolong a cycle of violence, and is extremely unfair to both Israeli and West Bank Palestinian civilians. Once Israel makes peace with the West Bank, the West Bank can vote on the status of its relationship to Gaza. Once Israel makes peace with Gaza, a referendum can be held in both states for citizens to decide whether they wish to fuse or remain separate political entities. Yet this decision should be left up to the Palestinians themselves. To impose a bi-state (as opposed to tri-state) solution is imperialist, for it is to impose the vision of Western leaders on the region, rather than leaving the decision to the residents themselves. This vision ignores the realities on the ground, realities that were created by the Palestinians themselves, when, in a democratic election, the Gazans chose to vote for Hamas, and the West Bankers chose to vote for Fatah.
No comments:
Post a Comment