Can there be a Middle East Peace Plan between Israel and Palestinians? With Israeli forces now inside Gaza, some are speculating on what it would take to garner peace in the region. Obstacles to a two-state solution include the separation wall built by Israel which added 8% of the West Bank to Israel, Palestinian refugees and their descendants, settlers in the West Bank, and the need to connect the West Bank to Gaza, among others.
What do you think would be reasonable solutions in attaining a two-state solution between Israel and Palestinians? What area or areas do you think either side will never negotiate on?
The article also briefly points to one suggestion of a single state. Do you think this is an option at all? Why or why not?
I pose these questions to encourage thoughtful answers. I would ask that people posting here be thoughtful in addressing these and any other questions posters may come up with. This type of answering, however, is not required to post here; I just felt we could all raise the level of discourse that seems to be lacking in some other discussions. Thanks
In keeping to a theme of simplicity and expediency, the offer that Arafat turned down would be a good plan to use. There were a lot of concessions from both sides, Israel included East Jerusalem, at the time that was a big shift. On your second thought, it is hard to see any possibility for a single state, except maybe after 100 years or more of peace.
goldminor:
Thanks for the insight. I agree with you on the one-state solution. It is too bad though because a lot of good people on both sides could share in a lot of good land and common civility.
The real shame is that many of them lived peacefully enough in earlier times. Over the last month, I searched out historical knowledge of events, mainly looking to fill in blanks on the rise of Islam. There are plenty of times, where there was a relatively peaceful existence between the two cultures. Which dispels the notion that they have been fighting each other for thousands of years. Mostly, after the rise of Islam, the Arabs, Turks and Persians fought each other for the next 800 years, with the exception of the occasional Crusader wars. It does appear that some Jewish tribes were converted by force or choice in those times. But there was always some Jewish people living in the region, despite what the Romans had done to them, and the events afterwards. Anyway, the only way to move forward, is for the Palestinians to accept the two state proposal and then do their best to control the violent ones in their midst. I believe that Israel will have to remain on guard for many years, even if there is a peaceful solution. The diehards will never stop until the end.
goldminor:
I agree with you that Israel would have to continue to be diligent if the two-state solution is ever reached. However, have you heard the reports with regard to the Israeli settlers, especially those in the West Bank, and the violence against the Palestinians? What should Israel do about them? Or should the Fatah government be allowed to arrest and prosecute them as Israel does with Palestinians?
Israel should have controlled the settlers years ago. I believe it would have been a better long term strategy, and could have led to earlier peace initiatives becoming reality. Even though it would have meant a more cramped Israel, everyone would have benefited from decreased tensions. Plus the increased security needs, caused a lot of unnescesary grief for Palestinians. That is one fault area, that sits fully on Israel. So it is up to Israel to make it right where they can. Fatah could not be involved, because it would become an allout fight. The settlers would automatically fight them to the death.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |