In 1998, I moved to Israel to study at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beer-Sheva. I had two Israeli and one Bedouin roommates in the quad apartment I shared, and a girlfriend of Persian-Jewish descent. I stayed there until fall of 2000, when I moved to Tel-Aviv. Apart from a brief summer back in the States, I stayed in Israel until 2002, for about four years.
When I arrived, it was during the warm glow of the Oslo Accords. When I left, the Palestinians were well into what had begun as the "al-Aqsa Intifada", sparked when Ariel Sharon went to the Temple Mount, angering the Palestinians. I experienced 9-11 in Tel-Aviv, and also first read of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative in the International Herald-Tribune in the Tel-Aviv apartment I shared with the aforementioned girlfriend.
Through all this, one thing seems to be largely accepted as a given (even if not embraced) by almost everyone I talked to there is that one day there will be two states, based somewhat on the 1967 borders, with a little give and take on both sides. Some Settlements will be evacuated to "buy off" a Palestinian right-of-return, and the two countries will probably live in a state of uneasy, tense Cold-War-Like Berlin Wall standoff until, one day, after a couple generations of fading tempers, there will be a stiff and cool businesslike regard between them.
It would probably even be called "peace", although there may never truly be a written agreement that offers solid closure.
A Palestinian state is almost certain. Only the hard-liners on both sides say otherwise. But for the most part it is not a matter of if, but when, and under what circumstances. But if the Palestinians go ahead with their proposed Resolution on the 23rd, there is a way that Democrats can work with that, and make a case to secure both the Jewish and Arab/Muslim votes in 2012, and earn goodwill in a region where we could sure use some.
More after the falafel.
Is it a good idea for a Palestinian state to be declared on the 23rd?
There are good reasons to do it, and there are good reasons not to. Right now it looks like it is going to go ahead, and at least it will shake things up and re-frame the debate. But if it goes ahead, the real question is "what will the United States do about it?" Will we pull out all the stops to sink it, and risk burning up goodwill (of a sort) we've painfully gained with our toe-in-the-water support of the Arab Spring? Or will we go for broke and support it, or at least not hinder it, and let Israel feel the increased isolation in a volatile region, where Egypt and Turkey both are rattling sabers?
My argument is that declaring a Palestinian state is fraught with problems, but if it is going to happen, let's harness it, and let's harness it while we have a relatively enlightened Administration that happens to be Democratic.
A Palestinian state ushered into existence next to a smiling Democratic Administration can be moulded by that Democratic Administration. It can be influenced towards human rights and free elections, and reinforce the border and push towards an actual treaty. A Democratic Administration is more likely to support a Palestinian leadership that won't be facing its own "Tahrir Square" 30 years from now.
On the other hand, if we wait, or sabotage a declaration of Statehood because the notion is uncomfortable or "rocks the boat", then we run the risk of having the resolution being brought up again in the future, when a bellicose Republican Christian Zionist type is in office.
Imagine Rick "Gimme Them Thar Nukular Weapons!" Perry in office, ready to show off his "defender of Israel" chops as a Palestinian state is declared over American objections. Even if the Rethugs accept a Palestinian state, you know they'll find a despotic strongman overlord to prop up, for the sake of "stability", and will constantly allow for that state to antagonize Israel so that Israel has a reason to maintain close ties to the US, powerful defense forces, and so that the Palestinians continue to serve as an example of poor Arab leadership.
I'm still uncertain about whether a Palestinian declaration on the 23rd is a good thing for either Palestine or Israel. The Palestinians seem to think it is a good idea and don't see possible problems; and the Israelis seem to think it is a horrible idea and don't see the possible benefits.
But if it happens, we should embrace it, and President Obama is in a much better position to "get in on the ground floor" of a new Palestine and steer it towards peace and respect for law and human rights. That desire for respect and human rights is a driving force in the Arab world right now, and a Democratic President can earn points with the Arab community by using his influence to make that a cornerstone of a new Palestine.
Meanwhile, being able to go to Israelis and say "we can't stop a Palestinian state, but we can see to it that it is a state that operates by the rule of law and will respect the borders and peace". A secure Israel? A lot of Jews would vote for that.
We won't see any of that with a Republican President.
So-- thoughts?