I have in this diplomatic blog recently suggested a different two-state solution than the conventional one usually implied whereby Israel is reduced to the indefensible Jordanian-Israeli 1949 armistice lines. The latter will never happen for a number of reasons. 1) It is not in the interest of Israel’s survival to be reduced to the Auschwitz lines. 2) Ramallah has no interest in ending the conflict with Jerusalem and end the claim for immigration of millions of Palestinians to Israel. 3) It is not feasible to transfer 700 000 Jews from East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria or even just 100 000 Jews.
I have spent three decades carefully studying the details of Israeli planning in Israel and Judea/Samaria. The planning and establishment of Jewish communities throughout the land is intended to facilitate two possible outcomes: a) The first solution is intended to partition the entire Western Land of Israel between Israel and a Palestinian state in ways that would give Israel defensible borders. This would include granting Palestinian sovereignty over the three main Palestinian regions of Israel as well as the three main Palestinian regions of Judea and Samaria. Prime Minister Netanyahu was about to reveal the Israeli partition map in Judea and Samaria through application of Israeli sovereignty in redeemed indigenous areas but this was halted by President Trump through his misguided personal promise to a group of leaders of Muslim countries not to allow Israeli annexation. b) Israeli planners have long been aware of the longterm political consequences of the Haredi demographic explosion and knew already in the 1970s that Haredim would eventually become the majority in Israel and that this demographic shift would enable Israel to apply sovereignty to the entire Judea and Samaria and offer Israeli citizenship to the region’s Palestinian residents. The demographic trends were clear already in the early days of the indigenous restoration project in Judea and Samaria 50 years ago. Palestinian fertility rates were falling while the Haredi population continued to multiply at a very rapid rate. The Israeli planners thus established Jewish communities throughout the land in such a way so as to allow political flexibility for future decision-makers in Jerusalem. The Oslo process and resulting maps were also part of this planning. It is clear from the planning that partition of the land was always the preferred option.
But what about the Palestinian part of the equation? The not-so-secret policy in Ramallah since the very inception of modern Zionism is to not accept Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel within any borders, meaning that they will not sign off on end-of-claims no matter the borders. This is not illogical, they are less concerned about the details than the overall picture which is the ”liberation” of all land ”from the river to the sea”. This is a radicalized mindset where the conflict is a zero sum game where it is all or nothing. The question is whether this could change? Of course it can. It may seem unlikely now but it is perfectly possible. Demographic partition means that the main Arab regions in the Western Land of Israel would become part of the Palestinian state while Jewish and mixed communities would remain or become part of Israel. Israeli policy has long been maximum secrecy, i.e. not to show Israel’s cards for as long as possible. However the idea was to apply Israeli sovereignty in parts of Judea and Samaria that Israel intends to retain under the partition option. The Israeli government clearly wanted to keep the partition option open and it should be carefully emphasized that the E1 area was designated as Israeli under the Trump peace plan. However, it should be obvious to any clear-eyed observer that there will not be partition unless there is first de-radicalization of Palestinian political culture. Why? Other than the inevitably disastrous security consequences of unreformed Palestinian statehood for Israel and a resulting permanent humanitarian calamity for Palestinians in Judea and Samaria, Ramallah rejected Barak and Olmert’s insincerely generous partition proposals which were issued knowing full well in advance that the Palestinians would reject any partition map that would imply end-of-claims. This was well known by the architects of the Oslo Accords who successfully turned the till this day rejectionist PLO into collaborators with the Israeli military administration in Judea and Samaria.
Rather than funding leftwing extremists with no legitimacy in Israel, the Europeans should engage in a major effort to promote de-radicalization in Palestinian society because there will be no Palestinian state as long as ”from the river to the sea” demanding immigration of millions of Palestinians to Israel and deportation of 700 000 Jews and then all Israeli Jews remain the undisputed Palestinian consensus.
