Public opinion polls published over the weekend clearly indicate that a majority of the Israeli public continue to
support a solution of two states for two peoples.
3/18/09
by Dov Weissglas (op-ed) -- Public opinion polls published over the weekend clearly indicate that a majority of the Israeli public continue to support a solution of two states for two peoples. The Palestinian terror from Gaza, which continued to dog Israel even after disengagement, may have sharpened the need to ensure careful security arrangements in any place from which Israel should withdraw in the future, but did not change the basic desire of a majority of the public to separate from the Palestinians-separation by peaceful means while creating conditions for fair and secure coexistence. Most Israelis do not want to continue controlling the territories, which could lead to the formation of one state for the two peoples.
There is, therefore, no basis to the contention that the outcome of the elections and the establishment of a Likud government serve as a public seal of approval for a fundamental change in the accepted position. It is possible that the Likud's return to power is an expression of public disapproval with Kadima's foreign policy path, which advocated negotiating on final status arrangements before the Palestinians had shown the ability and desire for secure coexistence. It is possible that in the public's opinion, Netanyahu will ensure Israeli interests in future negotiations better than others. But a majority of the public has not empowered Netanyahu to entangle the Israelis in the risk that their state will become the national home of two peoples.
Netanyahu has no reason to "fear." He will not be called upon tomorrow morning to agree to the establishment of a Palestinian state. The Palestinians, considering their own internal troubles, probably have no interest in this now. The Palestinian Authority is torn and divided, and unsure about its status in Gaza, which continues to exist as an independent Hamas state. It is for good reason that Olmert's proposal for a final status arrangement was summarily rejected. The PA leaders do not have a real interest today in an IDF withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. It is clear to them that only the IDF and the security establishment are preventing a takeover of their territory by Hamas. In this situation, negotiations or a political arrangement are not at all possible. The Palestinians also do not want to fail in establishing a state prematurely.
What do they want? They want diplomatic assistance, regional and global, in their battle against Hamas. They want continued international assistance for the economic, administrative and security demonstration of the PA. They want Israeli consent to expand the area of activity of Palestinian security organizations to additional areas. They want an improvement in living conditions and movement in Judea and Samaria. They demand real implementation of Israel's commitment to put a freeze on settlements and remove illegal settlement outposts.
At the same time, they demand the semblance of a political horizon: The recognition and announcement by Israel that in due time, when conditions are ripe, Israel will consent to the establishment of a Palestinian state. They say, and not illogically, that without a clear political future, the PA will find it difficult to fortify its internal standing and maintain the relative stability and quiet that exist today.
The establishment of a Palestinian state-with sovereignty restrictions and with the fulfillment of known conditions-is also a clear Israeli interest. The road map, which is the plan agreed upon by the entire world, states that this state will only be established when necessary conditions are met; this is the optimal means of reducing the risks posed by the Palestinian state.
The overwhelming Israeli government's rejection of a Palestinian state, which has ostensibly arisen following the political change that took place here, will not prevent its establishment, but may certainly lead to the loss of the world's support for the road map. We cannot presume that the international community will give up the idea of the Palestinian state just because of Netanyahu's election or as a gesture to the Likud's renewed wishes, but it may at this opportunity be glad to get rid of the road map, which is viewed by many members of [the international community] as a "burdening" document that "delays processes," due to the conditions posed to the Palestinians. In such a case, Netanyahu, who does not want a Palestinian state at all, will be forced to accept it without the important conditions that are currently guaranteed to Israel.
by Dov Weissglas (op-ed) -- Public opinion polls published over the weekend clearly indicate that a majority of the Israeli public continue to support a solution of two states for two peoples. The Palestinian terror from Gaza, which continued to dog Israel even after disengagement, may have sharpened the need to ensure careful security arrangements in any place from which Israel should withdraw in the future, but did not change the basic desire of a majority of the public to separate from the Palestinians-separation by peaceful means while creating conditions for fair and secure coexistence. Most Israelis do not want to continue controlling the territories, which could lead to the formation of one state for the two peoples.
There is, therefore, no basis to the contention that the outcome of the elections and the establishment of a Likud government serve as a public seal of approval for a fundamental change in the accepted position. It is possible that the Likud's return to power is an expression of public disapproval with Kadima's foreign policy path, which advocated negotiating on final status arrangements before the Palestinians had shown the ability and desire for secure coexistence. It is possible that in the public's opinion, Netanyahu will ensure Israeli interests in future negotiations better than others. But a majority of the public has not empowered Netanyahu to entangle the Israelis in the risk that their state will become the national home of two peoples.
Netanyahu has no reason to "fear." He will not be called upon tomorrow morning to agree to the establishment of a Palestinian state. The Palestinians, considering their own internal troubles, probably have no interest in this now. The Palestinian Authority is torn and divided, and unsure about its status in Gaza, which continues to exist as an independent Hamas state. It is for good reason that Olmert's proposal for a final status arrangement was summarily rejected. The PA leaders do not have a real interest today in an IDF withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. It is clear to them that only the IDF and the security establishment are preventing a takeover of their territory by Hamas. In this situation, negotiations or a political arrangement are not at all possible. The Palestinians also do not want to fail in establishing a state prematurely.
What do they want? They want diplomatic assistance, regional and global, in their battle against Hamas. They want continued international assistance for the economic, administrative and security demonstration of the PA. They want Israeli consent to expand the area of activity of Palestinian security organizations to additional areas. They want an improvement in living conditions and movement in Judea and Samaria. They demand real implementation of Israel's commitment to put a freeze on settlements and remove illegal settlement outposts.
At the same time, they demand the semblance of a political horizon: The recognition and announcement by Israel that in due time, when conditions are ripe, Israel will consent to the establishment of a Palestinian state. They say, and not illogically, that without a clear political future, the PA will find it difficult to fortify its internal standing and maintain the relative stability and quiet that exist today.
The establishment of a Palestinian state-with sovereignty restrictions and with the fulfillment of known conditions-is also a clear Israeli interest. The road map, which is the plan agreed upon by the entire world, states that this state will only be established when necessary conditions are met; this is the optimal means of reducing the risks posed by the Palestinian state.
The overwhelming Israeli government's rejection of a Palestinian state, which has ostensibly arisen following the political change that took place here, will not prevent its establishment, but may certainly lead to the loss of the world's support for the road map. We cannot presume that the international community will give up the idea of the Palestinian state just because of Netanyahu's election or as a gesture to the Likud's renewed wishes, but it may at this opportunity be glad to get rid of the road map, which is viewed by many members of [the international community] as a "burdening" document that "delays processes," due to the conditions posed to the Palestinians. In such a case, Netanyahu, who does not want a Palestinian state at all, will be forced to accept it without the important conditions that are currently guaranteed to Israel.
Email a friend
twitter
facebook
feed