[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:

"Therefore, for a lasting and fair solution, there needs to be an exchange
of populated territories to create two largely homogeneous states, one
Jewish Israeli and the other Arab Palestinian."

Here is the puzzle: If you go to the trouble to actually think about what
Avigdor Lieberman is proposing (that a Palestinian state plunge into Israel
in various locations where there is now a large Arab Israeli population)
you realize that he advocates the creation of a Palestinian state with
borders actually more dangerous than the '67 lines.

Granted, he also writes that "Israel will need to retain a presence on its
borders to ensure no smuggling of arms" but that is painfully vague. What
is a "presence"?

.So why is he termed a "right winger" when in many respects he is proposing
something to the left of Meretz?]

My blueprint for a resolution
By AVIGDOR LIEBERMAN The Jerusalem Post 06/23/2010 23:40
www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=179333

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and
expecting different results," Albert Einstein once said.

Since 1993, successive governments, supported by the international
community, have tried to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict using the
flawed paradigm of land for peace. Each time, the same formula was
attempted, but failed every time because of Arab recalcitrance.

Increasingly, the international community has started to demand that Israel
return to the pre-1967 armistice lines as the basis of any resolution to the
conflict. This has largely happened because there is a misunderstanding that
the dispute is territorial in nature and confusion on international law and
precedent.

Most importantly, the Israeli leadership has historically provided no
alternatives to this paradigm.

Those who claim that Israel must return to the socalled Green Line need to
examine UN Security Council Resolution 242, the legal framework created
following the 1967 war when the territories were conquered.

The resolution purposely never called for a full withdrawal from the West
Bank. Lord Caradon, the main drafter of the resolution, called the pre-1967
lines "artificial and undesirable", another drafter, Eugene V. Rostow, US
undersecretary of state for political affairs in 1967, said Israel needs to
retreat only to "secure and recognized borders, which need not be the same
as the armistice demarcation lines."

In fact, the Green Line was created as a line where the Israeli and
Jordanian armies concluded their fighting when Israel's War of Independence
ended. The Jordanian- Israeli Armistice Agreement specifically stated: "No
provision of this agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims
and positions of either party hereto in the peaceful settlement of the
Palestine questions, the provisions of this agreement being dictated
exclusively by military considerations."

So there is no evidence that the Green Line, the demarcation that former
dovish foreign minister Abba Eban described as the "Auschwitz lines," was
ever considered a border of any kind.

While many claim that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is territorial, the
facts suggest otherwise. Israel had no citizens, settlers or military in the
West Bank until 1967, but did not enjoy one moment's peace from our
neighbors and the terrorists that they supported.

The Palestinian Liberation Organization preceded that war and was created in
1964, specifically stating in its original constitution that it made no
claims to the West Bank.

IF THE conflict returns to the pre-1967 lines, it will inevitably pass
beyond those borders and into Israel. Most of the country's Arab population
defines itself as Palestinian politically and culturally.

Many openly identify with the Palestinian national movement to the point
where they openly act against the state which provides them with full civil
rights. In 2006, the Arab leadership wrote a paper titled "The Future Vision
of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel," which was deeply troubling as it
questioned Israel's legitimacy and raison d'être as the realization of
Jewish self-determination.

Even worse, some Arab leaders actively assist those who want to destroy the
Jewish State. Former MK Azmi Bishara directed Hizbullah rocket attacks on
Israel and Ahmed Tibi advised Yasser Arafat and current Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, even though he is a member of the Knesset
whose wages are paid by the taxpayers.

Large-scale demonstrations against Israel regularly appear in Arab cities
all over the country, where it is not infrequent to hear the cries of "Death
to the Jews" and where pictures of terrorist leaders from Hamas and
Hizbullah are prominently displayed. These phenomena are a clear indication
that a conflict between two peoples is the cause of friction.

The solution lies not in appeasing the maximalist territorial demands of the
Palestinians, but in truly creating "two states for two peoples."

The current demands from some in the international community are to create a
homogeneous pure Palestinian state and a binational state in Israel. This
becomes the one-and-a-half to half state solution. For lasting peace and
security we need to create true political division between Arabs and Jews,
with each enjoying self-determination.

Therefore, for a lasting and fair solution, there needs to be an exchange of
populated territories to create two largely homogeneous states, one Jewish
Israeli and the other Arab Palestinian. Of course, this is not to preclude
that minorities will remain in either state where they will receive full
civil rights.

There will be no so-called Palestinian right of return.

Just as the Jewish refugees from Arab lands found a solution in Israel, so
too Palestinian refugees will only be incorporated into a Palestinian state.
This state needs to be demilitarized and Israel will need to retain a
presence on its borders to ensure no smuggling of arms. In my opinion, these
need to be our red lines.

We have seen that history is moving away from attempts to accommodate
competing national aspirations in a single state. The former Yugoslavia was
broken up into many separate states. Czechoslovakia was split into two, and
even in Belgium there are strong voices who wish to see that nation broken
into separate Walloon and Flemish territories. The precedent of creating new
states based on ethnic, national and even religious boundaries has been
established in the international community and is becoming the trend.

With all the difficulties involved, this is the only solution that ensures
long-term stability in the region.

In most cases there is no physical population transfer or the demolition of
houses, but creating a border where none existed, according to demographics.

Those Arabs who were in Israel will now receive Palestinian citizenship.

THERE ARE those who will claim that it is illegal to remove citizenship from
individuals. However, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 55/153,
written in 2001, explicitly states: "When part of the territory of a state
is transferred by that state to another state, the successor state shall
attribute its nationality to the persons concerned who have their habitual
residence in the transferred territory and the predecessor state shall
withdraw its nationality from such persons."

There are also those who claim that those Arabs who would become part of a
future Palestinian state would reject this. Firstly, we need to beg the
question: Why would Arabs who claim to support Palestinian national
aspirations reject this plan? However, I believe that we can put this to a
referendum to all of the citizens of Israel and let them decide.

I have no doubt that they, regardless of race or religion, will show
political maturity to ensure a lasting peace which is in the best interests
of all.

While many are growing impatient for a resolution, setting artificial time
limits or pressure will not help.

Regardless of how long it takes, the resolution to this conflict can only be
achieved through nonviolent means. There are currently more than 100
territorial and national disputes around the world where those involved do
not resort to violence.

However, to build trust and a positive atmosphere between the parties the
Palestinians cannot continue to incite against Israel, glorify murder,
stigmatize Israel in international forums, boycott Israeli goods and mount
legal offensives against Israeli officials.

While there will be many ups and downs during this arduous process the
resolution can only arrive through direct negotiations.

This is the blueprint for a permanent resolution to our conflict. In the
words of Theodor Herzl: "If you will it, it is no dream."

The writer is foreign minister and deputy prime minister.