Weekly Commentary: A Thumbnail Sketch of the Different Genuine Israeli
Positions on Palestinian State

Dr. Aaron Lerner Date: 17 December 2014

Let’s set aside the rhetoric for a moment and consider the true divisions
within Israel on the question of a sovereign Palestinian state.

#1. The secular messianics: The members of this group honestly believe that
if Israel were to completely and absolutely withdraw to the Green Line that
the Arabs would drop their other demands (e.g. return of refugees to within
Israel) and we would enjoy utopian peace in perpetuity.

Operative conclusion: There is no reason to be concerned about the efficacy
of the security and other arrangements associated with the withdrawal of
Israel and the founding of a sovereign Palestinian state since there will be
utopian peace regardless of the details. The purpose of all of this
verbiage is only to convince those who don’t embrace this view that a deal
is possible.

#2. The instrumental solution advocates: The members of this group
genuinely believe that it is possible to come up with an arrangement under
which a sovereign Palestinian state could be created that did not represent
an existential threat to Israel.

Avigdor Liberman, the head of Yisrael Beiteinu, is probably the most
important advocate of this position. Liberman has consistently taken the
position that the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state does not hinge
on the ability of the Palestinians to honor the commitments it makes in an
agreement so long as a third party is deployed on the ground to maintain
order. Over time the identity of this third party has shifted from being
Jordan and Egypt to NATO forces and most recently some kind of joint force
involving Saudi and other nations.

#3. The “buy time” opponents of a Palestinian state: The members of this
group recognize that the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state would
represent an existential threat to Israel but believe that, tactically, it
is not possible to reject such an idea outright. Instead of openly
rejecting the idea of a sovereign Palestinian state they either describe the
state in terms such that it is not actually sovereign or with requirements
that can be safely assumed to be “non-starter” requirements.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu best represents this approach.

#4. The “move on” opponents of a Palestinian state: The members of this
group believe that it serves Israel’s interests to openly reject the concept
of a sovereign Palestinian state as a “solution” and to move on to the
implementation of alternative arrangements.

Naftali Bennett of Bayit Yehudi is a prime example of this school of thought
with his proposal to annex areas in Judea and Samaria with the Palestinians
in the annexed area, just as the Arabs of eastern Jerusalem, able to take
Israeli citizenship, while those autonomous areas not annexed enjoy massive
investments to improve economic conditions.

Suffice it to say that the majority of Israeli voters identify with either
the “buy time” or “move on” approach.

The challenge for the Likud, Bayit Yehudi and Eli Yishai parties in the
current elections is to get Yisrael Beiteinu and Kachlon national camp
supporters to understand that a vote for these two parties is a vote that
could empower a coalition to facilitate the creation of a sovereign
Palestinian state.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il