I think we've seen enough to understand that negotiations will be unproductive until they are based on a shared vision of the end-point, with the modalities being the primary subject of negotiation. The big problem now is that there is no shared vision of anything, and there won't be until both sides get comfortable with the idea that both of them are there to stay, so they had better learn how to live with each other in a viable and dignified manner rather than what has been going on since 1948. Until that realization dawns we should stop fooling ourselves.
As for the aid that is so desperately needed at the moment, airlifts are probably the most expensive and least-efficient way of delivering the help that is required, unless the contributions have in mind an operation on the scale of the Berlin airlift of 1948/49. The current US operation is so far a drop in the bucket, but it just started, so we'll see. That said, it would be far more efficient if Israel would let a sufficient flow of trucks in and some kind of international force were put on the ground to prevent them from being pillaged. Funding of UNRWA needs to resume as all those in the know acknowledge it is the only workable solution for delivering assistance there. Even that appears not to be on the horizon.
So far, this is all a lose-lose proposition and it is likely to remain so at least until the US, the EU and several key Middle Eastern countries become meaningfully serious (i.e. backing words with real sticks and carrots) to make it clear to both sides that any further assistance depends on tangible measures to end the war and the suffering.
Given the track record of Saudi-sponsored madrassas in places like Pakistan, I'm not sure that putting them in charge of deprogramming terrorism would work out well.
There are some meticulously planned injustices in the Israeli division of the West Bank into the A-B-C areas. Water is mainly in the Area C, and is mainly reserved for Israelis. What is left to Palestinians on the West Bank is not sufficient. Will that continue?
If the two-state solution ever becomes reality, will Israel let Palestinians with Israeli passport stay in Israel or expel them to the new state?
My thought too. Surely a peace conference relies on the good faith of all parties. If some attendees, e.g. Iran, far right Israelis, maintain their absolutist positions I can’t see a way forward. If they are excluded from the process I also can’t see a successful conclusion. I hope my gloom is mis-placed.
Is anyone considering the option of merging the West Bank with Jordan, and Gaza with Egypt? That seems like one way to arrange for functional and friendly governance of those territories.
Thoughtful and complex is your analysis. Clearly there are no easy answers, but it is clear that nothing meaningful can/will happen so long as Netanyahu and his coalition remain in power as well as Hamas retaining any political presence in Gaza.
But the best starting point, as I think you are seeing it, is that a two-state solution is a necessary, albeit not a sufficient condition for any lasting peace and security arrangement. And that is where the details and complexity come into play as well as negotiations of some kind. Establishing Palestinian statehood up front would, I believe, force Hamas out of the political fray, and would be devastating to Netanyahu. At that point the institutions of statehood could be constructed through the UN, and negotiating security and economic arrangements could take place.
Given the track record of Saudi-sponsored madrassas in places like Pakistan, I'm not sure that putting them in charge of deprogramming terrorism would work out well.
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. There are no easy answers here but the two state situation seems to be the only viable outcome. Not a lot of good choices.
I think we've seen enough to understand that negotiations will be unproductive until they are based on a shared vision of the end-point, with the modalities being the primary subject of negotiation. The big problem now is that there is no shared vision of anything, and there won't be until both sides get comfortable with the idea that both of them are there to stay, so they had better learn how to live with each other in a viable and dignified manner rather than what has been going on since 1948. Until that realization dawns we should stop fooling ourselves.
As for the aid that is so desperately needed at the moment, airlifts are probably the most expensive and least-efficient way of delivering the help that is required, unless the contributions have in mind an operation on the scale of the Berlin airlift of 1948/49. The current US operation is so far a drop in the bucket, but it just started, so we'll see. That said, it would be far more efficient if Israel would let a sufficient flow of trucks in and some kind of international force were put on the ground to prevent them from being pillaged. Funding of UNRWA needs to resume as all those in the know acknowledge it is the only workable solution for delivering assistance there. Even that appears not to be on the horizon.
So far, this is all a lose-lose proposition and it is likely to remain so at least until the US, the EU and several key Middle Eastern countries become meaningfully serious (i.e. backing words with real sticks and carrots) to make it clear to both sides that any further assistance depends on tangible measures to end the war and the suffering.
Given the track record of Saudi-sponsored madrassas in places like Pakistan, I'm not sure that putting them in charge of deprogramming terrorism would work out well.
There are some meticulously planned injustices in the Israeli division of the West Bank into the A-B-C areas. Water is mainly in the Area C, and is mainly reserved for Israelis. What is left to Palestinians on the West Bank is not sufficient. Will that continue?
If the two-state solution ever becomes reality, will Israel let Palestinians with Israeli passport stay in Israel or expel them to the new state?
Very useful analysis - and will Iran be asked to the Pre-Conference? Surely it must be engaged directly as well?
My thought too. Surely a peace conference relies on the good faith of all parties. If some attendees, e.g. Iran, far right Israelis, maintain their absolutist positions I can’t see a way forward. If they are excluded from the process I also can’t see a successful conclusion. I hope my gloom is mis-placed.
Is anyone considering the option of merging the West Bank with Jordan, and Gaza with Egypt? That seems like one way to arrange for functional and friendly governance of those territories.
My understanding is that Jordan and Egypt are adamantly opposed to this. That aside, it does seem like the intuitively right option…
Thoughtful and complex is your analysis. Clearly there are no easy answers, but it is clear that nothing meaningful can/will happen so long as Netanyahu and his coalition remain in power as well as Hamas retaining any political presence in Gaza.
But the best starting point, as I think you are seeing it, is that a two-state solution is a necessary, albeit not a sufficient condition for any lasting peace and security arrangement. And that is where the details and complexity come into play as well as negotiations of some kind. Establishing Palestinian statehood up front would, I believe, force Hamas out of the political fray, and would be devastating to Netanyahu. At that point the institutions of statehood could be constructed through the UN, and negotiating security and economic arrangements could take place.
Given the track record of Saudi-sponsored madrassas in places like Pakistan, I'm not sure that putting them in charge of deprogramming terrorism would work out well.
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. There are no easy answers here but the two state situation seems to be the only viable outcome. Not a lot of good choices.