The two-state solution, imperfect as a final-status agreement, could still be a crucial stepping stone toward achieving a more comprehensive formula for equality and just peace that everyone can live with.
It has been a long time since I’ve heard someone make an optimistic case for the current round of peace talks. Insiders, observers and outliers on every which side of the political spectrum in both Israeli and Palestinian society have every reason to smell failure in the air. History alone makes the strongest case for why the current American-led peace process is doomed. Add the on-the-ground reality into the mix and you’ve got a dismal picture.
To quote former settler leader and two-state opponent Dany Dayan, “20 years after Oslo, the burden of proof is on [two-state] believers, not me.”
But whereas Einstein once defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, the truth of the matter is that few people have accurately predicted some of the most dramatic and world-changing events in modern history.
Addressing the pessimists among us, first and foremost Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, U.S. President Obama said in an interview published Sunday: “If [Netanyahu] does not believe that a peace deal with the Palestinians is the right thing to do for Israel, then he needs to articulate an alternative approach. And as I said before, it’s hard to come up with one that’s plausible.”
Of course, there are other options. The most popular alternative is one, liberal democratic state in which Israelis and Palestinians live on the same land and enjoy equal citizenship under the law. Such an outcome means the end of the exclusive ethnic nation-states of Israel and Palestine as we understand them today, but it does not...Read More