RE-FRAMINGThe Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Why Should This Conflict Matter To Us?

• The conflict is emblematic

-- In the Muslim world

-- In the global community

-- As the battleground for human rights and

international law

-- For Jews.

• The progressive international civil society cannot afford to see the Occupation actually win and a new apartheid regime emerge.

(1) The Issue of ExclusivityIn Israel’s Framing

• The Land of Israel belongs exclusively to the Jewish people; Arabs reside there by sufferance and not by right.

• There is no other people that has legitimate rights or claims.

In the Human Rights Framing

• Two peoples reside in Israel-Palestine and each has rights of self-determination.

(2) The Conflict

In Israel’s Security Framing

• Israel is fighting for its existence. The conflict is a win-lose proposition: either we “win” or “they” do.

• Israel’s policies are based solely on concerns for security.

• The Arabs don’t want peace; the Palestinians are our enemies.

• The problem is Arab terrorism.

AND

• There is no Occupation.

In The Human Rights Framing• The Occupation is at the center of the discussion and

is pro-active.

• Israel is not fighting for its existence: Palestinians recognize Israeli sovereignty over 78% of the country; the Arab world has offered Israel regional integration.

• All attacks on civilians are prohibited (in human rights language), whether from non-state (“from below”) or state (“from above”) actors.

• Israel is the strong party and the Occupying Power, not the victim.

• As the strong party, Israel must be held accountable.

(3) Solutions

In Israel’s View• Any solution must leave Israel in control of the entire

country.

• Israel needs a Palestinian state to “relieve” itself of the Palestinian population.

But

• Any Palestinian state must be truncated, non-viable and semi-sovereign – a bantustan.

In a Sustainable, Human Rights Approach

• A Palestinian state has to be viable and truly sovereign, not merely a bantustan.

• Only a win-win approach based on co-existence, justice, human rights and international law can resolve the conflict.

Critical Questions of Any Peace Process

• Will this plan really end the Occupation, or is it merely a subtle cover for control?

• Does this plan offer a just and sustainable peace, or merely an imposed and false quiet?

• Does this plan offer a Palestinian state that is territorially, politically and economically viable, or merely a prison-state?

• Does this plan address the refugee issue?

• Does this plan offer regional security and development?

THE ROAD AHEADTO A JUST PEACE IN PALESTINE/ISRAEL

Option 1: (Qualified) JusticeA VIABLE TWO-STATE SOLUTION

• 78% Israel; 22% Palestinian State

• Mutually agreeable settlement of the refugee issue after Israel recognizes the Right of

Return and acknowledges its role in driving out the refugees

THE ROAD AHEADTO A JUST PEACE IN PALESTINE/ISRAEL

Option 2:

A Threatening (But Real) Possibility

APARTHEID

THE ROAD AHEADTO A JUST PEACE IN PALESTINE/ISRAEL

Option 3:

ONE DEMOCRATIC STATE

THE ROAD AHEADTO A JUST PEACE IN PALESTINE/ISRAEL

Option 4:

A REGIONAL CONFEDERATION(Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon)

TWO-STAGE REGIONAL SOLUTION

Stage 1: Palestine/Israel (Separate sovereignty from viability)

• Palestinians accept a state including Gaza, 85-90% of West Bank and Arab parts of East Jerusalem, giving them sovereignty, citizenship and membership in the international community

on condition that, as Stage Two,

Stage 2: Middle East Union• The international community guarantees (within 5-

10 years) the emergence of a regional confederation.

• Palestinian political identity addressed by the creation of a state, yet

• All residents of the Middle East Union allowed to live and work throughout the confederation.

• Integrity of each member state respected, while

• Addressing the needs of the Palestinians (including refugees) and

• Neutralizing the Occupation.

• An MEU facilitates regional development.