The End Of A Viable Palestinian State

[Violet_Crumble]

The fatal flaw in most analyses of the Israel-Palestine conflict is the assumption that if the Palestinians can just get a state of their own, then all will be fine. A state on all the Occupied Territories (UN Resolution 242), on most of the Occupied Territories (Oslo and the Road Map to the Geneva Initiative), on even half the Occupied Territories (Sharon's notion) - it doesn't matter. Once there's a Palestinian state the conflict is over and we can all move on to the next item on the agenda.

Wrong. A Palestinian state can just as easily be a prison as a legitimate state that addresses the national aspirations of its people. The crucial issue is viability. Israel is a small country, but it is three times larger than the Palestinian areas. The entire Occupied Areas - the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza - make up only 22% of Israel/Palestine. That means that even if all of the territories Israel conquered in 1967 were relinquished, it would still comprise a full 78% of the country. Would the Palestinian areas constitute a viable state? Barely. Just the size of the American state of Delaware (but with three times the population before refugees return), it would at least have a coherent territory, borders with Israel, Jordan, Syria and Egypt, a capital in Jerusalem, a port on the Mediterranean, an airport in Gaza, a viable economy (based on Holy Land tourism, agriculture and hi-tech) and access to the water of the Jordan River. An accepted member of the international community enjoying trade with its neighbors - and enjoying as well the support of a far-flung, highly educated and affluent diaspora - a small Palestinian state would have a shot at viability.

This is what Israel seeks to prevent. Ever since becoming the head of the Ministerial Committee on Settlements in the Begin government back in 1977, Ariel Sharon has been completely up-front about his intention of securing the entire Land of Israel for the Jewish people. “Security” has nothing to do with Israel's expansionist policies. Successive Israeli governments did not establish 200 settlements because of security. Nor did they build a massive infrastructure of Israeli-only highways that link the settlement blocs irreversibly into Israel for security reasons. Nor can the route of the Separation Barrier, nor the policy of expropriating Palestinian land and systematically demolishing Palestinian homes be explained by “security.” They all derive from one central goal: to claim the entire country for Israel. Period.

Still, Israel cannot “digest” the 3.6 million Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories. Giving them citizenship would nullify Israel as a Jewish state; not giving them citizenship yet keeping them forever under occupation would constitute outright apartheid. What to do? The answer is clear: establish a tiny Palestinian state of, say, five or six cantons (Sharon's term) on 40-70% of the Occupied Territories, completely surrounded and controlled by Israel. Such a Palestinian state would cover only 10-15% of the entire country and would have no meaningful sovereignty and viability: no coherent territory, no freedom of movement, no control of borders, no capital in Jerusalem, no economic viability, no control of water, no control of airspace or communications, no military - not even the right as a sovereign state to enter into alliances without Israeli permission.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=7574

[Coastie for Truth]

1. You are assuming that Palestinians can only farm and can't do mental

work like software development, high end automotive engineering design, medical research, etc.

Have you ever heard of the Palestinian developed "Trusted Agent Electronic Funds Transfer" or the Palestinian and Iraqi developed hybrid cars, http://www.fordvehicles.com/escapehybrid/, (I lived in Metro Detroit)

[Igel]

2. The Mediterranean port should be easy enough, with good will

from Israel. But this assumes closed borders, which is a non-starter.

The capital in Jerusalem isn't strictly a necessity. Lots of governments have capitals elsewhere. It just needs a capital.

The rather small amount of territory that's under dispute would make no difference to viability. There's no way both countries could have unified territory and preserve the territorial claims imputed to the 1967 ceasefire line. Either Israel will be interposed between two pieces of Palestine (most likely scenario), or there'll be a strip of Palestine separating two chunks of Israel.

This means they'll have to form some sort of free trade area, or at least through-transit agreements, to make sure goods can get from one part of Palestine to the other. The other option is open borders between Egypt and Jordan; but Israel is hardly likely to permit that if it means even more dead Israelis. What is most required is good will between the two countries, the current Israel and the future Palestine. The Palestinians lot has hardly been improved because of the stance they've taken; at every point they played chicken, and lost. Both options are dependent on the same scarce commodity: good will.

Luxembourg and Lichtenstein are, for all intents and purposes, sovereign, but hardly completely independent. Just like Andorra and Monaco. Even Vatican City. But they are also heavily linked to the neighboring countries. Singapore, also minute, maintains its independence somewhat better. The Palestinians' model for sovereignty can hardly be Egypt's, given its size and configuration.

Nor can they hope for a heavy industrial base. They have few natural resources. They will have to go for a through-put production economy like Japan/Singapore, or a knowledge-based economy, or rely on tourism.

[Coastie for Truth]

3. Look at the Saudi, Egyptian, Jordanian "Knowledge Workers"

Lots of them are actually Palestinians. Even the Saudi. Egyptian, and Jordanian software developers in California's Silicon Valley. A lot of Palestinians.

I agree "They will have to go for a through-put production economy like Japan/Singapore, or a knowledge-based economy..."