Israeli and Palestinian former diplomats have banded together in order to start a new 2-State solution dialogue, based upon a confederation model. The plan will be presented to the United Nations & US government and looks more like a re-hashing of Donald Trump’s “Deal of the Century”, in that it is delusional and out of touch, bringing nothing new to the table.
The Associated Press (AP) have published a piece on the newest “peace proposal” to settle the Palestine-Israel conflict. The 100-page proposal, spearheaded by former Israeli official Yossi Beilin and Hiba Husseini who was part of the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s negotiating team, is set to “prioritize recognition” and sideline the ‘final status issues’. It proposes that the Israeli West Bank settlements, built in contravention of international law, remain in place with mutual land swaps, in order to make it more palatable for the Israeli side.
Dubbed controversial by the AP, it really presents as nothing new and, without even reading the document itself, proves completely ludicrous and out of touch with reality on both sides of the conflict. It is being hoisted up now, however, as a potential basis for reviving the “peace process”, initiated by the Oslo Accords [1993-1995] and will be presented to US officials representing the Biden administration, as well as the Secretary General of the United Nations. It has also been reportedly handed to both Israeli and PA representatives who have so far decline to comment.
Here’s why this proposal will hit the dustbin of history
First and foremost, neither the PA nor Israel will accept it. The Israeli government, headed by far-Right nationalist Naftali Bennett will not even entertain the idea of sitting down with PA President Mahmoud Abbas, despite the fact that Israel is currently battling to keep the PA quasi-dictator in place. The Israeli coalition currently in power is so far removed from the possibility of entering “peace talks”, with the PA, due to the fact that the power-sharing government is one of the most fragile in Israel’s history and any controversial move could see the dissolution of the government, spelling the end to the political careers of many leading Israeli politicians.
The Palestinian Authority on the other hand is at its lowest point, as it has completely eroded public support and even the PLO’s Central Committee meeting is being boycotted and/or criticized by every major Palestinian political party, apart from the ruling Fatah Party. Although the PA’s Fatah party leadership have been the least principled group in the Palestinian national movements political landscape, the issue of Jerusalem is one they cannot afford to budge on — which the new plan sidelines.
Although AP doubts the applicability of the plan itself, let’s play devil’s advocate and imagine that the Israeli government and PA both accept the plan. This would still result in utter failure. The Palestinian State proposed would include the Gaza Strip, where Hamas rules. Hamas is the biggest Palestinian political party and has much more support than Fatah inside the occupied territories. One of the architects of the new “Confederation Plan”, Yossi Beilin, laughed and said “I didn’t send it to Hamas,” adding sarcastically that he “doesn’t know their address”.
Working forward with the concept that the PA and Israel accept the plan, what do you do with Gaza? Then, when it comes to the final status issues; settlements, Jerusalem, the Palestinian refugee question and borders, the plan says it works first on recognition and that they are flipping the current model on its head, sidelining the most important issues to an after thought. What would recognition do to make anything better on the ground?
The way that this plan sounds, is as if it were written by people who have never heard of the Oslo Accords to begin with. Oslo was the recognition, the Israeli government recognised the PLO as the sole representative body of the Palestinians and the PLO recognised Israel’s right to exist as a State, from there they then sought a way forward, resulting in tangible changes on the ground and the formation of the PA. The reason why there has been no 2-State solution is because the final status issues are the only barrier left for both sides, on an official level — however, there are also other reasons that they don’t publicly state.
Even if the Israeli government recognizes a Palestinian State, in theory, in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem and the PA accepts the settlements remaining in place, which brings us again back to the final status issues. Then there is the added issue of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, DFLP and so on, which would be militantly opposed to such recognition and a plan of this nature. The reason for the Palestinian opposition would be that the PA had again made another concession, this time on settlements and allowing settlers to have usurped their land, whilst winning nothing for themselves than further collaboration with the occupying power. Also, the idea of mutual land swaps in order to facilitate the settlements remaining in place has already been discussed, it’s not a new issue.
Then there’s the added issue, now used as an excuse for not engaging the Palestinian side, that being the weapons of Hamas and the other armed factions in Gaza. Israel demands Gaza de-arms, which is off the table for the Palestinian resistance. Plus, how could you possibly hope to even start to solve this issue when one of the architects of the plan laughs at the prospect of approaching Hamas. The reason for the defeat of Trump’s “Deal of the Century” model, which was really an attempt to impose a more hardline version of this ‘Confederation Plan’ on the Palestinians, was not only PA rejection, but also the refusal of the armed groups to budge.
There are many other issues in the way of this proposal, but if this is going to at all shape the course of the debate on a failed “2-State solution” — currently accepted by consensus at the UN as ‘The Solution’ to the conflict — it must be understood today why it will fail tomorrow. Palestinians want equal rights, they don’t want only 20% of their land, whilst still being subjected to the overlords of an Apartheid regime. Palestinians seek freedom and are more united and stronger than ever. Attempts to impose any plan on them without consulting them and all their political parties will fail dramatically.
