It's theme:
It isn't too late for a two-state solution. Bringing the land into focus proves it.
He suggests, or declares, that "partition is still feasible...territorial dimension is solvable" and he has a new website that uses civilian satellite imagery to provide "a better understanding of settler trends" for
The interplay of geography and demography in the West Bank matters
Basically, he divides the population of revenant residents into various sub-group based of east or west of the security barrier. He comes up with a figure of
just under 556,000 Israelis living inside, or west, of the security barrier and more than 97,000 living outside of the barrier.
It's not a perfect summing up but he then writes that if
in a two-state solution, there were an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians regarding the relocation of these settlers, the prospect of relocation would become increasingly difficult...Israel needs to align its settlement policy with a two-state approach that enables Israeli-Palestinian compromise...None of this suggests that the barrier would necessarily be the border in a final-status agreement. That border would remain to be negotiated by the parties.
I left there this comment:
The term "relocation" is employed. As an aside, at least it is not "resettlement" with its historical echoes.I have but one question: do Arabs get relocated, too?Can parts of the Wadi Ara population be relocated?Or is it only Jews?Besides the question, I would suggest that Makovsky's plan would have a better chance to prove itself if it would proceed incrementally. For example, first, an updated Begin-era autonomy/self-rule plan. Then a federation-with-Jordan plan. These would prove to all that the Arabs desiring an independent state of Palestine indeed have the desire, capability and wherewithal to maintain a state structure and its administration, halt incitement, stop terror, initiate peace programs, begin joint normalization projects, etc. Something has to be done other than creating ideas to undo 20 years of what the Palestinian Authority has wrought.
And then I added this:
Whatever the "solution", let's not forget that there was a Palestine Mandate. In 1922, the two-state solution was done and Jordan, geographically 75% of historic Palestine started off on its road to be an Arab state.The two-state solution was tried in 1937 and the Arabs refused.Again in 1947, and refused.A war by Arabs in 1967 was launched when no "occupation" existed nor were there any "settlements" as Jews had been ethnically cleansed from Judea, Samaria and Gaza (aka, the "West Bank" and Gaza) between 1920-1948.Has Makovsky solved those problems which caused the Arabs to reject the two-state solution previously, which would then facilitate a two-state solution today?^
2 comments:
The Makovsky plan sounds feasable, except for one vital factor, namely the Arab rejection of a Jewish State on any part of "historic Palestine".
What is needed is not any more plans, but after 100 years, a more progressive Palestinian leadership
Makovsky makes his living off of producing these kinds of numbers. He will never put himself out of business by “knowing better.”
Post a Comment