2014–Not a Good Year for Israel

2014–Not a Good Year for Israel December 10, 2014

This has not been a good year for the State of Israel.

First, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry conducted Kissenger-like shuttle diplomacy in trying to renew the peace process between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. But his efforts failed largely because Israel’s politically-conversative adminstration of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not much of a partner. It was mostly due its apparent reneging on a commitment to release some Palestinian prisoners and its continued approval of increasing Jewish settlements in occupied territory. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas retaliated by beginning a process to join a bunch of international agencies, which Israel vehemently opposes.

Second, this summer Israel fought a two-month war with militants in the Gaza Strip, if not the governing Hamas adminstration itself. Palestinians living there suffered the most loss of life and destruction of property of any of their previous skirmishes with Israel. In contrast, and as usual, Israel suffered far less. This outcome increased the world’s largely negative opinion of Israel while increasing its favor toward the creation of a Palestinian state.

Third, political upheaval recently has occurred in the Israeli administration. Then, one week ago today, Netanyahu  fired two two centrist members of his coalition cabinet–Finance Minister Yair Lapid and Justice Minister Tzipi Livni. They have publicly criticized him for his settlement plans in occupied territories. Then the Prime Minister immediately called for new elections. Lapid had castigated Netanyahu for damaging Israel’s relations with the U.S. “because of patronizing and at time insulting behavior.” I think he is right. Netanyahu did that to U.S. President Barak Obama this year when he visited the U.S. and met with him.

Fourth, Israel’s Parliament dissolved itself yesterday and called for new elections in March next year.

Fifth, some of this recent political turmoil in Israel is due to renewed public discussion about whether or not Israel can continue to claim to be a Jewish state as well as a democracy. Recently, Netanyahu expressed his support of a hard-line, “nationalistic bill” before Parliament about Israel’s Jewish character which has greatly angered both Israeli Palestinians and non-Israeli Jews worldwide.

Sixth, the International Criminal Court yesterday granted the Palestinian Authority “observor status.” This upsets Israel to no end. Israel worries that if the Court eventually grants full membership to the PA, the PA could bring criminal charges to the Court concerning Israel and its political leaders in their decades of alleged mistreatment of Palestinians. Israel is very fearful of this happening. Abbas has proposed to the UN Security Council to compel Israel to withdraw from all of the West Bank, thus beyond the 1967 demarcation line. If the Council refuses, Abbas has announced that he will pursue full membership in the ICC.

Seventh, all of this negativity is contributing to an increased dismissal of a two-state solution by both Israeli Jews and Palestinians. The international community has been calling for a two-state solution for many years, and in recent years a majority of both Israeli Jews and Palestinians have come around to accepting this. If the two-state solution winds up in the waste basket, the ongoing, intractable Israeli-Palestinian conflict will worsen.

As I state often on this blog, there needs to be another two-state solution other than the traditional one–a Palestinian state in the two separated territories of the Gaza Strip and a Swiss-cheese West Bank connected by a corridor. Why? They’ve been trying for nearly fifty years to make that happen. It’s time to consider another two-state solution, such as the one I propose in my book Palestine Is Coming: The Revival of Ancient Philistia (1990)–let Israel have all of the West Bank and let the Philistines have “the land of the Philistines,” from whom they derive their name. This proposal is based on historical precendent, which is what Israel declares in its Proclamation of Independence. Unlike the U.S., Israel never afterwards drafted a constitution. Thus, Israel’s existence is based on its three-page Proclamation, which demands that Jews are entitled to their “ancestral land.” As I say in my book, THIS IS THE DISCUCCION JEWS NEED TO HAVE–what is historically “the land of Israel” and thus the Jews’ “ancestral land.” It is not where modern Israel is today or ever has been since its inception in 1948.


Browse Our Archives