Yesterday, David Hazony argued that in refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, the Palestinians were reserving a “pretext for future violence”:
It is not too hard to imagine that the Palestinian state would see itself as the champion of the rights of Israeli Arabs, who would now be depicted as oppressed under Israel’s ‘apartheid’ rule, giving all those anti-Israel forces around the world … something new to hate Israel for. But all this depends on the PA’s refusing to accept the very idea of a Jewish state – the very idea, that is, of Israel itself.
This may be true. But whether or not the Palestinians are sincere in their desire for peace, the very structure of negotiations makes it very unlikely that the Palestinians would ever recognize Israel’s Jewish character. After all, in negotiations with Israel, the Palestinians are represented by the Palestine Liberation Organization — and not by the Palestinian Authority. Indeed, despite the fact that Mahmoud Abbas heads both bodies, the PA and PLO represent different constituencies — with vastly different interests.
In this vein, the PA governs Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, whose interests include economic development, freedom of movement, and sovereignty. While many within the PA’s constituency oppose Israel’s existence — e.g., those who voted for Hamas — it is possible to construct policy such that recognizing Israel as a Jewish state within the context of a two-state solution becomes a matter of Palestinian national interest. Indeed, so long as PA leaders can be convinced that Israel’s domestic character does not infringe on Palestinian development and sovereignty, there is no non-ideological reason for the PA to care whether or not Israel is a Jewish state, as David correctly noted.
Alternatively, the PLO claims to represent all Palestinians worldwide, and its interests acutely reflect this difference. For example, insofar as it is internationally recognized as representing Palestinians in Lebanese, Jordanian, and Syrian refugee camps, the PLO stands to lose a great deal of its legitimacy by negotiating away the so-called “right to return.” Similarly, insofar as it claims to represent Israeli-Arabs, recognizing Israel as a Jewish state would mean disassociating itself from approximately 10-15% of its declared constituency — something that a rationally behaving political entity is unlikely to do.
For this reason, I disagree with David’s claim that the Obama administration has “fallen into Abbas’s trap” by conceding that Palestinians need not recognize Israel as a Jewish state. If anything, the administration is operating realistically — i.e., with a clear understanding of the PLO’s institutionally derived bright lines. Apparently, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is working under the same understanding: as David noted, Netanyahu has dropped the Palestinians’ recognition of Israel as a Jewish state as a precondition for talks. Of course, none of this suggests that peace is nigh. Still, insofar as peacemaking has long been the enterprise of romanticizing policymakers, this sudden cool-headedness might be a welcome development.
this analysis is superb…i would love to hear chas freeman’s (or adm. blair’s) critique of it…
…or george mitchell’s or even dennis ross’s….
…in fairness, one must ask – and answer – the question of how much easier the israel/palestine conflict makes it to ‘radicalize’ those who would otherwise behave more reasonably….
that said, as the iran/iraq war (remember that?), desert storm, afghanistan, pakistan and saudi arabia’s billion dollar export of wahabism, etc. would indicate that israel – and america’s wobbly alliance with her – are hardly at the center of that region’s troubles….
Clearly, Uzi Arad does not have the vision of Obama.
Only the One can see ten steps beyond the conventional tropes of yesterday, and forge a new beginning between the US and the Islamic world.
As for Israel, it is in the way at best, and possibly actively obstructive of the New American Policy.
/deepest thoughts of the elite Obama backbench.
Seriously, the Arab world has had an amazing success in changing the perception of the true dynamic of the Arab world’s unwillingness to tolerate a Jewish State in the mid east into the ‘Israel-Palestinian’ conflict, and further making the latter appear to be the most important of their many grievances against the West.
“As for Israel, it is in the way at best, and possibly actively obstructive of the New American Policy.”
The view that will win out is the survival of Israel. Obama and whatever “view” he holds can take a flying you-know-what. And Israel WILL survive.
Netanyahu’s correct: it’s 1938 again. This time, instead of Jews being defenseless, they have their own homeland, the best air force in the world, lots of f-16s, lots of nukes that they will use, and a determination to survive.
Israel will do what it needs to do and what it needs to do is to immediately destroy any Iranian nuclear capability forthwith. THAT will make the middle east a ton safer: not hand-holding Hamas while castigating Israel, as the feckless Obama bunch desire.
Seth, you are such an optimist! With leaders like Livni, ( and more than 30 of Israeli Jews voted for this Israeli version of Obama) Israel does not have a chance. Of course, taking into accoubt that 53% of Americans voted for Obama, we are even in worse shape.
elen,
Israel will do what it needs to survive. Menachem Begin bombed Osirik, got a lot of heat from the Reagan administration –withstood sales of AwAcs to Saudi Arabia and visits by Reagan (who I like) to burial sites of killed SS German soldiers –and Israel got through it. LBJ never helped ISrael. Nixon came through and literally saved Israel during the Yom Kippur war. Carter and Bush I worked actively against Israel (remember James Baker threatened to pull aid).
And Israel survived. It must knock out Iranian nukes immediately or do the best it can to limit the Iranian program –then, it can assuage our Neville Chamberlain of a president. First, survival. Second, being “liked” by the “world” . Livni has it the other way around.
Noah, the really purist Linkage advocates [maybe like tony blair], see Israel as the motive for Islamist extremists everywhere. In their view, the Islamist massacres and murders in Thailand, Kashmir, and even the Philippines are due to hatred of Israel. So why are they murdering Buddhist schoolteachers in Thailand??