Efraim Halevy

[Mediocrates]

Halevy makes a very interesting point. Since we accept that no permanent resolution can occur and total non agreement is unsustainable, there's a middle ground, a wonderfully Machiavellian one of permanent interim agreement.

From news article:

• The options for Israel and the Palestinians basically can be boiled down to these: a permanent agreement, an interim agreement, a de facto interim agreement, and a situation of no agreement. The best possible option - a permanent agreement - is not operable at this time and is the least probable.

• Since the leaderships of Israel and the Palestinians are faced with the reality of a no-solution situation, one in which a permanent solution is not workable, both sides will have to do what people often do in life - they settle for less, settle for something which is less permanent, less perfect. There will have to be an interim solution.

We have ended a two-year effort in trying to map out what we call the future borders between Israel and the Palestinian Authority: principles, scenarios, and recommendations. The options for Israel and the Palestinians basically can be boiled down to these: a permanent agreement, an interim agreement, a de facto interim agreement, and a situation of no agreement. I think the best possible option - a permanent agreement - is not operable at this time and is the least probable. At the other end of the spectrum, the possibility that there will be no agreement is not desirable because it risks a situation unfolding in which the parties lose control of the scene.

The Advantages of Settling for Less

An interim solution is easier for each side to implement in part because each side can tell its constituency that it is not final. The Palestinians can say this is a step towards the ultimate. Israel can say that it is reversible, even if it is not entirely reversible. It is one step in the direction of maintaining the quality of the Jewish democratic system of government which we wish to maintain, in which the Jews are the majority of this country. This country was created ultimately to be the epitome and the expression of the Jewish People and Jewish nationalism, although we have an Arab minority which should have full rights. We did not fight the War of Independence in order to create a multinational state.

It's quite brilliant, really. Create a permanent interim agreement where both sides can walk away claiming they've more or less won enough to fight another day, which they don't. I'm thinking of the Two Koreas. There's never been a peace treaty or bilateral agreement that the war is over or even that the 38th parallel is a border or that two countries legitimately exist.

http://jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowP...ed_Middle_East

[dayag]

I strongly disagree with giving the Palestinians anything without them ending all claims and issues against us. Anything they get is just one less bargaining chip gone.

If a permanent resolution is truly impossible, I'd rather just annex Area C and let the Palestinians wallow in freakish misery until they are ready to negotiate in good faith. I don't care whether they agree to this "interim arrangement." Any attempt on their part to use violence should be answered with disproportionate force.

[Mediocrates]

Except that I don't believe they will ever bargain. Never. May as well ask them to fly like seagulls or something. Never going to happen. The key is that Israel can still take unilateral actions and the Arabs can do whatever they like.

[Reffo]

The Arabs once again think that they are onto something. This time, they are trying to use the international blackmail angle. The isolate Israel internationally card. They are hell bent to play this card to it's ultimate conclusion, till they will lose this battle too

[farmboy]

If the EU and America via the UN would stop propping the Pals up and allow them to wallow in the mire that they seem to be destined for, the situation would sort itself out a darn sight quicker. While ever they have this inflated view of themselves they will never come down to earth and realise that they have absolutely no bargaining chips.

[johnvonneumann]

There is no reason, in principle, why a permanent agreement should not be reached some day (say, in a hundred years time). This will only happen when the great majority of Palestinians have abandoned any hope of destroying Israel. At this time polls show that about 30% are prepared to accept a Jewish state, while the rest wish to destroy it by more or less violent means. These proportions have to be at least reversed before Israel should even consider making any concessions that would carry serious risks.

With these proportions it is also hard to imagine anyone on the Palestinian side who one could make any sort of acceptable permanent agreement with. Any signed agreement that would satisfy Israeli needs would not be worth the paper it was written on.

On the other hand, interim agreements, that are beneficial to both sides and do not involve “permanent” issues such a sovereignty etc., could be made. The main reason why they are so hard to make is in fact outside interference and the so called “peace process” that makes many Palestinians believe that they are on the verge of achieving a complete victory.

Many on the Israeli left who support a permanent agreement (which in reality means only Israeli concessions) argue that things are moving badly for Israel and in the future Israel’s position is going to be weaker. They cite demographic factors and the supposedly growing “isolation” of Israel. However, these arguments are mostly bogus. Israel’s fertility rate is currently at 3.0 and is growing all the time (mostly due to the very high haredi fertility rate of around 9.) In Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria it is now higher than the Arab one. The Arabs also have a higher death rate.
(Some interesting observations can be found here

The idea that Israel is becoming “isolated” is even more false. This may be true to some extent in parts of Western Europe whose economic and political importance in the world is declining. It is certainly not true in relation to China, India, and South Korea whose importance is rapidly rising.

All this means that there is no urgency for Israel to make any permanent deals. The unpopularity and weakness of the Obama administration also means that less has to be feared from this direction. Israel’s most serious worries are internal, such as the attempts by the left to undo the colossal progress of that has been made over the last two decades (e.g. http://www.economist.com/node/17796932 ) and return Israel back to the “Third World” so beloved by the leftists.