The Logic of Abandoning the Two-States Campaign

Abstract

Bringing about the conditions needed for a durable two­state deal would necessitate currently unthinkable shifts in some long­standing assumptions held by Israeli Jews. A deal sufficiently durable to withstand post­agreement pressure from Palestinian dissidents would need to include three components:If a change in Israeli political consciousness great enough to accept such a deal is a necessary but unachievable prerequisite of a two­state solution, what can we hope and act to achieve? The reluctant conclusion offered by Michael Lerner in this issue of Tikkun — that we ought to replace policies guided by domination with strategies inspired by generosity — nosedives into the pool of well­meaning and impractical approaches to the Palestinian­Israeli dilemma.A “one person, one vote” campaign could, as Lerner suggests, have as its goal pressuring Israel to negotiate a two­state deal, but that may be no easier than a campaign whose goal truly is one person, one vote. Israel is already a single sovereign state with millions of disenfranchised adults.The Palestinian­led rights­for­peace campaign, as described by Yousef Munayyer in the New York Times on March 19, 2015, pressures Israel to grant political rights to Palestinians living in the occupied territories. This is the movement that brings us boycott, divestment, and sanctions, the campaign launched in 2005 by Palestinian civil society groups rejecting the official negotiations that failed to produce freedom and equality.In the Huffington Post of May 17, 2015, Jeff Faux of the Economic Policy Institute argues that Israel will not accept a one­state or a two­state solution unless the alternative is becoming an international pariah state like apartheid South Africa. Thinking along the same lines, the U.S. branch of the Palestinian equality movement is prioritizing campaigns to compel Israel to fully include all Palestinians under its control in all aspects of democracy. Tens of thousands of campus activists are building pressure on Israel through university­based divestment campaigns. Meanwhile, the hundreds of grassroots groups that make up the umbrella group U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation are pressuring the Israeli and U.S. governments to support Palestinian equality. Thousands of Presbyterian, Methodist, and Episcopal activists have mobilized to pressure Israel.If the tens of millions of dollars invested by its opponents are any measure, the growing pressure of the Palestinian equality movement in the Palestinian territories, the United States, and beyond will be the game changer that coaxes Israel into resolving Palestinian inequality. Growing campus activism frightens pro­Israel groups, because their calls for equality in diversity, political liberties, and suffrage for all under Israeli rule reflect the most fundamental American values.This equality campaign will push the Israeli public deeper into a debate about the necessity of having a particularly Jewish state apparatus in order to provide safety and security for Israeli Jews.Whereas historically, any pressure on Israel to negotiate a two­state deal was a call for Israeli initiative, nonviolent pressure to transform the current two­tiered, single­state arrangement will require Israel to justify the status quo. Israel can claim that the status quo is better than an unviable deal, but the viability of defending the status quo against the claim of disenfranchisement will continue to dwindle.It is no easier, then, to imagine the shifts in political opinion required for Israel to agree to a two­state solution than to consider those required to transform the current arrangement into a government for all its people. In response to the Palestinian equality campaign, Israel will need to choose among four options:It is not obvious which is most achievable in the shortest time frame. Unpredictable domestic, geopolitical, and natural events may shift the viability of each option. In any case, for Israeli Jews, the first option is inviable. But the second, a two­state deal, is not necessarily the easiest.Enfranchisement of Palestinian residents of Palestine/Israel could replace the political and military conflict with a principled platform for granting Jews and Palestinians security, economic viability, and individual freedoms, along with free expression and self­ determination as peoples.An enfranchisement campaign needn’t insist on any particular political arrangement, and it certainly should not insist on two states or assume that such an outcome is possible. The aim of this movement should be equal to its claim: political equality for all. Any political arrangement would need to ensure equality, and there is more than one imaginable equalizing political arrangement.What matters is action to pressure Israel to shift its policy, which it can do in any way that accommodates the needs of two sets of people seeking security, freedom, and self­determination.