In her new book, journalist Caroline Glick lays out a political plan built on application of Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. Here too, the question of how to deal with the demographic issue is a leading concern, but in this case, Israeli sovereignty becomes a surprising and essential demographic solution.
Journalist Caroline Glick has recently completed her book (in English) about the alternative plan to the 'Two-State' scheme. Glick directs her book 'The Israeli solution: A One State Plan for Peace in the Middle East' to the American audience "so that they will understand that the reason the United States' Middle East policy has been such a failure for the past two generations is because it's been based on a failed concept of carving a Palestinian state out of Israeli territory.
Whereas in Israel, the conversation has begun about alternatives to the 'Two-State' model, no such conversation is taking place in America. Since George W. Bush officially adopted the idea and made it the centerpiece of US Middle East policymaking, everyone has supported the establishment of a Palestinian state. In truth ever since the Nixon era, the paradigm that the United States has been promoting is the paradigm based on appeasing the PLO at Israel's expense."
Before Richard Nixon decided to treat the PLO as a desirable organization, US policy was not predicated on Israeli land giveaways. "In '67 there was no such concept in the United States. UN Security Council Resolution 242, which set out the terms of an eventual peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors, stipulated clearly that the Arabs must recognize the right of Israel to exist in peace and security within defensible borders and, only afterward, would territorial changes be addressed..."
In Glick's view, the US's reliance on the 'Two-State' paradigm as the panacea for all the Middle East's political pathologies has been the principal cause of most of its policy failures in the Middle East. "By viewing the Arab world through the prism of the Palestinian conflict with Israel, US policymakers' perception of Israel and the war against it has become distorted to the point of debilitation. The Americans are so blinded by their belief that by establishing a Palestinian state on territory Israel controls they will solve all the problems of the region that they cannot understand the region."
On a military level, according to Glick, this has blinded successive American administrations to the strategic significance of Israel's military campaigns and so blocked Washington's capacity to learn from Israel's experience or even understand that it is worth thinking about Israel's experiences.
In her book, Glick considers the US military intervention in Lebanon in 1982 and its intervention in Iraq in 2003. She discusses how the Americans' refusal to learn from Israel's experience in Lebanon, which stemmed from its embrace of the 'Two-State' model, made it impossible for them to understand the nature of the societies they were operating in or to develop strategies that were relevant to their battlefields.
In Lebanon, she explains, the Americans sided with the PLO against the IDF forces and deployed the Marines to force Israel out of Beirut while protecting the PLO from the IDF. "This was the aim of their 'peacekeeping mission,'" she says. "They were not prepared for the reality. That reality dictated that the parties fighting in Lebanon saw the US forces as an Israeli proxy. When they replaced the IDF positions all of those forces that were fighting against Israel aimed their guns at the Americans. The American misconception stemmed from the fact that they saw themselves as a liberating force, in contrast to the IDF, which they perceived as an occupying force. They were incapable of reaching the right conclusions regarding the PLO, Syria and Lebanon. The United States saved the PLO, and arranged a haven for it in Tunisia because the State Department believed that their generosity to Arafat would convince him to moderate his position, agree to the 'Two-State' solution and everything would be okay."
In Iraq, she explains, the Americans failed again because of the same misguided approach. "They thought they had nothing to learn from the Israeli experience of 18 years in Lebanon, because again, they were convinced that they were liberators and Israel was the occupier. So they marched blindly into Iraq. Most Israelis who understood Iraq and what happened to us in Lebanon foresaw precisely what happened in Iraq. But the Americans, who failed to notice the demographic similarities between the Lebanese and the Iraqis, didn't understand the relationships between the groups and the Syrians and Iranians -- the sponsors of the war in Lebanon -- and were blind to it. And again, their blindness owed to their inability to see Israel outside of the 'Two-State' paradigm. For them, Israel is only useful if it is giving land to Arabs. It isn't an ally; it is an obstacle to Arab support for the US."
The 'Two-State' solution, she explains, is the end of analysis and serious thinking about the region, not the beginning of it. "This is a belief that absolves its adherents from considering reality. If all of the problems of the Middle East stem from the fact that there is no Palestinian state in the Land of Israel then you don't need to learn about the Arab world, the various ethnic groups, the contradictory interests. There is no need for strategic thinking because every problem is clearly a result of 'Israeli greed'."
"The undertones of the 'Two-State' model are deeply anti-Semitic. And this makes sense. The eternal characteristic of Jew hatred is its rejection of logic and reason. If the Jews are to blame for everything, then there is no reason to think anymore. Jewish guilt is the catch-all explanation for everything that is happening, has ever happened and will ever happen in the world. If the Jews are to blame, then there is no reason to think anymore. There, you have the answer. Punish the Jew and everything will be fine."
In light of this, Glick sees the 'Two-State' model as nothing less than a model based on an anti-Semitic world concept. And Jews are not immune to the anti-Semitic rejection of reason. "The Israeli Left's belief in the 'Two-State' idea, despite innumerable proofs that it is false, is nothing but a part of the world view that rejects logic and reason."
Glick divided The Israeli Solution into three parts. Part One is a historical survey that lays out the failure of the 'Two-State' paradigm from the British Mandatory period to the present day.
In the second part of the book Glick examines the various aspects of the application of Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria. She provides an in-depth analysis of Arab and Jewish demography and shows that, far from being an existential threat to Israel, demography is one of our strongest assets. Glick demonstrates that if Israel were to apply its sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, and offer immediate permanent residency to all its Palestinian residents, as well as the right to apply for citizenship, Israel would still retain a two-thirds Jewish majority. Moreover, there is every reason to believe that the Jewish majority would only rise from there on in.
"The high rate of Arab emigration from Judea and Samaria, and the great potential for Jewish aliyah from Europe are clear indicators that time is on Israel's side. Moreover, the Jewish fertility rate has outpaced the Arab fertility rate in Judea and Samaria and is closing in on the Israeli Muslim fertility rate," she explains.
Ironically, she notes, Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is what will stop Jewish demographic erosion, in total contradiction to the way in which the 'Two-State' advocates describe reality. "Tzipi Livni speaks about a Palestinian state as a demographic solution whereas such a state would turn demographics into a real threat. After all, the Palestinian state would have control over its immigration policy. And who are the Palestinians in Syria and Lebanon who would immigrate immediately to a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria? They are the hundreds of thousands of people who live in villages that are called refugee camps and are controlled by al-Qaeda and Ahmed Jibril's PLO. This would be the implementation of the Palestinians' so-called 'right of return.' Obviously, these people would not live peacefully. They would incite the Arabs of the Galilee and the Negev to wage a terror war against Israel. All of the moderate Arabs, who are now well integrated into Israeli society, would be murdered like the collaborators that were killed in great numbers by Arafat when he came here. Only if we have exclusive control of the border can we prevent a demographic disaster. Even if all of the Palestinians become Israeli citizens we would prevent a demographic disaster by restraining Palestinian control in the immigration policy."
She also considers the record of success of the Israeli sovereignty model -- or the Israeli 'One-State' plan. "Israel has implemented the Israeli 'One-State' plan twice -- in Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. And both experiences were successful."
She devotes a chapter to Israel's legal rights to sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, and another chapter to its historic rights to sovereignty over the areas.
She spends, as well, two chapters considering the civil rights aspects of the Israeli 'One-State' plan and explains, "Israeli democracy and the status of the civil rights of Israelis and Palestinians alike will be massively enhanced if Israel applies its sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. The Palestinians in particular have been the primary victims of the 'Two-State' formula. From living in the freest society in the Middle East, outside Israel under military rule, they became subjected to the PLO's jackboot. For the past 20 years, the Palestinians have lived in a legal jungle, with no protected rights whatsoever and have stood by powerless as their children have been indoctrinated to become murderers and bigots. The Israeli 'One-State' plan offers them true civil rights and corrects a situation that should never have been created to begin with."
Part Three of The Israeli Solution considers the likely responses of the Palestinians, the larger Arab world and the European Union to an Israeli move to apply its sovereignty to Judea and Samaria. The last two chapters analyze how Israeli sovereignty over the areas would impact Israel, and the United States. In general, Glick's analysis led her to the conclusion that the party that will react most harshly would likely be the Europeans. "Today, the EU's only foreign policy is hostility towards Israel. This is made clear first and foremost in their aggressive rejection of Israel's sovereign rights to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. The Arabs have other interests. The Palestinians have limited capacities. The Europeans have nothing else going on. But in the end, Israel has the means to mitigate the damage of European anti-Israel actions. And a decision to apply Israeli sovereignty over the areas will give Israel the strategic clarity to meet the challenge in a coherent and constructive way."
Glick says she got the idea of writing a book after watching the vice-presidential debate ahead of the 2008 presidential elections. The moderator asked Sarah Palin rhetorically whether she supports the establishment of a Palestinian state. Palin looked slightly confused, hesitated and answered positively. From watching this debate Glick understood that in the absence of a clear, cogent alternative from the Right, the world, even those who support Israel, would continue to see the Left's vision as the only vision on the table for discussion.
"I brief the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate several times every year. Each time I present this plan on Capitol Hill, the response borders on euphoria. In the United States, just as in Israel, there are millions of people who understand that the 'Two-State' solution is a disaster. They are just waiting for someone to tell them that they can abandon it. My book gives them, and the Israeli public as well, the alternative that they are waiting for."
Glick rejects the voices on the Israeli Right that promote the idea of payment for Arab emigration or defining Jordan as Palestine. In her view, these are irrelevant ideas that no one will accept, especially the Palestinians themselves. "The only thing that should interest us is that Judea and Samaria is Israel," she says and notes that even though providing the Palestinians with permanent residency and the right to apply for citizenship is not a perfect solution and will damage Israel on certain levels, "it is absolutely clear that it is better than establishing a Palestinian state. Such a state would be the ruin of Israel."
Despite the risks, this policy will allow us to exist coherently as a liberal, open and Jewish country with the ability to determine our own fate, she explains.
Although Glick's book will initially be published in English, she expects that an Israeli publisher will buy the rights to it relatively quickly. "I have no doubt that, just as in the United States, Israelis have been waiting to have this conversation for twenty years. This book starts the conversation in a serious, comprehensive way, and I hope that in the next couple of years, we will see more and more people recognizing that there is a better alternative to the 'Two-State' model -- The Israeli Solution."
Article courtesy of Yehudit Katsover and Nadia Matar
Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green)
POB 7352, Jerusalem 91072, Israel
List of Most Recent Published Articles