What should be encourage is the two side (or Israel and the many "other sides") laying out their demands, and starting from that seeing where accomodation can be reached.
That is why I say Israeli needs to be proactive. Both sides in the ME tend to state negatives, not positives. This is poor negotiating.
Israel should respond that they are excited about a comprehensive peace plan, and they want to jointly see if a solution can be obtained. Clearly any sovereign state controls it's own immigration, so Israel should retain that right. In addition, Pals should stay in Pal state. However, WB settlements should not stay in Pal state either. Both sides can give, that is required. Further issues are the holy sites, and both sides should accommodate each other.
It would rapidly be up to the Pals to show their response, and with joint Arab & world pressure, this would likely be their best shot at a reasonable future. If they fail to take it, the rest of the world needs to clearly remember the missed opportunity, and who was too blame. Israel needs to very clearly not provide the Pals, the Arabs, or the rest of the world with reason to blame them instead. Israel needs to look very carefully at the fundamentally important issues for their state, vs. the rather tangential ones.
My own opinion is that following 9/11 Bush should have taken the Saudi plan when first floated, and put $500B into that rather than Iraq. But just my 2 cents. |
