Opinion | Two States: A Reckoning

Yeshayahu Leibowitz. A man of moral clarity. Credit: Alex Levac

"I would listen to the words of the prophet Yeshayahu Leibowitz,
who said immediately after the Six-Day War
that holding on to the territories would bring destruction down upon us."

Ever since I became politically aware, I have supported the two-state solution. It was always clear to me that it was the correct and moral solution for both sides. After all, there is no chance that 2.8 million Palestinians in the West Bank will relinquish their dream of an independent state, and if we don’t want to condemn ourselves to endless war, the results of which are liable to be catastrophic, it is incumbent on us to divide the territory between the Jordan and the sea between Israel and Palestine.

That is what I thought when I was a high school student, I would listen to the words of the prophet Yeshayahu Leibowitz, who said immediately after the Six-Day War that holding on to the territories would bring destruction down upon us. I even remember the arguments in the neighborhood, with the majority not wanting to give up Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem or the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. But to me it was clear the two-state solution is the realization of the Zionist vision of a Jewish and democratic state, living in peace with its neighbors and thereby achieving true security.

Since then, the years have gone by (55, to be exact), the reality has changed, and there is no better time for a reckoning of conscience and an examination of past beliefs than these days between Rosh Hashanah and the eve of Yom Kippur.

I asked myself a simple question: Suppose they made me the decision-maker, and I had to sign an agreement that gave the Palestinians a state. Would I sign it? There were years when I would not have hesitated for a moment. After all, immediately after the Six-Day War, Prime Minister Levi Eshkol declared that we were holding the territories only as a deposit, until there is peace, and the public believed that Israel would relinquish the territories and a Palestinian state would arise. But quite rapidly the national mood changed, and we fell in love with the territories. We started day-tripping between Jerusalem and Nablus and the temporary deposit became a “patrimony,” which has been ours since biblical times.

The big change came immediately after the Yom Kippur War, when the Gush Emunim movement realized that if it succeeded in filling the territories with dozens of settlements and hundreds of thousands of settlers, no government would be able to remove them. And indeed, in the winter of 1975, Defense Minister Shimon Peres surrendered to the messianic fervor of Hanan Porat and Moshe Levinger and approved the establishment of a temporary settlement at Kadum, from which 150 (!) settlements sprang up on every hilltop, and today it is clear that if any prime minister ever signs an agreement to evacuate the West Bank, it will end in a civil war of the settlers and the extreme right against the army and the government.

On the other side, too, there have been far-reaching changes. With the passage of time, the yoke of the occupation has weighed more heavily; there is more stealing of land, more harassment, more killings, poverty and unemployment. All this is only increasing the Palestinian desire for an independent state of their own.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Mazen, who supports a political struggle without the use of violence, is now no longer able to stop the popular rage and the acts of terror. The Palestinians have lost the hope of ending the occupation in non-violent ways and young people are coming out openly against the army. They are not hiding, but rather documenting themselves on social networks with weapons, and thereby becoming local heroes. As a result of this, the Palestinian Authority has lost control in northern Samaria, in Jenin and in Nablus, and in its stead Hamas and Islamic Jihad have gained control. Today Abu Mazen only partially controls his security services and some of his people are participating in terror activity against Israel.

Today, no one can ensure that if an agreement to establish a state is signed with the Palestinian Authority, it will indeed be implemented. The concern is that Hamas will take control of the territory (as it did in the Gaza Strip), and it its wake Iran will arrive. And then, instead of a demilitarized state aiming for peace, we will get threats, rockets and war.

Does this mean that there is no solution to the conflict and that we are condemned to die by the sword? Not for certain. We haven’t given up yet. I still remember Leibowitz’s words. But it is clear that time is working to our detriment. The extremists on both sides are getting stronger, and even people like us are beginning to have doubts about the solution that had been so logical and clear until now.