Peace is possible

In my lifetime, most of the new states that have come into existence have been the culmination of long-differed dreams. Timor-Leste was the first new state of this millennium, but it would have seen independence much sooner had it not been annexed by Indonesia after the Portuguese left. Kosovo, the most recent addition to the international community, was born out of ethnic conflict that has rocked the Balkans since the early nineties.\nIf and when a Palestinian state does come into existence it will be the example of a dream differed much longer than most. The celebration of Israel’s sixtieth anniversary has been a sobering affair precisely because it serves as a reminder that the Arab-Israeli conflict has lasted that entire sixty years without any satisfying resolution. In that regard, Israel’s sixtieth anniversary should serve as a sobering occasion for the United States as well, because lately we have done far too little to push a needed peace process forward.\nIgnoring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been one of George Bush’s great mistakes. It is still barely possible to imagine that Bush’s plan to transform the Middle East might have come to something. He would have had to have done two things differently: One would have been to show more competence in the immediate aftermath of the invasion of Iraq. The other would have been to push for a breakthrough between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Helping to lay the groundwork for a Palestinian state might have helped Bush to convince the Arab masses that his intentions for the region were benign, not exploitative. \nForeign policy conservatives and religious conservatives alike produce all kinds of arguments that hamstring the peace process. Many commentators decry the idea of negotiating with Hamas (even though Israel often does so indirectly) and insist that it is up to the Palestinians to clean up their militias before Israel should give up any concessions. \nThis line of thinking gets us nowhere. The continued growth of Israeli settlements in the West Bank makes disbanding the militias almost politically impossible. Hamas may support terrorist tactics and claim it wants to eliminate the Jewish state, but it controls the entire Gaza strip and will have to be negotiated with eventually. \nThe gap between the Palestinians and the Israelis is too large. Negotiations need a third party. The United States needs to put forth a specific plan of its own. \nThis plan will inevitably involve concessions on both sides. Palestinian refugees will probably have to give up their right to return to Israel. Israel will have remove many of its settlement and compensate the Palestinians for parts of the West Bank that were annexed. Jerusalem may yet end up being the capital of both countries. \nIf the United States could help implement these compromises, it would truly transform the Middle East.