海角大神

Secretary of State John Kerry arrives in Jerusalem this evening, trying again to restart negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. It's his fifth trip to the region in recent months, and this question remains unanswered: Is the two-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians still alive and kicking?

This question has been in play since the British Peel Commission proposed separating Palestine into Jewish and Arab states in 1937. Then, most Jews in Palestine supported the plan, while Arab leaders rejected it, leading the British to withdraw their support when a new commission declared the idea un-implementable. In the ensuing decades, the partition plan, renamed the two-state solution, remained on the negotiating table, and even came to be considered the region鈥檚 only hope for peaceful coexistence.

In the run up to Mr. Kerry鈥檚 last visit to the region, in May, the viability of the two-state solution was a question of great interest to my staff at Moment Magazine 鈥� an independent North American magazine of Jewish politics, culture, and religion. We asked a range of Middle East policymakers, scholars, and activists 鈥� all across the spectrum, from the far right to the far left 鈥撀爐o share their thoughts on the feasibility of side-by-side states. A rare, nuanced and often surprising discussion took form, transcending the clich茅d categorizations we have come to expect on the Israeli-Palestinian question. These responses provide crucial clues as to what peace talk negotiators are up against, and what Kerry and the Obama administration must do to help bring about two states.

The issues remain much the same as they have for the decades-long, on-again off-again peace negotiations. The status of Jerusalem, Palestinian 鈥渞ight of return鈥� (whether Palestinian refugees can return to their forbears鈥� land now in Israeli-held territory), Israeli settlements in the West Bank 鈥� all remain points of contention. What is different now is a mood that has settled over many of the parties involved and those watching from afar: a sense that the window of time in which a robust two-state solution was achievable may have closed.

One of the most striking aspects in the discussion is the mirror viewpoints of Palestinians and Israelis on the far left and right. Indeed, the similarity is uncanny. Spokespersons of both extremes argue that the two-state solution is nothing more than a carefully constructed illusion with no possibility of real-world application.

Dani Dayan, a leading advocate of right-wing Israeli settlers, contends that the concept has always been a farce. 鈥淭he two-state formula never really existed,鈥� he says. 鈥淟ike a kind of diplomatic 鈥楾ruman Show,鈥� it existed only in an imaginary world.鈥� He condemns what he calls the 鈥渢wo-state industry,鈥� which has 鈥渇ed itself with optimistic narratives and crises to be defused in order to keep itself alive.鈥� He says that 鈥渋n the real world, it was a mirage, looking tempting from afar but revealed to be hot air when approached.鈥�

In Mr. Dayan鈥檚 view, the best possible solution at the moment is to 鈥漝o the most beneficial things you can under this circumstance鈥� 鈥� including 鈥渞emoval of checkpoints and a potential dismantling of the security fence, joint large-scale industrial projects, renovation of refugee camps.鈥� This 鈥渨ill not mean peace,鈥� he says. It will be 鈥渁t most a peaceful non-reconciliation. It will not be the final status; it will be temporary until new options arise."

On the other side of the spectrum, American political science professor Virginia Tilley 鈥� a well-known critic of partition 鈥� agrees wholeheartedly. 鈥淥f course the two-state solution is dead,鈥� she says. 鈥淚t鈥檚 been dead for a long time. I don鈥檛 think it was ever alive鈥�The British clarified formally in the 1930s that partition was never intended, and certainly the situation is far more impossible now.鈥� Ms. Tilley argues that the continued belief in the two-state solution allows Israel to accrue territory. 鈥淭he longer everybody keeps going along with the idea of a two-state solution, the longer Israel can keep building settlements, which is a full-fledged state project to effectively annex the entire country.鈥�

Tilley sees only one path forward to resolution: a rejection of the premise that enthnicity or religion should make up a nation 鈥� a Jewish state and a Palestinian-Arab state.聽鈥淎 mass, nonviolent movement, with 300,000 Palestinians coming over that racist wall with signs saying, 鈥榚qual rights, democracy and freedom,鈥� would transform this entire conflict in a day,鈥� she says.

鈥淲hen people realize what鈥檚 going on,鈥� Tilley explains, 鈥渞ealize that the two-state solution was never viable, and finally accept that the only solution is giving equal rights to everybody and giving up the idea of an ethnic democracy 鈥� which has been given up everywhere else in the world 鈥� then there will be peace.鈥�

It is in the center that a divergence of opinion can be seen: Here thinkers envision slightly different practical paths to achieving a two-state solution, and there is beauty 鈥� and hope 鈥� in the nuance. Leading Israeli negotiator Shaul Arieli says that Israeli settlements aren鈥檛 the insurmountable obstacle some make them out to be.

鈥淚nside the [main Jewish settlement] blocs we have relative Jewish dominance, but outside, complete Palestinian dominance,鈥� he says. It is possible, he continues, to create borders that connect the major Israeli settlement blocs in the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem neighborhoods to Israel by annexing 鈥渁round 6 percent of the West Bank, which can be compensated with one-to-one land swaps, thereby reaching a two-state solution.鈥�

Israeli cinematographer Dror Moreh, director of the Academy Award-nominated documentary 鈥淭he Gatekeepers,鈥� thinks it鈥檚 worth spending Israel鈥檚 political capital to convince settlers, especially those who would need to be evacuated, that in leaving the settlements they would be doing what is in the best interest of Israel. 鈥淲e need to be clear and say, 鈥榊es, we sent you and you served and did your job, but we need you to do something else and come back now,鈥欌�� he says. 鈥淭his needs to be done seriously.鈥�

Efraim Halevy, former head of Mossad (the Israeli national intelligence agency), believes that the best way to achieve two states is through low-profile negotiations. 鈥淲e have to seek a practical understanding that will serve the interest of both sides without the other side having to renounce its devotion to its basic ideology,鈥� he says. 鈥淎n example of this is what happened recently in Gaza: When the people from Gaza began shooting rockets, Israel resorted to a weeklong operation, and out of the blue, on the eighth day of the conflict, a ceasefire suddenly emerged.鈥�

He explains: 鈥淣othing is known in public about this ceasefire, no documents have been published and there is no official information on who actually negotiated the ceasefire agreements. In practical terms, somehow ways are being found to do things that have not been done for several years, such as opening up the fishing area for Gazans. I think that similar things can be done with the Palestinians in the West Bank through negotiations with lower visibility.鈥�

David Makovsky, director of the Washington Institute鈥檚 Project on the Middle East Peace Process, argues that tunnel vision is best when it comes to negotiations. The disputed territory of Jerusalem and whether Palestinian refugees can return to their homes 鈥渁re two narrative issues that cut to the self-definition of the parties,鈥� he says. 鈥淭hey deal with very explosive issues like religion and nationalism. It seems to me you鈥檙e better off dealing with the practical issues of borders and security, creating the two states, and deferring these other two questions of Jerusalem and refugees.鈥�

These 鈥渃an-do鈥� suggestions aside, those in the center or moderate position on this issue are not dictating policy or public sentiment. This poses a challenge for Kerry and the many others who still think two states are the best or only option. Rather, the 鈥渃an鈥檛 dos鈥� and 鈥渨e shouldn鈥檛 dos鈥� dominate the public forum, fueling suspicion.

Kerry and those in the center with practical ideas about how to proceed on the ground must strengthen their voices or risk continuing to be unheard. Already public support for two states is ebbing: 鈥淭oday, after almost two decades of the Israeli left and outside 鈥榤ediators鈥� pushing a so-called two-state solution on us, I believe that it is clear to the vast majority of Israelis that this fallacy will not lead toward peace and coexistence in our region,鈥� says Likud party (far right) Knesset member Danny Danon.

Palestinian journalist Daoud Kuttab finds the same thing to be true among Palestinians. 鈥淢ore and more Palestinians are abandoning the two-state solution for the one-state solution, even while knowing that most Israelis still hold onto their desire for a majority Jewish state,鈥� he says.

Is this yet another swing of the two-state pendulum, or is it the end? That public sentiment truly marks the end of the two-state solution is doubtful. But until a leader appears with a vision to mobilize the center, the saga of the two-state solution will continue unresolved.

Nadine Epstein is the editor and publisher of Moment Magazine, a bimonthly of Jewish politics, culture, and religion. For more, go to聽.