Why Israel’s Status Quo Works

To the editor:

Bruce Ticker asks: How can Israel retain the Judea-Samaria territories “without the loss of life,” since “the Palestinians compose the largest population grouping there?” And what about “the risks and benefits of building [Jewish] communities there?” he wonders.

This is exactly the dilemma that faced Yitzhak Rabin when he became prime minister in 1992. On the one hand, he recognized that establishing a Palestinian state in Judea-Samaria-Gaza would pose a grave threat to Israel’s existence. Israel would be just nine miles wide in its middle, living next to a state run by terrorists and dictators. A Palestinian armed with a shoulder-fired missile, standing inside the sovereign borders of “Palestine,” would be able to shoot down a plane taking off from  Ben-Gurion Airport. No sane country would accept such a nightmare existence.

But on the other hand, Rabin was uncomfortable having Israel continue to rule over the Palestinian Arabs in those territories. So he devised the Oslo accords, which ended Israel’s occupation of the Palestinians and gave them something close to statehood, but without endangering Israel.

According to the Oslo agreement, Judea-Samaria was divided. Israel has continued to control the parts where Jewish communities are located. The Palestinian Authority took over the 40% of the territories where about 98% of the Palestinian Arabs reside; and Israel later withdrew from 100% of Gaza. As a result, for the past 28 years, there has been a new status quo, in which nearly all of the Palestinian Arabs no longer live under Israeli occupation—thus effectively eliminating accusations that the situation in the territories could ever resemble apartheid.

There is not one word in the Oslo accords that prohibits  Israel from construction in the 60% of Judea-Samaria that it governs, just as the accords do not prohibit the PA from building in the 40% of the region that it governs. Israel is permitted to create new Jewish communities in its area, expand existing ones, and legalize smaller communities that were not previously recognized. Since the PA signed the Oslo accords, it has no basis for complaining when Israel does something that the accords permit.

Thanks to Rabin’s solution, it is the PA, not Israel, that has been ruling the Palestinians since the signing of the Oslo agreement nearly three decades ago. The streets in PA territory are policed by the Palestinian security forces. The schools are run by Palestinian principals and teachers. The courts have Palestinian judges. The PA has its own de-facto army, a security force—trained and armed by the United States—which is one of the largest per capita security forces in the world. When elections are held, the candidates and the voters are all Palestinians. There is no Israeli governor or military administration, as there was before 1995. Pretty much the only thing the Palestinian Authority cannot do is import tanks, planes, Iranian “volunteers,” or North Korean missiles.

Israel’s friends in the Diaspora need not worry about the “demographic time bomb” that Israel’s critics often invoke; Rabin permanently defused it long ago. No matter how many Arabs reside in the PA territories, they do not pose a demographic threat to Israel, because they are not Israeli citizens and therefore cannot vote in Israeli elections. They vote in PA elections (when the PA and Hamas let them).

The status quo that Rabin established did not put an end to Palestinian Arab terrorism—because nothing short of destroying Israel will ever put a complete and permanent end to all Arab terrorism. Palestinian Arabs have been terrorizing Jews in the Holy Land since the early 1900s—long before there were settlements, disputed territories, or even a state of Israel at all. Each time there has been a wave of “intifada” violence, the Israeli security authorities have devised effective strategies to stamp it out. There always have been, and probably always will be, Palestinians who are committed to destroying Israel, and Israel’s best and brightest will continue to find ways to protect their country against the terrorists. Meanwhile, Israelis are able to go about their day to day lives despite the possibility of terrorism. The nation’s continuous technological advances, economic growth, and flourishing culture all testify to the fact that Israel, with the status quo, is not merely surviving but is thriving.

Thanks to Rabin’s one-state solution, today’s status quo ensures Israel’s Jewish majority, retains Israel’s defensible borders, and guarantees all faiths free access to their religious sites. At the same time, it allows nearly all of the Palestinian Arabs to live under their own government. There are no Israeli soldiers patrolling Palestinian cities. They live in an entity that is close to statehood in every respect except those few aspects that would endanger Israel’s existence.

The Palestinians do not have 100% of what they want. But then again, neither do the Israelis. The status quo does, however, give both sides much of what they want—which is better than what the alternatives offer. That’s why the status quo solution has lasted nearly thirty years already. It’s not ideal and it doesn’t solve every problem, but it’s the most realistic choice in a difficult situation.

Sincerely,
Stephen M. Flatow
Long Branch, N.J.