What is Israels position on a Palestinian state?
Israel has no desire to rule over the Palestinians. While this is an important aspect of Israel’s position on the establishment of a Palestinian state, Israel’s security and other vital rights and interests also play an important role. Under no circumstances could Israel accept the establishment of a terrorist state on its borders. In his speech at the June 4, 2003 Aqaba Summit meeting with U.S. President Bush and then Palestinian Prime Minister Abbas, Prime Minister Sharon had the following to say about a Palestinian state: “Israel, like others, has lent its strong support for President Bush’s vision, expressed on June 24, 2002, of two states – Israel and a Palestinian state – living side by side in peace and security. The government and people of Israel welcome the opportunity to renew direct negotiations according to the steps of the roadmap as adopted by the Israeli government to achieve this vision.” It is in Israel’s interest not to govern the Palestinians but for the Palestinian
Time after time, Israel has stated its desire to see two states – the State of Israel and a Palestinian state – living side by side in peace and security (as expressed in US President Bush’s vision of 24 June 2002). Israel believes that a true resolution of the conflict will see two national states, a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people and a Jewish state for the Jewish people. Israel has no desire to rule over the Palestinians, and believes that a truly democratic Palestinian state fully at peace with Israel will promote the long-term security and well-being of Israel as a Jewish state. Israel has no qualms regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state, per se. The only issue is what kind of Palestinian state should be established. Will it be a democratic state of law and order, which eschews terrorism, violence and incitement and therefore be a state with which Israel can live in peace? Or will it be an anarchic state that is continuing on the path of violence and terro
” On the other hand, it also stresses the legitimacy of Israel’s claim to the disputed territories. In the section entitled, “What is the status of the territories?”, it states: “However, these territories had formed the cradle of Jewish civilization during biblical times and Jewish communities existed there over thousands of years. Modern-day Israel has deep ties to the many historical sites located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Yet Israel’s claim to these territories is based not only on its ancient ties, religious beliefs and security needs; it is also firmly grounded in international law and custom.” I don’t find these assertions to be mythical. There is a perfectly reasonable case to be made for holding on to Judea and Samaria (not Gaza); and there is also a perfectly reasonable case to be made for accepting a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria. I happen to incline to the former position, with the understanding that the Arabs living in Judea and Samaria ought to be granted
