82
Developing an Israeli Grand Strategy toward
a Peaceful Two-State Solution
Introduction
This volume aims to identify enabling conditions to facilitate
Israeli society's support for a peaceful Israel-Palestine two-
state solution. This essay aims to discuss the challenge of
civil society activists to achieve this goal. In reference to the
two-state concept, we see Israeli society divided into three
major groups: Those who are convinced and pro-actively
support the two-state solution, those who are ambivalent,
risk-averse and passive, and those who oppose the idea in
principle. The task of civil society work today is to convince
as many as possible of the second and the third group to
join the supporters of a peaceful two-state solution. This is
easier said than done as there are concerns that have to be
addressed in each one of those three groups.
Peace Activists: This group feels strongly about the devastating
effects of occupation. For them two propositions appear to
be indisputable. First, June 2017 will mark a full half-century
of Israeli military rule over the West Bank and its stateless
Palestinian population; second, there is little indication in
Israeli (or Palestinian) politics that a change in this reality
will occur in the months ahead. Thus, longtime advocates
of “two states for two peoples” in Israel and abroad, will
no doubt mark fifty years of occupation with anguish and
protest — modern echoes of biblical prophets donning
sackcloth and ashes to denounce the rulers of the day and
the ruin promised by their defiance of sacred principle. For
this group, the anomaly of the democratic state of Israel
denying fundamental rights to millions of Palestinians is an
injustice that conscience cannot abide — certainly not for
five decades with no end in sight.
Ambivalent Majority: Unfortunately, five decades is also long
enough to recognize that the stand alone moral dimension
is not sufficient to mobilize the critical mass of Israelis,
who frame the issue in pragmatic terms and do not share
the same depth of conviction. This "silent majority" tends
to support the concept of “two states for two peoples” in
the abstract. However, they are convinced that the present
turmoil in the Middle East does not allow — for the time
being — to take concrete steps toward a two-state solution.
They are justifiably concerned about the economic, political
and security ramifications of dramatic change, and above
all afraid of military withdrawal creating the conditions for a
civil war situation. The undeniable injustice of the occupation
is not sufficient to motivate this group to advocate the two-
state approach. A majority will oppose externally-imposed
pressure with respect to issues they comprehend as being
of an existential nature for them, for their families and for
Israeli society at large.
The Settler Community and ideological supporters: This group
believes that they have much to lose by reaching a two-state
solution. Many of them will have to leave their homes and
resettle elsewhere; worse, for many — their belief system
and their life’s work is being challenged.
Thus, the task of civil society work becomes very complex:
those already convinced of the need to end occupation must
find ways to reach out to those who think differently, address
the fears of those who are undecided, and respond to the
practical, political and ideological concerns of the settler
community as effectively as possible.
The current project seeks to identify necessary conditions to
consolidate Israeli majority support for a two-state solution.
The salient question is not, however, whether majority support
exists for two states as an ideal future – the preponderance
of opinion research suggests that it does (Eldar, 2016).
Indeed, all four Prime Ministers Israelis have elected in the
21st century have gone on record opposing permanent
Israeli rule over the Palestinians – despite having all spent
their formative years in the Likud. The real issue is whether
action is urgently demanded at present, to advance – or, as
the recent Quartet report has it, at least preserve – any realistic
prospect of a two-state future (Middle East Quartet, July 1,
2016). Although most Israeli Jews reject the annexationist
agenda of the Right, they remain wary of withdrawal from
the West Bank, in the aftermath of wars with Hamas and
Hezbollah paramilitaries that seized control of de-occupied
territories. A Centrist bloc is the new fulcrum of Israeli public
opinion on the Palestinian issue; it tips the scales between the
classic binary of Right and Left. It is the question of urgency
– whether it is necessary to act now – that currently splits a
potential Israeli two-state majority between the activist Left
and the cautious Center.
This essay will draw on interviews with civil society activists
and scholars, to consider how civil society can contribute to
broadening support, particularly on the Center and pragmatic
Right, for action to advance a two-state solution. As the primary
non-electoral sphere in which citizens take organized action
to shape the agenda and norms of public discourse, civil
society is a perfect prism for examining what issues are, and
are not, burning in the eyes of Israelis – and for proposing
potential strategies to spark new fires on the pro-peace/
anti-occupation front. Ultimately, I will argue that peace
advocates must approach the fiftieth anniversary in the spirit
of heshbon nefesh – a rigorous, internal "accounting of the
soul" – acknowledging the roots of our current marginalization
in Israeli society, and designing strategies to build broad and
deep support for the struggle ahead.
Ned Lazarus
Heshbon Nefesh: Civil Society Seeking a
Two-State Majority
