The Two-State Solution
Owings Mills, Md.
Special to the Jewish Times
For true peace in the Middle East, there must be two states living alongside each other in peace and security. It’s the only solution.
First, Israel must retreat to its pre-1967 borders, and its capital will be in Tel Aviv.
Second, a new state will be declared in the so-called “West Bank”. The new state will be called Judea, and its capital will be in Hebron. [Hebron, after all, was King David’s first capital; see I Kings, Chapter 2, verse 11.] And for strategic reasons, the Golan Heights would be incorporated into Judea.
These two states, Israel and Judea, will be under a federation called Jewish United States Territories in Common Era (or simply “JUSTICE”) and its capital will be in Jerusalem. [Like Maryland with its capital in Annapolis; Virginia with its capital in Richmond; and with the overall federation—- the U.S. A.—- having its capital there between in Washington, D.C.
JUSTICE will be responsible for common matters, such as military defense, foreign relations, monetary policy and immigration control.
Each of the two states in the JUSTICE federation, Israel and Judea, will be responsible for local matters, such as police and fire departments, education, health and social welfare programs.
In Israel, the predominant culture will be secular; and in Judea, the predominant culture will be according to Torah Judaism.
All of the citizens—- whether Jewish, Christian, Moslem or whatever—- will be requested to pledge allegiance to JUSTICE. Moreover, at age 18, they will be requested to devote two years to government service and, thereafter, one month per year until age 50. The government will determine the type of service rendered—- be it military, environmental, health, social services, infrastructure, etc.
Remember, both are requests, not mandatory requirements. If any citizen refuses either request (or both), that individual citizen may still reside in JUSTICE, own property, have businesses, and enjoy all civil rights and protections. However, they will no longer have a right to vote, nor hold any public office, nor have a government job. If they don’t pledge allegiance and agree to serve the government and its people, why should they have any input and/or control over the government?
Wait, have we forgotten something? Oh yes, the so-called “Palestinians” in the “West Bank”.
Why should they be refugees for 60 plus years? Why should three generations live in squander in refugee camps, relying upon handouts from a UN agency? Why shouldn’t they participate in a government and a culture that is much more familiar and comfortable for them, not alien?
There is something like 3 million Arab people in the “West Bank”, give or take, and there is something like 100 million in various Arab states. Those Arab states, on the surface, have been vociferous champions of the “Palestinians” for many years, so let them take in the “Palestinians” on a pro-rata basis (amounting to a roughly 3 percent population increase per Arab country). And if you extend it to all Moslem countries—- with a population of around 1.5 billion—- that amounts to a very minimal 0.2 % population increase per Moslem country. Like a drop in a bucket.
In leaving Judea, the “Palestinians” must be totally compensated for the fair market value of their land and property plus full reimbursement for relocation expenses; and all of the Jewish people in present-day Israel and throughout the Diaspora will be asked to raise sufficient funds to take care of relocating the “Palestinians” out of Judea.
Haven’t population transfers occurred throughout history? And a fair number relatively peacefully?
Compare that with the Jewish experience. In Israel’s defensive wars initiated by the Arabs, approximately 800,000 Jews were evicted (or fled in terror) from a variety of Moslem countries—all without compensation—and Israel took in those refugees and integrated them into their society. Why shouldn’t the Arabs and/or Moslems do that?
Now, upon floating this proposal, there will be a tremendous hue and a cry—an uproar from all of the Arab and/or Moslem countries, the E.U., Russia, China—- all over the world—- and likely from our own State Department.
They will all say it’s racist, ridiculous, absurd, barbaric. But isn’t it at least as logical as the position taken by the Palestinian Authority for Israel to absorb some three million Jew-hating Arabs into their country and after Israel is substantially truncated)?
Why shouldn’t Israel state this position to the PA: “You’re asking us to commit national suicide. Were asking you to agree to a different population transfer, one more conductive to your own people; and we will even pay for it completely. Isn’t that much more reasonable?”
Again, the objective should be two states of similar cultural and religious backgrounds going back around 3,000 years and united, yet independent—where one state is not obsessed with hatred and the feverish desire to kill the other and push them into the sea—but rather, a free people with an open border there between and all living in peace and security.
Truly, an ideal two-state solution.
Leonard Bloom writes from Owings Mills.