According to Roger Cohen in the NYTimes today, he is
a strong supporter of a two-state peace. The messianic idea of Greater Israel, occupying all the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, must wither. Jews, having suffered for most of their history as a minority, cannot, as a majority now in their state, keep their boots on the heads of the Palestinians in the occupied West Bank any longer.
Well, I humbly suggest to Mr. Cohen that he is in error.
First off, we are in Judea and Samaria as a result of the situation before 1967. The Arabs then, before any "occupation" and any "settlement construction", were terrorizing the Jewish state within the 1949 Armistice Lines, having failed in their previous fedayeen terror campaign, their previous launcing of a war of aggression in 1947, their previous 1936-1939 First Intifada, their previous 1929 riots, their previous 1921 riots, their previous 1920 riots and their earlier sporadic anti-Jewish attacks. Dismantling communities and withdrawing is a solution which does not apply to the problem.
Secondly, "Greater Israel" or more properly, the Land of Israel in its historic boundaries, was already recognized by formal international organizations and institutions. Whether or not we have these or that borders is a matter of politics, military results and exigencies. But in principle, those borders are not "messianic".
Thirdly, Zionism did not come into being to facilitate the establishment of an Arab state in our homeland. "Palestinians" are a political fiction. If there is to be a "Palestine", it cannot exist without Jordan being part of the resolution.
Fourth, I consider your use of "boots on their heads" as a spin of Nazi-comparison. Shame on you.