Jay Shapiro argues that improving the economic and living conditions of Palestinian Arabs will not, by itself, bring an end to terrorism or produce peace with Israel.
Shapiro addresses the argument that providing Palestinians with more jobs, improved infrastructure, greater freedom of movement, and additional economic opportunities would reduce hostility toward Israel.
While such an approach may sound compassionate, he says, it ignores more than a century of history.
Shapiro points to the repeated rejection of proposals for an Arab state alongside a Jewish state, beginning with the Peel Commission partition proposal in 1937 and continuing with the UN partition plan in 1947.
Following Israel’s victory in the Six Day War in 1967, he notes, Arab leaders gathered in Khartoum and adopted the famous “Three Noes": no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.
Later diplomatic initiatives also failed to bring an end to the conflict.
According to Shapiro, the fundamental obstacle was not simply disagreement over borders or economic conditions, but the continued refusal to accept the legitimacy of a permanent Jewish state.
“Improving daily life does not erase an ideology that sees Israel itself as the core problem rather than a neighbor to live beside," he says.
Shapiro also points to the period following the Oslo Accords, when Israel transferred governing authority and territory to the newly established Palestinian Authority and economic cooperation increased. Rather than bringing an end to terrorism, Israel subsequently faced suicide bombings and, beginning in 2000, the deadly Second Intifada.
Similarly, Israel’s 2005 Disengagement removed its Jewish communities and permanent military presence from the Gaza Strip. Hamas subsequently rose to power, while resources were invested in rockets and terror tunnels and Israel faced repeated rounds of fighting.
Shapiro stresses that this does not mean Israel should seek to worsen the lives of Palestinian civilians.
Israel, he says, has both a moral and practical obligation to treat noncombatants humanely while defending all of its citizens. Improving Palestinian living conditions can be worthwhile when doing so does not compromise Israeli security.
However, he argues that economic measures cannot replace a fundamental change in Palestinian education and leadership.
“Real progress with the Palestinians requires Palestinians, and especially their leaders, to abandon the dream of Israel’s disappearance," Shapiro says.
He maintains that Palestinian institutions must begin educating future generations to coexist peacefully with Israel rather than teaching that the Jewish state must ultimately disappear.
Warning signs in American politics
Shapiro also turns his attention to developments in the United States, warning that hostility toward Israel is gaining influence within parts of the American political system.
For decades, he notes, Israel benefited from bipartisan support among Democrats and Republicans. The US-Israel relationship, he argues, has benefited both countries through intelligence sharing, military cooperation, and technological innovation.
Shapiro says that trend is now being challenged by political figures who go beyond criticism of particular Israeli policies and question the foundations of American support for the Jewish state.
His concern, he explains, is not criticism of Israel itself.
“Israel can be criticized," Shapiro stresses, noting that Israelis themselves routinely criticize their governments. The distinction, he argues, comes when political criticism turns into efforts to deny Israel the means necessary to defend itself.
For Shapiro, this question is inseparable from the historical origins of Zionism.
After centuries in which Jews lacked sovereignty and depended on others for their protection, he says, the Jewish people concluded that they needed the ability to defend themselves.
“Sympathy is not security," Shapiro says. “A kind word is not an army, and a state that cannot defend itself isn’t a state."
He warns that growing calls in the US to restrict or end military support for Israel should therefore concern Jews far beyond the immediate political debate.
Israel has long relied on support from both major American political parties, Shapiro concludes. Any erosion of that bipartisan consensus is a development that Israelis and American Jews must watch closely.