Like it or not, there will be two states - opinion

After nearly five months of bloody war, I submit that it’s time to face the often painful reality of our future and to stop trying to kid ourselves about our ability to call all the shots about our status in this neighborhood.

“Between the river and the sea,” as our enemies like to term this sliver of land on which we all live, are 7.2 million Jews and 6.9 million Arabs. That is a fact, as is the fact that none of us is going anywhere. And if none of us is going anywhere, there is only one solution that holds any promise for a productive future for both of us, and that is to find some way to live together so that we are not constantly trying to kill each other.

Living here for over 40 years, I am well aware that we have tried any number of times to come up with a plan to address this challenge. Our argument has always been that “they” have either always rejected peace proposals or that “we” simply do not have a partner for peace. Their argument? This is our land, you are colonizers, you have no right to be here, and we can wait as long as it takes to get it back. Everything else we always hear is simply a manifestation of this basic axiom, which is rooted in a belief system that categorizes every non-Muslim as an infidel.

Nevertheless, what have we learned from the events of October 7? Specifically, that (a) we were not invincible; (b) our government and military could not protect us; (c) even with our hi-tech security systems, if we live next door to chaos, eventually that chaos will seep across the border and envelop us as well; and (d) we did not have sufficient military materiel so that if not for the “keys to the supply locker” that the US gave us, we would not have been able to sustain the battle for anywhere near five months.

We also learned a lot about our Palestinian neighbors. We learned that (a) the Hamas leadership couldn’t care less about what happens to their people; (b) the idea of transferring displaced Arabs to other countries is a non-starter because no country wants to accept them; and (c) UNRWA has, for 75 years, perpetuated refugee status on those who were displaced in 1948, during which time the refugee population has continued to multiply.

In addition, there are other things we always knew. For example, (a) people brought up in a place where there is no positive future horizon will eventually rebel, as we saw in multiple past intifadas; (b) the longer a war draws on, the less sympathy and support we will get from the rest of the world; and (c) the Western powers who supported us will “pull the plug” on that support when their home political positions become untenable.

Therefore, we have only one choice: to put forth our own plan that creates some future sovereign entity for the Palestinians, drawing on the goodwill of the Arab states with whom we have maintained diplomatic relations, in spite of what is happening in Gaza, to assist us in this effort. Note well that no Arab country has recalled its ambassador, except for Jordan, in spite of local pressure to do so.

There is a path forward; here are some parameters.

ADMITTING ALL of this to ourselves, there may be a path we can suggest that would give us the security we need and deserve while putting a framework in place that stops the killing for the next 75 years (we don’t want to be too optimistic so let’s not call it a permanent peace treaty). Some possible parameters:

• The IDF stops the war, all the hostages are returned, and the Hamas leadership is given safe passage to some other country, never to be allowed to return to either Gaza or Judea and Samaria.
• All weapons of war in Gaza would be confiscated and the tunnel system would be destroyed.
• A coalition of Arab and Western countries would take responsibility for administering Gaza for three years to rebuild the Strip’s infrastructure and groom local leadership to become its governing authority.
• Israel completes the one-kilometer buffer zone on the Gaza side of the border, which would be off-limits to Gaza residents.
• A functioning port and airport would be built in Gaza so that residents could travel in and out without accessing Israel or Egypt.
• For three years, Judea and Samaria would be designated the Protectorate of Palestine, where a coalition of Arab and Western countries would perform the same role there as their counterparts in Gaza.
• At the end of three years, ideally, Gaza and Judea and Samaria would join together as the Sovereign State of Palestine, with civil security forces but no military and no capacity to engage in war.
• Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria would have the right to remain there as long as they so desired. It is anathema to the concept of peace for the Arab leadership there to say they want the area Judenrein, as previously stated, just as we would never say that no Arabs can live in Israel. Residents of these Jewish communities would hold Israeli citizenship and be eligible for Palestinian citizenship as well after the end of the three-year period should they wish to avail themselves of that option.
• A functioning international border would be established between the two entities, with an express lane for Israelis living in the Palestinian enclave to enter Israel and return.

Details must be clarified, but the objective is clear.

THERE ARE many other details to be clarified but the objective is clear: to build a non-military political structure that provides a framework for us to live together without killing each other every few years.

Understandably, there are those who say that now, in the aftermath of October 7, is not the time to talk about peace with the Palestinians or any concept of Palestinian sovereignty. Yet there is an opportunity right now, and these chaotic times worldwide do not augur well for the maintenance of the status quo. As such, we need leaders who can clearly and honestly see the challenges that face us and, using the relationships that have developed with our neighbors over the last few years, build a new framework that gives all of us hope for the future and the possibility of many years of quiet progress together.

As a person of faith, I believe that all of what happens to us here is in the hands of the heavenly one. Nevertheless, Deuteronomy 30:12 tells us that “it is not in the heavens” and that we were given this earth to continue the work of heaven, which implicitly means that the Eternal is happy to have our help to achieve anything close to nirvana. Pirkei Avot (Ethics of our Fathers) 2:16 enjoins us to act by saying, “It is not our duty to finish the work but neither are we at liberty to reject it.”

Our task is clearly laid out for us. We dare not shrink from it.

The writer is CEO of Atid EDI Ltd., a Jerusalem-based international business development consultancy; past national president of the Association of Americans and Canadians in Israel; former chair of the board of the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies; and a board member of the Israel-America Chamber of Commerce.