Part 2: A 23-state proposal for Mideast peace

Part two of two parts

In the last column, we took a look at Israel’s falling popularity with Americans. Today we will look at some cures, proposed by Rahm Emanuel — congressman, President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, Chicago mayor and ambassador to Japan. 

Also a likely Democratic Presidential candidate, whose father was born in Jerusalem. Emanuel is Jewish and was a civilian volunteer for the Israeli military during the 1991 Gulf War.

A few weeks back, at Tel Aviv University, he unleashed a brass-knuckled, goal-defining “tough love” speech to an Israeli audience, with the U.S. and the world‘s ears glued to the door.

He had some very bitter medicine for his audience, but preceded the cod liver oil with a spoonful of sugar: A recitation of repeated Israeli peace offers rejected by the Palestinians — something critics of Israel either do not know, or deliberately ignore, so enthralled are they in the narrative of Palestinian victimhood.

“I was still advising President Clinton from Chicago when Prime Minister Barak offered Chairman Arafat 98% of what the Palestinians were seeking, but he refused to sign,” said Emanuel.

“And what did Israel earn for offering sovereignty in exchange for security that second time? The Intifada.

“Prime Minister Olmert made a similar offer to the Palestinians in 2007. But President Abbas walked away yet again, sparking another wave of horrific violence,” Emanuel said.

“Three times since the early 1990s, you have offered the Palestinians sovereignty in exchange for your security—and three times your offer was not only rejected, but you were attacked as a direct consequence,” Emanuel said.

“In the United States, we have a saying: ‘Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.’ I understand all of that.”

Had he stopped there, he would have received a standing O. 

But he didn’t stop there. After reciting the history of Palestinian rejectionism, he then lowered the boom, hinting of a divorce.

“Without question, the alliance [between the U.S. and Israel] is at a crossroads. It cannot stand or survive as it has been. To maintain the strength of our ties, we need significant changes and a new direction.”

Israel has transitioned from an agrarian society in its earliest days, to a leading tech start-up innovator, to what he called (citing Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s own words) a modern-day Sparta.

“You have turned from being known for your technological prowess to being considered primarily a territorial pariah. You need to think about what that means for your future,” he said, becoming a 21st Century version of Daniel in the lion’s den.

He said Netanyahu has led Israel into a “dead end,” adding that Washington’s largely unconditional support has been a “mistake” that the U.S. must correct.

In the harshest imaginable terms, Emanuel said, “Unconditional support has allowed you to deny food and medical relief to innocent civilians suffering in Gaza, leaving the world to conclude that Israelis not only want to kill the Palestinians, but that they are completely indifferent to their death, destruction and suffering,” he said.

It also allows the Israeli government to permit burning of Palestinian farmland in the West Bank, and terrorize Palestinian families. “Israel has never been so isolated.”

As noted in the previous column, American public opinion is now more sympathetic to the Palestinians (41%) than to Israelis (36%). That is a first, and it is accompanied by a world-wide rise of anti-Semitism, some of which, rightly or wrongly, is laid at the feet of the Jewish state.

Also a first — in a recent House bill to send military aid to Israel, a plurality of Democrats, 103, voted no; 98 voted yes; a cowardly 10 abstained.

As I mentioned last time, a significant amount of the hate directed toward Israel is due to the appalling 70,000 Gazans killed in the war that was sparked by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023. The cause of the war gets almost no attention, while the 70,000 deaths are ridden like a thoroughbred by the Israel haters.

Another black mark against Israel is its policy in Judea and Samaria, now known as the West Bank. That is where a Palestinian state could arise, under the two-state solution proposed in the Oslo peace accords of 1993 and 1995. 

In all honesty, neither side wants that today. The hate is so deep each would enjoy a single state without the presence of the other.

The Israelis and Palestinians are like two scorpions in a bottle.

That is why Emanuel brushes aside the two-state solution in favor of a 23-state solution that would give, in his words, “the 21 Arab nations that have exploited Palestinian rights as a slogan for decades” to become a governing body “accepting the historic Jewish connection to this land.” 

He added Arab nations must stop “the heinous practice of financially rewarding terrorists  who kill Jews.”

“Arab leaders, not Israel, must hold the Palestinians responsible and accountable for their actions, and for being a true partner in peace.” In other words, he challenged the Arab world to act like responsible adults.

At the same time, “Israel must cease and desist from its cynical game of nurturing destructive organizations like Hamas rather than real partners.” (Israel has been known to encourage terrorists like Hamas, to make it an irritating counter balance to the Palestinian Authority.)

The above is Step 1 in Emanuel’s 3 Step peace plan.

It is bold and imaginative, and, given the success of the Abraham Accords, has at least a modest chance of success. The Arab League  long ago stopped talking about what was called the “3 Noes” — no peace, no recognition, no negotiations with Israel.

Emanuel said those who scream “from the river to the sea” — which is code for no Israel — will never have their way, and those who clamor for Israel to annex the West Bank will never get their way, either.

The other 2 Steps are less important.

Step 2 would establish a new global supply chain running from India to Europe, straight through the Mideast. And speaking of straight, it would bypass the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran is using to blackmail the world. Now that would be a treat.

Step 3 would end American aid to Israel, but allow it to buy weapons “under the same financial terms, the same restrictions, and the same requirements” as any other nation.

That seems fair, but the point that escapes Emanuel is that Israel has been in a state of war for 78 years, something that is not true for other arms purchasers. If it were not Sparta, Israel would be the Pearl Harbor.

In any event, Netanyahu already has announced he wants to wean Israel off American aid. Should the 23-state plan be achieved, Israel’s need for arms would diminish.

Is Israel ready? Is the Arab world ready?