Every time a curfew is lifted, my wife and I sigh deeply. Lifting a curfew has only one meaning these days. It means that more Jews will be killed in a terrorist attack. Like what happened two weeks ago in Tel Aviv.
After the inevitable attack, we slap the curfew back on. But everyone knows that is just a temporary measure, and that the curfew will come off sooner or later. And then, another attack. You might think it would be prudent to wait until there is assurance that the Palestinian Authority is taking action against terrorism. But since no one thinks that will ever happen, it’s like waiting for Godot. So what do you do?
There are only so many options here. Longer curfews is certainly a possibility. But then we are talking of years, not weeks. The only reasonable way to decide when to lift a curfew is by judging that the circumstances which made it necessary have changed. And that will take years, if it ever occurs at all.
Another option is war. War has proven to be remarkably successful in convincing violent nations to abandon the path of violence. Both Germany and Japan have sprouted serious pacifistic movements, which serve as a restraint on those societies. What a relief it would be if Palestinians would follow suit. But those kinds of changes only come after a serious military defeat such as that suffered by the Axis powers in World War II.
But for those who do not have the stomach for that (include me here) the remaining option is separation. For separation to work we need a serious geographic distance or a natural barrier between the two peoples. Putting up fences, and then issuing work permits and allowing masses of Palestinians to cross the borders, is not going to be of much help.
Genuine separation is a more serious matter. It means the relocation of one of the two peoples into a neighboring country. Palestinians have been pursuing this kind of solution for the past fifty years. But throwing the Jews into the sea is just not a reasonable plan. For starters, unlike fish, the Jews do not have gills. Territories to the east of the Jordan river offer a more hospitable geography for human life. But which people should move to the other side of the Jordan?
It is true that in biblical times some of the tribes of the Jews lived on the eastern side of the Jordan river, and important Jewish archeological sites may be found in that area. Jewish presence on the east of the Jordan long predates Arab presence there, and even in modern times, Jewish settlers purchased land and established settlements there before the establishment of what is today Jordan.
But there are serious practical difficulties with such a plan. The Jews of Israel have created a remarkably prosperous society in Israel. Abandoning that and trying to make the desert bloom all over again would be a terrible waste of human sweat and toil. And what would be gained? It is hard to believe that the Eastern Palestinians would be any more receptive to a Jewish state east of the Jordan than their co-nationalists are to a Jewish state west of the Jordan. The Jews will have to stay put.
Geographical and political logic demand that the move be made by the Western Palestinians. It is true that aside from a few small political parties, Israel has never advocated such a move. For years she has been nourishing the delusion of eventually achieving warm relations with the Palestinians and then with the entire Arab world. It will be very hard for Israelis to give up those dreams, but they may have no choice.
The Palestinians too will not easily agree to this scenario. The goal of most Palestinians is not freedom and independence. They are not interested, as Jews were, in founding a state of their own and then living at peace with their neighbors. If they were, they would be willing to do what the Jews did: namely to travel to a geographic location (such as Eastern Palestine) where these dreams could be made true. If they ever did desire such a move, material assistance would be made available.
Just as many on the left in Israel are happy to subsidize the transfer of Jewish settlers to Israel proper, so too an even greater plurality in Israel and abroad would be willing to subsidize the transfer of Arab residents of the territories to Jordan. If wealthy Arab nations used their moneys for a cause such as this, the world could be a much better place than it is today.
Transferring settlers will not defuse tensions in the area. All military assessments agree that if settlements are abandoned under pressure, this will lead to greater violence on the part of Palestinians. On the other hand, if Palestinians were to abandon the territories, even under pressure, no one in the world imagines that this would lead to further Israeli aggression.
So a solution is possible. It is within grasp. It is a workable solution, and one which might lead in time to an ultimate reconciliation between the two peoples. But it is a solution that requires cooperation from both sides. Until that happens, we will not see the end to the terrible cycle of Palestinian terror and Israeli retaliation.
