The so-called Two State Solution is one of the most empirically tested political arrangements of all time and every test has proven that the formula is a disastrous failure. Indeed, the three Gaza wars since the Disengagement proved to the average Israeli that Land-for-Peace is a dud! But American Jews see the future of the Two State Solution quite differently as was reported by a recent Pew Research Center poll:
“Jews from the United States and Israel have differing perspectives on a range of political issues concerning the State of Israel and the peace process. While Israeli Jews are skeptical that Israel and an independent Palestinian state can peacefully coexist, most American Jews are optimistic that a two-state solution is possible. On the controversial issue of the continued building of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, the prevailing view among Israeli Jews is that settlements help the security of Israel. By contrast, American Jews are more likely to say the settlements hurt Israel’s own security.” (Pew Research Center, March 8, 2016, “Israel’s Religiously Divided Society”)
So how do we resolve this apparent policy clash?
AIPAC Must Change to Stay Relevant
At the Conference I conducted my own non-scientific poll about the future of the Two-State Solution among American Jews, and everyone, including an important AIPAC staffer, seemed to suggest that AIPAC will never change its policy on the issue. I thought that was a strange position to take given that things on the ground are changing, as was shown by the Pew study, and even articulated by Left-leaning intellectuals and politicians from Thomas Friedman to Buji Herzog who say that Two-State is dead. Quite visibly, most serious players understand that Two-State won’t work because there are too many “settlers” to evacuate, and the Palestinian Authority is an incitement-machine which is no longer looking to negotiate, and even if negotiation would be possible, ISIS-HAMAS would immediately take over any land concessions. In other words, it’s over.
Moreover, not only is Israeli public opinion moving away from Two-State, but AIPAC’s constituency does as well. With the advent of J Street, the hard-Left has been pulled out of the AIPAC ranks. At the same time AIPAC is courting the American Orthodoxy and the pro-Israel Evangelical Christians. The latter are two forces which will naturally shift AIPAC’s policy rightward. In other words, both in Israel and in the pro-Israel community in the United States, there is a nationalistic political shift, and AIPAC will not always be at leisure to tow an old line. AIPAC’s goal will always be, above all, to remain relevant. Holding fast to Two-State will soon begin to undermine its relevancy. Therefore, I fully expect that next year’s Policy Conference, which will mark 50 years since the Six Day War and the return to Judea and Samaria, will include panels discussing serious alternatives to Land-for-Peace and the Two-State Solution.
Israel’s Heartland Represented in Washington
Even with AIPAC’s pro-Two-State stance, I felt that Washington was amazingly receptive to our message of a strong Israel which holds on to its ancestral homeland. On the Thursday before the conference I gave a Congressional Briefing on the Hill about Hebron. The event, which was organized by the Endowment for Middle East Truth and sponsored by Congressman Doug Lamborn, brought in a large, curious crowd interested in understanding the reality on the ground. On Sunday evening of the Conference, myself and the Director General of the Hebron Jewish Community, Uri Karzen, took part in an event organized by the One Israel Fund and co-sponsored by the Council of Judea and Samaria. Here too, a lot of people asked questions about our life and the political future of the Jews of the Israeli Heartland.
