Former Sen. Mike Gravel's Compass piece on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is critical of Israel's policies toward the Palestinians and is critical of Israel's current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Gravel wonders how otherwise progressive Jews can be supportive of policies he sees as anything but progressive. As a progressive Jew and a supporter of Israel, I feel the need to respond.
Sen. Gravel need look no further than numerous Israeli media outlets, available online and in English, to see a vibrant democracy in action, in which Israeli policies and politicians are critiqued in terms that make American politics seem tame by comparison. Public opinion polls in Israel continue to show a vast majority of Israelis supportive of a "two-state solution," an Israeli country and a Palestinian country living side by side in peace. Those same polls show skepticism that such a peace is possible. Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza and East Jerusalem, during the Six Day War in 1967. I agree with the majority of Israelis who believe that Israel needs to disengage from most of these territories in order for Israel to remain true to its own values as a Jewish democracy. Most Israelis do not place a higher priority on maintaining "settlements" in the West Bank than on achieving genuine peace. The dilemma that Israel faces is how to withdraw in a manner that doesn't put its civilian population at even greater risk than what is faced today.
Israel offered a "land for peace" treaty at Camp David in 2000, in negotiations facilitated by then President Clinton. In the absence of successful peace negotiations, Israel unilaterally evicted its own settlers out of Gaza.
There are two competing governance factions in Palestinian society -- the Palestinian Authority which controls the West Bank, and Hamas, which took over Gaza by force after Israel withdrew. The Palestinian Authority expresses a desire to make peace with Israel based on a two-state solution. Hamas as recently as last week reiterated its long-held view that Israel has no right to exist as a country. As recently as a few weeks ago, militants were launching rockets from Gaza into Israel, hitting towns, cities in Israel's south, and at least one school bus.
The Palestinian Authority and Hamas recently announced a reconciliation between the two factions. It is unclear how a "reconciled" Palestinian governing authority will come to view peaceful coexistence with Israel.
This week Israel marked its 63rd birthday with celebrations and a healthy dose of typical Israeli self-criticism. Palestinian society and much of the Arab world commemorated the same birthday, as has been the case for 63 years, by the name "Nakba," or the "Catastrophe." To be clear, the Catastrophe referred to is not Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza in the 1967 war. The Catastrophe refers to Israel's creation in 1948.
I agree with Sen. Gravel and others, including many Israelis, that Israel's continuing occupation of Palestinian lands seized in 1967 is inconsistent with Israel's own values. The more troubling question is how Israel can extricate itself from the occupation without placing its major population centers at even greater risk. A full Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 would put most Israeli civilians within 10 miles of a border. That's the distance between downtown Anchorage and Chugach State Park.
I hope that negotiations can lead to Israeli and Palestinian states living side by side in peace. As do most Israelis. And as do many Palestinians. But getting there isn't as easy as one wishes it were, thinking about it from my secure home in Anchorage, far from any hostile border.
Glenn Cravez is a mediator and attorney in Anchorage.
By GLENN CRAVEZ