Discussion moderated by Brig. Gen. (res.) Udi Dekel
Looking at the Palestinian arena, Dr. Kobi Michael sees a fractured Palestinian society that is deteriorating, largely because of the socio-political divisions. While they are not specifically caused by Israel, they can have a serious negative impact on Israel. At the same time, security coordination will likely continue, as this is at least as much of a Palestinian interest as an Israeli one. Dr. Ronit Marzan believes that Palestinian society will be characterized by a new approach, as the younger generation has seen that neither the armed struggle nor the political struggle for a two-state solution has borne fruit. Rather, there is growing support for a cultural struggle, namely, with an emphasis on human rights – which perforce means one state. From Israel’s standpoint, it is critical to stop weakening the PA; Israel and the Palestinians must understand that they are both part of the problem and part of the solution. Amb. Daniel Shapiro envisions significant resistance to the “deal of the century” within the United States, particularly given the US resistance to the imposition of any solution, any non-negotiated solution, and unilateral moves. The two-state solution is still preferred in the United States, and its potential realization, even in the distant future, should remain an asset for Israel. Otherwise, Israel might see an unfavorable proposal that might gain traction. In contrast, Maj. Gen. (ret.) Gershon Hacohen believes there is much potential in the area, particularly if it is open to new ways of thinking. The solution to the conflict should be approached through new ideas, not irrelevant anachronisms, and there are other paths to political rights and legitimacy other than one man, one vote – and these should be fully explored. The lack of a defined end state is an advantage, allowing for greater fluidity. Israel must learn to live in t is expanse with Palestinians, and not separate from them.