One Step Toward a Stable Peace

A proposal for the West Bank and Gaza Strip

In the deadlocked debate over the future of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, there is considerable merit in the arguments on both sides. Israelis have legitimate worries about security, while there is a growing world consensus that the Palestinians have a moral if not a juridical right to a homeland of their own.

TIME herewith offers a proposal for resolving the Palestinian problem that takes into account both Israeli fears and Arab aspirations. The plan, which draws on the views of experts in the U.S., Israel and Egypt, rests on three assumptions. One is that continuing Israeli rule over the West Bank and Gaza, with their overwhelmingly Arab populations, would prove impossible in the long run. The second is that substituting an imposed Jordanian and/or Egyptian sovereignty over the area, except during a brief transition period, would equally frustrate Palestinian nationalist yearnings, and thus preclude a genuine Middle East peace. The third is that Israel's security needs could be met without its troops occupying the West Bank and Gaza.

The following plan presumably is not acceptable to either side right away, although that does not mean it is ultimately unfeasible. No blueprint can or should be imposed in a single, dramatic act. Instead, it ought to proceed by stages, with each new step contingent upon fulfillment of the conditions required by the previous steps. This process might take years, even decades. The end result, however, could well be a new Palestinian state that could serve as a bridge between Israel and the rest of the Arab world.

The elements of the plan:

Political Structure. Israel would relinquish control over the West Bank and Gaza and withdraw to its pre-1967 borders. As envisioned by the architects of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which clearly seems to call for this withdrawal, there would be minor adjustments in the armistice lines of 1949, which bisected towns and villages and otherwise imposed easily remedied geographic hardships. More extensive border changes favoring Israel would be allowed, of course, with Arab approval. At the end of a predetermined period--perhaps five years--the West Bank and Gaza would be formally incorporated as a Palestinian homeland with transit rights (but not an extraterritorial corridor) guaranteed between the separated territories. Although this Palestinian homeland would have a government and the right to issue passports, there would be certain limits imposed initially on its sovereignty; thus the new country should be described as an "entity" rather than a nation. As a first step toward normalization, Israel and the Palestinian homeland would recognize each other diplomatically and affirm the other's right to exist in peace.

Logically, the capital of the new entity would be East Jerusalem, which is predominantly Arab. But negotiations that threaten to divide the Holy City once more would be long, painful and extraordinarily difficult. Until the Jerusalem question is solved, the new entity would use a West Bank city, perhaps Ramallah, as a temporary capital; it would function much as Bonn does for West Germany.

The new entity would be granted a symbolic presence in East Jerusalem, but no physical division of the city would be allowed.

An international commission, presumably organized by the U.N., would supervise elections in the entity to ensure that they were conducted freely; radicals and terrorists must be prevented from subverting the democratic process. The legislature chosen by these elections would draft a constitution and appoint a government that would have power over the entity's domestic affairs: education and culture, economics and commerce, health and sanitation, transportation and communication, etc. To enforce the entity's laws and provide order, the legislature would have the right to create a judicial system and to recruit and arm a civilian --but not paramilitary--police force.

Military Security. To assure that the entity is a threat neither to Israel nor to neighboring Jordan, its sovereignty would be partially limited. It would be unable to enter into alliances or military pacts.

It would be barred from establishing an army, air force and navy. It would not be permitted to acquire combat aircraft, tanks, mortars, artillery or missiles. Such restrictions on sovereignty are not unique.

Japan's military forces, for example, are limited by its constitution, while Austria's are curbed by an international treaty.

To make certain that the terms of demilitarization are respected and to provide early warning of a potential Arab attack that might first roll through the unprotesting West Bank, Israel would be allowed to maintain watch stations at key strategic locations inside the entity--notably sites overlooking the Jordan valley.

The Israeli forces at these stations would be strictly limited in numbers and prohibited from interfering in any of the entity's internal affairs.

With the new entity stripped of the means to protect itself from outside attack, its own security would have to be guaranteed by collective or bilateral international agreements and backed up by an international peace-keeping force.

This force, also presumably under U.N. auspices, would patrol airports, harbors and other points of entry to stop the smuggling of arms into the entity. It would combat terrorism directed at the entity or Israel.

At the end of a relatively long transition period, lasting perhaps 25 years, some of the limits on the entity's sovereignty would be removed. It would have to remain demilitarized and diplomatically nonaligned, but it would be free to seek confederation with its neighbors, most likely with Jordan, some 50% of whose people are Palestinians, or even, as improbable as it now seems, with Israel.

Citizenship. All residents of the West Bank and Gaza would be entitled to become citizens of the Palestinian entity and participate in its elections. This would include; if they so choose, the 6,000 Israeli settlers now living in the two territories.

Since 475,000 Arabs today hold Israeli citizenship, there is at least a precedent for Jews with roots in the West Bank to become citizens of a Palestinian state. As such, these Jewish settlers would be guaranteed freedom from economic, political or cultural discrimination. If the settlers who are there now opt to return to Israel, they would be compensated for reasonable economic loss by a special fund to which the U.S. and oil-exporting Arab states would contribute.

The main purpose of such a fund, however, would be to underwrite resettlement in the entity of Palestinian refugees now scattered throughout the Middle East. Although the 1.8 million Palestinians in the diaspora would also become citizens of the entity and thus have the theoretical right to "return" to the homeland, the entity would have the right to limit immigration according to its ability to absorb the newcomers. The entity could, and should, bar immigrants who are known terrorists. Since many Palestinians hold good jobs elsewhere in the Middle East, British experts estimate that only 500,000 or so from the diaspora would seek permanent residence in the entity. But because Palestinians everywhere would have a right to the entity's passport, they would no longer be officially stateless refugees. Not only might that satisfy their desire for a national identity, but it should also lead to the dismantling of the humiliating refugee camps in which the Palestinians have been kept by a number of Arab states.

Currently more than 40,000 West Bankers work in Israel, which also buys 65% of the West Bank's exports and provides 91% of its imports. The development of an economically healthy Palestinian entity would be almost impossible if this pattern were abruptly changed. The new state would require continued close economic links with Israel, as well as extensive ties with Jordan. Without such relations, there could be no peaceful coexistence between Israel and the entity.

Israel, Jordan and the entity would be strongly encouraged to form an economic and customs union--a mini-Common Market--that could serve as the precursor to a formal political alliance.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.