Sometime ago I read a piece from the folks at Americans for Peace Now that claimed that while the Pro-Peace, Progressive/Liberal Zionist camp has been marginalized and reduced they can still take credit for moving the argument for Two States to the forefront of discussions regarding the Middle East.
Now it is true that Likud and it's Rightwing coalition partners stand against this currently (or at least against a viable Two-State solution) and are doing everything they can to trash it as an outcome. Nonetheless, the discussion has shifted.
How far has it shifted the goalposts... Senator Diane Feinstein (not the most liberal stick on the tree) has just crafted a letter published over at J Street
Now it is critical to the support of a Two State solution from the U.S. so that the Israeli government knows it cannot continue to talk out of both sides of it's mouth. There are parts of this letter that are rather milquetoast and that pander to the Right's sense of entitlement. HOWEVER, I believe it is a strong effort to send the message to Israel that America will support it and understands it's issues. No doubt there will be many here that will be critical of this letter (and for good reasons) HOWEVER, Senator Feinstein I believe understands that one "catches more flies with honey....."
The Letter timed to coincide with President Obama's meeting with PM Benjamin Netanyahu will also send a message that despite all the "lovey dovey" rhetoric - America is committed to a "Two-State Solution" and not to an unsustainable Status quo.
Here is J Street's Statement
This Community of Yes is united in the belief that without bold action now, the region and the world will be consigned to watch an untenable status quo become even further entrenched and all sides descend into further conflict, violence and bloodshed.
We believe that without bold action now, the two-state solution may slip through our fingers and Israel's very future as a Jewish, democratic homeland will be at grave risk.
Without bold action now, the vision of a viable Palestinian state where the Palestinian people can peacefully pursue their own dreams of self-determination alongside a Jewish democratic State of Israel fade into darkness.
Without bold action now, American interests in the region will be sorely impacted.
The Israeli Progressive/Liberal Zionist camp has also come at this by supporting a boycott against settlement goods. In a statement in the Israeli paper Ma'ariv Shalom Achshav along with Americans for Peace Now says the following:
Those Palestinians, what ingrates. Instead of being happy that the Israeli economy has learned to exploit the lands of Judea and Samaria and to invest inordinate sums of money to build factories and industrial zones in the territories, the Palestinian Authority announces a boycott and a ban on purchasing Israeli goods that are manufactured in the settlements. We could have expected better from the Palestinians. Since we stole their land, established industrial zones in the territories and exploited the cheap labor that they were able to supply in abundance, the least they could do in return is to buy the products that are manufactured in the territories and help the Israeli economy continue to develop on the lands of the territories.
After all, the profits from Beigel&Beigel, which resides in the Barkan industrial zone, help pay the taxes to the Shomron Regional Council, by means of which the settlements are further expanded and new roads and other infrastructure are laid out for the illegal settlement outposts in its jurisdiction--definitely worthy causes that Palestinian funds ought to support. So it really isn't clear why suddenly, after all the years in which the Palestinians served the policy of occupation in the territories with their own hands and funds, top PA ministers stand up and declare a boycott on products manufactured in the settlements. What has changed? Has the Fayyad-Abbas government suddenly realized that it is wrong to operate solely on the basis of cursory economic expedience and that they ought to stop and think for a moment about their long-term political goals? Has the Palestinian people decided to fight the Israeli occupation not by violent means but by legitimate and more acceptable methods?
Now this is a boycott I and others here can get behind. As Americans For Peace Now say:
APN believes that boycott and divestment campaigns against Israel are misguided and counterproductive.
Misguided, because they target the average, innocent Israeli citizen — who may well support peace and a two-state solution — rather than the Israeli government policies that are ostensibly the target of the campaigns. Counterproductive, because they provoke a "circle the wagons" response. Such a response is understandable, since much of the pressure for such campaigns comes from historically virulently anti-Israel sources that are often not interested in Israeli security concerns or Palestinian behavior (my emphasis). This in turn creates very real and understandable worries about global anti-Semitism and the perception that the campaigns are not truly (or only) about Israeli policies but rather reflect a deep-seated hatred for and rejection of Israel.
...... A more constructive approach would be to shift the focus from Israel to the West Bank and the Golan Heights. It should be recalled that the West Bank has never been annexed by Israel and is not considered part of Israel, even by the Israeli government or Israeli courts. Even many American Jewish organizations whose mission is to support the sitting government of Israel distinguish in their activities and funding between Israel and the occupied territories. Likewise, while Israel has annexed the Golan Heights, it is clearly understood by all informed parties that the future of this area will necessarily be subject to Israel-Syria peace negotiations (which in previous rounds reached a far-advanced stage). Focusing activism on these areas will underscore the fact that activism is not anti-Israel, but rather is opposed to specific Israeli policies and practices, many of which are related to Israeli behavior in these geographic areas. Such an approach might include:
•efforts aimed at highlighting the point of origin of products originating in Israeli settlements in the West Bank or Golan Heights, to permit people to make informed choices in their purchasing and consumption;
•efforts to raise awareness about companies based in or operating in settlements, to permit people to make informed choices about their investment options;
•efforts to raise awareness of opportunities for people to "invest for peace" — investing in Israeli companies and projects whose work is consistent with peace, coexistence, and the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — rather than divest from Israel;
•efforts to raise awareness about private US funds flowing to settlers and settlements and to explore ways to curb such funding;
•efforts to exempt products originating in settlements from US preferential trade benefits; and
•efforts to bar US government purchase of products originating in settlements
I ask that you please encourage Senator Feinsteins letter even if you think it does not go far enough. In this case incrementalism helps. For Feinstein (a relatively conserv. Dem) to take this step, it shows that goalposts are indeed shifting.
Thanks for Reading this and considering it.