Podcast Summary
Israeli officials warn against one-state reality, but actions speak louder: Despite warnings from Israeli officials, Israel's continued occupation of Gaza poses significant security risks and moral dilemmas, and the lack of a peace partner doesn't absolve Israel of responsibility for creating conditions for peace.
The dominant narrative in Israel before 2014 was that a two-state solution was impossible due to the lack of a peace partner. However, Ezra Klein argues that this perspective absolves Israel of responsibility for creating conditions for peace and allows for the continuation of a one-state reality, which is becoming increasingly apartheid-like. A group of 100 former senior Israeli defense and diplomatic officials have warned for years that this reality is a catastrophe for Israeli security, democracy, international standing, and morality. They argued that Israel could have taken significant actions on its own to prevent this outcome. Now, in the aftermath of the 2014 Gaza war and the ongoing conflict, the question of who will govern Gaza in the future and how is a pressing concern. Israel's continued occupation of Gaza poses significant security risks and moral dilemmas. Nimrod Novik, a former Israeli government aide and member of Commanders for Israel Security, will discuss these plans and their relevance to the current situation.
Retired Israeli military officials call for change in Israeli policy towards Palestinians: Retired Israeli military officials believe the current policy of separation and maintaining the status quo is unsustainable and leading towards a one-state solution. They recommend actions to reverse this trend and work towards a two-state solution instead.
A group of over 500 retired Israeli military and security officials, known as Commanders for Israel Security, recognized the need for a change in Israeli policy towards Palestinians due to the lack of progress towards a two-state solution and the increasing instability in the region. They believed that the Israeli policy of separation and maintaining the status quo was unsustainable and leading towards a one-state solution. The Israeli government's reluctance to determine the end goal of their relationship with the Palestinians had resulted in a policy that was based on separating Gaza from the West Bank and maintaining the illusion of a status quo. However, this approach was failing as both the Palestinian Authority and the settlers were undermining the prospects for a two-state solution. The document, Initiative 2025, recommended actions to reverse this slide towards a one-state solution and work towards a two-state solution in the coming years.
The one-state solution in Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Despite the potential for a one-state solution, the speaker argues that a two-state agreement is inevitable due to unwillingness to compromise on equal rights or minority status, with separation and security control being the prevailing political ideology in Israel.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict may be moving towards a one-state solution due to the inherent contradictions in current policies and the lack of a viable two-state solution. There are different versions of what a one-state solution might look like, ranging from equal rights for all to Israeli rule with Palestinian repression. However, the speaker believes that a two-state solution is inevitable due to the unwillingness of both sides to compromise on equal rights or minority status. Separation, rather than peace, seems to be the prevailing political ideology in Israel, with security control being the priority over alternative arrangements. This perspective challenges the common assumption that peace deals and settlements are the primary focus of Israeli politics. Instead, the concept of civil separation with overall security control until a two-state agreement is reached suggests reversing the creeping annexation and finding a way for both peoples to live separately but relatively peacefully.
Improving the situation in the West Bank through unilateral actions: Israel can strengthen the Palestinian Authority by respecting their security agencies, expanding their control over territory, and implementing economic measures to help them deliver for their people, potentially paving the way for future peace deals.
Israel can take unilateral actions to improve the situation in the West Bank and strengthen the Palestinian Authority (PA), despite the current political challenges. This can be achieved by treating Palestinian security agencies with respect, expanding their control over territory, and implementing economic measures to help them deliver for their people. During the period after the 2nd Intifada, the PA showed potential for self-governance under leaders like Salam Fayad, but its progress was hindered by Israeli actions and the PA's own internal issues. Revitalizing the PA through these actions could pave the way for future negotiations and peace deals.
A political solution is needed for Israel to exit Gaza: The Palestinian Authority needs to rebuild its capabilities and credibility to effectively take control of Gaza and maintain legitimacy among its population, requiring international support and time.
The situation in Gaza requires a political solution for Israel to exit the region, as economic and security measures alone are not enough. The Palestinian Authority, which is the main source of their budget, needs to be perceived as working towards Palestinian statehood to maintain legitimacy among its population. However, the current state of the Palestinian Authority makes it unlikely that they can effectively take control of Gaza on their own. Instead, an interim arrangement under the auspices of the Palestinian Authority is needed for rehabilitation and eventual transition of power. The international community, including Israel, agrees that a Palestinian authority is necessary for Israel to exit the Gaza Strip, but it will take time and effort to rebuild the PA's capabilities and credibility.
PA absence in Gaza could prolong Israeli occupation: Israeli occupation may continue due to PA distrust, Hamas's perceived security control, and Israeli public unwillingness to pay occupation costs. Younger Palestinians support Hamas, believing armed struggle is the only way to bring change, fueled by past Israeli actions.
The absence of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Gaza could lead to a prolonged Israeli occupation, forcing Israel to manage civil affairs and potentially leading to increased support for radical groups like Hamas. This situation arises due to distrust in the PA and Hamas's perceived ability to maintain security and due to Israeli public unwillingness to pay the high price of occupation. The popularity of Hamas among younger Palestinians is a result of their frustration with the occupation and the belief that armed struggle is the only way to bring about change. The Israeli government's past actions, such as unilateral withdrawals and rewarding Hamas with concessions after violence, have further fueled this sentiment. The aftermath of the current conflict could lead to a strong desire for vengeance and a loss of dignity among Gazans, with no clear solution in sight for addressing these feelings.
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Human Suffering and Uncertainty: The Israeli government's actions in the ongoing conflict with Palestine have led to immense human suffering, consequences, and uncertainty for both parties. Intelligence failures and lack of recognition of Palestinian grief are major concerns.
The ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, specifically the events of October 7, 2021, have resulted in immense human suffering and consequences that are unprecedented for both parties. The speaker acknowledges the Israeli grief and mistakes made by their government, but expresses concern for the lack of recognition of Palestinian grief. The speaker believes that the Israeli government holds significant power in the situation and the consequences of their actions, including intelligence failures, have been devastating. The uncertainty of the future and the lack of a clear path forward make it difficult to predict how the situation will transform. The speaker advocates for a different course to ultimately lead to a better reality. The shocking revelation that Israeli intelligence had obtained Hamas's plan for an attack, yet failed to act on it, adds to the complexity of the situation and raises questions about the politics of Israel in handling these reports.
Israeli public demands PM Netanyahu's resignation post-war: Despite legal troubles, investigations, and public demand, Netanyahu may prolong the conflict to maintain power. Hope lies in the political system to prevent irrelevant considerations from affecting national security decisions.
Prime Minister Netanyahu's repeated refusal to take responsibility for the ongoing conflict and his focus on politics instead of national security interests has led to a widespread public demand for him to step down. With an overwhelming consensus of 80% of the public wanting him gone, Netanyahu faces significant challenges post-war, including legal troubles, investigations, and the end of his legacy. Despite these challenges, Netanyahu may continue to prolong the conflict to maintain his image as a wartime leader. The Israeli political system, which doesn't have cleanly scheduled elections, gives Netanyahu some power to extend the war. The hope lies in the combination of former chiefs of staff and the defense establishment to prevent irrelevant considerations from affecting national security decision-making. If a majority of the Knesset votes for a new prime minister, a new coalition can be formed through a constructive no confidence vote. Currently, the opposition is short of the required 61 votes, but if key members of Bikud join, a new coalition could be formed.
Israeli Political Landscape Shifting Amidst Coalition Crises and Protests: Coalition partners distancing from Netanyahu, potential alternative government, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir pushing agendas, protests growing, significant change possible, Israeli public perception uncertain
The political landscape in Israel is shifting, and Prime Minister Netanyahu's grip on power may be weakening. Coalition partners are distancing themselves from him, and some may form an alternative government without him. Two potential kingmakers, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, could be key players in this scenario. Ben-Gvir, in particular, is pushing his agenda of a one-state solution and depriving Palestinians of the right to vote for the Knesset, while Netanyahu is preoccupied with crises in Gaza and Lebanon. Protests against the government's actions have been growing, and the number of protesters could double in the coming months, potentially leading to significant change. However, it's unclear how the Israeli public will interpret this situation. Some may see it as a failure of the last 15 years of Israeli drift towards the right or apathy on Palestine, while others may believe that incompetence was the main issue. Regardless, the internal dynamics of the Knesset and the growing protests could lead to a significant shift in Israeli politics.
Netanyahu's shift from statesman to politician: Netanyahu's legal predicaments led him to prioritize political deals, weakening the supreme court. He also acknowledged his role in creating Hamas and appointed incompetent ministers, causing government instability. Potential successor Gantz shares similar ideas but is untested.
Netanyahu's shift from a statesman-like leader to a self-serving politician can be attributed to three factors. First, his willingness to provide legislative solutions for his legal predicaments in exchange for allowing others to pursue their agendas, despite the need to weaken the supreme court. Second, the realization of his role in creating the Hamas monster through deliberate policies, particularly during the aftermath of October 7, 2001. Lastly, the exposure of his incompetent appointment of ministers and subsequent deformation of the government structure, leading to a sense of responsibility for a major disaster. The potential successor, Benny Gantz, shares similar ideas regarding the Palestinian issue but remains untested as a leader. The question remains whether the short-term focus on a revitalized Palestinian authority and a more open and humane policy is what the people want, or if they still hold onto the long-term goal of a two-state solution.
Israelis' voting patterns don't always reflect their stance on Palestinian issue: Despite common belief, a majority of Israelis support pragmatic solutions to the Palestinian issue, but lack of effective leadership hinders progress.
The Israeli public's stance on the Palestinian issue is often misunderstood based on voting patterns alone. According to Nimrod Novik, an expert on Israeli public opinion, Israelis have not consistently voted for more right-wing leaders due to their positions on the Palestinian issue, but rather for reasons such as leadership and campaigning skills. Novik argues that a plurality to majority of Israelis support pragmatic solutions like a two-state solution or civil separation. The main issue, in his view, is the lack of leadership to pursue these options. Novik recommends two books for those interested in understanding diplomacy and its role in conflict resolution: "The Back Channel" by William J. Burns and "The Master of the Game: Henry Kissinger and the Art of Middle East Diplomacy" by Martin Indyk. These books offer insights into the importance of diplomacy and its successes and failures in the Middle East.
Meet the Team Behind the New York Times Opinion Audio Show: A diverse and talented team produces the New York Times Opinion audio show, including Jeff Geld, Claire Gordon, Emma Fogau, Annie Galvin, Roland Hu, Kristen Lynn, Isaac Jones, Christina Samalewski, Shannon Busta, Andy Rose Strasser, and Afim Shapiro.
The production team behind the New York Times Opinion audio show is a diverse and talented group of individuals. Jeff Geld serves as the senior engineer, Claire Gordon is the senior editor, and the team also includes Emma Fogau, Annie Galvin, Roland Hu, and Kristen Lynn. The show's unique sound is created by original music by Isaac Jones, audience strategy by Christina Samalewski, and Shannon Busta. The show is expertly produced under the guidance of executive producer Andy Rose Strasser, with special thanks to Afim Shapiro. This team's collaboration results in thought-provoking and engaging audio content for the New York Times Opinion.
