MINT-AND-CORN COUNTRY, INDIANA — Via Yglesias, this from the Post

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a major shift, will accept the notion of a Palestinian state — a policy pushed by the Obama administration but resisted until now by Mr. Netanyahu, Israeli officials and Americans briefed on the Israeli leader’s thinking said.

The policy reversal, which is expected to go public this weekend, could help restart negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians and allow the Israeli leader to steer a course between Mr. Obama’s view and those of his own hawkish base.

Certainly, I should like to see meaningful results from this about-face on Bibi’s part. However, given his hard-line past, and the mixed history of Likud respecting Israeli-Arab relations, I remain unconvinced, and second what Matthew suggests:

[I]t’s crystal clear as a matter of logic that if you can’t have a settlement freeze then you also can’t ever have a Palestinian state. Conversely, if you believe there needs to be a Palestinian state, then no matter what you think about when or how that should happen, you’re ineluctably drawn to the conclusion that the settlement project needs to be halted. Will Netanyahu embrace those conclusions? Well, I have my doubts

I, too, have my doubts. And I can’t even imagine how the AIPAC cabal would react were any sort of two-state vision to become reality.

Perhaps most troubling to me is the faux-sovereignty that Netanyahu seems to be offering. Again from the Post,

• Any Palestinian state must be demilitarized, without an air force, full-fledged army or heavy weapons.

• Palestinians may not sign treaties with powers hostile to Israel.

• A Palestinian state must allow Israeli civilian and military aircraft unfettered access to Palestinian airspace, allow Israel to retain control of the airwaves and to station Israeli troops on a future state’s eastern and southern borders.

• Palestinians must accept Israel as a Jewish state, a nod to the hawkish side of Mr. Netanyahu’s governing coalition that has raised concerns that the Palestinian Authority, which nominally governs the West Bank, does not recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

The last of these is quite reasonable; number two, perhaps. The first and third, however, strike me as being, for lack of a better term, “neocolonial”. Either Palestine becomes a sovereign nation or it does not; though I more than welcome slow, steady, measured change, I suspect that this will not be the beginning of a step-by-step path to full-fledged independence, but a way of permitting Israel to keep a tight leash on the Palestinians without continuing to vex much of the rest of the world with outright occupation — and without, one hopes, the bloodshed (certainly a welcome end, whatever the means).

I suppose I could just say, as an “isolationist”, that I just don’t give a damn, but as long as the United States continue to be forced by Washington to exert their waning influence in the Middle East, I do hope that the Obama Administration does everything in its power not only to support this ostensibly admirable step on Bibi’s part, but to compel him to take the necessary further steps. Or, he should threaten to cut foreign aid. Ha!

Update: Mr. Netanyahu formally made his announcement on Sunday. Unsurprisingly, I’m not the only skeptic; certainly not the most relevant doubter:

“Netanyahu’s speech closed the door to permanent status negotiations,” senior Palestinian official Saeb Erekat said. “We ask the world not to be fooled by his use of the term Palestinian state because he qualified it. He declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel, said refugees would not be negotiated and that settlements would remain.”

Filed under: Uncategorized