Unilateral Peace

Bitterlemons has a great series on the feasibility of unilateral peace, a concept where only one side attempts to forge a climate for peace regardless of the other party’s actions. Israel arguably embarked on a unilateral peace process through the Ariel Sharon-ordered disengagement from the Gaza Stip that led to the Hamas coup of the territory. The Bitterlemons series analyzes recent Palestinian officials’ statements regarding declaring an independent state in the event that the peace process continues to fail. Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad recently advocated the creation of independent Palestinian institutions to further develop the state building process initiated through the failed Oslo Accords.

Yossi Alpher writes:

“When the dust settles from the failed process and probably the collapse of one Israeli coalition and the emergence, conceivably after elections, of another, Israel would be well advised to offer conditional recognition to a self-declared Palestinian state pending settlement of their border and security issues. Solving those issues could be easier on a state-to-state basis, even if the outcome is a stable armistice agreement rather than an elusive end-of-conflict two-state solution.”

However, unilateral declaration of statehood remains complicated by internal disputes among Palestinians and the lack of stability in the government. Moreover, the Mahmoud Abbas-led Palestinian Authority lacks credibility and support among the population. Moreover, PA has little control over the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, where rockets continue to launch and strike southern Israel, thereby potentially thrusting any “new” state immediately into war with a significant military disadvantage.

Daoud Kuttab writes:

“Regardless, for Palestinian political unilateralism to stand any chance of success the ideological and physical division between Islamists and nationalists and the Gaza Strip and the West Bank must first be bridged. Without unity, there will be little incentive for Israel or the international community to view Palestinian political unilateralism as a serious measure.”

Lastly, Gilead Sher discusses the potential for a unilateral peace initiated by Israel through a withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. The main advantage of this strategy would be the resumption of peace talks between two states, as opposed to one state and a pseudo legitimate governing authority. Sher writes:

“Having said this, in the event that Fayyad retracts the Palestinian unilateral option, and only if negotiations fail after exhaustive, sincere and continual efforts to make them work, Israel should consider planning its own unilateral disengagement based on the need to ensure its Jewish, Zionist and democratic identity. It would do so by disengaging from the Palestinians and defining its boundaries roughly along the contours of the security fence. Such provisional boundaries would be essential to safeguarding Israel’s future. The Jewish people has a right to self-determination within borders that protect Israel’s vital interests and enhance its social fabric while strengthening national unity and security–preferably via a negotiated agreement, unilaterally if negotiations fail.”