Well, it's something different anyway ... Ever since the Peel Commission report of 1937
stated that "partition offers a chance of
ultimate peace. No other plan does," many
plans have been proposed for partitioning the
country between the Jews and Arabs - and all
have failed. The common denominator of all
the plans, from the UN's decision of 1947 to
the Oslo Accords and the road map is the
dependence on the goodwill of the sides. That
recipe led over and over to deadlocks and
outbreaks of violence.
A similar fate befell the armistice
agreements that in effect divided the country
after the Israeli war of independence, and the
Israeli occupation of the territories, which was
based on territorial unity and "administrative
partition" between civilians with full rights
and subjects of the military government. Ariel
Sharon's latest hit - an imposed interim
agreement (also known as "disengagement"
with a separation fence) - doesn't even pretend
to promise quiet, but only that the conflict will
continue from improved lines.
The idea of partition has much support, both
international and domestic. But in light of the
failed performances by the sides, which have
prevented its execution, it is worth considering
the alternative of internationalization:
expropriating the authority to determine the
borders and security arrangements from the
Israelis and Palestinians and giving the
authority to the superpowers, led by the U.S.
Haaretz