Who's to say they have to set up the existing government as the state? I think one of the advantages of a unilateral action by Israel to do this, would be that they could set up free elections to determine the government, rather than accept the self-appointed despots as boss.

How free can the elections be if Yasser Arafat's goons haven't been destroyed?



But your point is more or less mine. The existing government needs to go, and then we need to give the Palestinians a democratic state.

This solution, even if you assume it would be greeted warmly by Palestinians and the world, doesn't address how the borders would get settled.



Would "settlements" continue to be built while Israel rebuilds Palestine?



With the economy in Israel so bad due to war, how do you justify to voters a massive rebuilding project in the W.Bank and Gaza that you're just going to give away anyway?



This solution could only work if you substitute the United States for Israel, but that still leaves the border problem unsettled.



I think that besides Orrin's idea, the only other possibility is to merge the West Bank with Jordan and maybe make Gaza an autonomous zone under Egypt.

Well, the border can be dictated. Some settlements will have to be abandoned. The U.S. would certainly provide most of the funding.

This reminds me of the recipe for rabbit stew. First, catch a rabbit.



This whole plan assumes that we capture, kill or render harmless the several terrorist groups operating within the Palestinian areas. Unlike Saddam's thugocracy and totalitarian police state, groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad enjoy a fair measure of popular support, especially among the young (I'll grant that support for the PA and Fatah is a mile wide and an inch deep). Due to the educational system, the total breakdown in employment, a lack of trust, and a poisonous political philosophy, the Palestinians are in no mood to work towards a Palestinian state next to Israel. They want it all from the Jordan to the Sea.



What's required is not just snuffing some terrorists so as to allow all the good decent people (who are just waiting in the wings) assume responsibility for a new government. There are precious few such people. What's required is totally breaking the mindset and philosophy of the Palestinians. They need to be defeated, to feel and experience a crushing defeat, so that they come to understand that their old aspirations, old ways of doing things, old way of resisting the Israelis will not work
.



Palestinian society today is pathologic in multiple important ways. It needs to be shattered, and the people there need to experience the complete shame of failure. Only then is there a chance to re-build a society that can coexist with Israel, Jordan and the other Arab countries.

I don't know if I agree with the 'nessecary failure' idea or not--mainly because my knowledge on the Palestinain psyche is exactly nil. But, near as I can tell, Orrin's plan would provide that, if nessecary. If the Palestinan State becomes an agressor against Israel, then Israel legitimately declares war, and it becomes much harder for the world to say boo to a crushing defeat of them.

The Palestinians have already experienced

a whole series of crushing defeats, so it's

hard to imagine the scale the next one would

have to have in order to work.



Wherever you go, it is said that they local

people are "deeply attached to the land." In

most cases, that's baloney, but I have come to

believe that it's true of Palestinians.



If it were me, I'd rather be attached to a place

like Iowa, where you can grow stuff, but who

knows.

Steve - I agree in part - they have to be persuaded the old ways will not work - and I think the Sharon policy of targeted killings and bulldozing relatives' homes, patiently repeated, will deliver that message. I also think it's going to take a long time to recover from giving terrorists control of the educational system and media. This seems to me another reason not to rush into a Palestinian state. Why give them bigger, badder weapons when they aren't civilized yet?



The alternative course is, I think, to let Palestinians have visas to other countries - like the newly free Iraq. Then as the ongoing war continues to impoverish the West Bank and Gaza, more and more will leave until the remainder can just be turned over to Jordan.

Paul -



If the US is going to do most of the funding, shouldn't they do the building, and even then after a pullout, not before?



Once US troops are in, isn't it a de facto separate entity from Israel anyway, meaning that the pullout would already have had to have occured?

I'm not anticipating a US troop role -- our guys have better things to do elsewhere. Israel can supply any needed troops. The deal would be, we give funding for both Israel and the new Palestine in exchange for their willingness to follow our roadmap.

But how can you get both sides to start following a roadmap without defined borders? Why should the Palestinians cooperate if they don't know if they'll get E.Jerusalem beforehand?



How does the Palestinian Government's stance vis a vis Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, etc... fit into this? If our roadmap has anything short of total annhilation of these groups, what's the point of fighting a global war on terror?



If annhilation of these groups is the goal, then how can they be allowed to operate out of Damascus with impunity?

Matt - Israel can define the borders at any time. In fact, the wall Israel is now building will be the de facto border. The Palestinians probably won't get East Jerusalem. They'll cooperate because half a loaf is better than none.



Your questions about the terrorists and the war on terror are good. The war on terror is going to continue until all terrorism ends, just as the Cold War continued until communism fell.

I believe that this country (and democracies in general) doesn't have the stomach to take the war to every terror-supporting country. Even if we got as far as Syria, Iran, Iraq, and N.Korea, would we really be able to rally the country to take on Algeria?



Won't it seem cynical if Israel defines the borders heavily in its favor while claiming to help rebuild Palestinian society? Especially since they know better than anyone just how poisoned their society is?



I agree that they can define the borders at any time, but only in the context of a pullout, not in the middle of an effort to build a Palestinian civil society. Think about the political capital that would have to be spent by Sharon to get Israelis to support such an effort. What would it say if Israel then declared their borders and pulled out six months in to such an effort after finding the job too hard?



Are you suggesting that Israel would declare the borders and still remain in the W.Bank to help them?