Thomas Friedman's "What to Do With Lemons": A Lemon of a Proposal

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "What to Do With Lemons" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19friedman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion), Thomas Friedman proffers a "different approach" to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians, which, he would have us believe, is "much bigger and with more imagination" (Tom is a modest man). Friedman suggests that U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181, which partitioned Palestine in 1947 into independent Jewish and Arab states, now be reaffirmed by the Security Council based upon the 1967 borders with land swaps and security arrangements:

"Each side would get something vital provided it gives the other what it wants. The Palestinians would gain recognition of statehood and U.N. membership, within provisional boundaries, with Israel and America voting in favor. And the Israelis would get formal U.N. recognition as a Jewish state — with the Palestinians and Arabs voting in favor.

Moreover, the Palestinians would get negotiations based on the 1967 borders and Israel would get a U.N.-U.S. assurance that the final border would be shaped in negotiations between the parties, with land swaps, so theoretically the 5 percent of the West Bank where 80 percent of the settlers live could be traded for parts of pre-1967 Israel.

. . . .

Meanwhile, the U.S., rather than being isolated in a corner with Israel, can get credit for restarting talks — without remaining stuck on the settlements issue."

"Very simple," the Gray Lady's wizard informs us. Wow, why didn't I think of that? Actually, I can think of a number of reasons why I didn't think of it.

As reported earlier this month by Khaled Abu Toameh of the Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=223181), Azzam al-Ahmed, a member of the Fatah Central Committee who is closely associated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, informed the Egyptian newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm that "Fatah has never recognized Israel and will never do so." Somehow I don't find that reassuring.

Then, too, there was the unity deal between Fatah and Hamas signed at the end of April. At the risk of sounding redundant, the Hamas charter calls for the murder of all Jews, rejects any negotiated settlement with Israel, and demands that Israel be eliminated by jihad, i.e. holy war, an oxymoron if ever there was one. With Fatah embracing Hamas, which has been recognized as a terror organization by the U.S., the E.U., Canada and Japan, is this the time to believe that territorial compromise by Israel will bring enduring peace with the Palestinians?

Don't get me wrong: I favor a two-state solution based on the 1967 lines with land swaps. But let's not forget how Israel was rewarded with mortar shells and missiles when it unilaterally evacuated Gaza in 2005. I am also painfully aware that Israel is nine miles wide at its waist, and any withdrawal to the 1967 lines will leave Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa and Netanya at the mercy of Qassam rockets.

Friedman would have Israel return to the 1967 borders with "mutually agreed border adjustments and security arrangements." Well, I'm ready for this, Tom, but first explain to me those very simple "security arrangements." You see, I personally witnessed some of those 12,000 mortar shells, rockets and missiles hit civilian targets in southern Israel, yet a cynical world never cared, demanding only that Israel respond "proportionately."

So what is the solution? Perhaps there is no current solution. Given the violence, upheaval and uncertainty surrounding the so-called "Arab Spring," Fatah and Hamas, both struggling to remain in power, are at the moment prevented from reaching any compromise with Israel. In the real world, as opposed to the Merry Old Land of Oz located in Maryland just outside of Washington, timing is critical.

Let's first hear from either Fatah or Hamas that they are prepared to recognize Israel's right to exist within any boundaries whatsoever, and then let's start to talk. Unfortunately, this is a precondition that neither Fatah nor Hamas can presently accept.