ABSTRACT
Since the failure of the Camp David summit in 2000, the Israeli–Palestinian peace process has been stymied, in the absence of leadership that is willing (on the Israeli side) and able (on the Palestinian side) to take the steps necessary to negotiate an agreement. Nevertheless, the chapter argues that there is no acceptable alternative to a negotiated two-state solution and that such a solution is still possible. The major source of public ambivalence toward such a solution is profound mutual distrust in the ultimate intentions of the other side. To overcome this distrust requires visionary leadership, prepared to take a significant step toward reconciliation. The chapter proposes a joint statement of principles by the two leaderships, featuring mutual recognition of the other’s national identity and attachment to the land, spelling out the logic and implications of a historic compromise, and offering a positive vision of a common future for the two peoples in the shared land. (A hypothetical draft of such a statement of principles is presented in an Appendix.) The chapter describes this vision as a one-country/two-state solution to the conflict and spells out the reasons why a statement of principles embodying this vision can have a dramatic impact on public support for negotiations toward a two-state solution. Finally, it spells out the role of civil society in promoting such a statement of principles in the absence of visionary leadership.
