- Home
- About
- General Issues
- Maps
- Position Statements
- Netanyahu's "Israeli Comfort"
- Netanyahu: Too Big for His Britches
- Israel Twisting in the Wind
- A Question of Accountability
- ...and only afterwards move to discuss the topic of Jerusalem
- Negotiations By the Parties
- The World Should Help the Palestinian Hunger Striker
- Playing the Victim Card Will Not Bring Peace
- President Peres and Dr. Ashrawi: Thank You for Staying on Track
- Time to Negotiate the Northern and Southern Sectors of the Israeli-West Bank Border
- Israel’s Tussle with Europe
- Security and Borders: Both Required for Peace
- Etzion Bloc Expansion: Israeli Overreaching
- Next Steps: Negotiating an Initial Border
- Let Us Prepare for Two States
- Can Palestinians Recognize Israel’s “Jewish Character”?
- The Question of Recognizing Israel as a Jewish State
- Giv’at Hamatos
- Har Homa C
- About the Authors
- Feedback
- Home
Security
Security is enhanced through good borders. As the adage goes, “good fences make good neighbors.” When Israel and the Palestinians have fixed a border that both sides can accept, that in itself will contribute greatly towards positive security environment for Israel. A border with the West Bank will produce a safer and more secure Israel, safer and more secure than what can be gained through occupation, annexation, or expanding settlements in the West Bank.
Once the representatives of Israel and Palestine, with the support of the Quartet and other nations, commit themselves to establishing peace, then on the basis of having established a border, truly considering the options for the right of return, and making a fundamental commitment to the economic well-being of all in the region, the parties will be able to negotiate meaningful security arrangements.
We do not ask the State of Israel to negotiate with a terrorist organization, but we do ask Israel and its Prime Minister to consider negotiating with a broadened sense of what is reasonable. We believe in the possibility that both Hamas and Fatah can offer reasonable assurances that there is goodwill in both territories. We do not believe that any political party must forever operate with the goal of defeating another party according to its pre-printed agenda. We know full well that agendas can change, because political parties are composed of human beings who understandably have interests. Hence, we urge that negotiations commence on the basis of common humanity.
Furthermore, we do not object to provisos being inserted. We believe it is in the best interests of the State of Israel to negotiate with Hamas, but at the same time to clearly establish in writing what Israel will and will not tolerate. This would offer an opening for Hamas to be included, but at the same time for primary negotiations to occur with Fatah. This would also offer a way for Israel to withdraw from negotiations if political developments in the new state of Palestine are seen by the world community as a genuine threat to Israel and her citizens.
At the same time, the world would be foolish to ignore the concerns of Palestine as an infant state over its security issues. However, we strongly object to any proposal that would maintain or establish an initial peace by employing UN peacekeeping forces anywhere within Jerusalem or Palestine.