*****BALKIN ISRAEL-PALESTINE PEACE PROJECT***** Chicago – Jerusalem, Nov. 1, 2024
Full Version 2.0 with data analysis – November 1, 2024
Email: sbalkin@roosevelt.edu
A VISION FOR NEGOTIATIONS TO A CEASEFIRE AND LONG TERM COEXISTENCE: AN ISRAEL-PALESTINE CONFEDERATION WITH THREE SEMI-AUTONOMOUS PROVINCES: ERETZ YISRAEL, MUSLIM FALASTEEN, AND JUDAEA-PALESTINA
INTRODUCTION
An October 26, 2024 NY Times article says that that the US and Israel are exploring new frameworks for a ceasefire and hostage release. A ceasefire is not just to stop the large number of Palestinian and Lebanese civilian casualties but also to stop the deaths of soldiers in the Israel Defense Forces, of which 59 were killed in Gaza and Lebanon in the month of October 2024.
A framework for peace cannot be just about piecemeal deescalation but needs to have a vision for long term bi-cultural relationships and mutual security to generate the comfort to make the immediate changes to stop the casualties and bring home the hostages. It is hoped the ideas in this post can be that visionary framework.
Presently, the majority of Israelis would like the Palestinians in the occupied territories to be gone; and a majority of those Palestinians would like the Jews not to have their own state in the Levant. This blog post provides an outline for reconfiguring the land and placement of people, by religion and culture. It is not intended to be a strict edict for what must occur for there to be peace. It is a vision that can be a basis to begin a negotiation for a ceasefire followed by a more permanent peace. To be useful, both Jews and Arabs in Israel and Gaza-West Bank, have to realize that this vision, though imperfect, can provide a quicker way to peace than the existing plans because its advantages outweigh its disadvantages. It overcomes the major drawbacks of present One-State or Two-State solution: the problems of maintaining a democratic environment in a place of two strongly different groups where there is a desire for separate habitation and incentives for terrorism and war. Northern Ireland has done it and so have South Africa, Belgium, Utah, Switzerland, and Canada.
PLACE NAMES OF THE PROVINCES AND THEIR POLITICAL LANDSCAPE
Eretz-Yisrael (EY) is the Hebrew way to say Land of Israel and Muslim Falasteen (MF) is an Arabic way to say Palestine. Judaea-Palestina (JP) was a Roman way to designate the area after the Bar Kokhba Revolt in 132AD where, after the defeat of the Jews, a large percentage were killed or expelled by Romans with a significant number of captives sold into slavery. Israel-Palestine (I-P) is a name for the Confederation of which the provinces are a part of. These names are just working titles and it is left to the inhabitants of these places to eventually choose their own province names.
More important than names are the political, legal, and religious landscape for them. There are three main constituent groups in present day Israel and Gaza-West Bank. Each should have their own semi-autonomous semi-sovereign province but governmentally connected to each other in a weak confederation. A designation is provided who each province is for and where their capital should be. EY is to be for Conservative Religious Jews with strong ties to the Likud Israeli Parliamentary Coalition with its capital in West Jerusalem. MF is to be for Conservative Religious Arabic Muslims with its capital in East Jerusalem. JP is for people who are Liberal, Pluralistic, and are tolerant of all religions and lifestyles, including atheists, with its capital in a small dot of land in Jerusalem proximate to EY and MF. The three provinces are to be the political elements of the weak confederation of I-P with its capital in a small dot of land carved into an area at a border of West and East Jerusalem.
It is important to remember that the early years of the United States, from 1777 to 1789, had a constitution called the Articles of Confederation which established a weak central government. The King and Parliament of Britain controlled the governments of its colonies, which most of the colonists did not like, and in 1775 Britain was at war with them. A large proportion of the colonists did not want a repeat of British style control for their new country and called their country the United Colonies of North America; and then later changed it to the United States of America.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
What makes these three provinces semi-autonomous rather than fully autonomous is that all have to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), in the main, as an essential part of their constitutional framework. The UDHR was created 75 years ago by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 in Paris.
Especially important are articles 1 (born fee and equal in brotherhood), 3 (right to life, liberty, and security), 15 (right to a nationality), 18 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), 21 (periodic and genuine elections), and 26 (education is to promote understanding, tolerance and friendship).
For a fuller example, here is Article 21 that mandates a democratic form of government. “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his (/her) country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. …The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.”
Included in the 48 countries ratifying the UNDR were: Canada, China, Egypt, France, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Norway, Pakistan, Sweden, Syria, Turkey, United Kingdom, and the United States. Of course, the ideological and religious composition of most of those countries today in 2024 are different than they were in 1948.
HOW MANY STATES ARE THERE IN THE DAY AFTER?
Is this a Three State Solution, or a One State Solution, or a Four State Solution, or a Two State Solution with some add-ons? With nuance, it is all of the above.
This is a three-province solution with the provinces differentiated by religion and liberality, tied together as part of a weak Confederation. This new reconfiguration of Israel and Gaza-West Bank is being created in the aftermath of a very brutal and bitter war with a long history of mutual enmity. Therefore, the combatants should be separated while those who profess non-violence and cross-cultural toleration, should be able to live together in an environment of cooperative coexistence. The purpose for the overarching Confederation is to: (1) act as a referee to resolve inter-provincial disputes, (2) oversee the protection of national borders, (3) create and execute a foreign policy that is not accomplished by the provinces, (4) achieve economies of scale in governance and (5) deal with externalities. The Confederation level is to be made weak so the culturally disparate provinces have maximum autonomy subject to the same constraints which all of the provinces are subject to. If created and implemented correctly, the Confederation should be thought of as a net asset rather than a burden to the provinces. The other constraints that the provinces should be subject to will be discussed later in this post. To get a better sense of this in the physical dimensions, estimates are provided for the population size of the three provinces.
ESTIMATES OF POPULATION SIZE AND RELIGIOUS COMPOSITION FOR THE THREE PROVINCES OF ISRAEL-PALESTINE
Below is Table 1 that summarizes my estimates of the number of people that would choose to live in each of the three provinces. Following this table is a summary of my assumptions and the simple formulae used for calculating these estimates.
Table 1: Estimates of Population Size of the Proposed Three Semi-Autonomous Provinces of Israel-Palestine.
| Province | Population of Jews (millions) | Population of Muslim Arabs (millions) | Population of Others
(millions) |
TOTAL
(millions) |
| Eretz Yisrael (EY) | 4.3 | 4.3 | ||
| Muslim Falasteen (MF) | 3.7 | 3.7 | ||
| Judaea-Palestina (JP) | 2.9 | 3.8 = 1.3 from Gaza West Bank + 2.5 from Israel | 0.5 | 7.2 |
| Total of three provinces = Confederation of Israel-Palestine (I-P) | 7.2 | 7.5 | 0.5 | 15.2 |
Source: Professor Emeritus Steven Balkin, Roosevelt University, October 20, 2024; Pew Research Center; Israel Census
SUMMARY OF POPULATION CALCULATIONS
Muslims in MF and JP
In 2012, the Pew Research Center did a survey of Muslims in North Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. They estimated that 74% of Muslims in the Palestinian Territories pray several times a day. It is estimated that 5 million Arabs live in the Palestine territories of Gaza and the West Bank. That is used as the basis for an estimate of the likely population size of Muslim Falasteen, which is then 3.7 million people = 74% x 5 million people.
1.3 million Arab Muslims which is 26% of Arab Muslims in the Palestinian Territories who do not pray several times a day, is then estimated to be the number of Muslims from the Gaza and the West Bank people who would choose to live in Judaea-Palestina.
Using Pew data along with Israeli census data, it is posited that all of 2.5 million Arab Muslim Israelis, and .5 million Non-Muslim – Non Arab people in Israel will choose to live in Judaea-Palestina in addition to the Jews who choose to live in JP (2.9 million) – see the next paragraph for how that is estimated, the total population size of Judaea-Palestina is then estimated to be 7.2 million people (2.9 + 1.3 + 2.5 + .5 million).
Jews in EY and JP
In 2015, the Pew Research Center estimates that 40% of Jewish adults in Israel are secular. Using that estimate along with 2022 Israeli Census data which says that the number of Jews in Israel (including in the West Bank) is 7.2 million people. The number of Israeli Jews who would choose to live in Judaea-Palestina is then estimated to be: 2.9 million Jews = 40% x 7.2 million people.
Following the format for estimating the number of Jews for Judaea-Palestina, it is estimated that Eretz-Yisrael will have 4.3 million Israeli Jewish people who choose to live there = 6o% x 7.2 million people.
Summary of population estimates.
Surprisingly, the province with the largest population size is JP. Next is ER. In population size, the smallest province is MF. The population of JP plus ER gives those two provinces jointly to have the majority of the population in I-P. On the other hand, the majority of the population in JP are Arab Muslims and, of course, the total population of MF are Arab Muslims. So, of the three provinces, Muslims predominate in two of them. It is unclear how this will play out politically in the future. It is hoped that if most Israeli Jews and most Arab Muslims acculturate to the sentiment in the UDHR, the politics of I-P will no longer be based on religion but will be based on dimensions like Class, concern about Climate Change, the emancipation of Women, and on Left to Right beliefs in the Value of Government. It could occur that less religious Jews in I-P will try to influence the less religious Muslims into a Coalition of Liberals to control I-P, Or Jews in EY and MF will figure out that they have more in common that what sets them apart and form a Conservative Religious Coalition.
HOW TO GUARANTEE THE EXISTENCE OF A FOREVER JEWISH STATE WITHION A MULTI-RELIGION DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERATION
The goal is to make the central government weak in controlling lifestyles in the provinces so as to minimally impose on the cultural and religious basis for each province while, at the same time, placing strong preventative intervention in the militaristic and bellicose aspects of individual and group behavior. One should be able to live by the norms that your religion and philosophy prescribe but in a peaceful and respectful way. Restrict the types of food and clothing that are available and what you can or cannot do on your holy days but do not attack your neighbors who may do it differently; and let them vote with their feet (move) if they want to.
Israel has the greatest military power in the region so its security concerns are paramount in order to reach a ceasefire, end the Gaza and Hezbollah Wars, and plan for a long term peace. But this is also a three-edged harp. The rules for protecting the Province of Eretz Yisrael also apply to protecting the other two provinces. There must also be multiple ways and reinforcements to contradict expectations of militaristic behavior and guarantee peace throughout Israel-Palestine. The majority of Israeli officials and advocates exhort that every time land is granted to Palestinians outside of the control of Israel, Palestinians use it as a launching pad for terrorism and war. As mentioned above, a necessary condition for creating this Jewish, Muslim, and Secular Confederation is each Province’s acceptance of the UDHR, but in addition there must also be adherence to Singapore’s Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MRHA) which defines the following as punishable offenses:
“…Urging force or violence on the basis of religion, or against a religious group or its members; inciting feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility against a religious group; and insulting the religion or wounding the religious feelings of another person.”
To guarantee the preservation of the Jewish province of Eretz Yisroel and the Muslim province of Filasteen, legal permission is granted for the use of the Torah for laws in Eretz Yisrael where Halacha laws can be adjudicated in Batei Din courts, and permission for the use of the Quran for laws in Muslim Filasteen, where Sharia law can be adjudicated in their courts. These two provinces must be able to keep their religious and cultural character. But the supreme law of the land is, however, based on UDHR and MRHA; and Halacha and Sharia laws are secondary to it.
To protect each province from aggressive action from the other provinces in the Confederation are these additional legal constraints (1) states may have only local municipal and provincial police for local law enforcement along with a state militia, similar to the state units of the National Guard in the USA, that serve under the command of their state governor for responding to natural disasters and other state emergencies; (2) there must be strong weapon control laws for civilians and law enforcement which permit only conventional non-automatic weapons and no bombs, rockets or large knives and no suicide vests; and (3) as an extra layer of defensive protection in the early years of this new Confederation, each state should be linked to an ally protector nation or nations. For example, MF could be linked to Jordan or Qatar or Ireland or all three. For EY its protector nation can be the Canada or Great Britain or Australia or all three; and for JP it can be Norway or Germany or France or all three. For I-P, it can be the USA and Saudi Arabia.
RRELEASED PALESTINIAN PRISONERS AND UNRWA
The Palestinian Prisoners to be exchanged in a swap for the remaining live hostages and the bodies of the deceased must sign agreement to the UDHR and MRHA and be in a probationary status reporting every other week for five years to I-P Confederation Probationary Officers at the I-P Buildings. Palestinian prisoners should be released either to MF or to countries outside of I-P. Violating any principles of the UNDP or MRHA is cause for revocation of probationary status. Similarly, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and each of its workers must also sign on to the principles of the UDHR or MRHA and its or her/his violation of those principles is cause for revocation of its status in I-P.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS PRESENTLY HELD BY ISRAEL
To deter physically distant enemies of EY, MF, or JP, nuclear weapons should be allowed to exist either under the control by the I-P Confederation or by the protector countries for the I-P or to be negotiated.
It is perceived that the majority of Israelis are still traumatized by the Oct. 7 attack and that they need an extra level of protection from terrorist assaults. While it is reasonable to conclude that due to the externalities of fallout, nuclear weapons are useless for warfare within I-P and their immediate neighbors, controlling the nuclear weapons may give the people in EY a sense of defensive comfort that could encourage them to accept a ceasefire.
GUARANTEEING RELIGIOUS PRACTICES AND CULTURE IN THE PROVINCES
Provincial preferences for religion and culture must be maintained now and into the future. Built into the provincial and confederation constitutions are the principles that no amount of Muslim population growth and military acquisition would be allowed to dilute Jewish political power and cultural dominance in EY; and no amount of Jewish population growth and military acquisition would be allowed to dilute Muslim power and cultural dominance in the MF; and no amount of demographic or religious imbalance in JP could push it to adopt a state religion.
It would be permitted for Muslims to live in EY and for Jews to live in MF, but outsiders would not be able to vote in provincial elections. An advantage of this new three province configuration is it allows for strongly religion-focused Jews and Muslims to separate themselves from each other, while allowing members of these groups who desire to live in integrated and more secular settings to be able to do so.
DEALING WITH THE JEWISH SETTLERS IN THE WEST BANK
One solution is to allow the Settlers residential access to places that have Jewish Holy sites that are not Muslim Holy places but the Settlers’ power would be diluted because their voting rights are to be connected to EY not MF. For places with Jewish Holy sites that also have Muslim Holy sites on them (e.g. Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron), a sharing arrangement for space and access will have to be created through the consideration of tradition and negotiation, possibly including using the design and administrative help of the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan.
Sharing the Temple Mount Complex
It is suggested that the status quo should prevail with regards to the Temple Mount Complex, also known as Al Aqsa Mosque Compound. Presently the area is administered by Jordan while Israel provides security. An alternative arrangement that should help in the quickening of a ceasefire is granting 25% (9 square acres) of the Temple Mount space to EY where the area is to be north and west and out of close proximity to the Dome of the Rock. A Third Jewish Temple (Bet hamMiqdas HasSlisi, or a branch of it) can be built within these 9 acres. To avoid disputes between Jewish Orthodox groups and with other groups about whether the Temple is rebuilt before or after the Messiah comes, this Temple should be called the Version 2.5 Temple or the Not-Quite-Yet Third Temple. It should be co-designed and co-administered by EY along with Jordon in ensure that VERY holy Muslim space is NOT encroached upon. As in the Second Temple, only Kohanim (descendants of Aaron – Jewish Priests) should be allowed to enter this new Temple.
However, using a YouTube channel and discreet digital cameras, what goes on inside the Version 2.5 Temple, can viewed all over the world. There appears to be no Torah prohibition for using digital cameras except that Orthodox tradition prohibits turning on electric devices on shabbat and other major holy days. Chabad Rabbi Mordechai Lightstone observed in 1991 that the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Schneerson noted in a talk broadcast over a satellite that satellite technology is a key to understanding the underlying unity that connects all of Creation — “Seemingly, Heaven and Earth are two disparate entities yet at their core, they are truly one.”
Settler Acquired Land
The Settlers should transfer all the land back to MF that was obtained through the use of Settler force. The land where Settlers live in the West Bank that was obtained legally or by purchase, have to be exchanged to the MF, in the same amount and quality, elsewhere in Israel but the Settlers should not have to pay double for the land they legally purchased. Israel should obtain and pay for the land acquisition in Israel to transfer to MF. MF will need to have a land connection from Gaza to the West Bank. That highway and land can be part of the transfer land to MF for Settler land.
DETERMINING GOVERNANCE AT THE CONFEDERATION NATIONAL LEVEL
It is relatively easy to understand governance at the provincial level where rules of suffrage need not be complicated. Ruling at the Confederation level will be more intricate to keep it inclusive but also weak. Future negotiations between Jews and Palestinians living in Israel and in the occupied territories can resolve this. But here is one suggestion. Each province elects or proposes two representatives that then becomes an executive committee that rules as a group but only by unanimous consent (sometimes called consensus decision making) which means each of the six members of the ruling executive committee has veto power. The difficult national decisions will be negotiated and made at the beginning of the Confederation. Over time, the Confederation Executive Committee can change the way it is composed and how the Confederation is to be governed, perhaps replacing the executive committee with a national parliament.
LAW OF RETURN AND POPULATION DENSITY
There are two Laws of Return, a Jewish one; and a Palestinian one. Below are population estimates and a discussion for the Jewish Law of Return. Following this will be a similar analysis for the Palestinian Law of Return.
Jewish Law of Return
The basis for Zionism, the necessity for a Jewish national homeland was and is based on creating a backstop for dealing with antisemitism and the historic leadership from people like William Blackstone in Chicago, Theodore Hertzl in Basel, and Chaim Weizmann in Rehovot, Israel. The big push for a Jewish national homeland was to protect Jewish people from pogroms and a future Holocaust. While there has been and currently still is widespread antisemitism, it was specifically the pogroms in Russia and Europe, the Holocaust driven by Nazi Germany, and the widespread refusal of countries to take in Jews as refugees, that generated the necessity of creating a Jewish homeland that needed to be somewhere. It was chosen to be in Uganda by Herzl or in the Crimea by Stalin, but support was strong, especially by William Blackstone and Jewish and Christian biblical theology, that it be in and around Jerusalem.
Using a simple data analysis below, it will be shown that in present Israel, excluding Gaza and the West Bank, Israel could fully accommodate the addition of all the 18 million extra people eligible for the Jewish Law of Return. If the Jewish-Palestinian problem can be solved and there is genuine peaceful co-existence between Israel, Palestinians, and other Muslims around the world, it is likely that instances of antisemitism will decease and thereby requests to move to Israel by Jews will decrease. It may occur that more Jews will want to move out of Israel rather than to it. A more tolerant Muslim world is likely to cause many Israeli Jews to want to move back to both Arab countries and non-Arab Muslim countries to expand the places for engaging in education and trade.
Descriptions of the Calculations for Population Density for Israel
The Jewish Agency estimates that 18 million people who live outside of Israel are eligible to live in Israel under the rules of the Law of Return. The land area of Israel is 8,630 square miles (not counting Gaza and the West Bank) for 9.3 million people. That give Israel a population density in 2023 of 1077 per square mile.
If all 18 million people left their places of residence outside of Israel and came to present day Israel, the population density would soar to 3,163 per square mile.
As one can see in Table 2 below, even if all Jewish people in the world outside of Israel, who met the Law of Return conditions for eligibility to move to Israel, actually moved to Israel, density would still be below the most dense countries in the world. While a full return triples the density for Israel, there are several more countries/places with densities above 3,163.
Table 2: Population Density of Three Selected Countries Compared to Density of Israel If All Potential Returnees Moved to Israel in 2023
| Country | Population Density per square mile 2024 |
| Singapore | 21,039 |
| Bahrain | 5,302 |
| Malta | 4,367 |
| Israel now | 1,077 |
| Israel with all potential returnees | 3,163 |
Source: Professor Emeritus Steve Balkin, Roosevelt University, October 23,2024; worldbank.org; embassies.government.il; worldpopulationreview.com
Palestinian Law of Return
It is advocated that Arabs who lived in what is now Israel, Gaza, or the West Bank (formerly part of the British Mandate of Palestine) and became refugees, and their descendants, have a right to move back to that area and reclaim the land they lived on. It is hard to find solid data on this and definitions of who is eligible for the Palestinian Right of Return vary also. Estimates are 50,000, 5 million, or 9 million.
If Palestinians, eligible to Return, all do return to MF, the following Table 3 presents the different total population sizes and population densities of MF under the four different estimates for the number of Palestinians eligible to the Right of Return. Assuming the size of the area of any land swaps are equal, the area of Muslim Filasteen would be the same as the area of the occupied territories. It would be the area of Gaza (139 sq. miles) plus the West Bank (2,262 sq miles) which is 2401 sq. miles.
Table 3: MF Palestinian Population Size and Population Density due to Right of Return
| Addition of Palestinian Population to MF due to Right of Return (alternative assumptions) |
MF Estimated Population Size (millions) | MF Population Density(per sq. mile) |
|
| 0 | 3.70 | 1,541 = 3.70/2401 | |
| 50,000 | 3.75 | 1562 = 3.75/2401 | |
| 5,000,000 | 8.70 | 3623 = 8.70/2401 | |
| 9,000,000 | 12.70 | 5289 = 12.70/2401 |
Source: Professor Emeritus Steve Balkin, Roosevelt University, October 23,2024; maps.cga.harvard.edu/cmes/Map_02.pdf
One should compare Table 3 to Table 2. In one extreme, without any additions to the Right of Return Palestinian population, Muslim Filasteen has a greater population density compared to Israel by about a third. (1541 MF vs 1077 Israel). In the other extreme, if all potential Palestinian returnees moved to MF, density would increase by almost 2.5. But it would still have a lower density compared to Singapore and would be about the same density as Bahrain. The population density of Israel plus all of its potential returnees would be 3163. That is substantially lower than the population density of MF plus all of its returnees which would be 5289. That is a 67% lower density in Israel or 40% higher density in MF.
In 1948 or 1967, the ability to easily and safely build high density environments with very tall buildings was limited. But now it is relatively easy and safe to do. In 2024, the tallest building in the world is in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. That building is called Burj Khalifa (Tower of Khalifa) to honor the president of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Khalīfah ibn Zāyid Āl Nahyān) and is 2717 feet high.
Understandably MF or I-P may want to limit building size and population density in certain places due to the harm it may cause to holy sites, archaeological projects, environmental quality, and cultural preferences. Those drawbacks to density are what should limit it.
However, in addition, there should be prior conditions of no-radicalization that could preclude one from moving to MF or JP or EY from outside I-P. Those conditions are no prior association or membership in ISIS or Hamas or Islamic Jihad. All returnees must sign a formal agreement to the principles of UDHR and MRHA and failure to abide by those rules will result in deportation from anywhere in I-P.
INTERNAL BOUNDRIES
Security requirements, new transportation linkages, land swaps, and the promotion of harmonious habitation, need to be taken into account when drawing the internal boundaries to create the three provinces for the Confederation of Israel-Palestine. This will require a smart, talented committee of experienced political geographers who know the history of Israel and Gaza-West Bank well, to draw the boundaries that are based on the outcome of the political negotiations about the details for the Confederation arrangements.
CONCLUSION
I think the majority of Palestinians and Israelis are truth telling people. But a substantial portion of them lie by projecting a rhetoric of peace while they try to militarily grab land that is to be controlled by their own religion and culture. The vision in this post is an attempt to give each side to this dispute what they want: a secure thoroughly conservative religious Jewish province; a secure thoroughly conservative religious Arab Muslim province; and a secure liberal pluralistic province including Jews, Muslims, people of other religions, atheists, and a variety of lifestyles.
The biggest problems are accommodating the Laws of Return, eliminating the risk of terrorism to Israel from radical militant Palestinians, and the risk of settler terrorism to Palestinians. Each province, as well as the Israel-Palestine Confederation, need to determine if there are to be any restrictions on population density which can limit the amount of additional population to be living in each province. New construction technology suggests that there do not need to be density and immigration size restrictions with a full Law of Return. The added population can be accommodated in their designated province.
Having confederation and provincial constitutions based on human rights, religious tolerance, and non-violence, as essentially stated in the UDHR and the MDRA, are important ingredients to make this three-province arrangement be democratic that can last over time while accommodating religious and cultural differences.
-00-
I would like to thank the following readers who gave me important critical feedback. The opinions and ideas in this paper are not necessarily those of my readers. Sana Ahmed, Barbara Balkin, Maysa Hammoud, Ron Litchman, and Elliot Zashin.
Return to the Home Page of the Balkin Israel-Palestine Peace Project