학술논문
Das Ende der Zweistaatenregelung? Alternativen und Prioritäten für die Regelung des israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikts
The end of the two-state regime? Alternatives and priorities for the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
The end of the two-state regime? Alternatives and priorities for the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Document Type
Text
Author
Source
SWP-Aktuell (27/2016)
Subject
Language
German
Abstract
Angesichts der Instabilität im Nahen Osten betonten Israels Premierminister Benjamin Netanjahu und Kanzlerin Angela Merkel bei den gemeinsamen Regierungskonsultationen im Februar 2016, dass es nicht die Zeit für große Fortschritte im israelisch-palästinensischen Friedensprozess sei. Doch fördert das Festhalten an der Zweistaatenregelung als bloßes Mantra, bei dem konkrete Umsetzungsschritte unterbleiben, die Verfestigung der Einstaatenrealität unter israelischer Dominanz. Dies macht eine Konfliktregelung letztlich unmöglich. In den Bevölkerungen nimmt die Zustimmung zu einer Zweistaatenregelung ab. Als Alternativen haben Einstaaten- oder Konföderationsmodelle derzeit zwar noch geringere Realisierungschancen. Deutsche und europäische Politik sollte dennoch kreative und konstruktive Aspekte solcher Modelle ausloten, die es erlauben, nationalen Identitäten sowie individuellen und kollektiven Rechten kooperativ Geltung zu verschaffen. Priorität muss allerdings sein, bei den Konfliktparteien durch eine Veränderung der Kosten-Nutzen-Kalküle den politischen Willen zu generieren, überhaupt eine Konfliktregelung herbeizuführen. (Autorenreferat)
Faced with the instability in the Middle East, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Chancellor Angela Merkel stressed at the joint government consultations in February 2016 that it was not the time for great progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. But adhering to the two-state regime as a mere mantra, in which concrete implementation steps are not taken, promotes the consolidation of the nation-reality under Israeli dominance. This makes a conflict settlement impossible. In the population, there is a decline in support of a two-state regime. As alternatives, nation-state or confederation models currently have even lower chances of realization. Nevertheless, German and European politics should explore creative and constructive aspects of such models that enable national identities as well as individual and collective rights to be cooperatively applied. However, the priority must be to generate the political will of the parties to the conflict by changing the cost-benefit calculation to bring about a conflict settlement. (author’s abstract)
Faced with the instability in the Middle East, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Chancellor Angela Merkel stressed at the joint government consultations in February 2016 that it was not the time for great progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. But adhering to the two-state regime as a mere mantra, in which concrete implementation steps are not taken, promotes the consolidation of the nation-reality under Israeli dominance. This makes a conflict settlement impossible. In the population, there is a decline in support of a two-state regime. As alternatives, nation-state or confederation models currently have even lower chances of realization. Nevertheless, German and European politics should explore creative and constructive aspects of such models that enable national identities as well as individual and collective rights to be cooperatively applied. However, the priority must be to generate the political will of the parties to the conflict by changing the cost-benefit calculation to bring about a conflict settlement. (author’s abstract)