Michael Kosowsky '14

I think that the U.N. vote will negatively affect the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The move to go to the U.N. went against the commitments the Palestinians made in the Oslo Accords, and caused the Israelis to retaliate by authorizing new housing, so as not to lose face. Additionally, as seen with the Arab invasion of Israel in 1948, a true peace cannot be achieved by documents signed in the U.N., but rather by direct negotiations by the parties involved. Lastly, the vote weakens the influence of the United States in the negotiations, because the passing of the resolution reflects poorly on the Obama Administration, which repeatedly tried to convince the Palestinian Authority not to go to the UN and for Europe to vote against the measure.

Michael Kosowsky is treasurer of the Brandeis Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Catie Stewart '16

The vote is significant in that it shows a huge amount of international support for an independent Palestinian state, thus refocusing the conflict and peace process. I don't think this was a move for peace, as it was unilateral; instead, it was a Palestinian bid for dignity and some feeling of self-determination. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's subsequent announcement that there will be settlements built in E-1, an area that if built upon, will be the end to the notion of a contiguous Palestinian state, shows that the two-state solution is not the top priority for Israel.  Until Abbas and Netanyahu are willing to work bilaterally, I do not see a two-state solution, which I believe is the only real way to achieve peace, happening.  

Catie Stewart is an active member of J Street U Brandeis.

Natan Odenheimer '15

The Palestinians' successful U.N. bid changes the framework for all involved parties. Through his recent actions, Palestinian Prime Minster Abbas displayed that he is acting proactively and plans to build a state-with or without a partner. The international response resonated loud and clear: there is broad support for a Palestinian State and equally broad rejection of further Israeli expansion in the West Bank. One might ask, "Why would Israel make a move that seems to further international isolation?" Henry Kissinger, a former Secretary of State, once said, "Israel does not have foreign policy, only internal policy." Israel's actions seem to correspond with this saying. The question now isn't whether the U.N. vote was good or bad for Israel or the peace process. Instead, we must think about how Israel will respond, what the Palestinians will do next, and what can be done to permanently break the entrenched conflict given the new diplomatic reality and upcoming elections in Israel. Israeli leadership needs to make a decision: align with the international community and make progress or keep sticking its head in the sand but win the upcoming elections.

Natan Odenheimer is a founder of Brandeis Visions for Israel in an Evolving World.

Ari Moshkovski

The recent U.N. vote has only exacerbated the stalemate in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Abbas's U.N. gambit may have successfully isolated Israel in the General Assembly. However, Netanyahu's response-announcing massive settlement expansion-sent a forceful, two-fold message:  the U.N. cannot affect reality on the ground and Israel is capable of exacting a price for Palestinian unilateralism. Real progress toward the establishment of a Palestinian state will require both sides to negotiate painful compromises on the issues at the core of the conflict: recognition, borders, security, refugees and Jerusalem. Currently, mistrust between the two sides makes meaningful negotiations impossible. If the international community is truly interested in advancing the peace process, it should encourage Israelis and the Palestinians to take steps which signal to the other side that they are serious about the peace process. Anything else is simply theater.

Ari Moshkovski is a Ph.D. candidate at the Schusterman Center for Israel Studies.




*