The two-narrative solution: Or why Tzipi Livni isn’t (yet) a peacenik

Although Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech on June 14 unfortunately created as many obstacles to peace as it removed, it was a watershed moment in one important respect: After 42 years of Occupation, the entire Israeli mainstream has finally come to accept the inevitability of Palestinian statehood.

Only the ideological segment of the settler community and a smattering of far-rightists continue to claim that Israel can and should control the entire "Land of Israel", from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan.

The enormity of this accomplishment can be appreciated when one remembers that, in the early 1970s, support for a two-state solution was considered so radical that the Labor Party forced its Secretary-General, Arieh (‘Lova') Eliav, to resign due to his muted call to consider this "subversive" idea.

The Palestinian arena has also seen huge progress towards the two-state model, notwithstanding the potential for backsliding: After decades of rejectionism, the PLO in 1988 endorsed UN Security Council Resolution 242, thereby recognizing Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity. And even Hamas seems to be moderating its approach of late, as recent statements by Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Meshal suggest.

But if the battle for the two-state principle has largely been won, an equally important struggle is still in progress: The struggle to have each side accept the legitimacy of the other. In other words, "the two-narrative solution".

Yassir Arafat's reported unwillingness to acknowledge the Jewish people's historical ties to the Temple Mount, for example, created a severe loss of faith among Israeli Jews in the critical months after the 2000 Camp David summit - as the Second Intifada began, but while diplomatic talks were still underway. And bellicose declarations by Hamas figures, who periodically assert their organization's refusal to ever accept Israel's right to exist, badly undermine the generation of even minimal trust.

But the reluctance to accept the legitimacy of the other side is not a Palestinian monopoly. In his speech, for example, Netanyahu managed to frame Palestinian statehood as a distasteful act of national trespassing that Israel is being obliged to swallow: "The truth is," he rued, "that in the area of our homeland, in the heart of our Jewish Homeland, now lives a large population of Palestinians." Netanyahu never once used the phrase, "Palestinian people", and it goes without saying that the words, "Palestinian rights", never crossed his lips.

Sadly, Netanyahu is not an atypical voice in this regard. As I was reminded this week, even more enthusiastic supporters of the two-state paradigm are still far from embracing the two-narrative spirit. Tzipi Livni is a case in point.

This past Tuesday, I sat in the audience as the former Foreign Minister, who is now the head of Israel's parliamentary opposition, addressed the hundreds of delegates gathered for the Jewish Agency's annual assembly in Jerusalem.

Although I clapped warmly to welcome Livni as she entered the hall - my way of thanking her for insisting on the two-state model as a condition for any coalition arrangement with Netanyahu - my enthusiasm had waned by the time she finished her speech.

True to form, Livni energetically reiterated the importance of a two-state solution as the only way of keeping Israel both a Jewish-majority state and a democracy. But Livni's Likud roots clearly showed through as she asserted the Jewish people's "juridical rights to the entire Land of Israel".

As with Netanyahu, Livni reduced the two-state vision to the level of dry political exigency: The "Occupation" was never mentioned, the Palestinians were not noted, and the idea of reconciliation between two warring peoples was not referred to, even pro forma.

After decades of hard work, the Israeli peace camp has won the battle for the two-state solution. Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan speech marked the Greater Land of Israel movement's unofficial surrender.

But the effort to have each side accept the legitimacy of the other is still a work in progress. As was the case with the two-state idea in the early 1970s, those who promote the "two-narrative solution" in Israel are too often depicted as misguided "radicals" and "leftists", whose loyalty to the country is brought into question.

Let us hope that it will take far less than 42 years to claim full victory in this battle for reconciliation.