Herzog’s 'separation peace plan' is a fallacy to gain Israel more time and impunity

Whatever rhetoric Israel decides to use within the context of the Jerusalem Intifada, the underlying concept remains consistent. Following his initial calls for separation of the Palestinians from their homeland, which revealed a plan as sinister as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s overt violence, opposition leader Isaac Herzog has promoted his hypothesis during a meeting in Rome with US Secretary of State John Kerry.

The premeditated incitement proposed by Herzog, which complements Israeli state violence and expansion, builds upon two premises: security concerns and the “fight against radical Islamic terror”. As both narratives form part of the international agenda, it is likely that Herzog’s “separation peace plan”, as described by Israel National News, and opposition to the two-state paradigm, which is upheld through the diplomatic variation of negotiations, will garner support.

According to the Jerusalem Post, Herzog urged Kerry to “stop with the big words” before adding, “Our citizens are being murdered and we must engage in the separation process that will serve as the basis for the reality of the two-state solution vision.” The opposition leader also availed himself of the opportunity for a brief rant against the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement which is “gaining focus around the world” while emphasising that “Israel cannot wait for lengthy diplomatic negotiations.”

The metaphor of waiting has served both the Palestinian Authority and Israel well. In the case of the PA, its compromises and dependency upon the coloniser have been excused perpetually through the alleged predicament of waiting, while eliminating its wilful participation in the process. Israel, on the other hand, has employed the discourse of waiting depending upon opportunity. It will not hesitate to expand its colonial presence at any given time, yet will extend the process in order to remain within the parameters constructed for its impunity. The reason for this is simple; the international community has failed to deal with Israel as an illegal colonial presence in Palestine.

At first glance, it may seems as if Israel is facing diplomatic pressure to resume negotiations, following France’s warning that it would recognise the Palestinian state in the absence of Israeli agreement to proceed with the two-state compromise. Recognition of Palestine, however, has proved to be little more than a symbolic stunt that has failed to offer any formidable change for Palestinians. Settlement expansion, despite recognition, has continued without concrete efforts to halt the colonisation process. Palestinian civilians are being murdered following Netanyahu’s authorisation of sniper fire and the state’s lenience towards extrajudicial killings. France, in particular, has revelled in playing its duplicitous role, seeking compromise from Mahmoud Abbas regarding the unity government in order to appease Israel, while churning out efforts at an international level which will ensure the veneer of a stalemate, thus giving Israel further incentive to bolster its presence and intentions.

No matter how much Herzog may try to promote the separation plan as the basis for a two-state scenario, the level of cohesion regarding the intentional procrastination reveals the fallacy of such talk. The current uprising will, unfortunately, continue to be manipulated in order for Israel to glean further benefits — notably more time to act with impunity — thus providing another premise for the increased oppression of Palestinian civilians and, in turn, safeguarding both Israel and the international community from scrutiny, as is portrayed clearly by the unfolding events.