8f4976f94d868210VgnVCM100000e56411acRCRDapproved/thenational/Articles/Migration/2009-Q3A Palestinian state is now plausible but no easier to win7f4976f94d868210VgnVCM100000e56411ac____With Benjamin Netanyahu agreeing to a Palestinian State - albeit one that meets his specifications - and the EU's Javier Solana calling for a Security Council resolution to recognise a Palestinian state a certain date, the idea has now become commonplace.<p>With the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreeing to a Palestinian State - albeit one that meets his specifications - and the European Union's Javier Solana calling for a UN Security Council resolution to recognise a Palestinian state a certain date, the idea has now become commonplace. Even here in the US, it is a near "article of faith" to project a two-state solution as the only acceptable outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.</p> <p>Because this has not always been the case, it is useful to trace the evolution of this acceptance in our political discourse and to recall how difficult it was just a few decades ago to support Palestinian rights. In the late 1970s I founded the Palestine Human Rights Campaign. We were a coalition that included Arab Americans, African-American civil rights leaders, representatives of major US churches and prominent peace activists. We defended Palestinian victims of torture, imprisonment without charge, and land confiscation, opposed all violence and supported two states. Despite winning broad public support, we were shunned by Washington's political establishment. Even a coalition of progressive groups rejected our application for affiliation because some members said our pro-Palestinian agenda would be divisive and detrimental to their work. We also incurred threats and harassment and in 1980 my office was firebombed.</p> <p>Ten years later, in the lead up to the 1988 presidential contest, my institute led a national campaign, "Statehood Now", calling for recognition of Palestinian self-determination. Working with a diverse coalition, we ran and won delegate-slots to 10 state democratic party conventions seeking resolutions in support of Palestinian rights and a two-state solution. With the help of allies in Jesse Jackson's campaign for president, our resolutions passed in all 10 states. In Maine, for example, our resolution called for "the right of Israel to exist within secure and internationally recognised borders, and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and an independent state", while in Texas it read "any settlement must respect and insure the safety, self-determination and right to exist within secure and internationally recognised borders of both the Israelis and Palestinians".</p> <p>Armed with these victories, we went to the Democratic National Convention seeking to amend the Party's platform to include recognition of Palestinian rights. The language we sought called for "mutual recognition, territorial compromise and self-determination for both Israelis and Palestinians". The campaign of Michael Dukakis, the democratic candidate for president in 1988, vigorously opposed our efforts, but with Mr Jackson's support, we persisted in having our language debated. This was the first time (and, I might add, the last time) that the issue of Palestinian rights was debated from the podium at a political party's convention.</p> <p>The 1990s witnessed the Madrid Peace Conference and the Oslo Accords, but still no formal recognition of a Palestinian State. The best George H W Bush could do was a minor upgrade of the language of Camp David calling for "legitimate Palestinian political rights". Bill Clinton moved the language further, supporting the Palestinians' "right to live as a free people, determining their fate on their own land". Hillary Clinton as first lady was the first in the White House to actually speak of a Palestinian State in 1998. But her husband's administration quickly made it clear that her remarks were not official policy. When, toward the end of the Clinton administration, Yasser Arafat, becoming frustrated with the Peace Process's lack of progress, threatened to unilaterally declare a state, the reaction from Washington was firm and threatening. It was not until January 7th 2001, in the closing days of his presidency, that Bill Clinton spoke of a Palestinian State, making him the first US President to do so.</p> <p>In 2002, following Israel's reoccupation of the West Bank and its near total destruction of the infrastructure of the Palestinian Authority, the Bush administration became committed to a two-state solution. But George Bush did so in what I called at the time, "a perfectly bizarre speech", calling on the Palestinians to first establish a working democracy before they could have their state. During the next six years, discussion in the US changed and official acceptance of a two-state solution became widespread. Sadly, however, while this concept was gaining acceptance, the reality in the West Bank and Gaza was deteriorating, making the realisation of that now accepted goal more difficult.</p> <p>We are now in the 43rd year of the occupation. The landscape of the occupied lands has been dramatically transformed: a half million settlers reside there; a network of settler only roads, coupled with an intrusive barrier wall, has cut the territory into cantons; Jerusalem is burgeoning with settler colonies and is cut off from the West Bank; and the long physical and now political separation of Gaza from the West Bank has made unity of Palestine's parts more difficult. Now the US president has committed his administration to an outcome of two states which he says is in the national interests of the United States. Even in the early months of his term, he has demonstrated a commitment to balanced pressure and active engagement toward achieving two states.</p> <p>The political battle for acceptance of a Palestinian State has been won. Supporters of two states must now assess the circumstances which define the current reality on the ground. The old battles are just that, old battles. There are now new challenges to face. What confronts us today is how, given where we are, we can realistically achieve the goal for which many have struggled for decades, and that is a secure, independent, contiguous and viable Palestinian State.</p> <p><i>James Zogby is president of the Arab American Institute in Washington</i></p> 82YYOPINION2009072000000020090720000000100ARhttp://adedit.ad.atl.publicus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090720/OPINION/707199912170719991220090720100000000dc109a6871a68210VgnVCM200000e66411ac____7f4976f94d868210VgnVCM100000e56411ac____2cb17fdfa2448210VgnVCM100000e56411acRCRD