The Trump program opens for Israel for the first time the possibility of shaping reality in Judea and Samaria in a way that serves national security needs. So far, only three dangerous and harmful options have been faced. Good conditions have now been created to fight for a fourth option, which will meet most of its needs.

The Palestinian national combination of aggression, violence and irresponsibility forced Israel to choose between the persistence of the occupation, the integration of millions of Palestinians into its population and the establishment of a sovereign state that would threaten Israel with a variety of radical forces - Arabs, Iranians and others. Palestinian society and its leadership do not strive to accept responsibility for the state for the constructive reasons of building a nation and society, but for establishing a basis for the persistence of the struggle in Israel. The lesson is learned. Today, there is no public weight factor in Israel that offers the Palestinians real sovereignty, including control of air and electromagnetic space and complete control of land crossings. Except for those who are delusional at the edge of the camp (or slogans who did not give much thought to their meaning), they all understand that these will be used by the Palestinians to fight against Israel and will require every government of life to conquer the West Bank, and then be stuck there forever.

The second option is the persistence of the occupation. Because sovereignty to Palestinians is dangerous, Israel has had to control them, assume responsibility for their fate and maintain the repulsive daily contact with a society that does not want to build itself alongside the State of Israel.

The third option is the inclusion of millions of Palestinians within us, either in annexation that requires civil rights, or in legal disputes that deny their de facto inclusion. In this case, Israel will no longer be able to successfully strive to achieve its Zionist goals, squander its national resources and degrade the Jewish state for arrears and dysfunction that are required of its new population.

The variety of options serves the Palestinian radicals, as they all tattoo the Israeli success story and dismiss the Palestinians from their national responsibilities. This is how they will be used again in one of their traditional roles: the first aggressor, or the victim in the last two. In addition to their billions of dollars, they will also live in a functioning country that offers, even under military occupation, a better quality of life than would be expected of Palestinians in the company of his people in the Arab world.

Between Israel and Palestinian nationalism, there has been a "zero-sum game" for a century: the harm of Israel to the benefit of the Palestinians. In 1948, Ben-Gurion understood that he was not a partner in a historic compromise of dividing the land and a member of Abdullah to exclude their destructive national movement from the strategic equation.

The Trump plan can help Israel dictate to the Palestinians a fourth option: disengaging from them without an agreement, forcing boundaries and security arrangements, in a way that would severely impair their ability to harm Israel and be built from its resources. To this end, the settlement blocks and the Jordan Valley must be attached to Israel and set on the new border a hard obstacle that will prevent entry into Israel. Relations with the Arab world will pass through the corridor in Jericho and be under Israeli supervision. Gaza will be cut off so that Hamas does not take over the West Bank. Only revolutionary change in society and the Gaza regime will warrant reconsideration. The IDF will maintain its freedom of action in Palestinian territory as well, and will enter their cities to counter terrorism if the Palestinians do not do so effectively on their own.

This option has a painful, even tragic price, that will challenge Israeli society. It requires uninterrupted Palestinian territory for complete disengagement. This is where the displacement of the localities outside the blocks and the valley is requested. Even with a broad definition of these and their creative affiliates, these are the tens of thousands of Israelis who have settled in state authority in the historical homeland of the Jewish people. The evacuation can be softened by a gradual process in which he leaves his home only when the state builds a proper replacement for it in 1967 or in chunks, but the pain will be great and the temporary rift inevitable.

The choice is not between resilience and historical injustice, but between necessary and painful crying for generations. If you were tempted to apply sovereignty to any locality, we would be drawn to the default of the third option, to the delight of the Palestinians.

Dr. Dan Schippen is the head of the Haifa University's International National Security Program