Unlike Ben-Gurion, Yitzhak Rabin left neither a diary nor detailed documentation for his considerations in leading the Oslo process. However, in his last speech to the Knesset (5.10.1995), prior to the approval of Oslo II, he presented a conceptual outline emphasizing four principles:
1. Aspiration to achieve "the establishment of the State of Israel as a Jewish state, in which at least 80 percent of its citizens will be Jews."
2. "A united Jerusalem, which will include both Ma'ale Adumim and Givat Ze'ev as the capital of Israel under Israeli sovereignty."
3. "The security border for the defense of the State of Israel will be placed in the Jordan Valley in the broadest interpretation of this term."
4. Referring to a Palestinian state: "It shall be an entity that is less than a state, and which will independently manage the lives of the Palestinians under its authority."
In these principles, Rabin expressed loyalty to the legacy of his commander Yigal Allon. In the unresolved tension between the Jewish connection to the Bible and its security necessity, and the desire to end Israeli control over the Palestinians living in these areas, Rabin presented, in the best Mapainik tradition, a compromise outline of "both." An effort to preserve the Jewish settlement blocs in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, as well as an effort to transfer a significant part of the area to the control of the Palestinian Authority; Both a willingness to give the Palestinians space for sovereign control, and an insistence that the Palestinian Authority will ultimately be "an entity that is less than a state."
Under the direction of this concept, most of the territories in which most of the Palestinian population is concentrated were transferred to the Palestinian Authority. As early as May 1994, IDF forces withdrew from all areas in the Gaza Strip, except for the settlements, and this area was transferred to the control of the newly established Palestinian Authority. In January 1996, all Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria in Areas A and B were also transferred to the Palestinian Authority. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated, but within three months of the Knesset's approval of Oslo II, Rabin's vision of ending Israeli control over most Palestinians was fully realized. Since then, a clear majority of Palestinians between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea do not live under Israeli control. By establishing the Palestinian Authority and transferring 90 percent of the residents of Judea and Samaria to its control, Rabin removed the demographic threat that endangered the future of the State of Israel as Jewish and democratic. Those who seek further withdrawals in the West Bank, in the name of striving for separation, deny in this respect the achievement of Rabin, who already in early January 1996 completed the full possible separation.
Since then, the dispute over East Jerusalem and the West Bank in Area C has remained. These areas include all settlements, IDF camps, main roads, vital control areas, and the open space in the Jordan Valley. These spaces, drawn by Rabin with a personal focus, express the space necessary for Israel to exist and defend it. Any further concessions will harm the basic spatial conditions necessary for the defense of the State of Israel.
Abandonment of Rabin's principles
At the core of his approach, Rabin perceived the Oslo Accords as a process between Israel and the Palestinians, based on the aspiration for mutual change. However, on the Palestinian side, both in the PA and Hamas, an understanding of the power of blackmail in their hands has emerged: the more it is necessary for the State of Israel as a national interest to hurry to separate, the more comprehensive the Palestinians will be able to exact a price, and of course reject any agreement to the Rabin outline.
The Rabin government's efforts in developing the road network in Judea and Samaria were a critical component in the momentum of settlement development. From this perspective, Rabin's legacy turns out to be quite far from the image that the radical left sought to portray him as the "prophet of peace."
Thus, at Camp David in the summer of 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak's quest to formulate a final agreement with the Palestinians, and even more so in Taba, all Rabin's principles collapsed. The Rabin plan was replaced by the Clinton plan, which established far-reaching new principles for the "two-state solution," including dividing Jerusalem, giving up the Jordan Valley, land swaps for the "settlement blocs" that together do not exceed 6-3 percent of Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley, and Israeli agreement to a Palestinian state under full sovereignty. This new starting point also dictated the map proposed by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at the Annapolis Conference in November 2007. Those who, on the other hand, adopted the outline of principles presented by Rabin in October 1995, will certainly find it difficult to accept any further move leading to the Clinton, Barak and Olmert outlines.
The collapse of the message of global peace
Meanwhile, over the past 30 years, everything has changed. At the basis of Rabin's agreement to the Oslo process were assumptions that, although not officially articulated, shaped the consciousness of the leaders of the free world at the time. Over the years, all assumptions collapsed.
The atmosphere that shaped the early days of Oslo indeed marked historic news. The USSR and with it the Warsaw Pact disintegrated. The threat of the Cold War is over in Europe. Germany was united. The United States has gained unprecedented hegemonic power status, and the world seems to be developing in a trend of stability and prosperity toward a global order. At the time, the Arabs were in a state of crisis and inferiority, which was most intensified after the American victory over Iraq in the first Gulf War, in the winter of 1991.
Under these conditions, there was room for hope for regional peace in the Middle East as well. Since then, however, everything has changed. Iran has grown stronger. Radical Islamic forces, from Afghanistan to Yemen, Syria and Libya, have learned how, despite their inferiority, they possess combat potential that can endlessly disrupt the trend of stability that the West so desperately needs.
The outbreak of Russia's war in Ukraine has reawakened existential anxiety even in the heart of peaceful Europe. The return of war to Western consciousness undermined hope for a stable world peace in the Gospel of the End Days.
Nonetheless, the weakening of America's position in the Middle East over the past decade has undermined a key fulcrum on which the entire process was based. Under these conditions, Rabin would probably recommend reexamining all the basic assumptions of the Oslo Accords.
Netanyahu as Rabin's successor
A common Arabic proverb says, "There is nothing as good as what is." The proverb teaches that even in a situation that appears to be a crisis, reality generates positive potential. This is what emerges, for example, when we look at the development of Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria since Oslo. Within a decade, Jewish settlement in the area doubled from 116,500 in 1993 to 230,000 in 2003. The Rabin government's efforts in unprecedented development of the road network in Judea and Samaria, including the tunnel route to Gush Etzion and the bypass routes, the "arteries of life" – the Ramallah bypass, the Halhul bypass and the main route to Ariel – were a critical component in the momentum of settlement development. From this perspective, Rabin's legacy turns out to be quite far from the image that the radical left sought to portray him as the "prophet of peace."
Meanwhile, looking to the present and the future, the Rabin outline as presented in October 1995, with the outline of Area C and the settlement enterprise deployed therein as essential for the security of the State of Israel, has in fact become the de facto outline that establishes the strategy of Netanyahu's governments in the Palestinian arena.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us