1. a constitution does not define national borders. 2. an Israeli constitution needs to give only protection from the government. 3. the demographic threat comes from Israel's Arab population and not from Gaza. 4. a 2-state solution was forced upon us in 1946 when Jordan became a state illegally and contrary to the League of Nations Mandate and UN Charter (see San Remo Conference) and that two state solution which left a sizable Arab population in Israel was disastrous. 5.a demilitarized Palestinian state is not a state but autonomy.

I dont want it gets devided to a palestinian and jewish state. Never let this happen. This would make peaceful Israel turn into a terrorist state.

Sher totally and unequivocaly ignores the threat to Jerusalem and Gush Dan if Israel withdraws from Judea and Samaria. Sher is not satisfied with Hizbollah and the iranians in Lebanon. It was not enough for Sher that Israel withdrew from Gaza bringing to power Hamas and iran. Now Sher wants to withdraw from Judea and Samaria allowing the terrorists and iran to fill the void and mortally threaten israel. Dayenu, it was not enough for him. Where do we get people like this? Insanity,, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

in the name of preserving the Jewish nature of the country - also advocate for the unlimited acceptance of African refugees. Their argument in favor of partition is completely bogus. They used to call it Land for Peace, but the argument of peace is becoming impossible to sustain in face of frequent official statements by PA and Gaza leaders claiming that all Israeli land belongs to them.

Are you in Obama's pocket?

More unilateral steps? Because Gaza turned out so well.

But not in yet another Arab state on Israeli soil. Simple, now start working on that!

Demilitarized, airspace controlled ,etc etc, well ,will they be allowed to breathe,??? lordie sake, somewhere we have to find some shame in our faces.

separeted by Jordan River .

Who says just because Israel wants peace the Palestinians want it too? What they want is for Israel to give them the West Bank and Jerusalem on a silver platter and to leave the door open to taking the rest of Israel. It's laughable to hear Israel and the West say that Israel must make peace and pretend as if the other side is ready to follow along.

That experiment in "disengagement" is nothing but a total failure for Israel. Did Israel get peace? NO!!!!! Remember the last cease fire with the terrorists? They claimed it as a victory. NO!!! NO MORE YIELDING TO TERROR!!! Any yielding to the terrorists is like breathing out with a snake wrapped around your chest: it only tightens its coils until you cannot breathe and are dead.

Definitely! Starting finding shame with your statement! Israeli Jews would be hugging and kissing them all day if they weren't trying to kill them in return.

Shear starts with "The campaigns have ended, so the truth can be said" Shear, you are a bit late. If you felt so strongly, you should have set up a party around your beliefs BEFORE the elections. You would have spread the word, explained your position, and if you got enough votes could have implemented your policies. Instead, you sat silently and spared us your superior knowledge and insight. Now, even if you convince us, there is nothing we can do. There is actually no point in reading the rest of your article.

You write; "Sixty-five years after its inception, Israel still does not have a constitution or recognized borders for all of its territory". I agree for 100% with you about a constitution, but I disagree for 100% about none recognized borders ! The Jewish People, since the League of Nations vote in 1922, called the "Mandate for Palestine" got recognized borders within the area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, including the Golan Heights. This became International Law, valid to this day and reaffirmed by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. Even UNSC Resolution 242 is based on the League's Mandate. The Arab population of the so-called "West Bank", seems to be THE problem for you, Mr. Sher. Keep in mind that most of them are Jordanian citizens. Do not forget that neither a hypothetical Palestinian state, nor Jordan, would ever accept ONE Jew within their borders. So in an eventual settlement, Jordan, an artificial country created by the British by breaching in a treacherous way Article 5 of the League's Mandate on 77% of the territory intended to become the Jewish state, shouldn't be allowed to escape its obligations regarding its nationals. You further write: "a Palestinian state will be demilitarized, will not be allowed to have and army or form military alliances; its airspace will be controlled by Israel". Pure illusion: an independent State is INDEPENDENT, and has the right to have an army and to form military alliances, without any interference of a neighboring country.

Security first! Democracy is a popular term in leftist circles: does it provide security to an already too smalkl country? How about past experiencies regarding territorial concessions? Giving up our holy sites? To whom? To Holocaust denier? One more irrational idea from the Left.

sher talks about international guarantees for help on borders- worthless and dumb to raise the issue. after the holocaust, its only jews that control their physical destiny and not useless ban ki m oon and ashton enforcement which amounts to zer0. palestine would want its own army, control its borders for attack on what is left of israel so sher errs again. the bill clinton formula is a recipe for futhrur aggression and just like livni thought her 2006 resolution was effective, it had huge holes in it and is worthless. She can't see it because she is dumb. so sher is stupid again. waht the recipe is for israel to annex judea and samaria and for the foreign arabs sitting onjewish land to go to jordan, one way or another-that is the answer. Otherwise, israelis should pack up and move away from this cursed land, the waqf. sher, olmert, livni, ramon-all useless lawyers who understand nothing about geography and who run scared . They all run to obama-please help me, I feel isolated. You guys make me sick. I tell you what-there is n o chosen people-these are drek people , not chosen, not better than anyone else, not light unto nations-try useless shmutz!

A well-written article even though nothing it says is new, just common sense. There's nothing new in the reactions either, angry extremists who oppose any kind of compromise are known to haunt the Internet and ynet is no exception. While I know that most of these extremists do not bother themselves with trivial things like reality, I hope there might be one or two exceptions here who could answer the question: if not this solution, then what. Israel faces a really simple choice. We can keep Judea and Samaria OR we can be a Jewish democratic state. We cannot do both. In a very short time, we'll end up like South Africa, boycotted by the world. I know that most of the extremists commenting here don't live in Israel, and aren't even Jewish, so they probably don't care much about that. It's just one of the reasons not to take them seriously. For those who do care about Israel, boycotts could be catastrophic. To be blunt: Israel is completely dependent on the EU, the EU is not at all dependent on Israel. If the EU imposed trade sanctions on Israel tomorrow, it would not have an impact on the EU economy but it would be a death-blow to the Israeli economy. Once again that is unlikely to impress American Christians, but for anyone who is Israeli or Jewish, it matters quite a lot. So even if we don't do it for humanitarian reasons, we have highly selfish reasons to separate ourselves from the Palestinians. The option is of course to annex the area and give everybody Israeli citizenship, but that would give us an Arab minority of 40-45%. Such a bi-national state would not be a Jewish state. Given that Israel will never sink to the lows of human history and either kill or expel the Palestinians, these are the three options we face. 1. Separate by our own free will to remain a Jewish democratic state. 2. Try to cling on to the status quo until sanctions from the world forces us to change, and then at much worse terms. 3. Keep Judea and Samaria, but at the price of giving up on the idea of a Jewish state. As I said, this is of course not going to impress any extremist who doesn't think about the future, nor will it impress any Christian "Zionist" who doesn't care about Jews. It should be relevant for all those who care about a democratic Jewish Israel.

...it in his 5 October 1995 speech before the Knesset, his Contour-for-Peace: 1) Jerusalem will remain united under Israel's sovereignty and will also include the suburbs of Giv'at Zeev and Ma'aleh Adumim as well as "E1" area. 2) All major Jewish settlement blocs will be incorporated into the sovereign state of Israel, e.g. Gush Etzion, Gush Qatif, BeitEl/Ofra, Ariel, etc. 3) The Jordan Valley ought to be viewed in the widest sense of the term and it too will remain under Israel's rule. 4) The future Palestinian state will not be a regular one in that it will be totally demilitarized, its airspace will be fully controlled by Israel, as will its boundaries and all of its border passes: land, sea and air. One can only assume that if the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) accepted Rabin's Contour-for-Peace, Israel would also do so and the parties could conclude an accommodation of peaceful coexistence, recognized Israel's right to exist as the sovereign nation-state of the Jewish people, and the future Palestine as the sovereign nation-state of the Palestinian Arab people, and accept the treaty as the end of the conflict and the end of all future demands. Sadly, it appears, the PLO's leadership is still more committed to the PLO's Charter that calls for Israel's very demise and the demise of any trace of independent Jewish entity on ANY parcel of land of the Jewish peoples's ancestral homeland.

"If the government acts responsibly and with integrity, the evacuation of settlers may even unite the people of Israel."

It is obvious to any child, capable of reading a map, that the Two State Final Solution would destroy Israel within a decade. Indeed, that is the intent behind it. Judea and Samaria not only belong to Israel. Judea and Samaria are necessary for Israel to survive. Israel must absolutely reject sick path of the lunatic left, embodied by this idiotic article. Leftist lunacy does nothing but endanger Israel and threaten Israel's survival. Israel suffered thousand of maimed and murdered civilians from just lunatic leftist Oslo alone. Without accounting for freeing terrorists, other retreats and lunatic leftist actions and policies.

Mr. Sher wrote: "It is safe to assume that by that time Israel will have a multi-layered rocket and missile defense shield in place that will thwart attacks from any range..." That is very comforting. And the rockets and the jihadists who get through? "Oh well....but at least we tried!"

This is 2013 ... Can someone tell me why it has taken so long to publish this self-evident op-ed?

Gilead Sher is ignoring the core issues of the problem Its not Israeli that is the cause of no negotiations. Its the total rejection of any talks by the Arab side. The refusal to even sit in the same room as Israel because that would be seen as "normalization". There is no one to talk to, otherwise we would be in negotiations today. The Arabs are wedded to rejectionism and delegitimization of Israel. The so called "Arab Peace Plan" Sher refers to is a non-starter with its onerous pre-conditions. It is an ultimatum to Israel with no room to negotiate.

Just as delusional right wingers gave up their dream of "two banks of Jordan " and Sinai they'll give up West Bank unless they're completely suicidal. The right-wingers who glorify Bennett and Bibi simply don't realize that their actions will only bring even further radicalization of Palestinians and endless wars.

There's plenty of room for development in the Negev and Galillee. A Jewish homeland in Palestine is different from a Jewish homeland in the whole of Palestine. It was all rather vague in the original text. Nothing was to be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. That hasn't worked out. I for one think small Israel was quite enough provided it had secure and recognised borders with the rule of law.

Surprise, surprise, Gilead, but there are more settlers in favor of 'living' in peace then you could possibly imagine. In that regard, you're not alone, only in how to achieve such a prospect. So, settlers are really not the problem and left alone could almost overnight put together a workable solution with local Arabs. What is the true problem here, is a lack of basic foresight. I noted your use of the words "even if I'm wrong" -does that mean we can afford to take a gamble, which can cost countless lives, based on your hunches? Consider the reality of a de-militarized Palestinian state...how's that going to be achieved? Can you seriously expect Arab arms to be collected by neutral parties? This is also where we differ, I have actually have respect for Arabs in that I take their demands seriously. That includes liberating the whole of their Palestine...Tel Aviv included! So you will have us make their task easier by making a uniltaeral move by handing over strategic high ground, which many of the settlements are placed upon? Gilead, I read your words, and will not be counted amongst those who would demonize you on grounds of your belief. We both share a vision of a strong united Jewish Homeland, and yes, I also care about human rights when it doesn't interfere with our own rights to live in peace. Maybe, we can explore a solution that doesn't involve uprooting Jews from any part of Israel, based on someone's gamble of an illusive peace that could follow. Surely, we have ample proof of that after the Gush Katif debacle! Shalom! .

Hold Jerusalem in it's entirety, but the bulk of the West Bank is fated to be a write-off as was Gaza.

Demilitarized means managing the poor Arabs. Not allowing them an army means pouring more money and time into management. It would be better to grab our land surrounding them, and start to isolate their communities. Let them know it's a loosing battle and they are surrounded. Eventually, they will assimilate or leave. That's how you separate from them. Anything else will not work.