From my article on Huffington Post: Can’t We All Just Get Along? A Modest Proposal for Settlements on the Israeli West Bank (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-baker/cant-we-all-just-get-alon_1_b_798800.html):

Israel, whether it chooses to acknowledge it or not (or we do), is heading toward a one-state solution, one that includes the Palestinians as part of their citizenship. They may wish the Palestinian problem would go away. But their Arab neighbors have no reason, nor inclination, to accept millions of Palestinians into their midst. The reasons for this are well-known and I won’t rehash them here.

But, knowing that, and believing, as I do, in turning a problem into a solution, I propose the following:

Keep the settlements, but — after thorough screening and background checks — allow one third of the new apartments to go to Palestinian families (the apartments must be of equal quality). If the Palestinian families don’t have the money, I think the U.S. or international community could be persuaded to cough it up in the interest of peace and interdependency. We’ve certainly subsidized lesser causes.

I’ve long thought a two-state solution — with “Palestine” bifurcated down the middle by their hated Israel, was a geopolitical impossibility. By forcing these two people’s to live together, at least those who are realistic, with a common interest in their mutual housing and environs, both people would be moving toward the inevitable co-mingling of their populations.

I think two-state (now, three state?) proposals are disingenuous at best — from the Israeli side they are a delaying tactic, since the concessions necessary for co-existence, including disarmament and recognition, will never be met; from the Palestinian side they are a part of a strategy of slowly, inexorably, pushing Israel into the sea — I’ve never heard any credible proposal as to how a Palestinian state (let alone one as divided as Gaza and the West Bank are now) would be run. Instead, they hope for the “promised land” of an undivided Palestine. No significant Palestinian leader has recognized Israel’s right to exist, or even renounced armed struggle — they would not be leaders for long if they did.

Imagine if one had a magic box, and could place all hatred and feelings of vengeance inside it from both sides. Don’t worry! We have not gotten rid of those feelings, just put them inside the magic box, for now.

What would be left?

Well, there would still be enormous logistical challenges as to how to live in a parched, crowded, economically disparate region. The first thing a logical body politic would do is to tear down the wall, then they would improve the transportation and infrastructure, share the water and electricity etc. They would share access to the Mediterranean Sea.

This is an interesting thought-experiment and one both sides should consider, if just to sober themselves up to the honest practical realities of the situation in their New Jersey-sized homeland.

Of course, they won’t. None of this will happen while each side is at each other’s throat. But, by sharing their neighborhood, a lot could be accomplished. Think small first, then big, not the other way around — which hasn’t worked.

And if some Israeli settlers just can’t bear to live with any Palestinians, they should be moved to Israel proper, willingly or not.

It is time for new solutions. The Road Map was a dead-end. The Two-State solution is a geopolitical impossibility. Obama’s unimaginative pleadings, “Are you two peoples ready for peace now?” will only grant him snickers and disrespect from a region where respect is everything.

The annihilation of Israel is in no one’s interest, not even the Arabs, who would then have to contend with thousands of suddenly unemployed terrorists (and likely, so would Europe, as that would be the next logical stop to recreate their Caliphate – this has been spoken of by Muslim leaders many times).

At the same time, the fourth-world existence of the Gazans and that of their slightly better-off but impatient third-world cousins in the West Bank cannot continue.

Obama promised Change, oh so long ago, but lofty speeches have to be backed up by a practical plan.

Share the buildings, share the land, save the world.

Bob – in politics, you have to learn to get to your goals in indirect ways. Do I care if we get to lower GHG because someone embraces national self-sufficiency, more income for farmers, or any of the other top 10 reasons and doesn’t believe in Global Warming (even as we have a record ice melt in the Arctic for most of the last decade’s summer)? Not really. I just want to get there.

From my articles on Huffington Post and Op Ed News: Ending the Conflict With Iran So Everyone Wins (full version here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-baker/ending-the-conflict-with-_b_1216805.html)

Here is my proposal, in three parts,which can be applied together or separately. Adopting these proposals should please all parties. Iran would get its nuclear power. Israel and America would be assured that Iran’s nuclear fuel could not find its way into bombs.

1. Investigate and assist Iran (yes, really) in developing nuclear power plants that cannot produce plutonium, for example, pebble bed reactors. These reactors are being built for production in China and in France — which gets 80 percent of its power from nuclear sources already (We also need to centralize nuclear reprocessing as France does, so spent uranium is safe to dispose of.) For technical reasons, the embedded fuel in this kind of reactor cannot be used to produce highly enriched uranium, the source for nuclear bombs. This takes dangerous bomb-production off the table.. These kinds of thorium reactors cannot meltdown either, even when water is removed during a power outage, for example. If Fukushima had been running pebble bed reactors, or Liquid Salt Thorium reactors, there would have been no disastrous radiation leaks.

2. Involve Iran in the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). This is the global program to develop safe and efficient forms of nuclear energy that cannot be subverted into weapon making (i.e. no plutonium is produced, and radioactive components cannot be separated from the reactor). The U.S. and Japan are quite far along in this. It is the reactor-in-a-box approach. This program was started in the Bush administration (yes, really).

3. Set up a Global Uranium Bank. Just recently, New Scientist magazine published an article on how nations are pressing for a Global Uranium Bank to supply the inevitably increasing number of nuclear players in the world with internationally monitored sources of fuel. There is even agreement on setting up such a station in Iran, to be monitored by the IEAE. Even if thorium-based nuclear power plants aren’t yet ready for prime-time, though it is strongly in the world’s interest that they be made to be, we can control the supply of dangerous uranium through a global bank of it, and take back the waste for reprocessing that way too.

Good ideas, but mostly small-bore. If you want to eliminate the debt without cutting essential services or raising taxes, there’s only one way to do it: debt-free money. Greenbacker Money: debt-free United States Notes that Congress is empowered to create anytime, for any reason, and DID create under the original Legal Tender Law (1862) by president Lincoln ($450 million) to defeat the South during the Civil War, continuing ($350 million) through 14 series in circulation until 1996. This money would not have to be borrowed, raised in taxes, or backed by gold. It need not be inflationary if dedicated towards those areas of society that are actually in deflation, such as Infrastructure. It is a “Public Option for Money.” Congress can authorize new U.S. Notes anytime, for any reason, in any amount. Perhaps $4 trillion, spread over 10 years, should be directed towards infrastructure, to start. The Kucinich Bill, HR2990, aims to do this, as part of a larger package of reforms, but we can re-issue U.S. Notes anytime.