The New York Times’ William Safire weighs in on Colin Powell’s idea (with props to Hosni M.) for a provisional Palestinian state, calling the Secretary of State’s suggestion a “trial balloon” and a “lose-lose” idea. Writes Safire,

1. Statehood, even if qualified as provisional or interim, confers a degree of sovereignty. That means control of borders, the ability to make treaties, and to import arms from Iraq and by sea from Iran.

2. Partial statehood would give Arafat control of an airport. A plane loaded with fuel or explosives could hit a major Tel Aviv building within three minutes, too quickly for Israeli jets to scramble. Ritual condemnation would follow.

3. Any form of statehood would limit Israel’s ability to search out bomb factories and arrest terrorist leaders. What is now a tolerable sweep into disputed territory would be denounced in the U.N. as invasion pure and simple. That would trigger European economic boycotts and draw Arab allies into a wider war.

All sensible reasons not only to resist interim statehood for Palestinians, but a permanent sovereign state, as well. Recent polls show that the Palestinian people themselves support suicide attacks against Israel at a rate of 2 out of every 3. Half of all Palestinians think the long term Palestinian goal should be to eradicate the Jewish state. Granting sovereign powers to such a culture is suicide for Israel (as Benjamin Netanyahu has pointed out repeatedly). Which is not to say the Palestinians shouldn’t have the right of self rule — just to say that nothing the Palestinian Authority has ever done suggests that giving it more power internationally will increase the prospects for peace in the Middle East.

—–