The two-solution two-state solution

The Obama administration's attempts to encourage Israel to dismantle illegal outposts, advance peace talks with the Palestinians, and halt settlement growth in hopes of convincing Iran to suspend uranium enrichment are naive and potentially dangerous.

Consider these recent quotes from men with whom I often disagree:

• Israeli former Prime Minister and current "Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday that the United States must be told that Iran's nuclear program and outpost activity in the West Bank are two unrelated issues." (Haaretz, May 26, 2009)
  
• U.S. Secretary of State's special adviser on Iran Dennis "Ross writes that efforts to advance dialogue with Iran should not be connected to the renewal of talks between Israel and the Palestinians." (Haaretz, May 27, 2009)

My take as a self-styled chovev Shalom, or lover of peace, who supports Obama's understanding of a two-state solution? I have to side here with Barak and Ross. While the two issues—a just settlement between Israel and the Palestinians and Iran's nuclear ambitions—are not mutually exclusive in theory, we should delineate between them sharply in practice.

Yes, Israel must dismantle all illegal outposts immediately. Yes, Israel must commit fully and faithfully to peace talks with the Palestinians. And yes, Israel must suspend so-called-"natural" settlement growth during those talks. But none of these explains or justifies Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, which is based in a different set of issues:

• Desire for hegemony over the Middle East and beyond
  
• Enmity toward the Arab world and its largely Sunni population
  
• Fear of western ideas and ideals and their perceived corrosive powers
  
• Hatred for Jews both as representatives of the West and qua Jews
  

The quest for peace with the Palestinians and the concomitant rejection of occupation has nothing to do with the frightened, hateful, and ahistorically maniacal ramblings of Iran's reactionary leaders. It has everything to do with our necessary alignment with normative Jewish ethics; with our necessary commitment to Hillel the Elder's formulation of the golden rule: "What is hateful to you, don't do to others." Pashut, simple.

It's possible to be pro-peace and anti-occupation, while being horrified by Iran's vile polemics. It's equally possible to reshape the map in a way that establishes a viable Palestine and returns much of the Golan to Syria, while ensuring a secure, livable future for Israel. But it's not possible to accept that Iran's nuclear program is solely or even largely a reaction to Israeli aggression, because that's a transparent lie aimed at hiding Iran's regional and global ambitions behind a straw golem.

Along with many other chovevi Zion, lovers of Zion, who are also chovevi Shalom, I am willing to pay a very high price for peace—just not the ultimate one.