1. Both families that identify themselves with ethnic and spiritual descent from Abraham have a special relationship with the Land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and both are entitled and obligated to work out a sacred and decent relationship with each other and the Land, each governing itself internally as each seeks in its own way to carry out that task.
2. Each of these peoples is obligated to affirm the right and the obligation of the other as well as of itself to do this; each must see itself as part of a conjoined twinship, in which the health of our twin is our own health, and the hurt of our twin is our own hurt.
3. For Jews and Jewish organizations wherever they live, this means support for Israel as a state that expresses Jewish values, including the ancient value of justice and love for the foreigner who lives within the Land and in a Jewish jurisdiction.
It also means support for the creation of a free, peaceful Palestine that observes basic human rights--not as a reluctant concession to realities of power but in joyful embrace of a sacred obligation and a recognition of our conjoined twinship.
4. Such a state of Israel does not need to reenact the individualism of modernity but can legitimately root itself in communities and encourage communities, so long as there is equality in access to economic goods, civil and human rights, education, etc.
5. Israel has the right and obligation to defend a territory that is sufficient to support a flourishing state, and the obligation to not claim possession of any territory beyond that necessity (on the ground of the spiritual importance of self-limitation) as well as on the grounds of justice and practicality.
6. Control of land within the Green Line, plus only the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, is essential to the nationhood of Israel. Control of land beyond that is not essential to the nationhood of Israel. Control by Palestinians of all the land beyond the Green Line (with those tiny exceptions) is essential to the viability and peacefulness of a Palestinian state. Israel should therefore be insisting on both.
7. Both the creation of Palestinian refugees from Israel and the creation of Jewish refugees from a number of Arab states and territories were the expression of the fears and rages of the early years of Israel's independence. Many ethical failures on all sides, committed under great pressure, are visible in retrospect.
It is important for both sides to acknowledge these ethical failures and do tshuvah--repentance--for. For Israel, this should include a formal recognition that there were ethical failures; substantial investment in resettling Palestinians abroad in a new State of Palestine; admitting carefully limited numbers of the original inhabitants into Israel; and negotiating compensation for Jewish refugees as well.
Ending the settlements and the occupation is not a win-lose but a win-win event. "Ending the settlements" might mean bringing the settlers home and/or their agreeing to live as Palestinian citizens under Palestinian law, without special protections from Israel.
9. For Jews who see peace and nonviolence as a higher good than violence (even if they are not absolute pacifists), and especially for those Jews who are ready to take the risks of nonviolence upon themselves, it is appropriate and important to support those voices in the Palestinian community who are urging a turn to nonviolent rather than violent resistance to the occupation. For everyone, it is an obligation to criticize especially strongly the use by some Palestinians and some Israelis of violence against unarmed civilians.
10. One of the most powerful forms of action for social change is to create in the present the forms that one envisions for the future. Thus Jewish wisdom teaches that if the whole Jewish people were to observe two Shabbats-Sabbaths-in a row, Messiah would come--because Shabbat is itself a mini-Messianic moment.
The U.S. sit-in movement was based not on petitioning for the end of segregation nor on attacking its defenders but simply on integrating drugstores, buses, and voting booths--and forcing segregationists to respond to those fait accompli.
As Martin Buber wrote in "Recollection of a Death" (in Pointing the Way, p. 118): "I cannot conceive of anything real corresponding to the saying that 'the end 'sanctifies' the means; but I mean something which is real in the highest sense of the term when I say that the means profane, actually make meaningless, the end, that is, its realization!
And to put this in positive, rather than negative, terms: The means become the end. Act out the vision in the present, and you are far likelier to achieve the vision.
In regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the most powerful version of this approach has till now been the original creation of ultranationalist Israeli settlements on the West Bank. They envisioned a future of Israeli domination, they acted to create that vision in the present, and they dragged a great deal of Israeli politics along in their wake.
Now the question is whether Jews and Palestinians committed to a just peace can do what the ultranationalists did: create pieces of our envisioned future, now. That is what Rabbis for Human Rights, Bat Shalom, and the Israel Committee Against House Demolition are doing when, together with Palestinians, they create a nonviolent action that interferes with home demolitions, breaks through siege and blockade barriers, re-plants destroyed trees, etc.
11. Committed Jews who are Americans also have both the right and obligation to bring their values, rooted in Judaism, to their influence on U.S. government policy, including U.S. policy toward the Middle East. Those values include protecting the peace and safety of Israel, and also the other Jewish values mentioned above.
In regard to how these values should be enacted, their views should take into serious account the wishes of any Israeli government, but not be controlled by its views.