Max Sawicky wrote:
>
> the Arab/Moslem govts, who would face
> the obligation of . . . disciplining the new
> proto-state,
A proto-state is not a state. And _no one_ has an obligation (or in the present case even the right) to "discipline" another state.
I'm not sure what the first steps should be. But the intermediate goal must be a West Bank/Gaza strip -- i.e. the Palestinian State -- which possesses _all_ the attributes of full sovereignty, which include the right and duty to build a military sufficient to defend its population, and in this case with its borders guaranteed by international treaty, with _at least_ the U.S., France, Germany, and England obligated by such treaties to attack any state which threatens those borders. (I believe Belgium at one time 'enjoyed' that sort of guarantee, which Germany broke in 1914???)
Ultimately, of course (decades, generations, years??) the only 'solution' is a secular, multi-ethnic, multi-religious democratic state. The two-state formula is only temporarily acceptable -- if only because of long-run (perhaps short-run) difficulties in respect to water-rights.
Carrol