The new Israeli proposal

The general impression seems to be no. Last year's failed talks by US Secretary of State, John Kerry, and the re-election of an intransigent Netanyahu government have meant little change. Although the BRICS countries (and the EU) have called for a different, more multilateral response, this is unlikely to happen. Much of this is down to BRICS' self-promotion and separation of political rhetoric from their prioritisation of economic relations with Israel's hi-tech and - especially in the case of India - arms industry.

Added to that there's the asymmetry between Israel and the Palestinians, from what Israeli peace activist Jeff Halper has called Israel's 'matrix of control' over the West Bank and Gaza (through checkpoints, roadblocks, parallel road systems, differentiated 'security' zones) and Israel's disproportionate use of force, most notably in Gaza in 2008-09, 2012 and 2014. As for the peace process: Israel opposes anything other than bilateral talks with the Palestinians, mediated by their ally, the US.

So where next? On 27 July Israeli Knesset (Parliament) deputy speaker and secretary general of the Labor Party Hilik Bar presented a plan on behalf of the two-state caucus.

It proposes Israel recognise Palestine as a state before proceeding to negotiations over borders based on the 1967 lines and including land swaps. Jerusalem would be an open city to both while settlers who choose to remain would have the right to be residents or citizens of the Palestinians state. But here's the catch: Israel would be responsible for their security, aided by the fact that Bar's plan envisages a demilitarised Palestinian state. And from media reports so far, there's no mention of Palestinian refugees.

In many ways Bar's plan reflects Kerry's initial proposals, which were sympathetic to Israeli concerns but which Netanyahu rejected. So it's hard to see the government approving the plan. Meanwhile, opposition Labor leader Isaac Herzog has avoided endorsing the plan. And it's unlikely the Palestinians would accept it in its current format either.

So does this mean it's a dead letter? Not quite. This is arguably the most significant position on the peace process from Israeli political society (as opposed to civil society's 2003 Geneva Initiative) in recent years, albeit from the opposition rather than government. And with the peace process restricted to Israel, the Palestinians and the US, Washington could well adopt it as its own as an Israeli initiative.

Herzog is encouraging Bar to take the proposal to the international community and collect feedback. Which is where those of us interested in the conflict can come in. Although the Liberal Democrats are no longer in government, that doesn't mean that we can't contribute. Through our internal party groups, Liberal Democrat Friends for Israel and Friends for Palestine, whether we agree with the content or not, we should make our views of the plan known.

* Guy Burton is Assistant Professor in the School of Politics, History and International Relations at the University of Nottingham, Malaysia Campus. Between 2010 and 2012 he was a researcher at Birzeit University in the West Bank. Previously he was a researcher for the Liberal Democrats in Parliament and was a GLA candidate for the party in 2004.