Friday, May 10, 2013

The "Two-State Solution" Will Result in a No State

What is the "two-state solution"?

Here's one clarification:-

The two-state solution refers to the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict currently under discussion, which calls for "two states for two peoples". The two-state solution envisages the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel in the territory of the former British Mandate of calls for direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. To achieve a two-state solution, the negotiations must address and resolve a number of core issues, including the borders of the Palestinian state, the citizenship of the new Palestinian state, the status of Palestinian refugees outside the final borders, and the status of Arab citizens of present-day Israel, besides the future of East Jerusalem.

It is, in essence, a development of the various partition schemes from Mandate days on:--

The first proposal for the creation of Jewish and Arab states in the British Mandate of Palestine was made in the Peel Commission report of 1937...The proposal was rejected by the Arab community of Palestine; was accepted by most of the Jewish leadership; and the British government rejected partition as impracticable.
Partition was again proposed by the 1947 UN Partition plan for the division of Palestine. It proposed a three-way division, again with Jerusalem held separately, under international control. The partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leadership. However, the plan was rejected by the leadership of Arab nations and the Palestinian leadership at the time, which opposed any partition of Palestine and any Jewish presence in the area. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War for control of the disputed land broke out soon afterwards.

The first indication that the PLO would be willing to accept a two-state solution, on at least an interim basis, was articulated by Said Hammami in the mid-1970s.

And further:

The Palestinians proposed a separate state, claiming as their homeland the territories outside the 1948 ceasefire lines, territories occupied by Israel in the 1967 war. This idea found widespread support in the international community, and Israel was called on to withdraw from this land, as affirmed in UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

US President Obama - and most everyone else - is really pushing the idea:

...the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security."

Basically, this solution is based onn "territorial compromise" but only by Israel.

The Arabs never are requested to compromise, although "land swaps" comes up ever once and a while.

I have postulated that among the many reasons this solution will solve nothing and get Israel into a more difficult situation, as have others, is that it is based on an assumption: the Arabs are serious, they are genuine in their desire to end the conflict and they can and will agree on a final-status arrangement.

Will they?

Yesterday's news (once again) -

Palestinian premier Ismail Haneyya said that the Palestinian people would never give up an inch of the Palestinian land or waive one of their national rights, including the right of return and the liberation of the prisoners.  Haneyya made his remarks during his meeting on Wednesday with a Bahraini parliamentary delegation led by speaker Khalifa Al-Dahrani in Gaza City.

Haneyya also stressed that the Palestinian people insist on liberating Palestine from the occupation and establishing their state with Jerusalem as its capital.

The "two-state solution" will result in a "no state solution" - no Israel.


No comments: