Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

One-state solution ?

149 replies

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:06

Why does it seem like all the mainstream western politicians assume that the only acceptable solution for Palestine/Israel is a two-state solution?

Surely it would be better to have one state, controlled and run by the UN for at least 50 years before slow transition to democracy, with a completely secular constitution, i.e. total separation of religion and state. Then everyone could have religious freedom.

It should be called neither Israel nor Palestine. I suggest "The Holy Land" as the official name.

Why is a suggesting a one-state solution so frowned upon?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Alstroemeria123 · 14/10/2023 20:10

That proposal would mean Jewish people have no option to live in a Jewish state, which seems somewhat unfair as every other major religion has multiple options for that.

I don’t think Israel stops people living there from following other religions anyway, does it?

ErrolTheDragon · 14/10/2023 20:13

Probably because neither the Israelis not the Palestinians want that?
And the UN can't, and wouldn't want to, just take over a country like that.

Im taking the name suggestion as satire.

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:16

I really don't understand why it is important to a religious person, or a person of a particular ethnicity, to live in a state governed by and for that religion or ethnicity.
And even if they do feel that way, it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to give any weight to such feelings when peace and an end to violence are at stake.

OP posts:
Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:18

The name suggestion wasn't satire - just an existing description of the area which is common to all three major religions.
The name would have to be something recognisable and uncontroversial.

But my real question is why don't western politicians think a one-state solution is even acceptable to talk about?

OP posts:
Chowtime · 14/10/2023 20:20

The palestinians don't want to share.

I'd rather live under Israeli rule than under Hamas any day.

DrinkingFreshMangoJuice · 14/10/2023 20:21

Because this is a war that's been fought for millennia. The two sides simply cannot cohabit at a governmental level. There have been decades of interventions chaired by 3rd parties that have all fall flat when one side has thrown their toys out the pram and flounced off.

Two states is the only solution.

Alstroemeria123 · 14/10/2023 20:23

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:16

I really don't understand why it is important to a religious person, or a person of a particular ethnicity, to live in a state governed by and for that religion or ethnicity.
And even if they do feel that way, it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to give any weight to such feelings when peace and an end to violence are at stake.

OK, so you’re proposing that the UN also take over Sri Lanka, Argentina, Italy, Poland, Spain, Denmark, England, Egypt and Malaysia, to name just a few countries…

Queucumber · 14/10/2023 20:23

Well done. It’s very difficult to find something that unites Israelis and Palestinians but I think your plan would do it. They’d all think it was stupid.

underneaththeash · 14/10/2023 20:23

That sort of happens in Jerusalem already. Everyone has bits. And it works but it’s a bit fragile.
but why on earth would Isreal want to share land or power with terrorists? You can’t reason with people like that. Jewish people have lived in Israel for centuries, they didn’t just move in after the Second World War.

Pollyputhekettleon · 14/10/2023 20:25

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:16

I really don't understand why it is important to a religious person, or a person of a particular ethnicity, to live in a state governed by and for that religion or ethnicity.
And even if they do feel that way, it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to give any weight to such feelings when peace and an end to violence are at stake.

How could you not understand that? Have you literally never heard any of them explain why, in your whole life, with internet access?

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:25

Alstroemeria123 · 14/10/2023 20:23

OK, so you’re proposing that the UN also take over Sri Lanka, Argentina, Italy, Poland, Spain, Denmark, England, Egypt and Malaysia, to name just a few countries…

No, because those other countries have not been bombing/rocketing each other for decades.
I know of no other region where the violence is as entrenched. Maybe Sudan?

OP posts:
Yellownotblue · 14/10/2023 20:25

Because a one-state solution means the obliteration of Israel. I for one am very glad that western politicians are not advocating that.

UtterlyUnimaginativeUsername · 14/10/2023 20:27

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:16

I really don't understand why it is important to a religious person, or a person of a particular ethnicity, to live in a state governed by and for that religion or ethnicity.
And even if they do feel that way, it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to give any weight to such feelings when peace and an end to violence are at stake.

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's not a valid point of view. Clearly, many people do understand it. And I say that as an atheist.

IveHadItUpToHere · 14/10/2023 20:27

There are people in Israel and Palestine who have suggested a one-state solution. I haven't seen any that have suggested it be run by the UN or what the name could be. But there are people who think the logical outcome of Israel's current bombardment is that Israel will annex more of Gaza and, in that case, some people are suggesting that it would be better to have an one-state solution as long as all nationalities and religions were treated the same ie equal access to voting, passports, travel, education, health, justice system, freedom of faith.

PurpleChrayne · 14/10/2023 20:28

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:16

I really don't understand why it is important to a religious person, or a person of a particular ethnicity, to live in a state governed by and for that religion or ethnicity.
And even if they do feel that way, it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to give any weight to such feelings when peace and an end to violence are at stake.

Because every other country we Jews have ever lived in has tried to exterminate us 🤷

Mosaic123 · 14/10/2023 20:30

That's right PurpleChrayne. It's sad.

SisterMichaelsHabit · 14/10/2023 20:30

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:25

No, because those other countries have not been bombing/rocketing each other for decades.
I know of no other region where the violence is as entrenched. Maybe Sudan?

Really? No other region? You've never heard of anywhere else where something similar is going on? You're unaware of Pakistan/India? You've no idea about Tibet? You've not heard of Kosovo? Just to name a few?

I think you need to open a geography book before authoritatively suggesting nonsense solutions to problems that involve real people's lives.

And also look up what the UN actually is/does.

Hiphopopotamonster · 14/10/2023 20:31

Oh my goodness you’ve solved it! Who knew the whole Israel Palestine conflict that has been raging on for generations, that many assumed had no easy answers, could actually be solved on mumsnet with a few uninformed sentences. I hope the governments across the world are paying attention.

Honestly 🙄

DrinkingFreshMangoJuice · 14/10/2023 20:31

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:25

No, because those other countries have not been bombing/rocketing each other for decades.
I know of no other region where the violence is as entrenched. Maybe Sudan?

I suggest you do a quick Google of global history and current tensions.

FelicityFlops · 14/10/2023 20:34

So Germany would now still be run by the UK, Russia, France and America. I don't think so.
It is bad enough still to have to pay tax for the reunification, which, as far I know, was universally mandated, but not funded in any way outside Germany.

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:34

Yellownotblue · 14/10/2023 20:25

Because a one-state solution means the obliteration of Israel. I for one am very glad that western politicians are not advocating that.

It would also mean the 'obliteration' of Palestine. Both would cease to exist as political entities.
Of course people who consider themselves 'Israelis' would probably continue to use the term unofficially, somewhat similar to the way 'Persian' or 'Celtic' are still used as descriptors of identity.

OP posts:
IveHadItUpToHere · 14/10/2023 20:35

It shouldn't need pointed out but the PPs who are deeply invested in saying there isn't any solution, don't represent most of the people in Israel and Palestine. The majority do want a peaceful solution to be found. Whether their leaders, the surrounding terrorists or the US and UK share that aim is a different matter.

SisterMichaelsHabit · 14/10/2023 20:36

Also might I suggest you recognise your privilege that you've obviously never been persecuted or felt like an outsider for your beliefs (or lack thereof) for thinking the Jewish people don't need their own country after at the very least a thousand years of systematic persecution and forcible eviction from what was formerly their homelands by most of the rest of the world.

Trianglesandcircles1 · 14/10/2023 20:37

No-one here is explaining why the two-state solution has any more chance of successful realisation than the one-state.

It seems self-evident that the two-state solution will never happen.

OP posts:
regularmumnotacoolmum · 14/10/2023 20:38

Chowtime · 14/10/2023 20:20

The palestinians don't want to share.

I'd rather live under Israeli rule than under Hamas any day.

That's untrue in its entirety. Historically Palestinians had always shared with Christians and other Jews. They continue to share with Christians.

Swipe left for the next trending thread