Netanyahu rules out two state solution

[ConnieCounter]

Netanyahu rejects a Palestinian state. Surprise surprise.

What is his plan for Gaza?

Resettle with Israeli settlements? Return to continued Israeli occupation?

How can the US, UK, EU and others continue to support this war when they claim to be in favour of a two state solution?

https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-news-01-18-2024-73d552c6e73e0dc3783a0a11b2b5f67d?taid=65a95f27cc8ea90001513093&utm_campaign=TrueAnthem&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter

This is what they said today
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240118-meshaal-hamas-rejects-two-state-solution/

They want a totally independent Palestinian country, in control of its own destiny, rather than the eradication of Israel.

But Hamas are a terrorist organisation so what they think is pretty irrelevant. What do Palestinians want?

(I have to admit I don't fully understand the difference between a two state solution and a separate country but I assume they want the West Bank and Gaza to be within the same borders somehow)

Netanyahu doesn't want a two state solution either. That doesn't mean that Israelis don't want that.

(I have to admit I don't fully understand the difference between a two state solution and a separate country but I assume they want the West Bank and Gaza to be within the same borders somehow)

Let me try and help:

Two-State Solution - This is the most widely, mainstream, endorsed solution, especially by the so-called "international community", including the United Nations, the United States, and the European Union. It proposes the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel. It has some variations to it, though:

• Mainstream Version: Envisions Israel and Palestine as sovereign, independent states, usually with borders based on pre-1967 lines, potentially with agreed land swaps and a shared or divided Jerusalem.
• Variations: Some proposals suggest different border adjustments or security arrangements. Specifically, some pro-Israel proponents envisage a version that sees Israel retaining overall control over the outside borders of the eventual state of Palestine. This is, generally speaking, rejected by Palestinians and their supporters as a version of "occupation light" as opposed to full sovereignty. Other proposals envisage a de-militarised Palestinian state - again, this is endorsed by some on the pro-Israel side and tends to be viewed with scepticism among Palestinians and their supporters - their primary argument being that nothing would stop Israel from invading and maintaining a de facto occupation / hegemony as it pleases in the absence of some sort of a "checks and balances" mechanism.

One-State Solution - This suggests that Israel and the Palestinian territories should form a single, bi-national state. Opinions vary widely on how this would be structured. Again, there are various versions:

• Equal Rights Version: Advocates for a democratic state where all inhabitants (Israeli and Palestinian) have equal rights. This idea is favored mostly by leftists. Ideas around its practical implementation vary widely, ranging from a "one size fits all" approach to suggestions modelled more along the lines of existing, multi-ethnic states such as Switzerland (a federation with far-reaching devolution of power).
• Annexation by Israel: Some right-wing Israeli factions favor annexing the West Bank and Gaza and, typically, offering limited rights but not full citizenship, to Palestinians. This would arguably be considered illegal under international law and is widely considered discriminatory. It would, however, also, essentially, be the codified continuation of the status quo.
• A Single Palestinian State: Basically the same thing as the annexation scenario - except "the other way around". Comes with all the same issues as the former - rarely ever discussed because nobody thinks it could ever realistically happen.

... and, of course, any number of "pretty crazy stuff people come up with", all of which are pretty niche.

HTH.

The problem, you see, is that the creation of Israel was also endorsed by the “International Community” and look how that has turned out.

The Arabs will accept a Jewish state the day Hell freezes over.

piers Saudi Arabia have already said explicitly that they want a two state solution so obviously recognise a state of Israel.

This source says "nearly all" of 40 ME and EU countries support a two state solution I.e. recognise Israel.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/arab-states-eu-agree-on-need-for-two-state-solution-after-israel-gaza-war/

So not sure why you say this: "The Arabs will accept a Jewish state the day Hell freezes over."

So if I'm reading this correctly, Hamas are saying that they expect to have the whole of Israel, West Bank and Gaza for themselves eventually, with no Jewish state.

But that they'll accept 67 borders + Jerusalem - set up as a full Palestinia state including a Palestinian army - as a starting point. But without recognising this as a permanent agreement or recognising that Israel has a right to exist.

Can you see why Israel might have a problem with this?!

Of course I can see why Israel might have problems with it! In precisely the same way Palestinians might have a problem with Netanyahu being openly anti a two state solution.

You seem to have missed this bit of my post: But Hamas are a terrorist organisation so what they think is pretty irrelevant. What do Palestinians want?

Both Hamas and Netanyahu are only representing one (fairly inflexible) view on a solution. Until they are both out of a position of having a say, I think its impossible to see a way forward.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68046625

Conservatives and Labour both condemning Netanyahu's position on a two state solution

@AdamRyan - you said "They want a totally independent Palestinian country, in control of its own destiny, rather than the eradication of Israel."

Which isn't what the article says at all.

They very clearly say they want the eradication of Israel and that the 2 state solution is a stepping stone.

Which is exactly what Israel fears, and why Netanyahu is opposed to a 2 state solution.

Given that we have a healthy disbelief in our politicians' wisdom and omniscience when it comes to decisions they make about our own country, I don't understand why we suddenly think that they're right about Israel. A country where the safety outcome won't even affect them.

The 'international community' is just a bunch of politicians. Why do you suddenly think they are right? All that can be said is that they give an indication of what their own countries will do, based on their own countries' interests.

It is Israeli citizens who will die if they are wrong.

If your teenage kid played russian roulette because his best friend told him that he thinks the gun is empty, would you think that was reasonable or would you freak out at him for being completely stupid?

@AdamRyan The opinions of politicians who neither have to live with the responsibility nor consequences of their decisions are a matter of supreme irrelevance.

Conservative and Labour talking heads can pontificate to their hearts’ content, but it is all ultimately white noise.

As for the Palestinians and the Israelis, trust has broken down irrevocably and neither are happy with a two state solution.

So now we find ourselves in a winner takes all scenario.

I just read it again and they don't "very clearly" say that at all. But i don't want to get into interpreting what terrorists say. They are by nature extremists.

What do people living within the boundiaries of Israel want? Israeli and Palestinian?

The point of view of UK politicians, who I vote for as my democratic representative, is very important to me and should be to anyone in the UK. That's the point of them.

A parties position on the Gaza war would be a voting issue for me. I'm pleased both main parties are taking the same stance on this.

@AdamRyan You may be as pleased as Punch but it matters not a whit to the belligerents. I believe taking pride in ineffectual performative gestures is commonly known as “virtue signaling”.

Hahaha. Engaging in democracy is not virtue signalling, you silly sausage 😂

The 1967 borders represent 21 per cent of Palestine, which is practically one fifth of its land, so this cannot be accepted "

plus

"our right in Palestine from the sea to the river, and from Ras Al-Naqoura to Umm Al-Rashrash or the Gulf of Aqaba, cannot be waived. This is our Palestinian right"

equal "eradicate Israel". Look up where those map points are.

"comes to facilitate Palestinian and Arab consensus at this stage,"

equals "2 state solution is a stepping stone.."

"but without giving up any part of our right or our land and without recognising the usurping entity [Israel]."

equals ... stepping stone to removing Israel"

Not sure how it can be interpreted in any other way.

And of course it matters that this is what Hamas is saying. The past is our best indication of the future. We have seen how they managed to take control of Gaza - the closest thing there has ever been to a Palestinian state - and use that to attack Israel.

How can you possibly see it as a rational response from Israel to allow a setup where if the same thing happens again , it would destroy them?!

How can you possibly see it as a rational response from Israel to allow a setup where if the same thing happens again, it would destroy them?!

Are you saying you think the most appropriate solution is the status quo? Or a solution where there is only Israel? What happens to the Palestinians?

I've been clear that I think Hamas have to go. I also think the Palestinians need their own state to resolve this situation, as at the moment they are stateless and that seems inhumane.

If you disagree, then say what you think rather than just throwing stones

What would you suggest then?

He's a war monger slowly losing support, it's only a matter of time before Israel isolates itself. If there is a shooter in a school you don't flatten the school. Even in the US they go in and extract. In Gaza the israelis have just levelled it. It is genocide and the world is slowly waking up.

Yvette Cooper today said there needs to be a two stat solution. As has Biden. It's going to expose Nettenyahu for the war criminal he is.

You can't escape the truth these days...

We won't go as far as I'd like (ban Israel diplomats, cease trade etc) but pushing for a two state is important.

No chance that Israel will be isolated. Ever.

The UK, USA, India and Germany will forever support Israel and their right to exist.

Surely Bibi can't last long?

He looks like he's on his way out (let's pray he is, certainly)

@5thCommandment

"Yvette Cooper today said there needs to be a two stat solution. As has Biden. It's going to expose Nettenyahu for the war criminal he is.

You can't escape the truth these days..."

You can, apparently, escape reality. Here's something for you to think about: in war, the other guy always gets a vote. The Palestinians won't stop until they've scrubbed Israel from the map.

Now if you are fine with that, I respect your honesty, but let's not play games and pretend there is a peaceful two-state solution.

@AdamRyan I've been clear that I think Hamas have to go. I also think the Palestinians need their own state to resolve this situation, as at the moment they are stateless and that seems inhumane.

If you disagree, then say what you think rather than just throwing stones

I genuinely don't know how this can be changed to a good situation.

That doesn't mean that Israel is required to harm themselves.

The Palestinians won't stop until they've scrubbed Israel from the map.
I think the Israeli government has actually the same rhetoric towards the Palestinian state. They are doing a good job at doing this in Gaza at the moment.

Realistically speaking I don't think anybody thinks that there will be two states and everyone will get on straight away. There's alot of mistrust on both sides.
What is being said is discussing and making it clear that two states is the eventual end goal. Even if it starts off with one that at the minimum are willing to just tolerate each other, and then who knows, maybe one day in the future it could even lead to there being a cordial relationship between the two states. Even if it does seem unlikely now.
But for either side to say that only one state should exist is not only wrong but will just continue the cycle of violence.
How it will be implemented is ofcourse another issue that will probably take years to be negotiated, it certainly won't happen overnight