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

Yeah sorry, lazy language on my part, apologies. I'll edit

@Polka83
Regarding your point about suffering, it seems to me that it is part of the human condition.

In other words, at any given time at any given point in the world there will be people suffering. Objectively, are they any less deserving that a family member? No, they are not. But one simply cannot have empathy for the whole world. That is to be too insincere, or to burden oneself with a mental pressure no one individual can uphold.
Then we can be a little more restrictive and argue that perhaps some people deserve more empathy than others... that argument quickly gets murky.
For me, I save my empathy for the people who touch my life and for where I have agency. I can comfort a lost child looking for his parents. I can help a struggling elderly neighbour fill in forms. I can volunteer in my local community.

But I can neither take responsibility for nor do I have agency in human suffering in far flung places around the globe.

I can't change it. But yes, Israeli politics. I have no idea if Mikaeli is perceived extreme or mainstream.

I'd like to see a more pragmatic approach than Netanyahu's about how to end the war though as at the moment it is a disaster for absolutely everyone. Feeling sad for all the people who have lost loved ones or have families with uncertainty around how their loved ones are.

@Polka83 : Would a review of situation and pressure being applied by the US and EU be harmful to the Palestinians?

A review, no. But although I can't see the future, I can certainly see how a 2 state solution without the security needed to keep Israel safe could be completely disastrous for the Palestinians.

Now stay with me through this. At first you might be thinking 'this is only bad for Israel'. But keep going to the end.

1.A Palestinian state without political maturity could be taken over by extremists in exactly the same way as Hamas took over Gaza

1. A Palestinian army (a Palestinian demand which Israel opposes) would then be under control of extremists, based in the West bank

1. Lack of appropriate border controls (a Palestinian demand which Israel opposes) would allow significant weapons to be imported

1. Gaza is geographically isolated by the desert, 30km from the first kibbutz attacked on 7th October.

The West Bank is a similar distance to Israel's major population centres. Look at these cities on the map, and consider how many more casualties an attack like 7th October launched from the West Bank would take:

Tel Aviv 30 km from WB: population 1.3 million
Jerusalem: 30metres from WB: population 900k
Haifa 60 km from WB: population 600k
Beersheba: 20km from WB: population 200k

1. Similarly, rockets launched from the West Bank would not all be stopped, and would not leave enough time for evacuation to bomb shelters when detected

1. The West bank is 20km from the coast. A miltary attack by that Palestinian army led by extremists I mentioned in point 2 could cut Israel in half, isolate cities and destroy them.

Now many people say that the Palestinians wouldn't do any of these things if they only had their own state. BUT Hamas have been clear that a 2 state solution is only a stepping stone, and a significant number of Palestinians agree with them.

Like I say, I can't see the future, but I don't think anyone could say this was impossible. Or even very unlikely.

So why does this harm the Palestinians?

Because even with Israel's military, it would be facing a really tough fight for survival which it might not win. Do you think they would hold back?

I know it's very fashionable to say that Israel is deliberately trying to kill all the Palestinians in Gaza, but the numbers are very clear. More than half of Gaza's infrastructure has been destroyed, compared to 1% of the population. Israel may not being as careful as we'd like, but that's a huge discrepancy.

If Israel's survival was at stake, all their efforts would be on protecting their own population.

50% Palestinian population loss (across the West Bank as well as Gaza) to match the 50% infrastructure loss in Gaza during this war would be 2million Palestinians killed. 100 times more than this war in Gaza.

If Israel did win, I expect they would then expell the remaining 1 million Palestinians, and tell anyone in the UN who complained exactly where to go.

And if Israel didn't win - well, they're a nuclear power, so that would be pretty bad for all of us.

So I think that when Israel tell us that a 2 state solution without sufficient security guarantees doesn't work for them, we should listen.

So I think that when Israel tell us that a 2 state solution without sufficient security guarantees doesn't work for them, we should listen.

And what about the right of Palestinians? Where will they go, those that will survive, somehow????

And the fact they are supported by countries which do have nuclear arms too?

My entire post is explaining why pressuring Israel to accept a 2 state solution without security guarantees could be terrible for the Palestinians.

So let's just not do that.

Sorry stats but your post does read like "no state for the Palestinians, too dangerous for Israel".

It's also pretty dismissive to claim the destruction of half the "infrastructure" (which equates to water, food, hospitals, housing etc) isn't a problem. There is no plan to rebuild the infrastructure.

If not a two state solution, then it has to be a one state solution. How would you support that in a way that gives Israelis and Palestinians equal rights and a shared territory?

@statsfun ,

That is a ridiculous argument. I could use the same against an independent Scotland. At times the Scots have been ruled by extremists, and they have a history of pretty aggressive raids across the border (admittedly going back a while now).

I suspect White South Africa used this type of argument to prevent the black citizens having decent rights. It is justifying apartheid in the interests of the ‘lesser’ race.

A two state solution would be carefully negotiated with security guarantees for both sides from the international community. They were nearly there but for the greed of Arafat.

Any state can become bellicose. You could have used exactly that argument against creating Israel in the first place.

I said weeks ago that Netanyahu wanted to obliterate Palestine, and was yelled down by the right wish Israel supporters on here.

My post explains why forcing a 2 state solution without sufficient security - ie the thing Netanyahu opposes - could cause destruction to both Israelis and Palestinians.

I'm not sure how you go from that to Netanyahu wanting to obliterate Palestine by opposing 2 state solution without sufficient security.

It's exactly the opposite

You're asking the wrong question.

This apocalyptic scenario comes from forcing a 2 state solution without sufficient security

The question is how to make a 2 state solution safe.

I'm certainly not saying "no state for the Palestinians, too dangerous for Israel" @AdamRyan

I just find it strange when people can't see why Netanyahu opposes it.

Does anyone on here know what Gantz position is on two states? I'm sure I read on one of these threads that he is favoured to possibly be the next Israeli PM

There is rightly a strong concern for the protection of Israel in any two state solution but we also need to ensure measures to protect the safety of Palestinians. Even BEFORE 7/10 there were over 200 Palestinians killed by IDF forces in the West Bank (and around 10 more by settlers) in 2023. Adequate security needs to be in place for both sides.

Indeed, what about the safety of Palestinians? Surely Israel should go back to the original borders and all illegal expansionists settlements should be destroyed.

There is already the iron dome, the buffer zones and heavily controlled borders, no "palestinian" government and limited democratic administration of Palestinian areas. This high high security is not making Israel any safer (or at least not making them feel any safer). I can't see what more security there could possibly be.

So when I hear Netanyahu saying "more security" I think he is setting an impossible condition, knowing its impossible, because he doesn't want a two state solution. And I'm afraid your post hasn't changed my mind.

What "more security" do you think is possible, whilst giving the Palestinians a state?

@NewbutoldfatherI could use the same against an independent Scotland

Well you could...

If the SNP had the destruction of England in it's manifesto instead of a referendum.

And the battle of Culloden was ongoing rather than 300 years ago.

And if Nicola Sturgeon had been arrested for mob murders rather than financial fraud.

And if 3 months ago, there had been a paramilitary raid by SNP members - joined by other random Scots - where they brutally slaughtered the whole population of the village of Hexham.

And if 70% of Scots supported that slaughter of their English neighbours instead of just thinking they're tossers and wanting any country to beat them at football or rugby.

But as it is... I'd think you were exaggerating the risk of an independent Scotland.

I understand Hamas have today ruled out a 2 month ceasefire in exchange for hostage release. Someone posted on another thread with link

I read the article but it doesn't say its been confirmed by Israeli officials. I have read that talks are still underway but if it was rejected I wouldn't be suprised, as hamas have said previously they won't accept anything less than a full ceasefire as part of the deal

Are you surprised? I'm not. What's to stop Netanyahu from completely destroying Gaza in 2 months after the hostages are all released.
Let's hope it's the start of a negotiating position though

@AdamRyan And I'm afraid your post hasn't changed my mind.

Really? You still think Netanyahu and some Israelis (more now than 4 months ago) oppose a 2 state solution out of some kind of vindictiveness, or a desire for a bigger country? Rather than it being based on a justified fear of what will happen to their families based on past experience?

OK. I guess we all understand the world in different ways.

when I hear Netanyahu saying "more security" I think he is setting an impossible condition, knowing its impossible, because he doesn't want a two state solution.

Both things can be true. He can be demanding security guarantees because he believes they are necessary and he can also not believe that a Palestinian state can ever be trusted and so try to prevent that from coming about. Some Israelis will agree with him, and some will have more hope.

What "more security" do you think is possible, whilst giving the Palestinians a state?

I've already said that I think the situation needs to change so that Palestinians no longer want to attack Israel before a 2-state solution can be possible. That's my opinion, no-one else's.

I don't think that if a 2 state solution isn't possible right now then some other way for the Palestinians to have a state right now must be found. Many people have lacked self-determination for very long periods of time. I think that changes to give Palestinians better lives are more important.

I have seen settlers interviewed who definitely want a bigger country, so I think some Israelis do want this. Many of them believe the WB is a part of Israel, and I heard one say that it would be best for everyone if they simply took anywhere in the world that they deem to be Israel.

@stormy4319trevor I have seen settlers interviewed who definitely want a bigger country, so I think some Israelis do want this

It does seem that some do. My impression is that it's a small minority.

Every country has some people with unpleasant views. What matters is whether they are allowed to impinge on other people.

Dismantling settlements in the West Bank seems like an achievable way to improve Palestinians' lives, and does seem to have support from many Israelis.

Netanyahu has never wanted a two state solution, and admitted on camera that he derailed the Oslo accords. No, I'm afraid I don't think it's solely due to security concerns. I don't think his support of the West Bank Settlers makes peace particularly likely. He must realise that it can only breed hostility and anger.

@statsfun It's a bit alarming that there are people who live in the settlements in government, and politicians like Bennett who actively support settlements. Of course Netanyahu has always been clear he supports settling the 'wasteland' of Judea and Samaria. Seems quite a powerful movement to me.