Two state Solution - is it possible?

[onegrumpyoldwoman]

I think the situation is comparable, geographically, to the Partitioning of British India. in 1947.

To stop bloody Hindu/Muslim fighting it was proposed that the Muslims were given their own State of Pakistan. This was made up of the two most Northern states of India which were split by part of India. They were West and East Pakistan
The reason for this was that these states had the biggest Muslim population already.

So Muslims headed North to their new country and Hindus headed South into the rest of India.

So far so good, - but not for long.

Bear with me as I get to the "kicker".

West Pakistan started trying to foist it's will on East Pakistan, which East Pakistan resisted. A bloody Civil War ensued which resulted in the break away of East Pakistan that became Bangladesh. The human cost in the War of Bangladeshi Independence was 3 million dead, in 8 months 2 weeks and 6 days. It is classed as a "Genocide".

Ghandi tried to make peace between the warring parties by suggesting a land corridor was established between the two countries that went across India. Rumour has it that this what what caused his assassination in 1948 by a Hindu Nationalist.

Well done to those who have got this far.🙂

There is a similar situation in the Holy Land.
There are two pockets of Palestinian people separated by Israel.
Each are controlled by a different group (Hamas controls Gaza - and Fatah controls The West bank} They have different ideologies.

Personally I can't see how a single state for the Palestinian people is possible.

So if thr Israelis dont want it and the Palestinians don't want it then why do you?

Why do you want the Jewish state to be forcibly invaded and dissolved and Jewish people to be a minority?

Erm, how would that in any way benefit Israel?

A deal needs to benefit both sides, remember.

You want Isreal to agree to one state? Basically for Israel to agree to there being no more Israel?

It would benefit Israel because it would allow there to be peace which I'm sure they want.

I think this post highlights why it is so important that Palestine is recognised and that both go into talks as equal states with equal rights.

It turns my stomach a bit hearing people talking about Israel 'giving' Palestinians control of Gaza and the West Bank like it is some kind of fucking favour to stop illegally occupying land or stop illegal blockades and collective punishment or some kind of reward for good behaviour. We don't strip Israel of their rights because they have behaved badly, we respect that they are a state in control of their own country even if we think they are behaving terribly. Palestinians deserve the same. They are equal to Israelis and they deserve to recognised as such. Talks need to start from a point where they are both seen as equal, both deserving of respect and security.

I probably shouldn't be posting because I am still so angry after seeing children beheaded and burned alive by Israel but honestly the way some of you talk like Palestinians just don't matter and Israel come first in everything makes me feel sick and I don't even think you realise you are doing it.

@blurry5205 looking at the trail of posts quotes it seems clear I meant Jewish people in the Jewish state to echo your terminology. You were concerned about becoming a minority within a single state if Israel and Palestine were joined I think?

Another condition would have to be that the new state is demilitarised.

After Oct 7th? Are you absolutely mad?

There will never be one state after Oct 7th. It showed that Israel were right all along.

You are saying Israel should give Hamas $10 billion? Do you think they’ll spend it on rebuilding civilian infrastructure seeing as they didn’t spend much of the billions of $ of aid they’ve already had on the Gazan people.

Do people even think before they post?

Almost all the concessions being sought in the 2 state solution have a potential cost to Israel: a cost which comes almost entirely from on-going terrorism, because the concessions increase Israel's security risk.

I don't understand this tbh? What concession is Israel making beyond pulling out completely from Gaza and allowing them self determination and to independently govern their own state. Why do you feel that would result in more terrorism? Why is it a a cost to Israel? What other option would you propose that would improve Israel's safety?

So it's the obvious way to actually stop the war. Stop the Palestinian attacks and terrorism on Israel.
This has to go both ways

Would it? What basis do you have for that assertion?

Apart from 'Well I'd stop attacking if it was me"

Didn’t Israel pull out completely from Gaza before Gazans elected a terrorist organisation, with a mandate to destroy Israel and kill Jews, to govern them?

That’s to @Dulra

I don't understand this tbh? What concession is Israel making beyond pulling out completely from Gaza and allowing them self determination and to independently govern their own state. Why do you feel that would result in more terrorism? Why is it a a cost to Israel? What other option would you propose that would improve Israel's safety?

I'm not really sure what you don't understand.

Israel protects itself by removing the capability of Palestinian terrorists. By reducing the import of weapons. By arresting terrorists.

No longer controlling goods at the border would allow Gazans to bring in weapons from Iran.

Gazans already governed their own state and chose a government committed to eradicating Israel.

Removing security control would allow Hamas to commit additional atrocities like October 7th, which they've said they'll do again and again.

I'm pretty sure that Israel would love it if Palestinians no longer wanted to attack and kill them. But that's not in their gift. No, not even by withdrawing entirely - history proves that.

No they didn't

Israel depends on the US for money, so they will probably be forced to accept a one or two state solution by them whether they like it or not.

I'm not really sure what you don't understand.

What you expect to happen? It cannot go back to what the situation was pre Oct 7th. A two state solution would not happen overnight. I am sure it would be done over time with checks along the way that both sides were sticking to the agreement. Oppression of Palestinians like before is not an option and is not and has not made Israel any safer.

I'm pretty sure that Israel would love it if Palestinians no longer wanted to attack and kill them.
Really all Palestinians want to kill Israelis? No need for these dehumanising statements particularly when close to 40,000 Palestinians have been killed by the IDF in the past 6 months! I know whose safety I am more concerned about going forward

From the Arab Palestinian perspective, their goal was never to establish a state for themselves next to the Jewish state. Their goal has always been first to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state or to undo the Jewish state once established.

Ernest Bevin, the British foreign minister after WW2 needed to explain to Parliament why the British have failed to carry out the trust that they received from the League of Nations to help the Jews achieve sovereignty.
They didn’t fail the Arabs. They created Jordan. They created Iraq. But they failed the Jews and needed to explain why.
These are his words;
“His Majesty’s Government have thus been faced with an irreconcilable conflict of principles…For the Jews the essential point of principle is the creation of a sovereign Jewish state. For the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of sovereignty.”

In February 1947 Bevin calls the conflict irreconcilable.
There are no settlements.
There are no refugees.
There is no ‘occupation’.

All of the issues that we hear are the cause of the conflict don’t exist yet.

This is the conflict.
The Jews want a state. The Palestinians want the Jews not to have a state. If you don’t view the conflict through this prism, you have not understood the conflict at all.

We see this in the rejection of the peace negotiation in 2000. The irreconcilable difference was Arafat’s insistence that 4 million ‘refugees’ (now numbered at 5.9 million) Palestinians be given the right to return to Israel. (The Palestinians do not possess a right to return.) In effect, another way of undoing the Jewish state.

We see this in Gaza, which is the first time the Palestinians could control the land and have self determination. Rather than use the land to build a state, their priority and resources have been to undo the Jewish state.

With regards to a 2 state solution. Eventually, the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank should be under their own sovereignty that is first administered by Egypt and Jordan and eventually themselves.

With regards to a 2 state solution. Eventually, the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank should be under their own sovereignty that is first administered by Egypt and Jordan and eventually themselves.

Would you let Palestinians have a say in this at all?

I was wondering why you want Jewish people to go from having their own state to being in a minority. I don't know what that has to do with me personally.

At the cost of no longer having their own state? You think Israelis would be happier without there being an Israel?

Please explain? Did you ever go to Gaza after 2006 and see Israeli military there?

There was no Israeli military presence in Gaza from 2006 until Gazan’s carried out the mass atrocities of Oct 7th and started the current war.

I don’t think we’re communicating very well, and I’m struggling to find ways to respond to your questions in a way that satisfies you. A one state solution where all the people who live there are treated equally is going to change the proportion of people who are are from different background/cultures because at the moment the Palestinians are corralled and separated and don’t “count”. I think you are free to want or think differently.

Israeli troops bulldozing crops inside Gaza 2020.

Standard behaviour https://features.gisha.org/closing-in/

I'm pretty sure that Israel would love it if Palestinians no longer wanted to attack and kill them.
Really all Palestinians want to kill Israelis? No need for these dehumanising statements

Brief comprehension lesson:

"Israel would love it if Palestinians no longer wanted to attack and kill them." (what I said) says that the terrorists who attacked and killed Israelis (on October 7th, and at various attacks before and since) were Palestinian. If no Palestinians wanted to kill them, that would make Israel happy. This is true (and neither dehumanising nor a sweeping statement)

"Israel would love it if the Palestinians no longer wanted to attack and kill them." (not what I said) says that most or all Palestinians are terrorists who want to kill Israelis. Still not dehumanising, but definitely a sweeping statement, and not true. And again - not what I said.

It's a small difference, but attention to detail is important when trying to understand other people - and certainly before throwing accusations at them.

The UK is the only Anglican state. Only about a quarter of people loosely identify as Anglican. We manage to muddle along with others.