Israel and the US abandon the two-state solution'

I for one would like to know what the alternative is:

The incorporation of the West Bank into the state of Israel? No, because it would mean bestowing Israeli citizenship on the Palestinians, which will not happen for obvious reasons;

the status quo? Meaning the continuing occupation of the Palestinian territories, accompanied by the further establishment and expansion of Israeli settlements?;

The first solution is politically impossible and the second is likely to mean the formalisation of a kind of apartheid, with the Palestinian territories fulfilling the role of Bantustans financed by the UN agencies, with periodic uprisings suppressed by the Israeli army.

Given that there are now so many settlements, the idea of a viable Palestinian state would already have been nigh on impossible to achieve, even though lip service has been paid to it ad nauseum. Now it looks as though Israel and the US have dropped any pretence to believe in a viable Palestinian state.

The occupied/disputed territories could be returned to the Arab nations who controlled them between 1946 and 1967. Or they could be fully annexed by Israel. Or some of both.

Given the terms of the original UN mandate for Palestine, and the fact that the occupation is now 50 years old, I would have thought that Israel's claim to the territory was stronger.

well the two state solution has been dead for quiet a while. there will probably be a bi-national state with full citizenship being given to all the Palestinians residing there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-state_solution

well the two state solution has been dead for quiet a while. there will probably be a bi-national state with full citizenship being given to all the Palestinians residing there.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-state_solution

I don't understand how this would be politically feasible.

An example of a 'bi-national' (actually a 'tri-national') state which is often mentioned is the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina. However, in this state there are three contiguous but more or less clearly defined geographical areas. In the case of the Palestinian territories, the settlements are dotted all over, like a polka dot petticoat.

---------- Post added 16-02-2017 at 19:26 ----------

The occupied/disputed territories could be returned to the Arab nations who controlled them between 1946 and 1967. Or they could be fully annexed by Israel. Or some of both.

Given the terms of the original UN mandate for Palestine, and the fact that the occupation is now 50 years old, I would have thought that Israel's claim to the territory was stronger.

I was not aware of the legal principle that if you illegally occupy a territory for 50 years, against the will of the inhabitants, then it automatically becomes yours.

the two state solution was a great idea but Israel just seems to have used it to buy time before they have gobbled up all Palestinian land. I don't think the peace process was ever going to go anywhere.

http://original.antiwar.com/ramzy-baroud/2017/02/15/israels-vision-for-the-future-is-terrifying/

In the early 70's we used to call at Haifa, as the port for Jerusalem.

I was told, at that time that power was shared, on a proportional representation system

They even had three Sabbaths, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, to take into account the three religions prevalent.

It was run from the Knesset.

What happened to that system?

No doubt something to do with the friendly neighbourhood suicide bombers?

Some context for those who don't know how the occupied territory came about and might fall into the "the Israeli's are the baddies" meme which is common in some circles.

In 1947 the UN decreed (resolution 181) that the land roughly corresponding to Israel and the "occupied" territories should be divided between a primarily Jewish state and a primarily Arab state.

The surrounded Arab states didn't like this plan, and decided to "drive the Jews into the sea". They lost, but occupied some of the territory intended for the 2 states in the process. The jewish state of Israel was formed in the territory which was left.

In 1967 some of the Arab states got together again and again to "drive the Jews into the sea". They lost again (took 6 days) and some of the territory which they stole in 1948 ended up in the hands of Israel where is has been ever since.

The thing the Israels are primarily guilty of is trying to manage a perpetual threat of annihilation and genocide.

In 1947 the UN decreed (resolution 181) that the land roughly corresponding to Israel and the "occupied" territories should be divided between a primarily Jewish state and a primarily Arab state.

The surrounded Arab states didn't like this plan . . .

why should the Arabs accept a plan that gives half of Palestine to jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe ?

Our government put us into the EU.

The Arabs didn't have a say in the matter.

Let's give Palestine back to the Arabs.

why should the Arabs accept a plan that gives half of Palestine to jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe ?

 

Our government put us into the EU.

 

The Arabs didn't have a say in the matter.

 

Let's give Palestine back to the Arabs.

Who should adjudicate on such matters if not the UN?

This land has changed hands so many times in recorded history it can't legitimately be said to belong to any one people.

It is after all basically the ancient Kingdom of Judea plus the ancient Kingdom of Israel.

So you tell me why the claim of the Arabs to this land trumps all others, you may as well argue it should be given back to the Romans.

Who should adjudicate on such matters if not the UN?

 

This land has changed hands so many times in recorded history it can't legitimately be said to belong to any one people.

It is after all basically the ancient Kingdom of Judea plus the ancient Kingdom of Israel.

So you tell me why the claim of the Arabs to this land trumps all others, you may as well argue it should be given back to the Romans.

The Palestinians have been living there for several hundred years.

The Eastern European immigrants haven't.

Now let's give Palestine back to the Arabs, and let the Palestinians reclaim their sovereignty that has been cruelly denied to them these last 70 years.

I don't know why the US/the west doesn't just leave well alone.

The Palestinians have been living there for several hundred years.

 

The Eastern European immigrants haven't.

 

Now let's give Palestine back to the Arabs, and let the Palestinians reclaim their sovereignty that has been cruelly denied to them these last 70 years.

The vast majority of the people from both sides are natives to the region and the Jews' historical claim is older. Not to mention the UN mandate for Palestine.

Are you actually ranting against the rights of first, second and third generation Eastern European immigrants in their current homeland? Been hanging around the the BNP or the FN have we?

It's the ancient homeland of both sides. They're pretty much all Semites.

The Palestinians have a claim to the land, but the Arabs of the surrounding nations don't. The Palestinians are more genetically related to the Israeli's than they are to the surrounding Arabs anyway.

This is about religion. Which group of Yahweh worshippers should control the holy sites of all Yahwists.

---------- Post added 16-02-2017 at 20:43 ----------

I don't know why the US/the west doesn't just leave well alone.

Erm. Because it's not "well" and millions of people will die if it kicks off maybe?