One day Bibi Netanyahu will be sitting in the dock at the World Court in The Hague facing charges for Crimes Against Humanity.

Many have said they oppose the illegal settlements. Some even said they support a Palestinian state.

Sadly I can no longer view those responses. Perhaps that's why this thread is so short.



I also eagerly await the concrete retaliatory steps from Western nations. I know they will finally side with the occupied people whose lands are being stolen to this day.

...the two state solution...

After seeing what's gone on in the West Bank for years now, how can anyone still think a two state solution is possible? In the early 2000's I firmly believed it was the way to resolve the conflict, but now I don't think there's any chance of a Palestinian state ever happening. So taking out crimes against humanity such as ethnic cleansing, and ensuring Israel remains a democracy, what's the solution? One possible solution is Israel annexes the West Bank and Gaza and makes all Palestinians Israeli citizens. But the problem is that Israel has always wanted the land, but not the people. I've not got any more ideas, but think it's at the stage I no longer support a two state solution because of the impossibility of it happening.

With each side wanting their side to be dominant and to hold sovereignty in such a state. Israeli Jews were not willing to give up their Jewish national homeland and abandon the Zionist Project and Palestinians were still not willing to accept the Jewish presence on Arab lands (though that may be a minority view now)l

This was according to a joint survey in 2023 - before Oct. 7th. Palestinians no doubt would now be more practical and accept "less" while the opposite would be true for Israelis. Why give anything at all, when they are within reach of the ultimate goal?

Without some pretty improbable change of viewpoints, the one-state solution is just as impossible as the two-states. It also has a plethora of issues and dangers, not the least of which is bloodshed in a civil war when two such different peoples with a history of hatred are forced to live under one nation.

The only obstacle to the two-state solution - aside from the political will sadly lacking - are the settlements. Dismantling of the settlements, maybe some land swaps and re-absorption of the settlers into Israel proper would be daunting, of course. Those who argue that it is unrealistic to expect Israel to agree to such terms should be countered by pointing out that it is far more unrealistic to expect Israel to agree to a one-state solution that would effectively equal the end of Zionism and a Jewish national homeland. It will not happen.

I also don't think that Israel should be rewarded for its continued, long-standing bad behaviour vis a vis allowing the settlements. Agreeing to kill off the two-state solution, that allows both people to achieve self-determination and nationhood, because of a situation Israel willfully created, seems like letting the bully win.

Something I couldn't resist. I promise, this time I am offering my two cents' worth in good faith.

I am far more optimistic about the two-state solution than the present company. First, to paraphrase Churchill, a two state solution is the worst possible one, with the exception of all others. Regardless of details, a single state for all of the former mandatory Palestine would inevitably create an unstable powder keg of a state ready to explode (or implode) at any time like Syria did recently. This would not be a matter of "if" but "when", and it will result in unimaginable chaos all across the region, not just Palestine, and would result, as the best case scenario, in two or more states anyway.

So the only, or the most practical solution is two states. I am more optimistic now than ever in the feasibility of it taking shape: I am looking at the situation from a regional perspective rather than a strictly Israel/Palestine issue. With the decisive defeat of Iran's proxies in Lebanon, Syria and Gaza, there is a massive geopolitical shift towards recognition of and reconciliation with Israel among Arab states. This brings unprecedented benefits to Israel, along with commensurate political leverage on the part of the Arab states to pressure Israel towards a rapid negotiated two-state solution.

The issue then becomes that of Palestinian sovereignty. As things stand now, the Palestinian Authority has no territories to call their own and no means of unilaterally taking charge of any. This deprives Palestinians of all the legal benefits that the status of a sovereign state affords in the international arena. It doesn't take much territory or even internal stability (more on that later) to gain that status. Just ask the neighboring Lebanon or Cyprus. A negotiated settlement for any territory, no matter how small, will elevate the status of the Palestinians in all further negotiations far beyond mere concept of a state. What prevents PA, the legitimate representative of all Palestinians, from moving forward with such negotiations has less to do to do with hard-line right wingers in Israel than it does with internal hostilities within the Palestinian society. The Gaza experiment of 2005, when Israel ended all traces of its presence there (and which, incidentally, demonstrated Israel's readiness, by a Likud government no less, to dismantle illegal settlements) , didn't fail because of Israel's territorial ambitions. it failed because of the struggle that ensued between the armed forces of various Palestinian factions. The outcome of this struggle, and not Trump's self-aggrandizing fantasies of luxury hotels, is what keeps the war going. And of course, this struggle and not the Israel/Hamas war are the mirror image of the regional centuries-old conflict between Iran's Shiite and Saudi Sunni factions for dominance. This, and not the equally baseless allusions to genocide and ethnic cleansing, is why Hamas and PIJ need to be rooted out of Gaza.

But I digress. I think my assumptions for the changes in the political climate both within Israel and its currently occupied territories are very reasonable and promising, if not concrete. In any event, all possible scenarios in ending the Israel/Palestine standoff eventually lead to the same outcome: two (or more) states, but at a far higher cost than a negotiated two-state settlement at the earliest possible time. The conditions for allowing such negotiations to take place are improving, and not disappearing.

Call me an optimist. A pragmatic, emotionally disciplined and impervious to peer pressure optimist. If you dare.