Editor’s note: Alan Hart’s view is probably spot-on! as was Dr. Alan Sabrosky’s “Two-State Delusion,” in 2009. But, Matt Hill proposes a simple solution to the Israel-Palestine problem, “only political stubbornness, not popular support or irreconcilable differences, prevents the two-state solution from working;” “…these facts need pointing out because Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists the conflict is “insoluble“, and that aiming for two states is unrealistic. After all, Netanyahu and his fellow Likud hardliners would much rather face a confused Palestinian movement in thrall to a chimerical non-solution than sustained, organized pressure to fulfil Israel’s legal obligations, argues Matt Hill in The Telegraph : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
news/worldnews/middleeast/ israel/9703026/The-Israel- Palestine-problem-has-a- simple-solution.html. “Perhaps a push for One-State” will pressure the Israelis into accepting Matt Hill’s already internationally recognized boundary – the 1967 line, – which, with some minor adjustments, would form a natural border between the two states. Jerusalem would be partitioned, as it was until 1967, and serve as a shared capital.
By Alan Hart
In the final countdown to the UN General Assembly vote on recognition of Palestine as a non-member state, the PLO has indicated that it’s expecting “a pleasant surprise”, it being the number of European countries which will not do Zionism’s bidding on this occasion and will vote for the resolution. Victory for the Palestinians in this forum can be taken for granted, and it will help to further isolate the Israel of Netanyahu as a pariah state, but… It won’t be, can’t be, a substitute for a viable strategy to secure justice for the Palestinians.
In my analysis the Palestinians now have only one option.
For starters it requires the PLO to recognize and declare that the two-state solution is dead (not least because no Israeli prime minister is going to trigger a Jewish civil war in order to end the occupation of the West Bank including East Jerusalem).
The next step should be winding up the Palestine Authority and handing total responsibility for the occupation back to Israel.
That would open the door to what I believe to be the only viable strategy for the Palestinians if they are ever to obtain justice.
With the two-state solution not only dead but formally buried, they could then campaign, with growing global support, for equal rights and security for all in one state (all of pre-1967 Israel plus all of the West Bank plus the Gaza Strip).
In one or two decades at the most, because the Palestinians would outnumber the Jews, one state would mean the end of Zionism, but it would also open the door to real security for the one state’s Jews.
As I have previously written and never tire of saying, the Jews are, generally speaking, the intellectual elite of the world. And the Palestinians are by far the intellectual elite of the Arab world. What they could do together in peace and partnership in one state really is the stuff that dreams are made of. They could change the region for the better and by doing so give new hope and inspiration to the whole world.
As things are and look like going, and given that the Palestinians are never going to surrender to Zionism’s will by accepting crumbs from its table, the only alternative to one state for all is a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine. That might buy Zionism some more time for the short term, but in the longer term it would most likely guarantee that the rising global tide of anti-Israelism was transformed into classical anti-Semitism, setting the stage for Holocaust II, shorthand for another great turning against Jews everywhere, and starting quite possibly in America.
The question arising from the summary analysis above is this. Where does UN General Assembly recognition of Palestine as a non-member state fit into what I have proposed?
Answer – it does not fit.
So what use could “President” Abbas make of it when he gets it?
When announcing that he was winding up the Palestine Authority and handing responsibility for the occupation back to Israel, he could say to the world something like this: “We are truly grateful for this recognition of our rights and claim for justice, but we must also be realistic. Zionism has no interest in a two-state solution so we must move on. One state with equal rights for all is the only way of preventing a “catastrophe for all.”