Israel – Palestine Conflict: Two-State Solution: More Rhetoric than Reality

The Two-State Solution has long been viewed as the most viable path to peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict, envisioning both an Israeli and a Palestinian state coexisting side by side. Despite being the cornerstone of peace efforts for decades, this solution remains elusive, leaving many to wonder why it hasn't been realized. To address this question, we will explore key events in chronological order.

Historic perspective – Throughout the history Jews have been in minority with some theological disagreements with Christianity. They were portrayed collectively responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion; these beliefs laid the foundation for centuries of hostility & persecution. Later during 19th & 20th centuries, the rise of racial theories contributed to a new form of antisemitism. Jews were persecuted not just for their religion but also for their supposed racial characteristics which was perceived as threat to Aryan Race. This type of racism culminated in the Holocaust under Nazi Germany, which saw the systematic extermination of six million Jews during World War II. The genocide underscored the vulnerability of Jews and the need for a homeland where they could seek refuge and self-determination. After World War II, there was increased international sympathy for Jewish survivors, many of whom were displaced and stateless. Zionism movement garnered strength in response to rising antisemitism & persistent persecution of Jews aiming to establish a homeland for the Jewish people in the historic land of Israel (then part of the Ottoman Empire and later British-ruled Palestine). After the World War - British support for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. While the mandate also stipulated that the rights of Arabs in Palestine be protected, but it led to tensions between Jews and Arabs. By the end of World War II, Britain found it increasingly difficult to manage the tensions in Palestine. In 1947, the British government announced its intention to withdraw from Palestine and referred the matter to the newly formed United Nations.

UN Partition Plan (1947): The United Nations proposed a partition plan to divide Palestine into two states—one Jewish and one Arab. While the Jewish community reluctantly accepted the plan, as it allocated them about 55% of the land (much of it desert), the Arab community rejected it. They viewed the plan as unjust, given that Arabs made up around 67% of the population while Jews comprised about 33%. The rejection of the plan led to the outbreak of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, during which Israel successfully defended its sovereignty and even expanded its territory beyond the borders outlined in the UN partition plan. By the time the war ended, Israel controlled approximately 78% of Mandatory Palestine. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs were displaced during the conflict, sowing the seeds of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

The 1967 Arab-Israeli War : also known as the Six-Day War, was a turning point. In just six days, Israel decisively defeated neighbouring Arab nations—Egypt, Syria, and Jordan—securing control over 100% of historic Palestine, including the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. This defeat shifted the Palestinian cause from being part of a broader Arab struggle to a focus on Palestinian self-determination. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which had been founded in 1964, emerged as the leading representative of Palestinian national aspirations after the war

The Oslo Accords (1993) : For the first time, both sides formally recognized each other. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), led by Yasser Arafat, faced growing diplomatic and economic isolation, particularly after losing support from Arab states. In 1988, the PLO acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and shifted its strategy from armed struggle to negotiations. This paved the way for the 1993 Oslo Accords, a landmark agreement between Israel and the PLO, aimed at establishing a framework for future negotiations and a potential two-state solution.

As part of the agreement, the Palestinian Authority (PA) was created as a self-governing body, responsible for limited autonomy in Palestinian territories such as the West Bank and Gaza Strip. However, its powers were—and remain—severely constrained, functioning more like a local council than a fully sovereign government. In 1995, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, a key figure in the peace process, was assassinated by a Jewish extremist. Subsequent Israeli leadership was less committed to the promises made in the accord. Over time, Israeli politics experienced a significant shift toward right-wing and ultra-nationalist ideologies, which were once considered fringe but have since become part of the mainstream. Today, the annexation of all Palestinian land is openly included in the manifesto of several political parties

Settlement Expansion & emergence of Hamas There are now over 700,000 Israeli settlers living in the Palestinian territory of the West Bank, and their numbers continue to grow, making the prospect of a Palestinian state increasingly unfeasible. Israeli historian Avi Shlaim poignantly described the ongoing settlement expansion in the West Bank with the analogy: "Netanyahu is like a man who, while negotiating the division of a pizza, continues to eat it." As a result, there is now little contiguous Palestinian land left to form a viable, sovereign state, with settlements being a major obstacle to the two-state solution.

Within Palestine, political divisions also complicate the path to peace. Fatah, which controls the West Bank, and Hamas, which governs Gaza, remain deeply divided. Hamas, considered a terrorist organization by Israel and much of the international community, refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist. Its violent tactics and hardline stance pose significant challenges to advancing any peace process.

The Israeli occupation has caused decades of hardship for Palestinians, placing them under military surveillance and imposing severe restrictions on their movement, land usage, water resources, and economic activities. Its like apartheid of South Africa - a system of institutionalized segregation, discrimination, and oppression with Separate laws, roads, and services for Israelis and Palestinians. This has led to significant socio-economic disparities between Israelis and Palestinians living within the same region. The average life expectancy for Israelis is around 83 years, with a GDP per capita (PPP) of approximately 30,000 USD, while Palestinians face a life expectancy of 73 years and a GDP per capita of just 3,000 USD and Gaza is even worse with more than 85% population living under poverty.

Geopolitics and international pressure are crucial in resolving regional conflicts. A notable example is South Africa in the 1990s, where the anti-apartheid movement gained widespread global support. South Africa faced political and economic isolation, with a UN arms embargo, international boycotts, and sanctions. The country was also banned from major sporting events, including the Olympics. Ultimately, the costs of maintaining racial segregation became unsustainable, pushing the South African government to transition toward democracy.

In contrast, the international response to the Israel-Palestine conflict has been weak and divided. While many countries condemn Israel's policies, there have been no sanctions, boycotts, or trade embargoes, allowing Israel to act with relative impunity, citing its right to self-defence. Moreover, the U.S. has provided Israel with approximately $150 billion in aid, making it the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance. As a result, the geopolitical approach to this conflict has remained largely diplomatic and rhetorical

Can Israel and Palestine Coexist as One Secular Democratic State?

Since the Two-State Solution appears increasingly uncertain, some advocates propose a different approach: a One-State Solution where Israelis and Palestinians coexist in a single, secular, democratic state with equal rights for all its citizens. While it may seem like a utopian dream, many nations have demonstrated remarkable transformations just by fostering liberal, inclusive, and multiracial cultures. Prime examples include Singapore, the European Union, and Dubai.

Singapore's transformation from an impoverished, resource-scarce nation to one of the world's developed and wealthiest countries within just a few decades is one of the most remarkable success stories in modern history. Despite its ethnically diverse population, Singapore maintained social harmony by adopting multiracial and inclusive policies. The government introduced measures to ensure that no single ethnic group dominated, fostering unity and national identity. At grassroots level, the government has implemented a Mix Community Policy that ensures strict quotas for different ethnic groups are evenly distributed across public housing estates. This policy helps prevent the formation of ethnic enclaves and promotes integration. The country's four official languages—English, Chinese, Malay, and Tamil—are a testament to its inclusive policies. Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of Singapore, recognized the importance of religion in society but believed it should be kept separate from government affairs.

Europe, once a hotbed of World War I and World War II, has transformed into a largely peaceful and seamlessly connected continent with soft borders, easy movement between countries, and wider economic opportunities. United States, which nuked two cities in Japan during World War II, has reconciled with the past and moved on without resentment, becoming close allies.

Dubai's rise to prosperity stems from its liberal social policies promoting a business-friendly environment, which set the stage for rapid growth and modernization. Today, Emiratis make up only around 10-15% of the population, while expatriates comprise 85-90%. Indian nationals constitute one of the largest expatriate communities in Dubai, making up around 30%—double the Emirati population.

In the modern world, countries that thrive are those that have learned to coexist. Dividing a country in the name of race or religion in the present day seems like a medieval solution in the 21st century. This cycle of suspension & discord must end. Forgiveness is essential to end an infinite cycle of retribution. The new mantra in the making is 'coexist or you don't exist’