How Is a Two-State Solution Possible?

I have been thinking for a few weeks about how a two-state solution is possible. Arab nations have never wanted it. Every time, they not only rejected it but also wanted to destroy Israel. 

I think the term “two-state solution” for the Arab nations is a weapon. They only use the term for their preparation against Israel.

Do you know how many times Arab nations have rejected it? I guarantee we all do. But to clarify the point, let’s look at a few rejections of the two-state solution.

1947 United Nations Partition Plan: A UN plan to divide Mandatory Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states. Jewish leaders accepted it, but Arab nations rejected it, leading to the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

1967 Khartoum Resolution: The “1967 Khartoum Resolution” was the Arab League’s response to Israel’s victory in the Six Day War.

At the Khartoum Summit, Arab leaders agreed on the “three no’s”: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel, marking a firm stance against diplomatic relations with Israel.

2000 Camp David Summit: Hosted by US President Clinton, Israeli PM Barak proposed a Palestinian state mostly in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, but Arafat rejected it.

2008 Proposal by Ehud Olmert: Israeli PM Olmert offered a comprehensive peace plan, including land swaps and a Palestinian state, which Palestinian President Abbas did not formally accept.

Later, Hamas came into existence and engaged in fulfilling the wishes of these Arab nations.

I do not need to discuss Hamas’s history or the period after 2008. This is recent history, and everyone knows it.

Nowadays, many are discussing the two-state solution again, raising one question: is it really what Arab nations want, or is it really possible to settle the Israel-Palestine problem by a two-state solution?

Indeed, some situations changed. However, after reading the history of the two-state solution, I do not think it is ever possible.

However, if it ever becomes possible, I have so many unknown facts about it. Who represents Palestine? Who will sign on behalf of Palestine?

In a two-state solution, who will represent Fatah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), or the Palestinian People’s Party?

The two-state solution is not UNRWA aid. It cannot be delivered to someone who does not represent the people of Palestine. It is a state and needs proper leadership. It can never be a terrorist organization.

Most importantly, it has to be handed over to the party that can promise Israeli security as well as cares about the better lives of the future Palestine.

Do the people who are chanting slogans for a two-state solution in the streets, colleges, university campuses, or parliaments know the process? Do they know what the two-state solution actually is?

People, leaders, or ministers who talk about solving the Israel-Hamas problem with a two-state solution must understand what a two-state solution is. They should not use the term for political gain. They must consider whether the two-state solution is actually possible.

Someone who is antisemitic or anti-Israel must remember that Israel knows how to defend itself.

Jews are a nation that has survived centuries of fighting in different situations. Neither Hitler could defeat them, nor will Arab countries. Six hundred thousand citizens fought against 45 million Arabs in 1948 and won the war. Israel is like a small dot on the Middle East map, but its capability is not tiny.

Moreover, the people of Gaza, the West Bank, and Arab nations who care about the people of the future Palestinian state must accept the truth, and the truth is that Israel existed, exists, and will exist.

Before thinking about a solution, all the parties in Gaza, the West Bank, and surrounding Arab countries must come forward to better understand that Israel is a democratic country. A diplomatic solution is the only way to solve the problem. Israel will not accept being bowed down by force like in 1948, 1967, or October 7.

Finally, I still think the two-state solution is not possible. It is still too far. But what I believe is taking hostages or terrorism is a hindrance to the peace process. Those who talk about a two-state solution should pressure first Hamas to release the remaining hostages unconditionally. Otherwise, the two-state solution discussion is just an illusion.