Trump is trying to impose his version of the ‘two-state solution’ on Israel
As one whose home is in Israel, I am deeply concerned that Donald Trump’s latest “peace plans” which are being supported by the United Nations, purportedly to achieve a two-state solution, are, in fact, an attempt to impose borders on Israel using the term “two-state solution” but is dramatically different from the concept of a two-state solution as it was envisioned prior to the year 2001. That, in turn, could lead to a war for Israel and millions of dollars for Trump, who anticipates developing Gaza into “The Riviera of the Middle East”.
As far as I can see, there are two possible outcomes of Trump’s efforts. One is that the whole world buys what Trump is doing and, once again, Israel will be forced to fight a war to remain in tact. Like most Israelis, I hate being in a war again, so I hope that there is a better solution.
Unfortunately, the only other other scenario that I can envision is no better. In it, Israel does NOT go to war, lets Trump force his version of a two-state solution on Israel, making it unrecognizable as the country which has been built here so successfully.
To understand the above argument, it is necessary to go through the history of the two-state solution. The term goes back as far the George Bush 43’s presidency. Indeed, Trump himself used that term in his 1990 peace proposal. The concept was in fill swing by 1993, when Bill Clinton became President.
Back then, the two-state solution meant a NEGOTIATED solution which would create two states, Israel and a Palestinian State, which WOULD BRING BOTH COUNTRIES PEACE. Using this approach Clinton held negotiations at Camp David in which the Palestinians were represented by Yasser Arafat and Israel was represented by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. The result of those negotiations was the first Oslo agreement, which was signed in 1993. That agreement established a new entity called the Palestinian Authority (PA) which was to be headed by Arafat. Most importantly, the PA was to be the sole representative of the Palestinian people in future negations. It was anticipated that further issues, including borders, would be negotiated at a second meeting. The Oslo accords were widely cheered by most Israelis and Palestinians.
This second set of negotiations took place at Camp David in the Spring of 2000. Israel was represented by its Prime Minister Ehud Barack. (Rabin had been assassinated.) The PA was represented by Arafat. Unfortunately, as Hillary Clinton described it, “Arafat walked away.” That was the end of Bill Clinton ‘s attempt to bring about a two-state solution.
Ever since 2016, “two-state solution” has had an entirely different meaning than it did when Bill Clinton was President. In December 2016 (after the American election) the United Nations passed United States Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2334. The vote was 13-0 with the United States (Barack Obama) abstaining. UNSCR 2334 specifically referred to the two-state solution numerous times. The Resolution, states in relevant part, that the United Nations, “Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, INCLUDING EAST JERUSALEM, has no legal validity and constitutes a FLAGRENT VIOLATION UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW (CAPS MINE) and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace.”
There were two major differences between the “two-state solution” as it was used by Bill Clinton when he was President and the “two-state solution” referred to in UNSC 2334.
First, UNSC 2334 does NOT call for a NEGOTIATED peace. Rather, it says that Israel is violating international law and was significant attempt at forcing Israel to accept the armistice line (“Green Line”) established by the 1967 war as the international border between Palestine and Israel.
In 2025, the United States (Trump) proposed what became UNSCR 2803. It passed the Security Council unanimously with Russia and China abstaining. UNSC 2803 incorporates Trump’s earlier 2025 peace plan to end the conflict in Gaza between Hamas in Gaza and Israel. The key to both proposals is the establishment of an entity called the “Board of Peace”, which is to be chaired by Trump. UNSC 2308 specifically calls for borders between Israel and a new Palestinian State “in a manner consistent with relevant international legal principles.” Those principles were established both by UNSC 2334 and the Arab League Peace Initiative of 2002. Using international standards is a polite way of saying that Trump and the United Nations intend to force Israel to accept those borders.
This would present a major challenge to Israel. Israel has annexed both the Jerusalem’s Old City of Jerusalem and Gilo, a neighborhood immediately south of the Knesset and Israel’s Supreme Court. 40,000 Jews and no Arabs live in Gilo. As they have ben annexed, the Old City and Gilo, under Israeli law, are part of Israel. The loss of Jerusalem’s Old City would be particularly offensive to Israelis. Jews have lived there for 3,000 years. The first and second temples once stood there, making it the holiest site in Judaism. Would Israel go to war over the attempt to impose the 1967 armistice line (Green Line) as the border between Israel and a new Palestinian State? Probably. How ironic that the United Nations, an entity whose charter says that it is intended to establish peace, would pass a resolution which, in all probability, will lead to war.
Second, the world had changed radically in the years between Bill Clinton’s presidency and the passage of UNSC 2334. In 1993, when Oslo was signed, peace between Israel and the PA would have brought Israel peace. Nobody in the West considered Iran, Hezbollah, or Hamas to be a significant threat. Today they are Israel’s primary adversaries. Hamas in Gaza is only a small part of Hamas, which receives millions of dollars a year from Iran.
Both of Trump’s peace plans assume that if peace in Gaza takes place, peace in the Middle East will have been achieved. That is simply untrue. No matter what happens in Gaza, Israel will still be at war with Iran and what it calls the “axis of resistance”. Together, they are a formidable enemy.
In short, Trump’s peace plans, which now have the approval of the United Nations, were neither negotiated nor will they bring Israel peace. That is hardly what the term “two-state solution” really meant originally.
