Two-state solution or DELUSION?

The ‘two-state solution’ is the most common phrase uttered by politicians when talking about the Israel-Palestinian conflict. In fact, criticising the so-called two-state solution is heavily frowned upon in the political world.  It has become a somewhat ‘sacred cow’ that should not be questioned. In this article, we have decided to expose the fallacy of this long-standing policy of the British government, the UN, and indeed most of the world’s governments. Here are some FAQs to help you understand why this solution solves nothing.

What does a two-state solution mean?

It depends on whom you ask. Supporters of a two-state solution rarely clarify what they mean by ‘two states.’ With Israel being one of the two, is the would-be Palestinian state Gaza? Is it the West Bank and Gaza, which is separate from the West Bank and has a different authority in control of it (thus making three states)? How would this impact Jerusalem, the eternal, undivided capital of Israel? Have advocates of a two-state solution considered the implication of breaching international law (yes, you did read that correctly) by granting Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem? There is much wishful thinking about what the two-state solution can be, but few can say what it would look like in reality. 

Who would control a newly created Palestinian state?

Likely Hamas. The future of Hamas may seem uncertain, but at the time of writing, opinion polls show that Palestinian support for Hamas is at record levels. Hamas has a 76% approval rating among Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and their terrorist force, the Al Qassam Brigades, boasts an 89% approval rating. These are numbers Western leaders can only dream about in their own polling. These same leaders claim that “Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people,” but by this same logic, no Western government represents its people either, as none of them has such a high approval rating as Hamas does. Politicians failing to understand this is one reason they are trying to create a Palestinian state with a mythical, non-existent, peace-loving Palestinian government. They have failed to learn that forcing Western values onto other countries against their will simply does not work. Neither does handing over a territory to a terrorist organisation.

Is the Palestinian Authority a viable alternative to Hamas?

Not really. The Palestinian Authority (PA) currently controls the West Bank and pretends to be a moderate partner, but let us not forget they started the First and Second Intifadas against Israel, and they have been complicit in many of the terror attacks in the West Bank, including the funding of terrorists through their ‘Pay-to-Slay’ policy to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds per year. The real problem is that they aren’t radical enough for the Palestinian public. The PA’s approval rating is just 10% (not much higher than the Palestinian public’s view of the UK at 3%, which begs the question why UK politicians are cowed by them). In other words, if a Palestinian state is established with a PA government, it will either exist as a dictatorship against the will of the people or, if democratic, will lose a landslide election to a more radical group, like Hamas, and become ‘another Gaza.’  

What are the conditions for a Palestinian state?

Seemingly there aren’t any. The UK is willing to reward the Palestinians with a free state despite them rejecting all previous peace deals and continuing to seek the destruction of Israel. In January 2024, the UK Foreign Secretary, Lord David Cameron, suggested that Britain would consider recognising a Palestinian state, including at the UN, before an “irreversible” peace negotiation settlement to put pressure on Israel to accept. This unfair unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state without any conditions would be a slap in the face for Israel and the Jewish people as it rewards terrorism and those who seek Israel’s destruction. It would weaken both the UK-Israel relationship and undermine Israel’s interests. Therefore, there should at least be some pre-conditions. For example, they could require the Palestinian leadership to recognise the State of Israel; or that they cut all funding from the terror-supporting regimes of Iran and Qatar. Maybe guarantees could be given that terror attacks against Israel will stop. Or that a Palestinian state would allow Jews to enter and live safely with equal rights, like Israel currently guarantees Arabs in Israel. These seem to be very basic conditions required for the UK to recognise a Palestinian state. But even if these conditions were met by Palestinian leaders, they would likely be rescinded by the future Palestinian government, as they do not want peace with Israel. 

Is the two-state solution the only option for achieving peace?

Many politicians in the UK who are advocating for a two-state solution are genuinely desiring peace in the region and want to support Israel as well as find a way to help Palestinians. However, the two-state policy is outdated and maybe has even been a barrier for peace. So often, the UK government and opposition has rolled out this tired policy of a two-state solution in response to every diplomatic conundrum. If Israel does something the UK disagrees with, they cite a two-state solution as the answer; if Israel is attacked by terrorists, they turn to the two-state solution. This ‘one response fits all’ has failed to bring peace thus far and has sometimes weakened Britain’s standing with Israel. This obsession with a two-state solution has obstructed the formation of any new UK foreign policy and has limited fresh, imaginative ideas for a peace solution. It has also repeatedly given UK governments a diplomatically safe backstop position to be neutral, when instead the UK should be putting full pressure on Israel’s enemies to stop seeking its destruction.

Does a two-state solution reward terror?

It not only rewards terrorism but undermines Israel’s security. Right now, the Arab world is watching what the outcome will be when an Islamist terror group invades Israel, murders Jews, and takes them as hostages. Israel is aware that Hamas in Gaza is only one of its enemies and that the Iranian regime and its terror proxies present an even greater threat. The problem with proposing a two-state solution at this time is that it sends the wrong message to other jihadist groups. It shows weakness and says the West will capitulate to your demands after you butcher Jews, rape women, and kidnap children. The Palestinian people are suffering because of the failed leadership of Hamas. They were granted territory in Gaza that potentially could have been a future Palestinian state, yet Hamas’s desire to see Israel wiped out was greater than its desire to provide for its citizens or to seek peace with its neighbour. If the West wanted to reward Palestinians with a state, they should have done it during times of peace, not war. Unilaterally recognising a Palestinian state in the aftermath of the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust is a big moral mistake.

Do the Palestinians want the two-state solution?

No. UK politicians are determined to give the Palestinians a state because they think it will advance the two-state solution. Yet, while the Palestinians want a state of their own, they don’t want one next to Israel. A Gallup poll conducted in October 2023 revealed that 72% of Palestinians oppose the two-state solution. This statistic is actually growing, especially in younger Palestinians, so in future there will be even less support. Why then are Western politicians pushing something the Palestinians themselves don’t want?

Hasn’t the two-state solution already happened?

Yes! A conveniently forgotten fact is that there already was a two-state solution: Jordan (originally Trans-Jordan) was in fact part of the British Mandate for Palestine and was intended to be the state for the Arabs. Also, back then it was seen through the lens of the Israel-Arab conflict, but this has been reframed to be the Israel-Palestinian conflict to turn Israel from being the ‘David’ against the Arab world into the ‘Goliath’ against the Palestinians. The truth is that the ‘Palestinian cause’ is the one unifying policy of the Arab League. They are still united in their hatred of Israel.

What is the best option for Israel’s security?

Some politicians have said that the absence of a two-state solution has made Israel’s security more vulnerable. Some, astonishingly, even blame Israel and try to excuse Hamas’s actions as an act ‘out of frustration’. Such justification is completely unacceptable. Israel is not the reason there is no Palestinian state or peace. Israel is the victim of Islamist terrorism, and it is insulting to blame a nation whose sons and daughters are currently being held captive in the tunnels under Gaza for causing this terrorism. It is not the IDF’s actions, but Israel’s very existence that is the reason Islamists want to destroy it. Israel’s duty is to protect its land and its people and guarantee its survival. Israel also wants peace alongside security. Allowing the West Bank, for example, to become part of a Palestinian state would present Israel with another very serious security issue geographically, in addition to the one it currently faces in Gaza. This is because Israel currently has security control over the West Bank – something that it would have to lose if a Palestinian state was created. After all, a state cannot be a state without autonomy. This makes another 7th October-like massacre a possibility. Advocates blaming Israel for the failure of a Palestinian state often point to Jewish ‘settlements’ in the West Bank as problematic or even the cause of terror, but terrorism against the Jews by Arab Islamists happened before the modern state of Israel – and it should be emphasised that the West Bank, or Judea and Samaria as it is Biblically named, is the heartland of the Jewish homeland.

What is the real solution?

Since 1948, the Palestinian leadership has turned down every chance of statehood because it would mean they would have to recognise Israel. During the British Mandate period it should have been enough for the Arab world to accept Jordan as Arab and Israel as Jewish, but instead they wanted to weaken Israel and sought half of the land promised to the Jewish people. Then, as soon as Israel claimed independence it was invaded by Arab armies who sought to drive the Jewish people into the sea. Now, Palestinians and their supporters chant, “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free,” a direct call for the destruction of Israel. The real barrier to the two-state solution has never been the lack of recognition of a Palestinian state from Western governments, but the lack of recognition of Israel as a state by Arab nations and the Palestinians. The solution is peace. You cannot have peace between two sides when one wants to destroy the other. Israel wants peace, the Palestinians do not.

Continues: What God says about the Land of Israel