Despite the 10/7 terror attacks on Israel, the Two-State Solution (2SS) has been touted by the UN, the EU, foreign NGOs, and many countries. On November 8, the Trudeau government announced they are considering formally recognizing a Palestinian state.
On Nov. 4, Riyadh hosted the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution, with more than 90 countries represented. Their aim to reach peace was “through practical steps and specific timetables aimed at ending the occupation and realizing the independent Palestinian state.”
Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu – who normally supported the idea – has stated emphatically that a "two state solution is dead." Even the Israeli peaceniks living in the Gaza envelope who dreamt of co-existence, are changing their politics. The reason? They are loath to reward terror.
It's because the 2SS isn't a solution. It's a catch-phrase, that’s no more a proposal for reconciliation than it is a path to peace. It’s not a vaccine to cure the ills of the conflict.
Let’s presume the only thing once standing in the way of peace was land. That was the formulation then: land for peace. So Israel took the world’s advice, took the gamble, and began giving land away, expecting peace.
However, terrorism coming from Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) should have ebbed after Israel ceded Areas A and B to the Palestinian Authority 30 years ago, post-Oslo Accords. It didn’t. Terrorism should have declined after Israel ceded Gaza to the PA. Very much on the contrary. “Land for peace” became a meaningless slogan (or better, a clever marketing campaign). There wasn’t even an uneasy peace; there was just far more destruction.
From the get-go, “land for peace” was flawed to the core, premised on the notion that the onus is on Israel and only Israel, to sacrifice for peace. And if it doesn’t, then it isn’t interested in peace. For more clarity, imagine the rational reverse: “No land = war,” making the root cause of the ongoing conflict Israel’s recalcitrance.
What the world is asking now, by continuing to insist on a 2SS, is that Israel try again, after the worst slaughter of innocents on its soil ever.
And not just to dip its toe in the water before diving in – but to give the entire house away.
Not including the aforementioned giveaways, Israel tried the “land for peace” formula when offering a state six times in 25 years. Palestinian leadership turned it all away. In light of ongoing Palestinian terrorism, perhaps a new formula is worth trying? How about “peace for land”?
And what, precisely, could Israel want to see, besides the obvious clamp down on terror attacks, and end to pay-for-slay policies? For starters, there’s the niggling problems of incitement and widespread hate.
Post World War Two, Germans had a day of reckoning; a moment of judgment and accountability, where actions were evaluated, and consequences were faced. They went through a denazification, where Nazi ideology was speedily scrubbed from discourse, and Western values won out.
Today, deradicalization would need to come from the Palestinian “4Ms” – media, madrassas, mosques, and members of the political class.
Palestinians are treated to cradle-to-grave hatred that rivals Nazi Germany’s vilest antisemitism. They’re taught that Jews are the cause of every ill in their lives. They’re taught that Jews are mosquitoes, to be killed with impunity. Children are brainwashed and propagandized to believe that their greatest, and most heroic duty, is to kill Jews. For more information, spend time surfing the vast media library of Palestinian Media Watch, who have been tracking this material for decades. The Nazis at least tried to cover up their crimes; the Palestinian terrorists on 10/7 broadcast theirs on Facebook.
One might retort that there is plenty of hate coming from extremists in Israel. But they are marginalized; the far minority -- the exceptions, not the rule.
One might argue that: what should one expect from the Arab Palestinians, given the conditions they live in? This of course ignores the influences of the extremists, and corrupt leaders, who have lined their own pockets with aid and spent it on tunnels and weapons. Their resources are focused on destroying Israel, rather than lifting up their citizens.
Things changed after 10/7. Hate-filled sermons are no longer to be tolerated. They have planted deep roots and borne violent fruit.
It awakened a truth that many knew already: this was not an Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but rather an Israeli-Jihadist conflict. That belief was hardened as statistics bear that three-quarters of Palestinians supported the 10/7 attacks.
Therein lies the crux of the problem. Peace cannot be had when one side wants to kill the other. No land-bribes are going to appease.
It’s a lie to say the “armed struggle” and “resistance” is about land. This is the narrative for useful idiots and naïve Westerners. It’s unmistakeably religious and ideological.
Once upon a time, one could hope that two states could be eventually carved out, negotiations had, compromises proposed, and deals could be made. But giving it another go would be the very definition of insanity, i.e. doing the same thing over again, each time expecting different results.
And given reality, it would also be the definition of suicide.
An edited version of this article previously appeared in the National Post
 | A guest post by
|