We constantly hear about what they call a “Two-State-Solution” to the conflict between Israel and so-called Palestinians, repeated particularly by European and American politicians, more common on the left politically than on the right.
But what we also see is none of these “Two-State” advocates seems to have thought through what it would mean and how it could possibly work to do anything other than be the root of the next and more bloody conflict.
First, before we go into details, I challenge anyone to show me where e a “Two-State-Solution”, or a bi-national solution, between two adversarial sides, has ever worked successfully and ever produced peace. This is a safe request because there are no examples - not now, not in history.
Another cliché needs a look
We hear how “you don’t make peace between friends, you make it between enemies”. I challenge anyone to show us one example, of peace made between adversaries that has worked without one of the adversaries being defeated in war first.
The lesson of history is that peace comes when one nation successfully defeats the other to such a degree that the other changes its ideology.
Germany and the USA are allies today, because Germany’s Nazis were defeated and Germany came out of its destruction committed to reject the policies of the Nazis.
Japan is a US ally today, because Japan was forced to abandon its previous policies and go forward as a democracy.
Yet, the situation in the Middle East is unique. Many countries have recognized a non-state as a state. Even the UN has a Palestinian Delegation sitting behind a sign that says “The State of Palestine”.
So, let’s look what being a state means.
What is the two-state solution. And is it possible?
If Palestine is a state
It needs to identify a territory. Well, Israel, under international law can have a say in that, limiting Palestine to areas A and maybe part of B under the Oslo Accords at the most.
Today, there are no defined borders.
A State needs to have diplomatic relations in order for its citizens to travel to other countries.
If Palestine is a state, No Palestinians should be allowed into Israeli territory without visas and without diplomatic representation and relations, there can be no visas, so if Palestine is a state, Israel’s borders with it should be closed.
If Palestine is a state, it becomes solely responsible for any attacks against a neighbor made from its territory. (Mexico v USA, The Hague), with the nation attacked within its rights to take any action necessary to protect its territory and citizens.
If Palestine is a state, it does not have the right to use any currency other than its own, so they should immediately stop use of the Israeli Shekel. Banking and communications that go through Israel should be cut until and unless diplomatic relations are established and agreements be stated in treaty form.
In addition, a Palestine State would no longer have any right to access Israeli medical care, Israel power supply, or Israeli ports.
And the first time the Palestinian Leadership chooses war, Israel would be within its rights under International Law to destroy them.
Think about it.
Roger Froikin
Comments