Beyond a term that sounds good to the ear, the "two-state solution" is an unrestrained illusion and nothing more than a waste of time, at least for now.
1) I cannot agree with Steigel in his comment. Those Arabs and Palestinians who have lived peacefully in Israel for decades do not deserve either exile or death. And exile to where? To the best of my knowledge, there is no nation that will absorb any significant number of ‘exiled’ Palestinians. 2) There were years when I was naive enough to have disagreed with your thesis in this article, Joshua, but I was enlightened and awakened by rabbinic sermons in two different Reform synagogues. My grown children have both been very involved with and frequent travelers to Israel, but those sermons inspired me finally to visit Israel for the first time since 1978. I read Noa Tishby’s book. October 7th and the ensuing weeks ended my naiveté for good. It pains me to admit it, but you are SO right about the zero viability of a ‘two-state solution’, Joshua. This aging former hippie peacenik leftie has made personal peace with the facts as you express them.
Great article. If you want a 'two-state' the questions should be: (1) what could it look like? and (2) how do we get there? No western politician arguing for the the 'two-state' has an answer to either of these questions, let alone to both. It was always an extremely difficult issue to resolve, after October 7th it became a total fantasy.
One state solution is beyond illusion bordering on the purely delusional. So exile for all Palestinians or death. The Sufi has a saying "Two Kings cannot share one blanket."
Yasser Arafat famously said that if he would sign the peace agreement with Israel, he would be signing his own death sentence. For many Palestinians the whole state of Israel is one settlement. (River to the sea)The Arabs were trying to exterminate the Jews living in Israel from day one, and they cling to the believe that one day they will be succeed . Their new strategy is to provoke Israel in to using draconian measures to punish those who commit atrocities, and terror attacks against Israeli residents, and consequently destroy Israeli legitimacy, and dismantle the Jewish state . In this regard there are willing to sacrifice millions of their own people. Not my words, theirs. Until this mindset changes, any self blame, scapegoating the settlers ,Bibi or whatever else people can think off ,to change the reality that the Arabs would love to murder the Jews is just a waste of time. Oct 7th was just a small example what would transpire if the Arab armies would've won. Israel simply has no partner in any peace talk . There is no Palestinian President Sadat, until then, the destruction of those who would like to inflict more pain on Israel is the only option .
No Israel is not going to be their doormat anymore! They burned all their bridges all on their own and they didn't leave any room for doubt. We now probably see more clearly than ever before their true intentions, their true face and all the hypocrites in the world have been unmasked. The horror show they put on will be a flop like a bad B movie proving that their untalented crew and director were the worst investment to have ever existed on earth! They brought their own demise onto themselves and we are not feeling a shred of pity for them!
Two state solution from the people who see an authoritarian violent religious fundamentalist country like Iran on the verge of procuring a nuclear weapon and think- let’s send them cash! It’s “getting to yes” without any thought of the physical safety of millions of innocents.
And I'm not suggesting anything. And how do we know, and how do we demonstrate which narrative demonstrates the truth? In the world of postmodern thought, is each narrative valid and truthful? Does it depend on who says it?
If the narrative maintains, as Nur Masalha argues in his Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History, that there is a four thousand years history (Palestinians = Philistines), how do we frame this debate about a two-state solution?
1) I cannot agree with Steigel in his comment. Those Arabs and Palestinians who have lived peacefully in Israel for decades do not deserve either exile or death. And exile to where? To the best of my knowledge, there is no nation that will absorb any significant number of ‘exiled’ Palestinians. 2) There were years when I was naive enough to have disagreed with your thesis in this article, Joshua, but I was enlightened and awakened by rabbinic sermons in two different Reform synagogues. My grown children have both been very involved with and frequent travelers to Israel, but those sermons inspired me finally to visit Israel for the first time since 1978. I read Noa Tishby’s book. October 7th and the ensuing weeks ended my naiveté for good. It pains me to admit it, but you are SO right about the zero viability of a ‘two-state solution’, Joshua. This aging former hippie peacenik leftie has made personal peace with the facts as you express them.
Great article. If you want a 'two-state' the questions should be: (1) what could it look like? and (2) how do we get there? No western politician arguing for the the 'two-state' has an answer to either of these questions, let alone to both. It was always an extremely difficult issue to resolve, after October 7th it became a total fantasy.
And yet, it’s being taught at the universities.
One state solution is beyond illusion bordering on the purely delusional. So exile for all Palestinians or death. The Sufi has a saying "Two Kings cannot share one blanket."
Yasser Arafat famously said that if he would sign the peace agreement with Israel, he would be signing his own death sentence. For many Palestinians the whole state of Israel is one settlement. (River to the sea)The Arabs were trying to exterminate the Jews living in Israel from day one, and they cling to the believe that one day they will be succeed . Their new strategy is to provoke Israel in to using draconian measures to punish those who commit atrocities, and terror attacks against Israeli residents, and consequently destroy Israeli legitimacy, and dismantle the Jewish state . In this regard there are willing to sacrifice millions of their own people. Not my words, theirs. Until this mindset changes, any self blame, scapegoating the settlers ,Bibi or whatever else people can think off ,to change the reality that the Arabs would love to murder the Jews is just a waste of time. Oct 7th was just a small example what would transpire if the Arab armies would've won. Israel simply has no partner in any peace talk . There is no Palestinian President Sadat, until then, the destruction of those who would like to inflict more pain on Israel is the only option .
No Israel is not going to be their doormat anymore! They burned all their bridges all on their own and they didn't leave any room for doubt. We now probably see more clearly than ever before their true intentions, their true face and all the hypocrites in the world have been unmasked. The horror show they put on will be a flop like a bad B movie proving that their untalented crew and director were the worst investment to have ever existed on earth! They brought their own demise onto themselves and we are not feeling a shred of pity for them!
Two state solution from the people who see an authoritarian violent religious fundamentalist country like Iran on the verge of procuring a nuclear weapon and think- let’s send them cash! It’s “getting to yes” without any thought of the physical safety of millions of innocents.
And I'm not suggesting anything. And how do we know, and how do we demonstrate which narrative demonstrates the truth? In the world of postmodern thought, is each narrative valid and truthful? Does it depend on who says it?
Sounds good to my butt !
Never
If the narrative maintains, as Nur Masalha argues in his Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History, that there is a four thousand years history (Palestinians = Philistines), how do we frame this debate about a two-state solution?
That narrative is completely baseless.
This idea is unworkable, the very idea of it is atrocious.