Israel and Palestine - a one or two state solution?

 




These ladies have recently been evicted from their homes
in the Sheikh Jarrach area of East Jerusalem

I have recently returned from a visit to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and have observed at first hand the problems faced by the Palestinian people at the hands of the occupying forces. I have witnessed the dispossession of Palestinian families from homes they have occupied in East Jerusalem since the early 1950’s in favour of religious Israeli settlers. I have visited Hebron, where a once lively souk has been turned into a ghost town by settlers who have occupied the upper floors of the buildings, and who are attempting to drive out the remaining Palestinian families from their homes. I have spoken to refugees in the Deheisheh Refugee Camp in Bethlehem about their bitter experiences of occupation, and experienced some of the daily frustrations of life for ordinary Palestinians when passing through the Qalandia Checkpoint between Ramallah and East Jerusalem. I have also witnessed the progressive encroachment of Israel into the West Bank, in particular the building of a ring of settlements around East Jerusalem and down to the River Jordan which will effectively cut the West Bank into two.

The commitment of the UK Government and the rest of Quartet to a two-state solution is understandable, but may not be the best solution in the long run. It is doubtful if the Israeli Government is ever going to be willing to accept a viable Palestinian state on the internationally agreed borders between the two states, i.e. the Armistice Line of 1948, or the division of Jerusalem into two cities in two separate states. They have frequently gone on record to express their commitment to Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the State of Israel. They continue to press ahead with building settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank in defiance of international law and pressure from the Quartet and the rest of the world.

They are unwilling to accept a viable Palestinian state with complete autonomy over its economy, defence and foreign policy. The most they are prepared to concede is a demilitarised client state with limited powers. Palestine would be a physically divided state, with access between the West Bank and Gaza controlled by the Israelis. The main outlet from the West Bank to the sea would be through the Israeli port of Haifa, which can be blocked by the Israelis at any time at a moment’s notice.

A two-state solution would also not satisfy the aspirations of a great many Palestinians and Israelis. It would leave the Palestinians in Israel, both Muslims and Christians, who constitute 20% of its population, as a disadvantaged minority in a predominantly Jewish state. It would not guarantee the right of return to their former homes in Israel proper to any of the Palestinian refugees in exile worldwide or in refugee camps around the Middle East. It would also not satisfy the desire of many religious Jews to live near the holy sites of their religion, many of which are situated in the Occupied Territories.

Even if the Peace Initiative of the Arab League were implemented, Israel would still be exposed to threats from dissident groups within the Arab world, as well as from hostile states such as Iran. It would still feel the need to remain heavily militarised and perpetuate the disproportionate role of the armed forces in the life of Israeli society. A two-state solution is thus not an automatic guarantee of peace and stability within the region.

I met many ordinary Israelis and Palestinians on both sides of the border. What I observed was the fund of goodwill which exists between individual members of both communities. Although the Palestinians I met were all suffering in various ways under the occupation, none of them had any animosity towards the Jewish people, and many of them had Israeli friends. In Tel-Aviv, the genuine love and friendship between the young people of the various communities whom I met was very encouraging to see.

Many of them, particularly the Palestinians, were unenthused with the idea of a two-state solution, and would be happy to share a single state from the Mediterranean to the Jordan with the Jewish people. Such a state would have several advantages. It would guarantee the right of return of Palestinians to the whole of their former homeland, and not just to 22% of it. It could exist legally under international law without the wholesale demolition of the Israeli settlements. It would also be a secular, democratic state without a built-in ideological bias towards any one religion or ethnic group.

A one-state solution may not be ultimately possible, but it is worth considering. At the end of the day it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to determine for themselves how to share the land they both live in, and the international community should seek to encourage this dialogue rather than seek to impose externally-conceived solutions upon them.