Benjamin Netanyahu repeated his rejection of a Palestinian state last week but diplomats are pushing to resurrect the idea of a two-state solution.
What is the two-state solution?
At its simplest, the two-state solution is the idea that the creation of a Palestinian state next to Israel would end the crisis. There would be two states on the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
The two-state solution has become the most widely accepted policy internationally, even as Israelis and Palestinians increasingly see it as an impossibility.
Why is it so hard to achieve?
The Israeli occupation is the key issue that prevents Palestinians from forming their own state. Israel took control of the Palestinian territories – Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem – in 1967 and Palestinians have lived under military rule ever since. Internationally mediated efforts from the 1990s onwards have failed to change the status quo.
Even if the occupation were to end, there is little land on which Palestinians could build a state. An Israeli settlement movement in the Palestinian territories now numbers about 700,000 people.
Even if Israel were to be pressured to end its military rule, Palestinians themselves are deeply divided, with groups such as the internationally recognised Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) endorsing the two-state solution, while the Islamist movement Hamas seeks the destruction of Israel.
Are Netanyahu’s words new?
No. Israel’s longest-serving prime minister has never accepted the idea of a genuine Palestinian state.
In 2009, Netanyahu said a “Palestinian state” could in theory exist alongside Israel, but the conditions were so stringent that it would not be considered a sovereign state, with no military or control of its own airspace. In 2017, he said Palestinians could have a “state minus”. Israeli politicians talk about maintaining “security control” of all the land, which Palestinians see simply as control.
So why are Netanyahu’s comments making an impact now?
It is partly due to the devastating Gaza war, which has provided renewed momentum for governments and diplomats who seek to address the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.
But the words have also put Israel’s allies, such as the US and the UK, in a difficult position. Washington and London have long shielded Israel from international pressure by repeating that a negotiated two-state solution – no matter how impossible it seems – is a workable plan to end the crisis.
Netanyahu’s comments exposed the failures of that policy, and diplomats are now considering how Israel might be forced, possibly through sanctions, to end the occupation.
What about the “one-state solution” proposal?
Many Palestinians and some Israelis now advocate a “one-state solution” in which a binational secular state is created. Israel’s government sees this as unacceptable as it would in effect be the end of the Jewish state, as they would not have a demographic majority.
Palestinians and their supporters – and even some Zionists who want Israel to change its policies – say the current situation is in effect a “one-state reality”, but one in which Israel has ultimate control by enforcing an apartheid regime, with unequal rights based on race. Israel has denounced claims of apartheid as “fictitious”.
