By Richard Silverstein
November 01, 2021:
Informationclearinghouse.info
-- "Tikun
Olam" For
decades, the two-state solution has been the
consensus advocated by liberal and left-Zionist
groups, political parties; and foreign states
(including the US and EU) seeking to mediate the
Israel-Palestine conflict.
US administrations (with the glaring exception
of one) have routinely criticized Israeli settlement
policy as endangering the chance for such a
two-state agreement. Based on such a consensus one
might think that the world could then proceed to
implementing such a proposal. But the opposite has
been the case.
The two-state solution has proven to be a
chimera: an object that appears to exist, but never
has and never will. One might argue that two-states
is a viable plan if agreed to by the parties. But
one party in particular has defied this consensus
for a generation, while falsely maintaining (for a
considerable portion of that time) that it agrees
with it. That party, Israel, no longer even
maintains such fig-leaf position. For the past
decade or more, Israeli governments have at first
implicitly, then explicitly rejected it. Leaving the
rest of the world which endorses it looking like
utter fools. But governments like the US and
European Union have been only too happy to continue
the charade, because without two states their
approach would appear even more bankrupt, and make
them look even more ridiculous.
So two-states has been a useful tool to pretend
the world has a plan, when it doesn’t. To admit the
truth, would force anyone serious about peace and
justice issues to either throw up their hands in
futility; or admit failure and devise a different
approach.
No Advertising - No
Government Grants - This Is Independent Media
Get Our Free
Newsletter
That approach, a single state comprising both
Israel and Palestine, is derided as unachievable
because the Israeli side “would never accept it.”
But this is a fallacy based on a hypothetical future
result which no one has even bothered to attempt.
The same argument was offered during the South
African apartheid era. Advocating for majority Black
rule seemed impossible given the intractable
opposition of the ruling white majority.
But with enough political, moral and economic
pressure, that same apartheid regime recognized the
handwriting on the wall and conceded that its
continuance was doomed. During an extended process
of negotiation between the parties, a transition to
majority rule was successfully implemented.
Now, South Africa is by no means a shining
example of state-transformation. It is a state
facing the same problems as many other African
states (crime, corruption, entrenched power
elites). But at least it is a democracy in which the
people have an equal say in the political life of
the nation.
One state is a similarly achievable outcome. But
given Israeli opposition, it cannot happen until the
very world political elites which have decided
two-states is the only viable option, give up this
illusion. In addition to embracing one state, they
must do something they have hitherto refused: to put
political, moral and economic muscle behind their
position. Israeli refusal must be met with isolation
in all the areas mentioned above: the Israeli
economy must be boycotted; it must be denied
financial opportunities and access to capital
offered to other states; state sponsored
institutions in such fields as the arts and academia
must be isolated; and Israel must be ostracized from
international bodies and denied access to
opportunities to normalize itself before the world
Obviously, this will take a force of will so far
not in evidence. It will take resolve the world has
lacked. It will take a global movement exerting
incessant moral pressure for action. It will take
continuing change in the foreign policy consensus
among academic elites such as that seen
here and
here. Books such as Ian Lustick’s recently
published,
Paradigm Lost along with his NY Times op-ed,
Two-State Illusion, also chip away at this
poisonous consensus. But despite the slow
transformation of opinion, the resistance has so far
been unable to make radical change due in part to
the powerful counter-force of the Israel Lobby
throughout the west (especially in the UK and U.S.)
That being said, students of history must
remember the powerful states which appeared
impregnable, only to fall due to their inherent
instability and internal contradictions (USSR and
its East European client states, Nazi Germany,
Yugoslavia, Rhodesia, apartheid South Africa,
Argentina’s military junta, Somoza’s Nicaragua,
Battista’s Cuba, etc.). We should remember as well
the collapse of the post-WWII colonial era with
Britain and France’s loss of colonies in Africa,
Asia, and the Middle East. Despite Israel’s apparent
stability and economic vitality, it too could, and
likely will suffer a similar fate.
Merkel’s Two-State Mirage
Registration is necessary to post comments.
We ask only that you do not use obscene or offensive
language. Please be respectful of others.