Is a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine possible? | Start Here
Summary
TLDRThe video script explores the concept of the two-state solution as a means to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It delves into the history of the region, the complex dynamics of land division, and the political and social challenges that have made this solution elusive. The script highlights the historical context, the role of international and local actors, and the impact of ongoing violence. It also examines the criticisms of the two-state solution and presents alternative viewpoints, including the one-state solution, emphasizing the importance of addressing the underlying issues of rights and governance.
Takeaways
- 🌍 The two-state solution, envisioning Israel and a new state of Palestine coexisting peacefully, is widely considered the most viable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but remains elusive due to historical, political, and territorial complexities.
- 🗺️ The land in question is marked by complex territorial divisions, including Israeli military occupations, Palestinian territories separated by Israeli settlements, and ongoing disputes over borders and control.
- 📜 The two-state solution concept has been around for decades, but some critics view it as an avoidance strategy that allows politicians to avoid addressing the core issues, such as individual rights and historical grievances.
- 🕌 Historical context is crucial: the region has been controlled by various empires and has a diverse population, with tensions rising during the British mandate due to growing Jewish immigration and Zionism.
- ⚔️ The conflict escalated after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and subsequent wars, leading to a complicated history of displacement, military occupation, and territorial disputes.
- 🤝 The Oslo Accords in the 1990s were a significant step toward peace, with Israel and Palestinians recognizing each other and outlining a framework for potential statehood, but they left many permanent status issues unresolved.
- 🚧 Key obstacles to peace include the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements, political shifts in Israel towards more hardline positions, and divisions within Palestinian leadership.
- 🇺🇸 The United States has played a major role as a mediator but faces criticism for its strong alliance with Israel, which some argue limits its ability to pressure Israel for concessions.
- 💔 The peace process has been stalled for years, with recent conflicts like the 2023 Gaza war further complicating prospects for negotiation and leading to renewed calls for a two-state solution from international leaders.
- 🏴☠️ While the two-state solution remains the stated goal of some Palestinian groups, internal divisions and the rise of Hamas complicate representation, and there's debate about whether this solution is still viable given current realities.
Q & A
What is the two-state solution?
-The two-state solution is a proposed framework for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by establishing two sovereign states: Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
Why has the two-state solution been difficult to achieve?
-The two-state solution has been difficult to achieve due to complex issues such as borders, the status of Jerusalem, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and mutual distrust between the parties involved.
What historical events led to the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
-The conflict has roots in historical events such as the British mandate in Palestine, the Balfour Declaration, the partition plans proposed by the British and the UN, the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and subsequent wars and uprisings, including the Six-Day War in 1967 and the Intifadas.
What was the Oslo Accords?
-The Oslo Accords were a series of agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in the 1990s, aimed at achieving a peace process and establishing a framework for Palestinian self-governance in parts of the West Bank and Gaza.
What are the main challenges to implementing a two-state solution today?
-Challenges include the continued expansion of Israeli settlements, political divisions among Palestinians, shifts to the right in Israeli politics, lack of trust and credibility in leadership on both sides, and insufficient international mediation and support.
What role has the United States played in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process?
-The United States has been a key mediator in the peace process, supporting Israel diplomatically and militarily, while also advocating for a two-state solution. However, it has faced criticism for not exerting enough pressure on Israel to halt settlement expansion and make necessary concessions.
What are the positions of different Palestinian factions on the two-state solution?
-The PLO officially supports a two-state solution, while Hamas's position is less clear, with a 2017 document indicating acceptance of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders but without explicit recognition of Israel.
Why is the issue of Israeli settlements a major obstacle to peace?
-Israeli settlements are considered illegal under international law and their expansion in the West Bank complicates the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state, leading to further tensions and distrust between Israelis and Palestinians.
What impact did the 1948 Arab-Israeli War have on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
-The 1948 war, following Israel's declaration of independence, led to the displacement of over 700,000 Palestinians, the establishment of Israel, and the loss of Palestinian land, creating long-lasting refugee issues and territorial disputes.
How has the Israeli-Palestinian conflict evolved since the Oslo Accords?
-Since the Oslo Accords, the conflict has seen failed peace talks, continued violence, Israeli settlement growth, Palestinian political fragmentation, and shifting political dynamics, making a two-state solution increasingly elusive.
Outlines
🟦 The Elusive Two-State Solution
The two-state solution, envisioning Israel and a new state of Palestine coexisting peacefully, has long been proposed as a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Despite being widely discussed, its implementation remains distant. The complexity of the issue includes historical claims, land division, and political maneuvers, with criticisms that the concept serves as a way for politicians to avoid responsibility.
🟩 Historical Context and the Birth of Israel
The idea of partitioning Palestine dates back to the early 20th century, influenced by British control and Zionist movements. Tensions between Jewish and Arab populations escalated, leading to the UN partition plan in 1947, which proposed separate Jewish and Arab states. The plan was accepted by Jewish leaders but rejected by Arab leaders, resulting in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, which established Israel and displaced many Palestinians.
🟨 Oslo Accords and the Peace Process
The Oslo Accords, initiated in the 1990s, were a landmark in the peace process, establishing the Palestinian Authority and outlining a path towards a two-state solution. However, the agreements faced opposition from both Israelis and Palestinians, with criticisms of the accords' vague promises and the continuation of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The peace process faced numerous challenges, including the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.
🟧 Challenges to the Two-State Solution
Despite international efforts, the peace process has struggled. Factors include Israeli settlement expansion, shifts in Israeli and Palestinian leadership, and internal divisions among Palestinians. The Oslo Accords did not address key issues like the status of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees, further complicating negotiations.
🟥 Current Perspectives and Alternatives
Recent years have seen dwindling support for the two-state solution, with some suggesting a one-state solution as a more realistic approach. The Israeli government has largely rejected the two-state model, and the Palestinian leadership is divided and weakened. Amid ongoing violence, some argue for focusing on ending discrimination and ensuring equal rights rather than pursuing separate states.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Two-State Solution
💡Gaza Strip
💡West Bank
💡Israeli Settlements
💡Palestinian Refugees
💡Oslo Accords
💡PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization)
💡Hamas
💡1967 Six-Day War
💡Right of Return
Highlights
The two-state solution is seen as the only real solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, aiming for two states living side by side in peace and security.
The idea of a two-state solution has been around for decades but remains elusive, with ongoing conflicts complicating its realization.
The Palestinian territories, Gaza and the West Bank, are under Israeli military occupation, making the path to a Palestinian state complicated.
Israeli settlements, considered illegal under international law, have expanded, making the division of land and creation of a Palestinian state more difficult.
The history of the region includes control by various ancient kingdoms and empires, with modern conflicts rooted in these historical claims.
The British Mandate of Palestine and the Balfour Declaration promised a Jewish homeland, leading to increased Jewish immigration and subsequent tension with the Arab population.
In 1947, the UN proposed a partition plan for separate Jewish and Arab states, but Arab leaders rejected it as unfair.
The 1948 Arab-Israeli War resulted in Israel declaring itself a state, leading to significant Palestinian displacement and the establishment of current borders.
The 1967 Six-Day War resulted in Israel's control over the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, intensifying the conflict.
The Oslo Accords in the 1990s marked the beginning of the peace process, with mutual recognition and a plan for gradual Israeli withdrawal and increased Palestinian autonomy.
Despite initial optimism, the Oslo Accords faced opposition from both sides and failed to resolve key issues, such as the status of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.
Israeli settlement expansion continued during the peace process, undermining trust and complicating the creation of a Palestinian state.
Political shifts in Israel have moved towards the right, with fewer politicians supporting the two-state solution and some advocating for full annexation of Palestinian territories.
Palestinian leadership is divided between the PLO and Hamas, complicating negotiations and representation.
Recent conflicts, including the 2023 war in Gaza, have renewed discussions on the two-state solution but have also highlighted the significant obstacles and skepticism surrounding its feasibility.
Transcripts
let's talk about the two-state solution
Israel living alongside the new state of
Palestine it's long been seen as the
answer but remains
elusive with the war in Gaza it's back
in the headlines the only real solution
is a two-state solution over time a
lasting end to the Israeli Palestinian
conflict can only comes through a
two-state solution a future in which two
states live side by side in peace and
security so what do people actually mean
when they talk about a two-state
solution how long has the idea been
around and why do some people think that
it's become more of an avoidance
strategy that lets politicians off the
hook they use this as a tool to absolve
themselves of responsibility it's a form
of
escapism
the two-state solution is all about
deciding how this land is divided who
lives there and who controls it now you
might think it's about getting Israelis
and Palestinians to agree on a simple
split but there's nothing simple about
it just look at the map for a start this
is Israel and then you have the
Palestinian territories which are under
Israeli military occupation and cut off
from each other gaza's here Israel's war
has left the strip in Ruins and the West
Bank is more like a patchwork of
Palestinian land because of all the
settlements Israel has built over the
years these are illegal under
international law there are now 700,000
Israeli settlers living on Palestinian
land and it makes the path to a
Palestinian State much more complicated
if this was meant to be a question of
two states and if it was question of
drawing a border believe me a border
would have been drawn a long time ago
the problem is is that this has never
been about a line it's about the rights
of individuals it's about history the
region of Palestine has been fought over
for thousands of years and controlled by
different ancient kingdoms and empires
in more modern times it was part of the
Ottoman Empire but the British took
control there during the first world war
and it later became known as British
mandate Palestine the population was 78%
Muslim 11% Jewish and 10% Christian
according to a census in
1922 now even before they took control
the British supported the idea of
establishing a Jewish homeland in
Palestine it was stated in a letter
known as the Balor declaration and the
Jews were promised a national home in
Palestine that was the aim of a movement
called Zionism it encouraged Jews to
move to British mandate Palestine and in
the 1920s and 30s more and more did many
were fleeing persecution in Europe but
the growing Jewish population led to
tension with the local Arab population
the Palestinians Jewish and Arab armed
groups cropped up and there was
violence in response a British
commission suggested partitioning the
land but there was no support for the
idea the scheme to divide the country
between Arabs and Jews has pleased
nobody in Palestine an agitation has
fended discontent to the point of
terrorism in the 1940s the question of
what should happen in Palestine grew
more urgent so did pressure to establish
a Jewish homeland especially after World
War II and the
Holocaust in 194 7 the British asked the
United Nations to make recommendations
on the future government of
Palestine and this is what they came up
with another partition plan which
allocated 56% of the land to a Jewish
State and left 43% for an Arab State the
remaining land including Jerusalem with
all of its holy sites would be under
International control the UN General
Assembly voted to adopt the plan Jewish
leaders accepted it but Arab leaders
rejected it they saw it as deeply unfair
especially because the Arab population
was the
majority the following year Israel went
ahead and declared itself a state and
five Arab Nations went to war with
Israel Israel calls it their war of
independence Palestinians call it the
neba which means catastrophe because in
that fighting more than 700,000
Palestinians fled or were forced from
their homes many ended up in Jordan
Lebanon and Syria by the way that's
important to know about because when
people talk about a few future
Palestinian State one of the big
questions is whether all those
Palestinians and their descendants will
get to go back What's called the right
of
return now after the 1948 War Israel
ended up with 78% of the land so more
than the UN partition plan that left 22%
for Palestinians to live in split
between the West Bank and East Jerusalem
which Jordan controlled and Gaza which
Egypt controlled those borders became
known as the Green line they're still
the internationally recognized borders
of Israel and it's more or less the
division that many people have in mind
when talking about a two-state solution
but then in 1967 there was another War
Israel pushed out Jordan and Egypt
seized control of the West Bank East
Jerusalem and Gaza and imposed a
military occupation many many many
countries then started to put pressure
on Palestinians to say You must
recognize Israel's existence you have to
recognize that Israel took over 78% of
your historic Homeland and instead let's
try to get back that remaining 22% in
the Palestinian side the idea of
territorial partition was very very
difficult uh but by the 1970s there are
some who were pushing saying you know
look we're never going to get all of
historic Palestine we can build a state
on a portion of liberated Palestine and
in 1988 there was an official shift by
that point the pl o the Palestinian
Liberation Organization had become the
main group representing Palestinians and
their cause its chairman yaser arat
declared the independence of
[Music]
[Applause]
Palestine and although the Declaration
was mostly symbolic it was important
because Arafat also made it clear that
he accepted the principle of partition
and the existence of Israel that helped
pave the way for the Oslo Accords a pair
of agreements which are seen as the
beginning of the peace process it
started out with secret talks in
Norway's capital that's where the name
comes from and it led to this
moment the Israeli and Palestinian
leaders shaking hands on the White House
lawn after Decades of fighting they
declared their commitment to Peaceful
coexistence so what were the details of
Oslo well in The First Agreement 1993
the two sides formally recognized each
other which was a big deal they set out
a timetable for Israel to start
withdrawing from parts of the occupied
territories and for Palestinians to get
more autonomy that led to the creation
of the Palestinian Authority or PA
although its power was and still is
limited it's more like a local Council
than a government and the PA only
operates in parts of the Palestinian
territories because in the second dolo
agreement the West Bank was carved up
into three administrative areas what the
peace process was all about was not
about Israel accepting the 78% and
letting Palestinians live freely in the
remaining
22% instead what it was about was Israel
takes the 78% puts it in its pocket and
then negotiates over the remaining 22%
now the Alo Accords were interim
Arrangements they were only supposed to
last 5 years and in that time the two
sides Were Meant to to negotiate the
really tough stuff what are called the
permanent status issues so things like
how to share Jerusalem the city has huge
religious importance for both sides and
they both see it as their Capital the
issue of Palestinian refugees and
whether they get the right of return we
mentioned earlier what to do about all
the Israeli settlements security
arrangements and where you draw those
final borders so Oslo looked like it was
heading in the direction of a two-state
solution but it wasn't actually out the
Osa Accords are sometimes remembered as
having um sort of promised a two-state
solution that is absolutely and
completely false it's very very work
carefully drafted in order to avoid
mentioning anything about Palestinian
State still the two sides were talking
to each other there was a lot of
diplomacy going on and many people felt
optimistic about it there were a lot of
Peace conferences on all kind of levels
Grassroots politicians journalists
artists there was a hope in the air but
there was opposition to the peace
process too on both
sides in Israel there were big protests
against Oslo close to half of the
society that said we're not on board
with this process talking to terrorists
this is going to uh mean Israeli
withdrawal from territory that is an
essential part of the land of Israel in
1995 a Jewish nationalist who rejected
the peace process assassinated prime
minister Yak rabim so very early on one
of the main architects of the oso
Accords was
[Music]
gone there was also opposition on the
Palestinian side for lots of reasons
there are many Palestinians ill and they
were also in the late
90s who didn't agree with the p of
Arafat namely that the Palestinian
should recognize the state of Israel
there are many Palestinians who believe
that all Palestine belongs to the
Palestinian People Israel took it from
them in 48 and they feel that there's no
room for
compromise that was the position of some
armed groups like Hamas and Palestinian
Islamic Jihad who carried out attacks on
Israel there were also Palestinians who
opposed Oslo because of their
frustration about how little it was
delivering Israel never fully withdrew
from the territory it promised and it
kept building settlements we'll come
back to that in a minute at least part
of the Palestinians feel that they are
cheated that this was a c for Effective
Israeli annexation just a complete
disillusionment with diplomacy a
complete disillusionment with
negotiations with the with with the Oslo
process and and and so on by the end of
the 9s oslo's 5-year time frame was up
and the peace process was basically on
life support there was a push to save it
at Camp David the US president country
Retreat how is it going Mr President how
long is it going to take Mr
President we pledged to each other we
would answer no questions and offer no
comments but the summit ended without an
agreement and if anything there was more
distrust as both sides blamed each other
for the
failure soon after that frustration and
anger boiled over the trigger was this
visit by a senior Israeli politician to
the alaxa Moss compound in East
Jerusalem a super inflammatory move
check out our episode on aloa if you
want to understand why there were riots
and it led to an uprising known as the
second
inata Palestinians staged huge protests
some carried out attacks on Israel and
Israel used heavy military force against
Palestinians it was more than 4 years of
intense conflict and all the peace
efforts just were burning in the fire of
the intifa but they weren't complet
completely extinguished there were many
more attempts over the years to get the
peace process back on track and the
two-state solution became the stated
goal of all that diplomacy they begin to
say maybe one of the problems with Oslo
is it didn't spell out any end so let's
spell something out let's give something
to the
Palestinians um and this is when you
begin to have open declarations from the
United States that there should be an
entity called Palestine at the end but
while the International Community seemed
to be doubling down on the two-state
idea there were other developments
pulling momentum in the opposite
direction let's run through three major
ones starting with settlements which
Israel kept on expanding even during the
height of the peace process it was as
though the Oslo agreements gave Israel
the green light to build and expand
settlements with the thinking being and
they used to say this we have to take
every Hilltop and then we can negotiate
down and and that's why between the
years of 1993 to the year 2000 that's
why we saw virtually a doubling in the
number of settlers from 200,000 to
almost
400,000 once you are not ready to freeze
the
settlements you give the message that
you don't agree to a Palestinian State
cuz if you have an intention to continue
to build on Palestinian ground so for
sure you have no intention to evacuate
it then there's the way that Politics on
both sides have developed since the
early 2000s on the Israeli side there's
been a strong shift to the right and
fewer politicians who back the two-state
idea an ultra nationalist ideology that
was once thought of as Extreme has now
become part of the
mainstream settlers who openly call for
the full annexation of all Palestinian
territory are government ministers
and in his speech at the UN prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu held up a
map of Israel that covered the whole
land on the Palestinian side the
challenge is more about who actually
speaks for the Palestinian people
because it's not that clear you've got
the PLO which still represents
Palestinians internationally Arafat was
the chairman but he died in a suspected
poisoning in 2004 and was replaced by
Mahmud abas Abbas is also the president
of the PA but the PA doesn't operate in
Gaza anymore because after elections in
2006 Hamas ended up in control there so
Palestinian leadership is already split
and then there are bigger questions
around legitimacy there haven't been
elections since that vote in 2006 these
days abas is pretty unpopular he's seen
as old and out of touch and the PA is
accused of being corrupt and working too
closely with israelian authority not
only does not have any um uh credibility
and doesn't no longer has any capacity
it's virtually disintegrating in the
West Bank on the other hand polls show
that Hamas and its leader isma Han are
more popular than Mahmud Abbas but
several countries classify Hamas as a
terrorist organization and refuse to
recognize it as a representative of
Palestinians so where has all of this
left the peace process well dead
basically the last time there were
direct negotiations about a two-state
solution was in 2014 during the Obama
Administration so a decade ago you need
uh credible leaders in Israel and
Palestine which we we don't have you
need serious mediation from outside
which we don't have and you need a
mobilized uh Regional and Global public
opinion to support the two negotiating
parties but it's nowhere on the horizon
right now this is where the US also
comes in for a lot of criticism because
while it's always had an important role
as a mediator the US is also Israel's
biggest Ally and
protector Americans
have such a leverage over Israel who
Israel is politically economically
diplomatically internationally and
obviously H militarily totally dependent
on the United States they never really
took measures to push Israel they just
you know condemned Israel
with talking you don't get
anything and then there's everything
that's happened since October 7th
2023 around 1,00 people were killed in
hamas's attacks on Israel that's
according to the Israeli
authorities in response Israel vowed to
wipe out Hamas its war on Gaza has
killed more than 31,000 Palestinians
most of them women and
children the un's highest court said
there is a plausible risk of
[Music]
genocide and against that horrifying
backdrop Talk of the two-state solution
is back it's once again being presented
as the only option for lasting Peace by
a range of world leaders and
organizations the United States
continues to believe that the best
viable path indeed the only path is
through a two-state
solution
what's the Palestinian position well the
two-state solution Remains the stated
goal of the PLO hamas's position is less
clear in 2017 they published a document
that did accept the formation of a
Palestinian State along the 1967 borders
some took it to mean that Hamas was open
to diplomacy but Hamas is never
explicitly recognized Israel and it
maintains its right to use violence
against the occupation as for Israel's
current position well officials from the
Prime Minister down have repeatedly
rejected the idea of a two-state
solution is there still a chance for a
two-state solution I think it's about
time for the world to realize the oso
Paradigm failed on the 7th of October
and we need to build a new one and in
order to build a new one do that new one
include the Palestinians living in a
state of their own is that what it
includes biggest question is what type
of Palestinians are in the other side
this what Israel realized o the answer
is absolutely no it's not that the
two-state solution is absolutely utterly
forever impossible it's just politically
very very unlikely and would require
such a coincidence of interests and
political determination that his
likelihood is extremely slim so there's
a lot of skepticism plus there's an
accusation that all the talk of a
two-state solution is actually part of
the problem those words have become the
Fig Leaf it's become a way of plating
Palestinians very very convenient to
believe that there is a
solution somewhere on the on the shelf
and one day we will take it and use it
but it's not there anymore some people
argue that there needs to be a more
drastic change in mindset to one that's
more realistic about the current
situation where you've got one state the
state of Israel that has almost total
control over Palestinian life and
enforces a system of discrimination that
human rights groups describe as
apartheid the argument goes why not
focus on fixing that with a one-state
solution so rather than dividing the
land you focus on how to govern it and
ensure everyone's rights are protected
regardless of their religion or
ethnicity we have a one state we don't
have to create it we have to create a
new regime only to turn it from an
aparte system to a to a democracy I
don't want to oversimplify it it's right
now it seems Unthinkable it's not like
we will do a magic and this will
work but at least I can see a road
somewhere often times people talk in
terms of escapism oh this will be undone
with one-state solution or be undone
with uh a two-state solution
but what we really need to focus on is
ending that violence will Palestinians
do they want to have their own separate
entity their own separate State
certainly some do but the vast majority
are not looking to have a state the vast
majority are looking to have that their
rights are enshrined and protected and
that's got to be the starting
point
we've done lots of other explainers
related to Israel and Palestine here's
one we filmed in East Jerusalem this one
is all about the US Israel
[Music]
relationship
関連動画をさらに表示
Desmontando las mentiras sobre la historia de Israel y Palestina
Dave Smith on Idea that Israeli Leader Netanyahu Propped Up Hamas
Asking Palestine Protestors What From the River to the Sea Means...
"The Palestinian Authority are not good guys... they are going to pay the [Oct 7] terrorists"
Egyptian ex-FM to Israel: If Gaza violence continues, Hamas continues | Conflict Zone
Face à face Iran - Israël : et après ? | Une leçon de géopolitique | ARTE
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)