The obstacles to a two state solution don't just lie with Hamas Goldie. In 2017 Hamas accepted the idea of the formation of a Palestinian State along the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital, conditional upon the return of all refugees to their homes - it falls short of actually formally recognizing Israel as a state. The rhetoric of the time was that their fight was with the ''Zionist Project'' not with Judaism as a whole - so anyone shouting ''Death to all Jews'', or anything similar, is not doing it in the name of Hamas. A two state solution would involve a return to 1967 borders - Israel's long time occupation and settlements have already been declared illegal by international law - so a two state solution would involve Israel giving up settlements (10% of their population lives on them). Also a long term solution for Jerusalem and the return of an estimated 7 million refugees which isn't going to happen. There is also the question of the Golan Heights which are also occupied illegally.
Where does the solution lie, if it is not two states, Cologne? You cannot undo history. You cannot undo Israel. Hamas-led Palestinians cannot live and work alongside Israelis. What is your solution?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/073b51f6-80be-11ee-8b9f-88bb79961c7d I think this gives a balanced account of the vast majority of marchers intentions yesterday, from a newspaper which has been stunningly pro Israeli throughout. Certainly as I walked to Notting Hill from Marylebone pre match via Lancaster Gate/Marble Arch where the march started there were hundreds of Palestinian flags and a thoroughly benign atmosphere. Pretty far from being a ‘hate march’. People just want the killing to stop. I have no doubt that there were both religious and political extremists looking for trouble involved in the march, but only a tiny % of the 300,000, certainly much less proportionately than the extremists who took part in the so called ‘patriotic’ counter protests.
Oops see if this works https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...lmer-voices-make-a-plea-for-decency-65x6rhtmq
At the Camp David summit he was very close to accepting it and later appeared to have privately accepted it but this was never formal - at any rate Israeli intelligence kept up their assassination attempts right up to the end so that he seldom slept in the same place twice. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/01/world/middleeast/israel-palestine-two-state-solution.html
Can't get past the paywall. Most reports I've seen say Arafat, along with other Arab leaders, turned down a credible two state solution, which most Jewish leaders supported.
On Nov.15th 1988 the PLO proclaimed the independent state of Palestine, in speeches on the 13th and 14th of December that year he accepted UN Security Council Resolution 242 and Israel's right ''To exist in peace and security''. This was considered as being the most important step prior to a formal agreement. Consequently Arafat supported Iraq's occupation of Kuwait and many Arab states which supported the US led coalition cut off funds to the PLO and began providing financial support for opposition groups in Palestine such as Hamas - a fatal decision that turned out to be !
I've been thinking a while about this Goldie I don't think any solution of mine would be acceptable for all parties. I think the West should draw red lines for Israel much more clearly indicating that if they go on as they are then they would be guilty of war crimes - an international arrest warrant for Netanyahu would also be consistent with international law. To a large extent Israel has become emboldened by the unconditional support it has received from countries like the UK, the USA and Germany - and thinks it has no limits. This shouldn't be understood as whitewashing Hamas in all this, they are just as guilty. I believe that the creation of Israel in 1947 was a mistake just as I believe the Balfour declaration establishing a homeland for the Jews in 1917 was also a mistake (bearing in mind that at that time Jews only made up 4% of the population there and that most Jews at that time were Anti Zionists) but it's too late to correct this injustice now and there are 7 million Jews now living there and they have a right to remain. But we can balance this out, and just as the UN took a proactive role in creating Israel it must now do the same in creating Palestine - if necessary with the protection of UN forces until full statehood is achieved. A two state solution is the only way - the Israelis have withdrawn from settlements before, and I believe they would do it again if it guarantees their long term security. The problem is the number of Palestinian refugees - altogether now around 5.9 Million, a large number of which are around the area in camps in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza and the West Bank. A peace settlement would have to include their ''right of return'' and how that could be achieved peacefully is beyond me.
Good post, Cologne. So you do think the two state solution is the only way. That must be right, and just as Western powers need to be all over Israel to ensure that it is not reckless of collateral damage when pursuing Hamas, there needs to be some force behind any guarantees on long term security of both Israel and a new Palestine. I have doubts however, whether the UN is currently strong enough (Russia and China in the security council) or has the confidence of the parties (certainly not Israel). That's just another part of the problem
It’s a kick in the teeth for every single current Tory MP, not a single one deemed up to the job. I seem to remember he did a fantastic job of renegotiating the British membership of the EU, for which the electorate thanked him effusively. Didn’t he also single handedly help turn Libya into the beacon of progression and stability we see now? Top notch diplomacy.
