NOURNEWS: The history of modern Palestine began from the beginning of World War I when two colonial European nations were preparing for the final defeat of the Ottoman Empire. The dialogue between two British and French diplomats called François Georges-Picot and Mark Sykes led to the Sykes-Picot Secret Agreement that divided Palestine between Paris and London. After World War I, Britain persuaded France to exit from Palestine, and Britain’s guardianship over Palestine began practically in 1919.
London was going to turn Palestine into an exclusive land for Jews around the world. So, the wave of Jews’ migration initiated from across Europe to Palestine. The population of Palestine’s Jews increased threefold over one or two weeks, consisting of 30 percent of this land’s population. Britain, supporting the immigration of Jews, let them create their authority over Palestine and capture more lands from Palestinians.
When did the first sparks of the two-state solution hit?
The first sparks of the two-state solution began with the protests of Palestinians and the anger of Jewish immigrants in 1936. In response, Britain created the royal investigation committee to examine the causes of tensions and understand the mutual dissatisfactions. The committee, led by Lord Robert Peel, visited Palestine and heard the witnesses of hundreds of Arab and Jewish representatives, and the final report of the committee advised dividing Palestine into two Arab and Jewish nations.
How has the two-state solution changed over the past years?
The resolution 181 of the United Nations General Assembly, issued on Nov. 29, 1947, is based on Peel’s report to divide Palestine. The idea of a two-state solution drew attention after the rise of Palestinians for the second time and the first intifada and the Oslo Agreement. However, the failure of the Camp David Summit in 2000 and the second intifada derailed the attempts aimed at achieving an agreement. Despite the next attempts, including the “Roadmap” in 2003 and the Annapolis Conference in 2007, the two-state solution has remained ambiguous until now.
Where are the borders and capitals in the two-state solution?
According to the classic version of the solution, in addition to some land exchanges for the settlement of Israeli townships in the West Bank, which is based on mutual agreements, the internationally recognized borders between occupied lands and Palestine will be determined based on borders before 1967. According to this, Jerusalem will be divided into two capitals, West and East Beit ul Moqaddas for Israel and Palestine, respectively.
Who is responsible for providing security during the establishment of two states?
The security of both sides will be provided by the UN Peace Guardians or security arrangement with mutual agreement. The displaced Palestinians and the just division of natural resources are issues that will be discussed within this framework.
Why do Palestinians disagree with the two-state solution?
It seems that the two-state solution is the follow-up of the path founded by Yasser Arafat in the Oslo Agreement, which is the more recognition of Israel and forgetting the issue of Palestine. Because creating Palestinian nations requires recognizing the regime of Israel, which means withdrawing from the rights of Palestinians over the whole lands and wasting years of fights and resistance by Palestinians.
Is the two-state solution possible?
The continuation of the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank over the years has made it impossible to form an integrated and lasting Palestinian nation in the remaining parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The number of Israeli settlements has increased twofold after the Oslo Agreement. With the surge of religious rightist and nationalist movements, there are programs to create settlements in the C zone that consist of 60 percent of the West Bank. It has been estimated that the number of settlers in the West Bank and Jerusalem is about 75,000 people that consist of a single religious and ethical block. They are armed and have huge resources for backing the settlements and protecting the army of Israel.
Can the Israeli regime perform the two-state solution?
The two-state solution calls for returning to the borders before 1967. Is the Israeli regime capable of evacuating the settlements with extremist occupiers, who are similar to those settlers that caused an internal security crisis for Israel in 2005 while withdrawing from Gaza? In 2005, some rabbis of the religious Zionist block called for disobeying army command and fighting against withdrawing because they see Palestine as “Jews’ holy land” and see the withdrawal of Israel as infidelity to their belief. This is not the end. Even if Palestinians can create a country in the remaining lands, these growing people who care too much for Israeli governments will not cut their hands off the remaining zones. The West Bank is “Yahuda and Samarieh” for them, and they will not compromise with the Israeli government over them.
What are the security concerns regarding the two-state solution?
The security concerns are another reason that prevent the Israeli regime from performing the two-state solution, especially because of the records of conflicts with Palestinian groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. They fear a Palestinian country will become a station for attacking Israel. The return of displaced Palestinians is another problem. The problem of displaced Palestinians goes back to the Arab-Israel war in 1948 and the following conflicts that caused the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. The right of displaced Palestinians to go back to their homes is a deeply emotional topic for them. However, the Israeli regime disagrees with the huge return of refugees because it fears that the population balance in the occupied lands will change and intensify the security issues for the regime.
Why is Netanyahu against the two-state solution?
Netanyahu has clearly announced that he refuses the Oslo Agreement. He has also repeated his disagreement with the two-state solution and claims that the solution threatens the security of the Israeli regime, particularly now that the extremist right wing, including religious Zionists, are present in the coalition and Netanyahu is not even able to end the war under their pressures. However, it is simplistic to think that if the government changes, another Zionist will be able to perform the two-state resolution because the geopolitical and fundamental problems will still exist and the realities will not change with the current leaders.
Who is the winner of the two-state solution?
It seems the only party that benefits from the rhetoric of the two-state solution is the United States of America. The United States needs the motto of the two-state solution to show that it is working on a diplomatic solution in order to find a way to escape the mounting pressure of global public opinion as well as preventing the pro-Israel lobby from disagreeing with it and covering up its humiliating incapability to solve the Palestine issue. Events such as the expansion of settlements and Al-Aqsa Operation show well that Palestinians and the Zionist Regime are the groups paying the least attention to this solution!
No comments:
Post a Comment