Why does Israel Oppose the Two-State Solution?
- Israel’s expansionist policies and settlement activities obstruct the two-state solution and Palestinian sovereignty.
- U.S. support for Israel, viewing it as a strategic ally against regional threats, bolsters Israel’s stance on Palestinian territories.
- The humanitarian crisis in Gaza escalates, with civilians suffering under siege and limited access to essentials, underscoring the need for international intervention.
The 20th century was marked by devastating wars, conflicts, and the emergence of two major power blocs, the U.S. and the Soviet Union, which influenced global peace, harmony, and political alliances. Among the many crises during this period, the Holocaust stands as one of history’s darkest chapters, where millions of Jews were systematically murdered in Nazi extermination camps under Adolf Hitler. In the aftermath, there was strong Western support, particularly from the U.S., to establish a Jewish homeland, Israel, leading to significant immigration of Jews to Palestine—a region historically home to a majority of Muslims and under British mandate since 1917.
The Balfour Declaration of 1917, which promised British support for a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, set the stage for contention. In 1948, after heavy U.S. support and international debate, Israel declared its independence, a move met with resistance from Arab nations and the local Palestinian population. The declaration led to displacement and conflict, with Palestinian homes and lands often taken over as Israel expanded its territory. In 1947, the UN passed Resolution 181, proposing a two-state solution that would divide Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. Israel, however, disregarded this and other international recommendations, continuing its expansion into Palestinian territories.
When Benjamin Netanyahu, a prominent right-wing politician, became Israel’s prime minister in 1996, he adopted a hardline stance that included opposing Palestinian statehood. His tenure has seen increased settlement activity in the West Bank and continued restrictions on Palestinian rights, including severe restrictions in Gaza, which have resulted in humanitarian crises. According to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, the ongoing conflict has resulted in the deaths of over 35,000 Palestinians, with children facing severe malnutrition and a lack of adequate medical care. This has led to accusations from the United Nations that Netanyahu is using starvation as a tool of warfare.
In a May 15 interview, when asked if he would support a two-state solution if Hamas was removed from power, Netanyahu stated that any Palestinian state would invite the influence of adversaries like Iran, posing a security threat to Israel’s existence. He expressed that Palestinians could be granted administrative control but no military power, further underscoring his opposition to a fully sovereign Palestinian state. Similar sentiments were echoed by Israel’s Security Minister, Ben Gvir, who openly called for the killing of Palestinians and rejected the idea of an Arab state alongside Israel.
Despite global calls for peace, Netanyahu’s policies have led to a hardening of Israel’s stance on Palestinian sovereignty, particularly in Jerusalem and the West Bank. In a recent move, Slovenia recognized Palestine as a sovereign state, sparking widespread criticism from Israel. European countries, including Norway, Spain, and Ireland, have signaled support for Palestinian statehood, a shift that could pressure Israel on its policies. In Israel, opposition members in the Knesset have criticized Netanyahu, claiming his policies have isolated Israel internationally.
Israel’s policy also reflects its alignment with the United States, a steadfast ally that provides military support even amid human rights concerns raised by other international actors. U.S. President Joe Biden has described Israel as a key strategic ally in the Middle East and has continued to support it to counter Iran’s influence, which is perceived as a regional threat. For this reason, Israel views a neighboring Palestinian state aligned with Iran as a significant security risk and has maintained strict control over Palestinian territories, including military incursions into Gaza to weaken Hamas and other militias.
Further complicating matters, the ICC recently issued an arrest warrant request for Netanyahu, accusing him of crimes committed in Gaza. This request has divided Western opinion, with some support for accountability but with U.S. officials, including President Biden, defending Israel’s actions and condemning the ICC’s stance. This dichotomy reveals inconsistencies in international policy toward Israel and Palestine, as Biden has previously supported ICC actions against other leaders, like President Putin, over similar allegations.
Israel’s expansion and occupation policies conflict with UNSC Resolution 242, passed after the Six-Day War in 1967, which calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from occupied territories. Palestinians argue for the recognition of East Jerusalem as their capital, as it was historically controlled by Jordan until Israel occupied it in 1967, though this claim has not been internationally recognized. Moreover, Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights in 1981 further underscored its approach to territorial control, often in defiance of international mandates.
With the two-state solution currently obstructed by Israel’s policies and continuing U.S. support, a shift toward peace seems challenging. The humanitarian crisis in Gaza grows as thousands of civilians remain under siege, suffering from limited access to necessities and under the constant threat of violence. According to many, achieving peace would require Israel to negotiate sincerely, respecting Palestinian aspirations for sovereignty in Gaza, the West Bank, and other territories.
For lasting peace in the Middle East, the international community needs to pressure Israel to engage in negotiations that could lead to Palestinian sovereignty, honoring UNSC Resolution 242, which calls for withdrawal from occupied lands. These steps could promote cooperation and stability, promoting peace and understanding among the region’s diverse populations.
The author is studying Global Sudies at Government College University, Lahore.
