two state solution – Artifex.News https://artifexnews.net Stay Connected. Stay Informed. Sat, 20 Jul 2024 19:10:39 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.2 https://artifexnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/cropped-Artifex-Round-32x32.png two state solution – Artifex.News https://artifexnews.net 32 32 EU Middle East envoy vows to push for two-state solution https://artifexnews.net/article68426243-ece/ Sat, 20 Jul 2024 19:10:39 +0000 https://artifexnews.net/article68426243-ece/ Read More “EU Middle East envoy vows to push for two-state solution” »

]]>

Israeli security forces close-off a main entrance to Huwara town in the occupied West Bank following reported attacks by Israeli settlers on July 19, 2024.
| Photo Credit: AFP

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s stubborn opposition to a Palestinian state does not deter the European Union’s Middle East peace envoy from believing a two-state solution remains achievable.

Sven Koopmans, in an interview with AFP, said with the Gaza war ongoing and Israel needing international support, Mr. Netanyahu’s government cannot indefinitely disregard European views on resolving the conflict.

Watch: Israel-Palestine conflict: What’s the two-state solution?

Mr. Netanyahu and some Ministers in his right-wing government staunchly oppose the creation of a Palestinian state, which many argue has become even more urgent since Hamas’s October 7 attacks sparked the devastating war.

“I think that recently he was very explicit about rejecting the two-state solution,” Mr. Koopmans said.

“Now, that means that he has a different point of view from much of the rest of the world.”

The Dutch diplomat said one side’s rejection of “the outcome that we believe is necessary” does not mean efforts to seek a solution should cease.

Last month the European Union invited Israel to discuss Gaza and human rights.

Israel agreed to a meeting after July 1, when Hungary, which supports Mr. Netanyahu’s government, assumed the EU presidency.

“It is important that we have that discussion,” said Mr. Koopmans.

“I am sure that in such a meeting, there will be very substantive discussions about what we expect from our partner Israel.

“And that relates to things that we do not see at present.”

‘Relevant actor’

Mr. Koopmans said it was “completely unacceptable” for there to be thousands of aid trucks waiting at the Gaza border.

The envoy also raised concerns about Israeli settler violence in the occupied West Bank, saying some attacks amounted to “genuine terrorism”.

Named as special representative for the peace process in 2021, Mr. Koopmans said the European Union was one of the most energetic institutions pushing for a two-state solution.

Mr. Koopmans said his work was guided by the EU’s 1980 declaration recognising the “right to existence and to security” for Israel and “the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people”.

The declaration called Israeli settlements on Palestinian land “a serious obstacle to the peace process”.

The European bloc was only nine members then and Mr. Koopmans acknowledged divisions within the 27 existing members on the Middle East strife.

But he insisted the bloc “should not make ourselves smaller than we are”.

He highlighted that the 27 countries, with a combined population of 450 million, were Israel’s largest trading partner and the top aid donor to the Palestinians.

“We are the biggest political neighbour to both of them. Of course, we are not the biggest security provider, let’s be honest. But we are a big and relevant actor.”

EU nuances

Mr. Koopmans listed his top priorities as ending the suffering in Gaza, preventing a regional war between Israel and Hezbollah, and reviving the peace process to establish “a free state of Palestine living alongside a safe and secure Israel”.

The envoy acknowledged the “different nuances” of EU members on the Middle East.

Spain and Ireland joined non-EU member Norway in recognising a Palestinian state this year.

Hungary and the Czech Republic have on the other hand sought to block EU sanctions against Israeli settlers in the West Bank.

The Palestinian state recognitions infuriated Israel, while Mr. Koopmans said the move could “contribute” to a solution to the conflict.

The European Union is also a major backer of the Palestinian Authority that many countries say Israel seeks to undermine.

“We want to see the PA thrive. We want it to have an ability to govern in an effective and legitimate manner,” said Mr. Koopmans.

“We want to strengthen the PA also so that it can again take over in Gaza when the time is there.”

The European Union met with Foreign Ministers from Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in May and Mr. Koopmans said there were “positive reactions” to its proposals.



Source link

]]>
Watch: Israel-Palestine conflict: What’s the two-state solution? https://artifexnews.net/article68399630-ece/ Sat, 13 Jul 2024 07:44:32 +0000 https://artifexnews.net/article68399630-ece/ Read More “Watch: Israel-Palestine conflict: What’s the two-state solution?” »

]]>

Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack in Israel and Israel’s continuing war on Gaza have brought the Palestine question back to the fore of West Asia’s geopolitics.

As the war has destroyed much of Gaza and killed 37,000 of its people, the world has also seen more and more countries voicing strong support for a future Palestine state. Recently, three European countries–Spain, Ireland and Norway–recognised the Palestine state.

More are expected to follow. Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Jordan, say there wouldn’t be lasting peace in the region unless the Palestine question is resolved. An internationally recognised solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict is what’s called the two-state solution.

What’s the two-state solution?

The short answer is simple: divide historical Palestine into an Arab state and a Jewish state to find lasting peace. But the long answer is complicated. Israel, a Jewish state, was created in Palestine in 1948. But a Palestine state is not yet a reality. So, a two-state solution today means the creation of a legitimate, sovereign Palestine state that enjoys the full rights like any other nation state under the UN Charter.

Let’s take a look at history.

The rootsof the two-state solution go back to the 1930s of the British-ruled Palestine. In 1936, the British government appointed a commission headed by Lord William Robert Peel (known as the Peel Commission) to investigate the causes of Arab-Jewish clashes in Palestine. A year later, the commission stated that the Mandate had become unworkable and proposed a partition of Palestine into a Jewish and Arab state. At that time, Jews accounted for some 28% of Palestine’s population. According to the Peel Commission proposal, the West Bank, Gaza and Negev desert should make up the Arab state while the much of Palestine’s coast and the fertile Galilee region should be part of the Jewish state. Arabs rejected the proposal.

After the Second World War, the UN Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) put forward another partition plan after Britain expressed its interest in vacating the Mandate. UNSCOP proposed that Palestine be divided into three territories—a Jewish state, an Arab state and an international territory (Jerusalem). Jews made up roughly 32% of Palestine’s population at this time. According to the UNSCOP plan, the Jewish state was to have 56% of the Palestine land and the rest for the Arabs. The Partition plan was adopted in the UN General Assembly (Resolution 181), but it never made it to the Security Council. Arabs rejected the plan, while the Zionist leadership of Israeli settlers in Palestine accepted it.

As there was no UN Security Council decision on Partition, Zionists unilaterally declared the state of Israel on May 14, 1948, a day ahead of the expiration of the British Mandate. This triggered the first Arab-Israel war. And by the time a ceasefire was achieved in 1948, Israel had captured some 22% more territories, including West Jerusalem, than what the UN plan had proposed. Jordan seized the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including the Old City, while Egypt took the Gaza Strip.

Another pivotal event in the conflict was the 1967 Six Day War.

In the War, Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria. So the whole historical Palestine has been under Israel’s control since 1967. Palestine nationalism emerged stronger in the 1960s, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and its Chairman Yasser Arafat.

The PLO initially demanded the “liberation” of the whole of Palestine, but during the Oslo process of the 1990s, it recognised the state of Israel and agreed to the creation of a state of Palestine within the 1967 border, which made up some 22% land of historical Palestine. Israel initially rejected any Palestinian claim to land and continued to term the PLO a “terrorist” organisation. But in the Camp David agreement, which followed the 1973 Yom Kippur War in which Egypt and Syria surprised Israel with an attack, it agreed to the Framework for Peace in the Middle East agreement. As part of Framework, Israel agreed to establish an autonomous self-governing Palestinian authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and implement the UN Resolution 242, which has demanded Israel pull back from all the territories it captured in 1967.              

The Framework laid the foundation for the Oslo Accords, which, signed in 1993 and 1995, formalised the two state solution. As part of the Oslo process, a Palestinian National Authority, a self-governing body, was created in the West Bank and Gaza. The PLO was internationally recognised as the legitimate representative body of the Palestinians. The West Bank was divided into Areas A, B and C. While the Palestinian Authority was to have limited powers in Areas A and B, Area C remained under Israeli control. But the promise of Oslo was the creation of an independent, sovereign Palestinian state which would live next to the Israeli state in peace. This promise has never been materialised. 

Why so? 

The first setback for the Oslo process was the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the Prime Minister who signed the Accords, in November 1995 by a Jewish extremist. Rabin’s Labour party was defeated in the subsequent elections and the right-wing Likud, under Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership, came to power. The rise of Hamas, the Islamist militant group that was opposed Oslo saying the PLO made huge concessions to the Israelis, also contributed to the derailment of the peace process. 

There are specific structural factors that make the two-state solution unachievable, at least for now. One is boundary. Israel doesn’t have a clearly demarcated border. In 1948, it captured more territories than it was promised by the UN. In 1967, it expanded further by taking the whole of historical Palestine under its control. From 1970s onwards, Israel has been building illegal Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories. Palestinians say their future state should be based on the 1967 border, but Israel is not willing to make any such commitments.

Two, the status of settlers. Roughly 700,000 Jewish settlers are now living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. If Israel is to withdraw to the 1967 border, they will have to pull back the settlers. The settlers are now a powerful bloc in the Israeli society and no Prime Minister can pull them back without facing political consequences.

Three, the state of Jerusalem. Palestinians say East Jerusalem, which hosts Al Aqsa, Islam’s third holiest mosque, should be the capital of their future state, while Israel says the whole of Jerusalem, which hosts the Western Wall, the holiest place in Judaism, is Israel’s “eternal capital”.

Four, the right of refugees to return to their homes. Some 700,000 Palestinians were displaced from their homes in 1948 when the state of Israel was declared. According to international law, they have a right to return to their homes (today, Israel proper). Israel says it won’t allow the Palestinian refugees to return.

While these are the structural factors that make the two state solution complicated, on the ground, Israel’s rightwing leadership show no willingness to make any concession to the Palestinians. For Israel, even the recognition of the state of Palestine by European countries, was a reward for “terrorism”. Israel wants to continue the status quo — the status quo of occupation. The Palestinians want to break that status quo.

Presentation: Stanly Johny

Production: Shibu Narayan

Video: Thamodharan B.



Source link

]]>
Is a future Palestine state possible? | Explained https://artifexnews.net/article68241006-ece/ Sat, 01 Jun 2024 21:36:00 +0000 https://artifexnews.net/article68241006-ece/ Read More “Is a future Palestine state possible? | Explained” »

]]>

PLO chairman Yasser Arafat shakes hands with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin as U.S. President Bill Clinton stands between them after the signing of the Israel-PLO peace accord at the White House in Washington on September 13, 1993.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

The story so far: Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack in Israel and the latter’s continuing war on Gaza have brought the Palestine question back to the fore of West Asia. As the war has destroyed much of Gaza and killed 36,000 of its people, the world has also seen more countries voicing strong support for a future Palestine state. Recently, three European countries, Spain, Ireland and Norway, recognised the Palestine state. Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Jordan, say there wouldn’t be lasting peace in the region unless the Palestine question is resolved. An internationally recognised solution to the crisis is what’s called the two-state solution.

What’s the two-state solution?

The short answer is simple: divide historical Palestine, the land between the Jordan River on the east and the Mediterranean Sea in the west, into an Arab state and a Jewish state. But the long answer is complicated. Israel, a Jewish state, was created in Palestine in 1948. But a Palestine state is not yet a reality. Palestinian territories have been under Israeli occupation since 1967. So, a two-state solution today means the creation of a legitimate, sovereign Palestine state, which enjoys the full rights like any other nation state under the UN Charter.

What are the origins?

The roots of the two-state solution go back to the 1930s when the British ruled over Palestine. In 1936, the British government appointed a commission headed by Lord William Robert Peel (known as the Peel Commission) to investigate the causes of Arab-Jewish clashes in Palestine. A year later, the commission proposed a partition of Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state. At that time, Jews accounted for some 28% of Palestine’s population. According to the Peel Commission proposal, the West Bank, Gaza and Negev desert would make up the Arab state, while much of Palestine’s coast and the fertile Galilee region would be part of the Jewish state. Arabs rejected the proposal.

After the Second World War, the U.N. Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) put forward another partition plan. It proposed that Palestine be divided into three territories — a Jewish state, an Arab state and an international territory (Jerusalem). Jews, who made up roughly 32% of Palestine’s population, were to have 56% of the Palestine land as per the UNSCOP plan. The partition plan was adopted in the U.N. General Assembly (Resolution 181). Arabs rejected the plan (India voted against it), while the Zionist leadership of Israeli settlers in Palestine accepted it. And on May 14, 1948, Zionists unilaterally declared the state of Israel. This triggered the first Arab-Israeli war. And by the time an armistice agreement was achieved in 1949, Israel had captured some 22% more territories than what the U.N. had proposed.

How did it get international legitimacy?

In the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria (Israel continues to control all territories except the Sinai which it returned to Egypt after the 1978 Camp David Accords). Palestine nationalism emerged stronger in the 1960s, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

The PLO initially demanded the “liberation” of the whole of Palestine, but later recognised the two-state solution based on the 1967 border. Israel initially rejected any Palestinian claim to the land and continued to term the PLO as a “terrorist” organisation. But in the Camp David Accords, which followed the 1973 Yom Kippur War in which Egypt and Syria surprised Israel with an attack, it agreed to the Framework for Peace in the Middle East agreement. As part of the Framework, Israel agreed to establish an autonomous self-governing Palestinian authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and implement the U.N. Resolution 242, which has demanded Israel pull back from all the territories it captured in 1967. The Framework laid the foundation for the Oslo Accords, which, signed in 1993 and 1995, formalised the two-state solution. As part of the Oslo process, a Palestinian National Authority, a self-governing body, was formed in the West Bank and Gaza and the PLO was internationally recognised as a representative body of the Palestinians. The promise of Oslo was the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state which would live next to the Israeli state in peace. However, this promise has never been materialised.

A video on the Yom Kippur war that happened 50 years ago 

What are the hurdles to achieving the two-state solution?

The first setback for the Oslo process was the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli Prime Minister who signed the accords, in November 1995 by a Jewish extremist. Rabin’s Labour party was defeated in the subsequent elections and the right-wing Likud, under Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership, came to power. The rise of Hamas, the Islamist militant group that opposed the Oslo Accords saying the PLO made huge concessions to the Israelis, also contributed to the derailment of the peace process. After the collapse of the Oslo process in the 1990s, there were multiple diplomatic efforts to revive the two-state plan, but none of these made progress towards achieving the goal.

Multiple reasons could be identified for this failure. But there are specific structural factors that make the two-state solution unachievable, at least for now. One is the boundary. Israel doesn’t have a clearly demarcated border. It is essentially an expansionist state. In 1948, it captured more territories than it was promised by the UN. In 1967, it expanded further by taking the whole of historical Palestine under its control. From the 1970s, Israel has been building illegal Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories. While Palestinians say their future state should be based on the 1967 border, Israel is not willing to make any commitments.

Two, the status of settlers. Roughly 7,00,000 Jewish settlers are now living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. If Israel is to withdraw to the 1967 border, they will have to pull back the settlers. The settlers are now a powerful political class in Israeli society and no Prime Minister can pull them back without facing political consequences. Three, the status of Jerusalem. Palestinians say East Jerusalem, which hosts Al Aqsa, Islam’s third holiest mosque, should be the capital of their future Palestinian state, while Israel says the whole of Jerusalem, which hosts the Western Wall, the holiest place in Judaism, is Israel’s “eternal capital”. Four, the right of refugees to return to their homes. Some 7,00,000 Palestinians were displaced from their homes in 1948 when the state of Israel was declared. According to international law, they have a right to return to their homes. Israel says it won’t allow the Palestinian refugees to return.

While these are the structural factors that make the two-state solution complicated, on the ground, Israel’s rightwing leadership shows no willingness to make any concessions. Israel wants to continue the status quo — the status quo of occupation. The Palestinians want to break that status quo.



Source link

]]>
Palestinian statehood key to post-war Gaza rebuilding plans of Arab nations https://artifexnews.net/article68181376-ece/ Thu, 16 May 2024 07:37:23 +0000 https://artifexnews.net/article68181376-ece/ Read More “Palestinian statehood key to post-war Gaza rebuilding plans of Arab nations” »

]]>

Palestinians carry mock large keys during a mass ceremony to commemorate the Nakba Day, Arabic for catastrophe, in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Wednesday, May 15, 2024.
| Photo Credit: AP

As Israel keeps up its campaign against Hamas, Arab leaders are mapping out ways to support post-war Gaza, placing one major condition on their involvement: a pathway to Palestinian statehood.

Major obstacles lie ahead in gaining the support of both U.S. President Joe Biden and the Israeli government, which is currently led by hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a staunch opponent of the two-state solution.

But the Arab quintet of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and Egypt have made clear that their financial and political support, which would be crucial to the future of the shattered Gaza Strip, comes at a cost.

“We have coordinated on this closely with the Palestinians. It needs to be truly a pathway to a Palestinian state,” Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan told a World Economic Forum meeting in Riyadh last month.

“Without a real political pathway… it would be very difficult for Arab countries to discuss how we are going to govern.”

It is not the first time Arab leaders have come together to chart a path towards a two-state solution, the cherished goal that they believe could defuse tensions in West Asia and help usher in a period of prosperity.

But with the Israel-Hamas war hobbling regional economies and spilling over into neighbouring countries, there is both urgency and opportunity.

Last month, on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum, European and Arab Foreign Ministers met to discuss how to advance the two-state solution.

Gaza will also be top of the agenda when leaders from the 22-member Arab League meet in Bahrain on Thursday.

Two goals

Arab countries are “pressuring the United States to achieve two things: establish a Palestinian state and recognising it in the United Nations”, said an Arab diplomat who is familiar with the talks.

“What is currently hindering these intensive efforts is the continuation of the war and Netanyahu’s intransigent rejection,” said the diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Arab leaders “have been trying to work with the Biden administration to mutually support the so-called day after” plan, said Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at Britain’s Chatham House think tank.

Central to their plan is the reform of the Palestinian Authority (PA) to clear the way for a reunified administration in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The PA has had almost no influence over Gaza since Hamas militants wrestled control of the territory from the Fatah movement of President Mahmud Abbas in 2007.

“,””],
responsive:{
0:{
loop:false,
autoplay:false,
nav: true,
dots:false,
touchDrag:true,
mouseDrag:true,
items:1
}
}
});
});

“We believe in one Palestinian government that should be in charge of the West Bank and Gaza,” Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani said on Tuesday.

The transition should “not affect the Palestinian cause” or “undermine the Palestinian Authority”, he told the Qatar Economic Forum in Doha.

In March, the Palestinian President approved a government led by newly appointed Prime Minister Mohammed Mustafa, who wants it to play a role in post-war Gaza. However, the biggest roadblock, according to Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a prominent Emirati analyst, is the Israeli government. He noted that Arab outreach efforts have also included the Israeli opposition.

Earlier this month, the UAE’s Foreign Minister met Israeli Opposition leader Yair Lapid in Abu Dhabi. They discussed the need for negotiations on a two-state solution, according to a statement from the UAE Foreign Ministry. “There are promises that if the Israeli opposition prevails in (early) elections it may be more amenable and more cooperative,” Mr. Abdulla said. Arab leaders have largely ruled out taking part in the governance of Gaza or sending security forces under current conditions.

On Saturday, UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan said the country “refuses to be drawn into any plan aimed at providing cover for the Israeli presence in the Gaza Strip”.

Last month, Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman al-Safadi said Arab states would not send troops to Gaza to avoid being associated with the “misery that this war has created”.

“As Arab countries, we have a plan. We know what we want. We want peace on the basis of the two-state solution,” he said in Riyadh. Oil-rich Gulf states Saudi Arabia and the UAE are also hesitant to cover the reconstruction costs without guarantees. “They certainly don’t want to just be a piggy bank. They’re not willing to just clean up Israel’s mess and just pour money into it,” said Bernard Haykel, an expert on Saudi Arabia at Princeton University.

The UAE’s ambassador to the United Nations, Lana Nusseibeh, said in February: “We cannot keep refunding and then seeing everything that we have built destroyed.”



Source link

]]>