The Annexation Of Israel's Two-State Solution

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has proven to be one of the most complex and “intractable” conflicts of modern history – or as some may even add – of all time. And after many decades of failed attempts at peacemaking in this region, there still seems to be no conceivable end to the conflict. During those same decades, most of the parties involved as well as the international community have embraced the idea of a two-state solution, but the question we pose today asks whether this solution is still a viable option considering the present context, and if not, is it finally time to consider a one-state solution? This essay will argue that although a two-state solution remains the more

The Israel-Palestine Conflict The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a part of the greater Arab-Israeli long-running conflict in the Middle East. The main point of this conflict is the existence of the state of Israel and its relations with Arab states and with the Palestinian population in the area. The idea and concept of Israel was born in the mid 19th century. Jews of Europe and America wanted a place for their homeland, where they could go and be with others of the same race and religion. Palestine was chosen because of its religious routs from The Bible as the “promised land” from God, and the motherland of Jews fled, known as the Diaspora.

The best solution to all the continuous wars and problems is a two-state solution; making a Jewish state and a Palestinian state and making Jerusalem neutral to both groups. The conflict between the Jews and the Palestinians will only end when both of the groups get an equal amount of land, and also when both of the groups start to recognize each other as a

The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most long-term, pressing, and largely confounding social, political, and national quandaries of our age. Since we have been moving with surprising velocity into the vast horizons of globalization, the conflict has built up tremendous momentum and has called into question the adequacy of our current attempts at coming to a peaceful resolution that can simultaneously and successfully address both sides of the struggle. The purpose of this paper has been to understand the prospect of a two-state nation solution for Israel and Palestine. The discussion arises a retrospective view of the context behind the present analysis. We begin with a discourse that informs the reader of the historical narrative between the Jewish inhabitants of Israel and the Palestinians who also seek to live in the lands which comprise Israel. At the forefront of the discussion are some key issues such as trends in Israeli settlement expansion over time, the manner in which these settlements create political challenges towards the prospect of a two-state solution, and the fragmentation of power within Palestinian political parties which inhibit the opportunity for proper negotiations amongst the two parties. Finally, we delve into a discussion on nationalism, it’s importance in the discussion of a two-state solution, and the challenges posed when trying to formulate US Foreign Policy towards the matter.

Many Palestinians are religious, and when the Israelis seized their homeland, they took away many of their sacred sites. Palestine is home to a multitude of sacred sites such as Jerusalem. As you can see by the changes from Document 1 to Document 2, in the span of about sixty years, Palestine has endeavored many changes. Palestine originally was composed of predominately Israeli occupied territories, but that fact is not correct today. Both, Jews and Muslims find Jerusalem sacred, which could lead to future problems. When attempting to establish a peace settlement, there will be vast conflict about it; neither group of people would be willing to give up such a holy city where so many vital biblical events have occurred. Religion is extremely powerful and important in places such as these, so it would be difficult and highly unlikely for one group to compromise. If anything, this may result in further violence. Thus, people’s religion contributes a large factor to the reason why there is a small chance for a peaceful settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

The two solutions are the One-State and Two-State solutions, and each is self-explanatory. The One-State solution would have Israel annex all Palestinian land to create one large Israeli state. On the other hand, the Two-State solution involves Israel and Palestine becoming two separate states in hopes that it would end the conflict. As previously mentioned, I had debated changing my preferred solution. This would have had me favor the One-State over the Two-State; however, I had come to realize that the One-State would have possibly provoked further conflict rather than solve

Since 1967 the borders between Palestine and Israel have been unfair. The Israeli people have taken a majority of the Palestinians land. This had caused conflict between these two territories for years. The Israel and Palestine conflict has been going on for many decades and nothing seems to be able to solve this issue. All because the Israeli government is very stubborn. They are not willing to make a compromise in this situation. The main issues between the Palestinians and the Israelites are; Israel has been unfair to the Palestinians and have taken the land which used to be their own. Not only has Israel created unfair boundaries but, they are also reluctant to let outsiders into Jerusalem. A place that is not only religiously important to the Jews but also to the Arabs. And above all of that Palestinian people feel as if they have to live in fear from the Israeli people. Israel militia has shot at mothers and children. These problems are still prevalent today; if we can solve the unfair borders, Jerusalem, and security we could have a safer Middle East.

Before anyone can comprehend the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one must understand the theory of Zionism. Theodor Herzl was the first Jew to have the idea of creating Israel. He was a witness of the Dreyfus affair, in which a Jewish officer was accused of treason, solely because he was Jewish. Herzl also witnessed mobs of people shouting “Death to the Jews”. This was the last straw for Herzl. Herzl decided that there needed to be a change so he made it one of his life goals to create a successful movement in which Jews founded a Jewish state. One of his main arguments was that discrimination against Jews could be eliminated if they had their own Jewish State, and so modern Zionism was formed. The idea of modern Zionism is so pertinent to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because much of the reason for Israel becoming a Jewish state is behind the fact that Jews were perpetrated throughout the years before Zionism even came into play of the situation.

The big question we ask ourselves today is, will Israel and Palestine ever agree to stop fighting? The conflict between Israel and Palestine has been traced all the way back to 1948 through 2005 in The Israel Palestine Land Settlement Problem, written by Charles Rowley and Jennis Taylor. However, this conflict did not end in 2005. This article was written in 2006, so anything within the last 10 years is not included. The conflict between the two counties still continues to this day and still remains a major problem. Israelis and Arabs have been fighting over Gaza on and off for decades now. The three issues laid out in this article are the four major wars that took place, the refugee problem, and the conflict between religions. It concludes with the road map to peace. Throughout his whole book, The Israel-Palestine Conflict, Gelvin speaks of the same historical events that occurred between Israel and Palestine, while the article reveals there are still other conflicts, the land settlement problem has been the major conflict between Israel and Palestine since 1948.

Due to the 80% of citizens reporting a Jewish faith, it is clear to say that Judaism has had a large role in handling conflicts. In the Torah, it is repeatedly shown through figures like Moses, that the most effective means of conflict resolution is through peace and mutual gain(Sacks). However, Israel shouldn’t back down on its morals. The steadfast attitude shown in both Israel and Palestine has clearly made mutualism harder to achieve, delaying the problem(Countries and Their Cultures). Finally, I was curious to know “ How have Israelis viewed the seemingly eternal conflict?”. Though most people have conflicting views on the complex issue, the general agreement between both Palestinians and Israelis is that the conflict is degrative towards both parties. Itamar Rabinovich - president of the Israeli Institute, former Ambassador to the United States, and former chief negotiator. - was quoted by the New York Times saying “Both Israelis and Palestinians pay dearly for the impasse. Keeping the settlement project in the West Bank saps Israel’s resources, compromises its international legitimacy and injects negative norms into Israel proper”. This is clear to many people, with the most pragmatic solution proposed being a two-state system. This would entail Jerusalem serving as a dual capital and Paste revoicing much of the west back as

Furthermore Israel’s extreme control will not allow the two sate solution happen henceforth not letting peace happen because of their selfishness. On the other hand Israel has extreme control because they deserve that land. In today’s world Palestine and Israel have a constant battle because of the fact that Israel controls almost every decision when it comes to the change in the government. In fact “Israel controls more than half of the west bank and all of east Jerusalem” (Abu) confirming that Israel is not ready to give up the land that belongs to Palestine. However the majority of those who live in east Jerusalem are Jewish. For that reason “Sources such as Water are to be kept under Israeli authority” (Abu), not only controlling the life style of the Palestinians but also controlling the agricultural in

If there are to be two states, the land must be apportioned between them and some people will probably need to move. Palestinians demand that all Israel settlers would leave any separate Palestinian state. There are some who favor the two-state solution with its many variations. Then I came across a new thought which favors coexistence. I definitely favor this position. After all, for many years we have yet to come to a solution involving this two party agreement. I can not help but think about slavery and racism in the past. It was only a matter a time before segregation was challenged and abolished. You can't have two classes of people living together and not have problems. Especially at the mistreatment and expense of another people. I am not saying that things are perfect but we as a nation are definitely better off than we were before slavery. As far as unity is concerned that is. You have to come to grips with the fact that if we will be happy and have a certain degree of peace we have to learn to "tolerate" one another. We do not have to be best friends but there is a certain level of respect that has to be recognized. These two different nations have to realize this simple thing. That as long as we are here we might as well live better, happier, and more fulfilling lives which only come about through respect, tolerance, and coexistence. Contrary to the ideas of annihilation and pointing

After listening to the Israel-Palestine panel, it became clear to me that a two-state solution is the only viable option. The panelists from Friends of Israel, J Street U, and Jewish voices for peace all clearly stated their support for and belief in the two-state solution. From discussion during the panel, I gathered that a two-state solution would include Israel as a Jewish, democratic state that will coexist peacefully alongside and independent Palestinian state. Borders in this solution would be based on pre-1967 lines with agreed land-swaps to allow each state to incorporate large population centers on the other side, and of course, there would be compromises over Jerusalem, as well as mutual access to all holy sites.

If the Palestinian people outnumbered the Jewish people by double the population, it’s not very fair or negotiable that half of the land should belong to the Jews. In “The 1948 War” it shows the United Nations partition plan of the 1947 and how it devastated the Arabs. “The Jewish state included 51 percent of Palestine, the Arab state 44 percent, and Jerusalem 5 percent. The Jews rejoiced over the creation of a state, while the Arabs expressed outrage at the division of their homeland.” Even when the Palestinian people clearly outnumbered the Jewish people by double the number, the plan was to divide the two into a two state country where it resulted in the Jews receiving more land than the Arabs. The land at the time, belonged to the Arabs and when they were letting in Jewish refugees, they didn’t really expect them to take over half of their land. Even though the Arabs wanted to go to war and lost, it’s still unnecessary for the Jewish people to own more than half of the country. It should be split into a ratio based on their population size, which is 30 percent Jewish state, 60 percent Arab state, and 10 percent administered international zone of Jerusalem closely monitored by the United Nations. This is the most logical and fair way for both states to receive the land they want, and they should be able to visit each other's land for religious

As the dream of a two state solution slips away, academia and politicians focus on a one state reality. Although one state between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea is the de facto situation (Mearsheimer 144), Palestinians are deprived of basic rights, including freedom of movement and political rights. The elongated peace process has been used as a stalling tactic to build Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, displacing an increasing number of Palestinians. Islamic groups discourage peace talks or any notion of the normalization of relations with Israel (Haass 57). A successful negotiation and subsequent diplomatic relations between Israel and the international community would deter terrorist activity. For these reasons, a renewal of a sense of urgency is critical to the negotiation of a successful peace plan. Palestinian unity and organization are vital to the possibility of peace. The United States must foster a sustainable peace efficiently and effectively. Therefore, the USs, as the global mediator and primary third party, must endorse a comprehensive one state solution in Israel and Palestine focusing on the development of integrative power sharing methods.