State Solutions: One for Zionists & Resistance; Two for EU, Saudi & Others
Almost thirty years have passed since on the lawn of the White House, Bill Clinton, winged by Yasir Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin shaking hands, recognized the signing of the Oslo Accords. In hindsight, Osamah Khalil, a Syracuse professor of West Asia, frames this moment as perilous stating that “Israel had no intention of agreeing to the emergence of a viable, contiguous, and independent Palestinian state, the Zionist entity was able to pursue its occupation and settlement policies with the political cover of endless negotiations.”
Among the issues with the agreement were the lack of resolution on key concerns that read like a haunting laundry list of the major problems currently facing Occupied Palestine: illegal Zionist settlements, the status of Jerusalem, Palestine refugees, the right of return and security coordination between the Zionists and the PA.
In continuation with Jabotinsky’s 1929 song “East Bank of the Jordan” and the 1977 Likud Party Manifesto, Netanyahu has recently reaffirmed Zionist intentions for a one-state solution. The editor of Ayatollah Khamanei’s Kayhan newspaper agrees with Netanyahu and his predecessors’ one state solution idea, with one major difference: for one Palestine state and not a Zionist one, labeling the idea of two states ‘treason’.
While this is all happening, associates of the fledgling EU bolstered by the US, the UN and Sweden have called for a two-state solution, which some say would necessitate a removal of 200,000 settlers, all of whom technically live in Palestine, but somehow have Zionist entity voting rights and the like. In the wake of an Abraham Accords stalling, Saudi FM Prince Faisal bin Farhan was asked at Davos if a “credible, irreversible” Palestine would restart Zionist normalization with his country. He replied yes and further explained, “as long as we’re able to find … a pathway that means that we’re not going to be here again in a year or two, then we can talk about anything. But if we are just resetting to the status quo before Oct. 7 in a way that sets us up for another round of this, as we have seen in the past, we’re not interested in that conversation.”
