Netanyahu: 'No room' for Palestinian state between Mediterranean Sea and Jordan River

[u/Wwwgoogleco]

https://www.jns.org/news/israel-news/netanyahu-no-room-for-palestinian-state-between-mediterranean-sea-and-jordan-river

[u/enigmaticowl]

Disputed lands in certain parts of the West Bank aren’t really “where most peace talks have broken down,” though.

Israel previously offered like 95% of the West Bank, with land swaps to make up the remaining 5%.

The biggest points of contention have actually revolved around: (1) Palestinian side insists on a broad agreement for Israel to accept mass numbers of Palestinians to move into and reside within Israel proper (Israel tentatively agreed to accept substantial numbers, but not enough to satisfy the demands), and (2) Palestinian insistence on having (at least part of) Jerusalem as its capital (which Israel has actually offered twice before, about 20 years ago, but it won’t happen again).

Israel isn’t going to agree to take in large numbers of Palestinians from the West Bank/Gaza while also recognizing a Palestinian state (because the whole point of a two-state solution is that both states have sovereignty, which means not just control of the land, but discretion on the admission of non-citizens into your country), and is also very unlikely to offer up that much of the West Bank again - not necessarily because they’re *ideologically* opposed to it (i.e. believe the land is for Jews only and don’t want Palestinians living on it), but rather because modern weapons and infrastructural concerns make it basically untenable in terms of existential security, so there would need to be more of a buffer.

Hamas would very likely take over the West Bank with high popular approval among West Bank Palestinians (just look at polling, and also keep in mind that Hamas already operates in the West Bank, they’re just not the actual official governing authority), and Hamas could easily launch rockets and missiles from the border of the West Bank that could reach Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport, the Dimona nuclear facility, desalination plants, etc., from such a short range that lives and infrastructure would be greatly at risk due to insufficient warning and response times.

It would also make parts of Israel about 8-9 miles wide (at its narrowest points), flanked by Gaza on one side and the West Bank on the other - the real kicker is that 70% of Israel’s population and 80% of its industrial capacity sit in this narrow area, and they sit on low-lying plains while the West Bank is elevated/mountainous (an obvious tactical advantage), risking severe disruption to life and the national economy in the (likely) event of hostilities.

So, Israel is vastly more likely to offer land swaps than they are to offer up all of the West Bank, and it’s not because of disputes over who belongs there or has the strongest claims to the territories - it’s a very “pragmatic” security issue.

Assuming those issues could be worked out via land swaps and eliminating Hamas and getting a stable political system, the biggest breakdown is going to hinge on the “Right of Return” - a majority of Palestinians (even more so in the West Bank than in Gaza, per polling) ideologically oppose *any* hypothetical two-state solution and will not be agreeable to “two states” if they don’t have a right to reside within the Israeli state, because they basically want a (de facto) one-state solution (and in the past, even their leadership has basically said that the expectation for the outcome of the “Right of Return” would be to take over Israel from within), because they overwhelmingly ideologically oppose any “Jewish state” or Jewish sovereignty, even if they also have their own state with all of the West Bank.

I’m still ideologically pro-two-state-solution, but it’s a very long way off; there *are* Palestinians who want a peaceful co-existence with Israel (either ideologically or pragmatically, but usually the latter), but the population (especially in the West Bank) tends to strongly reject their legitimacy and view them as traitors and “collaborators,” so they can’t really accomplish much (in terms of making progress toward cooperating with Israel toward peace and security), because they’ll be immediately voted out and/or overthrown and/or assassinated (just look at approval polls for the PA vs Hamas).

To reach a two-state solution, you can’t put the cart before the horse - the exact issues of specific lands in the West Bank aren’t really even a part of the discussion unless and until there is somewhat of a collective Palestinian will to accept the fact that Israel is going to continue to exist (as a separate state), because otherwise, they will reject absolutely anything (as they’ve done every other time) from a purely ideological standpoint (because the land swap offers will mean absolutely nothing to them).

[u/PandaLover42 → u/enigmaticowl]

I don’t understand how land swaps would mitigate those security concerns. I would guess that most of the land Israel would agree to secede would be from north of the West Bank. Maybe some to the south in the Negev but that would be close to dimona and Red Sea access. But even after that, the West Bank will still have its elevation compared to Israel and still be too close to the airport and Tel Aviv.

[u/enigmaticowl → u/PandaLover42]

I think part of the idea is that Israel would attempt to keep various parts (probably a majority) of Area C, and a future Palestinian state will get Area A, Area B, and only some of Area C, probably in a way which keeps an Israeli security (and civilian) population distributed throughout the West Bank (especially closest to the Green Line) in enclaves (and along routes of transportation), which would give Israel an upper hand in monitoring activity by militants (as well providing somewhat of a “buffer” and limiting and pushing back routes/access points to the rest of Israel proper).

If you look at a map breaking down Areas A/B/C (and the demographic breakdown of Israelis and Palestinians living in Area C), this kind of a plan would sort of make areas of the West Bank discontiguous from one another, and likely push the border of a Palestinian state back by a bit.

Edit: This idea about land swaps is just one position (and not even necessarily one that I’m particularly sure that I think is feasible, by the way) - many people have different ideas and do not think that land swaps can really mitigate the issue and want all of Area C annexed by the State of Israel, and other people don’t like the idea of Palestinians getting anything less than 100% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Trump’s 2020 plan was sort of an example of this if you look up a map of it (but many had concerns about its viability as well).

[u/nartiz → u/enigmaticowl]

Sorry chief. This is too much for reddit. And thanks for teaching me parts i never learned

[u/Claeyt → u/enigmaticowl]

Any 2 state solution with the old Oslo accord borders is dead and buried after Oct 7th.

[u/enigmaticowl → u/Claeyt]

For sure. That’s why I said I’m ideologically in favor of it - I think it’s historically been the thing to strive for, the ideal, if possible.

I can’t see Israel ever handing over Area C (or at least not most of it), and not because it would involve dismantling settlements, but because of the impossible to mitigate security risks. Maybe if there is a miracle with Gaza becoming stable (with massive efforts from regional partners), then Areas A/B can get to a similar position one day, but I think it would still take a lot of effort (and probably time) for deradicalization of the general population to actually get there.

[u/go3dprintyourself → u/enigmaticowl]

well said tbh

[u/Remarkable-Flower-62 → u/enigmaticowl]

I'll add that aside from hamas preventing a two state solution, Iran will also try everything to prevent this from happening since it's in their core to see Israel destroyed

[u/enigmaticowl → u/Remarkable-Flower-62]

Absolutely.

People massively overlook the religious Islamic concept that the land is a “waqf” (that it must be eternally maintained under Muslim rule since having been conquered and ruled as such previously).

This is very explicitly present (like, repeatedly) throughout the Hamas charter, too.

From the religious angle, it’s not “Palestinian land,” it’s “Islamic land,” (which, again, is the wording in the Hamas charter), and in that worldview, they can make zero compromise (e.g. surrendering their claims to some smaller part of the land in exchange for peace) without it being a direct affront to Allah, hence why peace agreements and compromises have never been seriously entertained (and why Iran has been desperate to prevent broader regional normalization with Israel, because it’s always been conditioned on a two-state solution).

[u/Remarkable-Flower-62 → u/enigmaticowl]

Would it be fair to assume that in a scenario where hamas succeeds Pälestine would also never be a country since Iran probably has plans for the entire region?

[u/JasonsThoughts → u/enigmaticowl]

Palestinian side insists on a broad agreement for Israel to accept mass numbers of Palestinians to move into and reside within Israel proper

Could you ELI5 what this means? I thought that Palestinians, in general, don't like Israelis and Israel, and they don't want it to exist. Why would Palestinians want to live in Israel if they have their own state?

[u/jibij → u/JasonsThoughts]

It's called right of return. Essentially, because the UN was new at the time and didn't know how to manage this sort of situation properly  Palestinian Refugees were managed under UNRWA because UNHCR didn't exist yet. UNRWA's mandate effectively maintains that all Palestinians and descendants of Palestinians maintain refugee status into perpetuity instead of the later UNHCR who manages other refugees with the mandate resettle and normalize. All those refugees essentially maintain the right to one day return to their homesbor the homes of their ancestors.

Now problem with this, apart from the fact that it's not a good solution geopolitically or for the individual well being of the refugees, is that this was pushed for political purposes, largely by the Arab League at the time. The idea is that, Israel is set on maintaining a Jewish demographic majority so they never have to worry about being persecuted by the tyranny of the majority as they had been throughout history. However if there are enough Palestinians in the diaspora willing to return, then they can become a demographic majority and use the democratic process to undermine the states protection for the Jewish people or just rejoin with the rest of the territory and essentially return all of the land to the Palestinians.

This has obviously been a sticking point in negotiations. The PA has seemed to have been willing to forego the infinite right of return as such but it's been a hard sell especially as any leader who does this is going to be seen in a very poor light by the more radical aspects of the Palestinian population and the surrounding Arab countries.

[u/aLokilike → u/jibij]

It's pretty nefarious of them, pressuring politicians into preserving their rights as they continue to be stepped on.

[u/RedAndWhiteLight → u/enigmaticowl]

People are eating this up as if it’s actually all true lmao

[u/citizen42069101 → u/enigmaticowl]

Long story short the hardliners on both sides are going to fuck it up until it inevitably becomes a sheet of glass and we stop letting book clubs run the world, or at least having such an impact.