What's new

Trump is OK with 2-state or 1-state solution in Israel vs Palestine

PeaceGen

BANNED
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
0
Country
Netherlands
Location
Netherlands
source : http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/15/politics/trump-netanyahu-two-state-solution-israel-palestinians/

Trump backs off two-state framework for Israeli-Palestinian deal

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump rejected the long-established US framework for Middle East peacemaking at a White House visit with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Wednesday as he announced his desire to reach "the ultimate deal."

In staking his claim to a prize that has eluded many a leader before him, Trump previewed the nascent outlines of an approach that -- if he sticks with it -- ditches bipartisan orthodoxy, borrows some old ideas and, Middle East experts say, will be no easier to pull off now than in the past.
As Trump declared his deep support for the Jewish state, he abandoned the bedrock principle that the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will come via two states for two peoples. Instead, he referred to the possibility of an Arab-backed peace process, an idea that's been floating around since the beginning of this century without producing results.
"The United States will encourage a peace and really, a great peace deal," Trump declared at a news conference alongside Netanyahu. "We'll be working on it very, very diligently."
Asked whether he was abandoning the idea of a two-state solution, Trump said, "I'm looking at two-state and one-state, and I like the one that both parties like."
He continued, "If Israel and the Palestinians are happy, I'm happy with the one they like the best."

He also said at one point, "It is the parties themselves that must directly negotiate. Both sides will have to make compromises." Then turning to Netanyahu, he added a question: "You know that, right?"
UN Sec Gen: 'No plan B'
170215213257-palestine-israel-flags-getty-collage-exlarge-169.jpg


170215213257-palestine-israel-flags-getty-collage-large-169.jpg

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/15/politics/trump-netanyahu-two-state-solution-israel-palestinians/#

What's the Israeli-Palestinian two-state solution? 00:55
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, speaking in Cairo alongside the Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs, stressed that the Israelis and Palestinians must not abandon a commitment to a two-state solution.
"There is no Plan B to the situation between Palestinians and Israelis but a two-state solution and that everything must be done to preserve that possibility," he said in remarks to the press.
The night before Netanyahu's arrival at the White House, senior administration officials cast doubt on the two-state solution, which the international community still holds as the basic foundation of any agreement. The US explicitly called for that arrangement under Republican President George W. Bush and Democratic President Barack Obama.
The Trump official's comments drew a response from PLO Executive Committee Member Hanan Ashrawi, who said that if Trump was "trying to create alternative realities, then he should spell out what the options are. A one-state solution would require equal rights and citizenship for all, unless he is advocating an apartheid state."
There are growing questions about whether a two-state solution is even possible, given Israel's continued settlement building, said Diana Buttu, a former spokeswoman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization who now teaches at Harvard University.
Since Trump's inauguration, Israel has announced 6,000 new settlement homes and legalized settler outposts in the West Bank.
"They've done that for 20 years, say they want a two-state solution, build settlements and destroy Palestinian homes," Buttu said. "That's not the behavior of someone who wants peace."
As a result, young Palestinians are "increasingly talking very openly about a struggle for one person, one vote," Buttu said.
Many Israelis, on the other hand, say that the Palestinians haven't warmly embraced a two-state solution either, pointing to polls showing that the idea has dropping support among the Palestinian public and arguing that its leaders haven't been willing to participate in the direct talks needed to reach an agreement.
Netanyahu, Trump push reset of US-Israel relationship
Netanyahu, who endorsed the idea of two states in 2009 under pressure from the Obama administration, sidestepped questions about whether he still supports the concept Wednesday, saying instead he wanted to avoid "labels" and talk substance: the need for Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and the need for Israel to have overriding security control. It's not clear how Netanyahu is going to persuade them to come to the table.
He also didn't give a direct response when asked whether he would comply with Trump's request at the news conference that he "hold back" on settlement expansion.
Pressed by reporters later Wednesday, the Israeli Prime Minister replied, "I think we'll try to find a common understanding that is consistent with pursuit of peace and security."
It was an early indication that getting the parties to comply with US aspirations in the Middle East can be a challenge.
Natan Sachs, a fellow at the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, said that for Netanyahu, the point isn't so much "to get to the deal with Palestinians, but to change the parameters and include the Arab states. That would be good for Israel if there is a deal with Palestinians, and it would be good for Israel if there isn't a deal."
States aligned with Israel in their dislike of Iran include Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. Israel has forged close but quiet security ties with these Sunni-majority nations over that shared view of Tehran. Now, Netanyahu is hoping to make those relationships more open and win Arab recognition of Israel by drawing these countries into negotiations on Mideast peace.
"I believe the great opportunity for peace comes from a regional approach," Netanyahu said at the White House, "from involving our newfound Arab partners in the pursuit of a broader peace and peace with the Palestinians."
170215122557-03-trump-netanyahu-presser-0215-medium-plus-169.jpg





  • [/paste:font]


Netanyahu: No greater supporter than Trump 02:28
Trump described the idea of Arab involvement as "actually a much bigger deal, a much more important deal in a sense. It would take in many, many countries and it would cover a very large territory."
Trump has said his chief negotiator for Middle East peace will be his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who has already been meeting with influential Arab leaders, such as Jordan's King Abdullah and UAE ambassador to the US Yousef al-Otaiba.
"I think we have some pretty good cooperation from people in the past who would never, ever have even thought about doing this," Trump said, "so we'll see how that works."
Sachs said that Trump seems to think the regional approach is new.
"It's not," he said, pointing to a 2001 Saudi initiative that proposed Arab recognition of Israel in exchange for peace with the Palestinians and Syria and an independent Palestinian state whose capital was East Jerusalem.
It was adopted by the Arab League in 2002 and re-endorsed in 2007 but has yet to lead to a resolution to the conflict.
While Jordan and Egypt have formal peace deals with Israel, Gulf states don't have formal diplomatic relations with Jerusalem and would have to sell a deal to their citizens before publicly improving ties.
"They've got to be able to sell their closeness to Israel to their own domestic politics as, among many other good things, something that's helpful to the Palestinians," said Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute. "The idea that Israel wouldn't have to do much on the Palestinians and have major progress with the Gulf states, that's a misread of the political dynamics."
CNN's Ted Barrett and Becky Anderson contributed to this report.

CNN is also talking about Trump's so-far light pressure to curb (delay/cancel) new settlement building by Israel, and how that fits in a 2-state solution,
and
how a 1-state solution (whereby Palestinians would be included as citizens of a Jewish state) would have no definitive majority of Jews (which i suspect to be scary or at least undesirable by Jewish Israelis),
and how
a 1-state solution with many 'Palestinian Israelis' could be perceived as not democratic.

It seems the Isreali leaderships need some time to think of a counter to the current 2-state/1-state paradoxes.. They probably dont want either a 2-state or a 1-state solution (that leaves them vulnerable to the undemocratic/non-democratic label by their many opponents internationally)

This is a decidedly Muslim forum. I'd like to see this thread list options for all leaderships involved, the Israeli, the Palestinian, and the supporters of Palestine.
Please do not engage in warmongering, i'll be monitoring this thread daily and will be very firm against all warmongerers in this thread.
 
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: i've posted an opinion gathering thread on defence.pk titled 'Trump is OK with 2-state or 1-state solution in Israel vs Palestine'
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:27:03 +0100
From: Rene AJM Veerman <rene@seductiveapps.com>
Reply-To: rene@seductiveapps.com
Organization: SeductiveApps.com
To: VandaagDeDag <tips@vandaagdedag.nu>, CNN <worldnews@cnn.com>, CIA <info@cia.gov>, NSA <nsapao@nsa.gov>, info@whitehouse.gov, Mossad <info@gov.il>, info@groenlinks.nl, christenunie@tweedekamer.nl, sgp@tweedekamer.nl, info@vvd.nl, info@pvv.nl, info@50pluspartij.nl, info@sp.nl, info@pvda.nl, d66@tweedekamer.nl, redactie@3fm.nl, ,"VandaagDeDag" <tips@vandaagdedag.nu>, CNN <worldnews@cnn.com>, CIA <info@cia.gov>, NSA <nsapao@nsa.gov>, info@whitehouse.gov, Mossad <info@gov.il>, info@groenlinks.nl, christenunie@tweedekamer.nl, sgp@tweedekamer.nl, info@vvd.nl, info@pvv.nl, info@50pluspartij.nl, info@sp.nl, info@pvda.nl, d66@tweedekamer.nl, redactie@3fm.nl, info@volkskrant.nl, redactie@volkskrant.nl, info@telegraaf.nl, redactie@telegraaf.nl, info@trouw.nl, redactie@trouw.nl, info@nrc.nl, redactie@nrc.nl, info@parool.nl, redactie@parool.nl, redactie@nieuws.nl, redactie@ad.nl, gastbijdrage@sargasso.nl



see https://defence.pk/threads/trump-is...state-solution-in-israel-vs-palestine.478289/

copy-and-paste of opening post in this thread is :
{COPY-AND-PASTE NOT INCLUDED from this crosspost to defence.pk}

see also http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/16/opinions/trump-israeli-palestinian-departure-miller/

What's the Israeli-Palestinian two-state solution? 00:55
Story highlights
  • President Trump announces he will support either a one- or two-state solution
  • Aaron David Miller: In departing from 20 years of US foreign policy, Trump adds a new layer of uncertainty

Aaron David Miller is a vice president and distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and author of "The End of Greatness: Why America Can't Have (and Doesn't Want) Another Great President." Miller was a Middle East negotiator in Democratic and Republican administrations. Follow him @aarondmiller2. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his.

(CNN)A veteran Israeli negotiator once quipped to me that someone or something could just be dead -- or dead and buried.

Wednesday, before his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and with Israel's active participation, Donald Trump may have moved the concept of a two-state solution as a cornerstone of US policy from the just dead to the permanently buried category.
Was this a tactical maneuver to help Netanyahu protect himself from his anti-two-state right wing, or does it reflect a more enduring shift in US policy? Here are my five takeaways.
140410154604-aaron-david-miller-story-body.jpg


Aaron David Miller
1) Trump's departure
In what was tantamount to a radical shift in US policy, Trump moved from a 20-year-old approach to the Palestinian issue into unknown territory, seemingly offering Israelis and Palestinians a choice between one state or two. Whether because of imprecision or inexperience, Trump put into play a concept -- one state -- without defining what he meant.
Was it one in which Israelis and Palestinians live happily ever after as citizens in the same state, or one where Israel maintains control of much of the West Bank and its inhabitants, and Palestinians exist as second-class citizens or worse? No US President has ever endorsed a one-state solution, offered up such choice or so willfully appeared to distance himself from a concept that clearly faces long odds without knowing what comes next.
In a way, Trump converted US policy into an exercise akin to ordering from an old-school Chinese menu: Choose one from Column A and/or one from Column B.
2) Israel and the US on the same page
No doubt the strategic purpose of this first meeting was to make it unmistakably clear that the acrimony of the Obama years has passed, and a new age in the US-Israel relationship has dawned. And that means moving along three planes: improving the American President's personal relationship with Netanyahu; coordinating more closely on Iran; and, at least for now, working with Israel to establish a new paradigm for peacemaking that is less abrasive to Netanyahu's right-wing opposition and more compatible with his own ideology.

170215121912-trump-netanyahu-joint-news-conference-2-medium-plus-169.jpg





  • [paste:font size="5"]


Former U.S. ambassador troubled by Trump answer 04:34
Netanyahu's nemesis, Education Minister Naftali Bennett, warned the Prime Minister not to raise statehood, and he didn't. From there it was only a hop, skip and jump to what followed: Abandoning a two-state solution that Netanyahu always disliked and was never really committed to.
The Israeli prime minister quickly validated the President's thinking by making it clear we need "new avenues" of peacemaking, a reference to a regional approach that engages the neighboring Arab states.

3) Two-state idea is dead: What's the problem?[/paste:font]
Let's be clear, today's abandonment of an idea that in many minds is already dead might not seem so radical and wild-eyed. But like many laws of gravity that operate in Trumpland, acting before thinking through the consequences seems to constitute a kind of prime directive. Sure, the two-state paradigm has been more fiction and illusion than functional concept these last few years. But sometimes fiction is useful, particularly when the concept is so widely supported -- at least in theory -- by so much of the Arab world, the international community and Israelis and Palestinians.


Netanyahu must stand up to Israel's right (Opinion)

There is no tooth fairy and no angels, and yet they both serve a purpose for millions of people. This isn't entirely willful self-delusion; it's based on the notion that separation through negotiations into some kind of semi-sovereign Palestinian polity is likely the least bad solution to the conflict. And to casually abandon it without an alternative, due diligence, or consultations with any of the parties (minus the Israelis) calls into question US credibility as an effective broker.
4) So what is Plan B?
To hear the President talk Wednesday, you would think the United States is heading for the deal of the century -- a deal much bigger than you can imagine. From the little we know, the new approach is based on a very old Israeli idea: Involve the Arab states as a way to both recognize the will of the Israelis and to show support for the tough decisions Palestinians and, presumably, Israelis need to make.
What's new isn't the concept, but the emerging affinity between Israel and Sunnis Arabs as a result of common threats from Iran and jihadists. This new coincidence of interests is very real. But whether it applies to the Palestinian issue is another matter.

170215192636-ahmad-tibi-amanpour-medium-plus-169.jpg





[paste:font size="5"]



Arab Israeli MP warns of dangerous regression 06:57
As early as 2002, the Arab world offered up its Arab Peace Initiative, which in fact provided recognition to Israel. But the catch to this regional approach (and there always is one) was reciprocal and painful concessions from Israel, including a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders and a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem.
Are key Arab states ready to endorse recognition -- even incrementally -- without serious Israeli concessions, including some kind of settlements freeze during negotiations? And have those states become so willful, stable and risk-ready that they will accept Netanyahu's Palestinian state and compel the Palestinians to accept some downsized polity that leaves Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty? And will Netanyahu, pressed by his right wing coalition and ever risk-averse, be able to meet even minimum Arab and Palestinians demands?

5) Back to where we started?[/paste:font]
Follow CNN Opinion
Join us on Twitter and Facebook

The two-state solution may well be impossible to implement. It requires leadership on both sides and effective US mediation. All three are currently missing. And I'm not pushing for it now. Negotiations between Mahmoud Abbas and Netanyahu would almost certainly fail. But that does not mean that the Plan B or some variation can succeed.
Give Trump, Jared Kushner and Netanyahu a chance to test the one-state solution. We certainly couldn't produce a deal; perhaps they will.
However, in a conflict that has no status quo, where sovereignty, religious identity and a struggle to maintain holy sites remain unrequited, don't be surprised if you can't do a deal without addressing these challenges.
 
If it means peace, then 1 state solution is good idea.
 
A 1 state solution is one where the Palestinians will form a large minority or a majority

So either it will be a apartheid state that will curtail the rights of Palestinians to vote or a two state solution where the jews will try to control everything around the Palestinians from the land beneath them to the skies above them snd the borders
 
I think a one state solution where Israel takes West Bank and Egypt takes Gaza is the best solution. Jews will be a comfortable majority in Israel this way and Muslim population will be a bit larger around 30%. After all the things have happened, I think this is the best way to end it peacefully. The problem is to get the parties involved to agree to it.
 
If it means peace, then 1 state solution is good idea.
In times of war losing means peace, but no one wants to lose for peace. So anything that means peace is not always a good idea.

I think a one state solution where Israel takes West Bank and Egypt takes Gaza is the best solution. Jews will be a comfortable majority in Israel this way and Muslim population will be a bit larger around 30%. After all the things have happened, I think this is the best way to end it peacefully. The problem is to get the parties involved to agree to it.
You wouldn't need to work hard to persuade Israel to annex Judea and Samaria (the ones you call 'West Bank').

Gaza is not under Israeli control since 2005.
 

Back
Top Bottom