The two-state solution is only the path to peace – OpEd – Eurasia Review

A coalition of predominantly Jewish members of the US Congress introduced legislation, known as HR 5344, which calls for the implementation of a two-state solution and proposes the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel .
The bill, whose main sponsor is Michigan Representative Andy Levin, has a steep climb to reality, not only because many pro-Israel lawmakers and radical Republican Party members oppose it, but also because many pro-Palestinian activists do not support the concept of two states.

The majority of enemies of the two-state solution adopt a one-state solution as an alternative. But how this is defined will vary depending on which side of the political spectrum is making the definition.

Republicans and pro-Israel extremists want a one-state solution without any non-Jews. They support Israel as it is today: an undemocratic nation that claims to be a democracy, while imposing a variant of South Africa’s former apartheid system.

Many far-left pro-Palestinian activists and activists are also embracing a one-state solution. But they define it differently, as a plan to create a nation in which Christians, Muslims, and Jews are equal in all respects.

Sadly, I don’t know of a single nation that exists today where Christians, Muslims and Jews are treated equally.

Such equality does not even exist in the society that is the model child of democracy, the United States.
Although US policies clearly support equality for all, failure to implement them leads to inequalities, especially against Muslims and also against Arabs. The United States also supports Israel’s moderate form of apartheid, which clearly discriminates against non-Jews and turns a blind eye to its ally’s violations of the rule of international civil rights law.

So far, there are 29 co-sponsors of Levin’s bill, known as the “Two-State Solution Act”. This is a small coalition given that there are 435 members of Congress and women in total. Among the hundreds of representatives who did not sign on as co-sponsors are many prominent pro-Palestinian voices in Congress, including Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Betty McCollum and Marie Newman. Some of these pro-Palestinian figures support a two-state solution, while others aggressively defend Palestinian rights and simply avoid using the term.

Levin makes it clear why he introduced the bill last month. “The need to achieve a two-state solution is more urgent than ever,” he explained in a supplement to the bill. “Earlier this year, we witnessed a conflict in Israel and Gaza that claimed hundreds of lives and caused devastating damage to homes and livelihoods, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. We have seen riots break out in Israeli towns once applauded as models of peaceful coexistence between Jews and Palestinians. And all of this has happened against a backdrop of deepening occupation in the Palestinian territories, which is tearing both the Israeli and American Jewish communities apart.

“As we enter this new year of the Jewish calendar, we must also enter a new chapter – a chapter in which the future of Israel as a democratic state and homeland for the Jewish people is secured and the aspirations of the Jewish people. Palestinians to a state of their own can be satisfied. . We can no longer credibly claim to support a two-state solution without taking steps to achieve it. This bill restores America’s role in helping the parties move forward on the path to peace and coexistence.

The two-state solution is based on the premise that Israel and the Palestinians will achieve peace on the basis of compromise. The one-state solution, on the other hand, is based on the belief that Israel can be reformed into a country that is truly democratic and treats everyone, Christians, Muslims and Jews, equally. This single state would include all of the historic land of Palestine, which was divided in 1948.

The truth is, you cannot have a “Jewish state”, or any religious state for that matter, and claim to be a democracy as well. To be a true democracy, which Israel is not, you must have equal rights at all levels for every citizen, and separate religion from politics. Separating religion from politics is the cornerstone of American democracy. The two do not mix.

But, as compelling as a democracy-based one-state solution may sound, the reality is that it is impossible to achieve even one day in the future. The Israeli government is based on a variation of the apartheid system that once defined South Africa. The differences between Israel and South Africa are significant. Apartheid-era South Africa was predominantly black, but with a white-led government that imposed restrictions on blacks at all levels of society. In Israel, Jews are in the majority and non-Jews in the minority. It has over 65 laws that discriminate against non-Jews.

Even if a two-state solution is miraculously achieved one day, it will not necessarily change Israel’s apartheid policy. So what is the real benefit of a two state solution? This would create an atmosphere and a commitment to reach a compromise. It can take the pressure off and lead to real change one day.

Obviously, reaching two states is easier than reaching one. In a conflict that has lasted for over 75 years, this is something to cling to.

Source link

Comments are closed.