The dangerous illusion of a two-state solution
Opinion: The left-wing has been advocating 'two states for two nations' as if it was an advertising slogan, promising us something, they themselves know can never realistically be achieved, while relying on wishful-thinking and half-truths.
"Two states for two nations" is an excellent slogan. The left-wing keeps repeating it as a mantra that will one day bring enlightenment. In reality, however, it is the key to the agenda of the Blue and White party.
So much efforts is being invested in making us believe there's real promise behind this plan, and that the long-anticipated peace is just waiting for us nay-sayers to go away so it can make its grand debut.
But at the end of the day, the political plans written over the past few years by former military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin and his friends promise us nothing but smoke and mirrors.
The "two states for two nations" slogan reminds me of the moment a couple finally ties the knot (or in the case of Israelis and Palestinians, get divorced) at the end of a rom-com. But while the movies cut away and leave us to imagine that the couple lives happily ever after, they never actually show us the reality of the day after. Well, the day after a two-states deal —at least according to those who advocate for Israel to seek a divorce from the Palestinians—would be a utopia with our security provided by an international mediating force, as if the world has ever shown Jews that they can count on it in times of need.
Another thing that would happen on this magical day after is a fence that nobody would ever try to breach. Just look at Gaza, and see how well it works there. We would also save so much money once we leave the West Bank — even though evacuating the settlements would cost us a lot more. Because finally, we will have the promise that the Palestinians will stay over there, while we are over here — a theory that conveniently omits the fact that we would have be over there other day anyway, because they will never stop trying to be over here.
Former GOC Central Command Gadi Shamni explained in a thorough report that if the potential Palestinian state attacks Israel, we would retaliate, but since it’s a sovereign state that wouldn’t approve of our invasion, we would have to rely on an international force. Are there any volunteers for this task?
Thus, at this point, as far as I'm concerned, the two-state solution would require the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of people from their homes. It's amazing how in a country that wouldn't demolish the homes of terrorists because of an excess of twisted morality, they are contemplating with such ease a mass evacuation of people from not only their homes but from their homeland as well. It’s not happening in any other country—especially in 2019, in a world where a discourse on human rights is integral—but here, we drink these ideas with our morning coffee.
We are constantly being told about the price we are paying for the continuation of the conflict, but the potential price we would have to pay for a two-state solution is skillfully disguised. Nothing in this country is free, and before you buy two for a price of one, you should check whether it’s actually worth it.
