OPINION & EDITORIAL
Two-state option not viable for Palestine
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Fayyad Sbaihat:
- Two-state option not viable for Palestine (April 7, 2005)
- American media is in need of reform (April 21, 2005)
- Alliance of misinformed, morally bankrupt supporting Israel (May 5, 2005)
- John Bolton-wrong man for UN ambassador job (March 17, 2005)
- Board of Regents must support divestment (March 3, 2005)
Related Stories:
- Controversial art shows grim reality of IDF (May 3, 2002)
- Letter (March 6, 2002)
- Israeli sympathizers present false truths (March 3, 2003)
- Jimmy Carter confronts fallacies of pro-Israel lobby (February 21, 2007)
- Hard Doses of Reality (October 6, 2003)
by Fayyad Sbaihat
Thursday, April 7, 2005
“There are different kinds of minorities. The notion of an Egyptian state for the Egyptians, a Jewish state for the Jews, simply flies in the face of reality. What we require is a rethinking of the present in terms of coexistence and porous borders.”
—Edward Said, 1999
For several years now, objective observers of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict have realized, and sounded off, that the current situation is moving in an irreversible path away from any possibility of two separate states as a lasting solution to the conflict.
Indeed, a solution of two states has been neither realistic nor viable, though it has been most popular, even among Palestinians and Israelis, since the occupation of the rest of Palestine in 1967.
The elusiveness of the two-state solution is perhaps its most glaring deficiency. There is no consensus on the borders of the two states. Many consider the West Bank and Gaza to be the de facto territory for the Palestinian state. But little mention is being made of the fact that massive blocs of Israeli colonies, highways restricted to Jews only, Israeli army installations and the new separation wall that isolates more than half of the West Bank from its urban centers are serious, irreversible obstacles that prevent a territorially contiguous state in the West Bank. As a result, a Palestinian state that falls into this description of the West Bank will be nothing but three large Bantustans or ghettos.
The establishment of two states on different pieces of mandate Palestine is a time bomb. It negates the Zionist project and the Palestinian aspiration of liberation, both calling for their prospective states in all of mandate Palestine. Such a solution will leave behind two states in an arms race, with ambitions towards the other’s land and resources.
The separate states scenario leaves many problems unsolved. The proposed distribution of land and resources is grossly disproportionate. The Palestinians, roughly half of the population, will be squeezed in 20 percent of mandate Palestine at best. All the major aquifers and other resources will be annexed by the Israeli state. The crowded Palestinian state will severely lack natural resources, employment opportunity, an independent economy and the ability to accommodate the return of any significant portion of the Palestinian refugees living outside Palestine.
The ultimate and perhaps the only viable solution to the crisis that is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the bi-national, federal union of a primarily Palestinian states coexisting with a primarily Jewish state distinguished by porous borders, that ultimately guarantee free movement of population and products, equality under the law and right to residency irrespective of ethnic or religious affiliations. Israel and Palestine must represent a federal union that unites them politically, economically, in external security and other international affairs.
In 1947, the United Nations issued resolution 181, known as the partition plan, for it mandated the division of Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state. This partition was carried out, though rather disproportionately, along population distribution lines. Areas mostly populated by Palestinians constituted the lands for the Arab states, and land populated by the new Jewish immigrants constituted the new Jewish state.
The borders of the new federal states would be drawn along the current population distribution and have at heart the UN Security Council resolution. The Palestinian state would retain sovereignty over all areas that have a predominantly Palestinian population. Similarly, the Jewish state will comprise of all area that are predominantly populated by Jews.
The territorial reconfiguration of the new federal union offers solutions to several sticky issues, in particular accommodating the returning refugees whose numbers cannot be handled in the densely populated West Bank and Gaza. Under the new configuration, the Palestinian state will be able to absorb the bulk of the returnees. Additionally, the Arab heritage and Palestinian identity of the Palestinians citizens of today’s Israel, about 1.4 million of them, will be preserved by incorporating them into a Palestinian state that would better attend to their needs and concerns.
Furthermore, since Israel fears the demographic growth of the Palestinian population and being faced by the choice of minority rule or relinquishing power, the Israeli state will be established on land that is primarily Jewish-populated.
Years of failed proposals and initiatives should at least inspire us to rethink the approach. The bi-national proposal addresses deep-rooted issues, not merely symptomatic ones. Hence, it holds true promise.
Fayyad Sbaihat (frsbaihat@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in chemical engineering.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 7:16am):
Perhaps it is time for the neighboring Arab states to step up to the plate and help the Palestinians for once. What is not an option is for Israel to stripped of the infrastructure they built up from nothing.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 8:26am):
Fayyad, you know this won't work. I am strugging to figure out what point you are trying to make by suggesting it.
Do you want to redistribute more land and money from Israel to Palestine? Assuming that is your point, I don't think that forcing the two peoples into one country is the solution.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 8:28am):
Why would the arab states do that? The plight of the Palestinians helps them control their own people. If the arab people continue to focus on their hatred of the Isrealis and the west, then they won't focus on the totalitarian regimes (aka monarchies) that they live in. The arab states use the Palestinian situation as a tool to maintain their power. And it's so easy for them to do! Throw 100 million in to a new mosque, pick a cleric who spews anti-zionist rhetoric, and have ten more years without a popular uprising! This is amazingly similar to what Bush did with the christian conservatives, isn't it? And people think he's dumb...
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 9:13am):
Fayyad, you know absolutely nothing of the "Zionist project" except for propaganda and BS.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 9:59am):
"The Palestinians, roughly half of the population, will be squeezed in 20 percent of mandate Palestine at best."
Wrong. Mandate Palestine included what is now the Kingdom of Jordan, which is 78% of of the land and has a population that is over 60% Palestinian. The proposal Fayyad calls untenable would give the Palestinians 20% of the remaining 22%, or about 5% more of mandate Palestine, and a total of 83%. That would leave Israel with 17%.
And this is unfair to Palestinians? Methinks thou dost protest too much.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 11:08am):
Actually, under the British mandate, there was Palestine, and TransJordan, two different states, like they have always been. Long before the Zionists chose Palestine as homeland for their fanatic fundamentalist state.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 11:32am):
"Actually, under the British mandate, there was Palestine, and TransJordan, two different states, like they have always been. Long before the Zionists chose Palestine as homeland for their fanatic fundamentalist state."
Always? There wasn't even a place called Palestine or people called Palestinians until the British came there.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 11:44am):
Boring. Luckily this is one of Fayyad's last propaganda pieces.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 12:03pm):
There IS an independent palestinian state. It's called Jordan.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 1:26pm):
It seems to me this is a peace offering that Jews have to accept. If they don't make peace fast enough, the Palestinians willgrow in numbers and grow more desperate, and Jews will have dug themselves into a hole. Another one of their prosecutions, many will be killed and the rest pushed into diaspora.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 1:48pm):
Nah - the Palestinians will always be too chicken-**** to match the Israelis on the field of battle.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 2:40pm):
Have you seen what happened when the massive and numerous armies of a wide assortment of Arab countries have tried to annihilate Israel and force them back into Diaspora? I'll give you a hint. The Arabs never won.
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 4:37pm):
It's hard for 12 year olds to fire guns correctly...that's why they've resorted to giving them C4 and a detonator...Go Palestine! not
Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 9:23pm):
"Go Palestine! not"
the last time i heard something that corny was 1992. fayyad may be a big pussy, but he is right about one thing, Israel has not made it's life easy.
Anonymous (May 15, 2005 @ 3:36pm):
The headline is absolutely right. A two-state option just won't work. So Fayyad, why don't you lead your bloodthirsty friends in mass suicide? Then it won't be an issue anymore.
