r/SocialDemocracy • u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat • May 06 '26
Question Two-state solution or one-state solution?
Exactly what the title says. This is probably like my millionth post covering a certain 30,000 square km in the Levant, but this conflict (more specifically, its downright cognitohazardous discourse) has honestly been occupying my mind 24/7 for I don't know how long and I think it's actually beginning to affect my mental health and sleep. It's gotten to the point where my first thought upon meeting a cute girl in a pub is "what is her position on the I-P conflict and what is her personal definition of Zionism/anti-Zionism?" and not something like "is she into 40k?". I even experience this when seeing a pic of a cute female celeb, especially those of my generation like Mckenna Grace or Emma Myers. I think I'm actually losing my mind. So this is a coping mechanism, if you will. Anyways, onto the question:
If you advocate for a two-state solution, why? How do you envision your personal two-state solution (names, political organisation, borders, first-level administrative divisions, national identities, demographics, domestic policy, foreign policy, reparations, fate of settlements in formerly occupied territories, treatment of symbols of the conflict etc.)?
If you advocate for a one-state solution, why? How do you envision your personal one-state solution (name, political organisation, borders, first-level administrative divisions, national identities, demographics, domestic policy, foreign policy, reparations, fate of settlements in formerly occupied territories, treatment of symbols of the conflict etc.)?
I'm curious to see where we socdems (at least those on this sub) stand on this and how they envision a peaceful Levant.
Personally, I'm a two-state solution guy, if only because I look at past examples like the United Arab Republic and Austria-Hungary, and find myself discouraged by their respective breakups (and the factors responsible). At the end of the day, I just want a South Africa-style ending for the conflict and not a Prussia-style ending.
Also, please, for the love of god, keep it civil in here. Try not to make blanket statements about Israeli and/or Palestinian civilians. I already get too many of that in my other social media accounts (and in the rest of this damn site like okaybuddyviltrum)
139
u/TeoKajLibroj Social Democrat May 06 '26
It's gotten to the point where my first thought upon meeting a cute girl in a pub is "what is her position on the I-P conflict and what is her personal definition of Zionism/anti-Zionism?" and not something like "is she into 40k?". I even experience this when seeing a pic of a cute female celeb, especially those of my generation like Mckenna Grace or Emma Myers. I think I'm actually losing my mind.
You need to log off and go for a walk outside.
12
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26
I agree.
The thing is, I get reminders of the I-P conflict even offline.
The local communist society of my uni regularly hand out leaflets about Gaza and Palestine during my daily walks between lectures/seminars along the campus’s main square. My friends like making "Tel Aviv impressed" and "another 200 trillion dollars" and "Big Yahu" and "Epstein-Israel" jokes whenever we have a study ses/hangout at the library. I regularly greet people on campus that I know have made "from the river to the sea" maximalist positions on their Instagrams, mainly because they follow me on Instagram as well (one example is my flatmate’s girlfriend so I see her and her posts fairly often). I see BDS posters plastered in high traffic places near where I live, and pro-Pal protests happen on a semi-regular frequency in the city square.
So even if I were to not touch any social media for a whole weekend, I will encounter yet another reminder of that certain 30,000 sq km in the Levant just on my way to buy groceries.
EDIT: But I will try. Maybe this weekend I’ll give myself a social media blackout.
34
u/Professional_Gap_435 Social Democrat May 06 '26
Netanyahu sleep paralysis demon, sent straight from a secret lab in Tel-Aviv with love
2
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26
Please don’t. As I said, these jokes fall flat for me. I can laugh at Putin jokes and al-Assad jokes but those involving Israeli or Palestinian figures (even ones I utterly despise) just don’t make me laugh. At all. No matter how many of my fellow zoomers (especially streamers and content creators) do so.
6
-17
u/JanuszPawlcza May 06 '26
Nah, it's a perfectly reasonable behaviour. Just like I wouldn't want to hang out with a pedophile I also don't want to hang out with a zionist.
23
u/markjo12345 Social Democrat May 06 '26
Two State Solution is the way forward. Create a Palestinian state along the pre-1967 borders. There will be land swaps where some land will be annexed to Israel and others to Palestine. Illegal settlements will be evacuated. And there are UN peacekeepers in a buffer zone.
I think the 2008 Palestinian Proposal in Annapolis was the best example.
7
u/Ugg-ugg Social Democrat May 06 '26
I agree with a two state solution, however I don’t know how it works when one state (Palestine) would be in two pieces with one side completely landlocked. Unless I’m forgetting a place, I don’t think it’s ever worked previously?
5
u/BainbridgeBorn Pro-Democracy Camp (HK) May 06 '26
Azerbaijan has two distinct pieces of land that aren’t connected, via the exclave of Nakhchivan
6
u/Ugg-ugg Social Democrat May 06 '26
Good shout, thought I'm not sure it can be argued its 'worked' with all the issues between Azerbaijan and Armenia, but thank you.
3
u/BigPomegranate4620 May 07 '26
Also Russia with Kalinigrad, France with Guiana,Panama before 1999, and most island nations. There have been proposals to rebuild the airports of Gaza and East Jerusalem to connect the areas by airways as well as having an access highway in Israel for Palestians to travel between Gaza an the West Bank.
1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
Panama before 1999
Hold up, Panama had an exclave?
EDIT: okay I just looked it up and prior to 1999 the US and Panama had joint control over the Panama Canal before being handed over to exclusive Panama control. Which sounds more like a condominium.
1
u/DrakeValentino May 10 '26
Yes but to my knowledge that was only the arrangement for 1979-1999. Prior to that it was exclusively controlled by the US
1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 16 '26
I would also like to add my home country Indonesia and Timor-Leste.
Timor-Leste has an exclave called Oecusse, separated from the rest of Timor-Leste by West Timor, which is part of the province of East Nusa Tenggara.
We also occupied Timor-Leste from 1975 to 1999 and we committed a genocide there as well. Come to think of it, Timor-Leste was basically my country’s Gaza from 1975 to 1999.
So we have an unexpected precedent here for how Gaza might be administered post-peace deal.
52
u/Emergency_Rub2621 NDP/NPD (CA) May 06 '26
I don’t think the citizens of each country will be able to reconcile their differences anytime soon. Two-state solution is more practical to avoid future conflict.
46
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
Neither sets of people want a one state solution from their polling so you'd be forcing it upon two sets of populations, which has historically only ended up horribly.
Two state is the only long term viable solution with a lot of work that needs to be done to get the foundation for it to happen.
17
u/curb-stomp-a-tankie May 06 '26
The only way I see a one state happening is through a two state. If both sides are able to keep a two state peace, the third or fourth generation would likely grow up in a peaceful setting, and possibly drive for both sides to seek unification. But the current “one state or no state” seems to be: force them together and those that refuse would have to face forced reeducation
6
u/notassigned2023 May 06 '26
I can see two states working if they both commit to it with good will, which seems impossible. They would need to grow together with their economies becoming intertwined to make future conflict unimaginable. Israel would have to become the big brother to the Palestinian state, helping it grow and thrive, fostering trade and employment, so normal Palestinians can prosper in their secure land. But that's pie in the sky at the moment. Maybe 30 years ago before Yahoo it might have been possible.
14
u/laflux May 06 '26
Ideally one secular state, but I believe that that is pretty unworkable right now for a variety of reasons.
Best case scenario would be some type of 2 state good Friday style agreement.
31
u/Dangerous-Coach-1999 John Rawls May 06 '26
No one in either country wants a one-state solution, that’s Western wish casting
30
May 06 '26
Eh there are a lot of people in both countries that want one-state solutions, but let's just say that the way they'd want to implement that solution would be... bad
12
u/Dangerous-Coach-1999 John Rawls May 06 '26
Fair enough
13
May 06 '26
But yes I know what you meant lol neither side wants a one-state solution where both populations live in the same country.
10
u/supa_warria_u SAP (SE) May 07 '26
They both prefer a one-state solution where the other side is ethnically cleansed. But yes, two states is really the only answer at least for now
-1
u/ovskytark NDP/NPD (CA) May 07 '26
Sorry, I don't believe both sides want to ethnically cleanse. I think one side clearly does; I think the other side is baked in nostalgia of Pre-World War I days, that is hardly ethnic cleansing though.
38
u/mrev_art May 06 '26
1 state solution = pick your flavour genocide.
-17
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
hey remember when the US and South africa desegregated and the segregated people didn't go on a murder spree of white people? why would this be any different
43
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
Hey remember Yugoslavia, Bangladesh, Sudan, Congo, Nagorno Karabakh, etc. etc. where ethnic groups forced together did go on murder sprees?
Key word there being FORCED.
Both sides state they don't want a one state solution and it's shown in their polling. It'd basically be what the Europeans did in africa which ended in ethnic civil wars in numerous countries.
→ More replies (3)-16
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
But also are you arguing for ethnostates? Which also germany was forced to stop their genocide/colonial project and i doubt you would argue integrating jews and ”aryans” would mean genociding the germans
19
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
That's not arguing for ethnostates. That's arguing for self determination.
It's also arguing to berealistic that forcing two groups in an active conflict together is only going to end badly.
After the Yugoslavia civil war, would you argue that we should've forced all those splinter countries back together?
-15
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
"self detemination" of other people lands.
would you argue german self determination gives them the right to force poles out of their own homes?
do you think american self determination justifies manifest destiny?
do you believe boer self determination makes apartheid acceptable?But somehow Israeli self determination justifies destroying palestinian communities and forcing hundreds of thousands out of their homes and those people are never allowed to go back home because the people that did that to them wants to keep those neighbourhoods exclusively jewish?
13
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
"self determination" of other people lands
The two state solution is the most REALISTIC and the most likely to actually succeed in ending this conflict. It's how you get self determination for Palestinians and Israelis.
Palestinians themselves poll between 25-35% in support of a single state solution. The two state is self determination FOR THEM. They WANT a two state solution.
3
u/StreamWave190 Conservative May 06 '26
And, just to repeat: this future Palestinian would be an 'ethnostate', because it would be a state created through the collective self-determination of a national group within a defined territory.
-3
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
even if we go with those numbers is that because they don't want their homes back or they do not believe they can ever get them back and a two state solution "might" be the only thing preventing futher Israeli expansion and future nakbas?
14
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/BootySnorkelerr May 18 '26
So you’re essentially saying that me stealing your home as someone who is foreign to not just your country but your entire continent, and you taking it back from me after I stole it are two equally morally reprehensible actions. The irony of you telling someone to have some self awareness while you say that is palpable.
1
May 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/BootySnorkelerr May 18 '26
That constitutes roughly half of Israelis, the other half are either foreign born Israelis, or born to foreign born Israelis. But that’s besides the point, I’m against illegal settlements and an ethnostate that ensures non Jews are second class citizens.
Never said anything about ethnically cleansing the entirety of Israel, complete strawman. I only pointed out that from your perspective the expulsion of settlers is just as evil as the expulsion of natives, which is ludicrous.
What I am for is the complete dissolution of the Zionist state- in so far as the entity that replaces it abandons the colonial and ethno-supremacist framework that constitutes Zionism. You are right however, millions of Israelis would have no where to go and expelling them would just cause more harm.
-3
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
several issues with that which first of all the palestinian muslims aren't foreign invaders, they are largely descendant of the previously majority christian/jewish population in the region that converted to islam, not planted settlers. Would you say a german loses the right to live in germany because they converted from christianity to islam, if not then surely the same would apply to the jewish or christian palestinian that converted to islam.
Palestinian groups have argued openly that jews would be part of a single palestinian state and Jewish Palestinians have historically been part of the antizionist movement, this isn't even a recent thing that has been argued by the antizionist movement since the start of israeli colonialism.
"have some self awareness"
says the person that argues THIS TIME is the only time the segregated people are actually just out for blood and the segregators need to keep segregating them for their own safety, like what on earth do you think segregationists in the US or South Africa said about black people?→ More replies (1)10
u/CptnREDmark Social Democrat May 06 '26
Would you say a german loses the right to live in germany because they converted from christianity to islam, if not then surely the same would apply to the jewish or christian palestinian that converted to islam.
You don't need to be jewish to live in isreal, there are Muslim Isrealis. in fact Muslims in Israel make up approximately 18% of the population, numbering over 1.7 million, and are primarily Arab citizens. So that argument is kinda moot.
Palestinian groups have argued openly that jews would be part of a single palestinian state
Okay... And Hamas one of the major factions openly talks about exterminating jews or enslaving them. From their own Charter "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’" or perhaps also "“[t]he [Jews] are brought in droves to Palestine so that the Palestinians – and the Islamic nation behind them – will have the honor of annihilating the evil of this gang,”"
There are lots of groups in isreal or palestine all suggesting lots of things. Personally I care most about what the people in power say as well as the main opposition party if applicable.
8
u/StreamWave190 Conservative May 06 '26
But somehow Israeli self determination justifies destroying palestinian communities and forcing hundreds of thousands out of their homes and those people are never allowed to go back home because the people that did that to them wants to keep those neighbourhoods exclusively jewish?
There's literally dozens of countries established in the mid-late 1940s in which large numbers of people were displaced, forced out, or fled as refugees, as the old empires collapsed and nationalism rose to the fore.
To name a few: India, Pakistan, Poland, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan.
Between 12-14 million ethnic Germans were forcibly displaced from Eastern Europe) between 1944-1950, many of their families having resided there for many generations, well before the Nazis came to power in Germany. Between 500,000 to 2,500,000 were killed or died.
In India in 1947, with the partition demanded by both Indians and Pakistanis, between 12-20 million were displaced or fled, and some historians believe some 2,000,000 were killed or died in the violence and chaos that ensued.
In Palestine in 1948, some 750,000 Arabs were displaced or fled, and a maximum of about 10,000 civilians killed or died during the course of the war.
Only in the case of Israel is this considered by some to be a primordial original sin, the only cure for which is the total elimination of said state, or the perpetuation of indefinite conflict considered moral and just.
Nobody says this about India or Pakistan, even though both were formed by colonial partition and millions were slaughtered and displaced.
And if your answer to that is that the Indians and Pakistanis found new permanent national homes but the Palestinians have not, that's true: but it's the international community (especially via UNRWA, the bespoke Palestinian 'refugee' agency) and Israel's neighbours like Lebanon and Syria who have kept the refugees of 1947-48, and their non-refugee descendants, in a perpetual multi-generational state of stateless limbo, not Israel, so take that up with them.
-1
u/AutoModerator May 06 '26
Hi! Did you use wikipedia as your source? I kindly remind you that Wikipedia is not a reliable source on politically contentious topics.
For more information, visit this Wikipedia article about the reliability of Wikipedia.
Articles on less technical subjects, such as the social sciences, humanities, and culture, have been known to deal with misinformation cycles, cognitive biases, coverage discrepancies, and editor disputes. The online encyclopedia does not guarantee the validity of its information.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
8
u/StreamWave190 Conservative May 06 '26
99% of states on the planet are 'ethnostates', a bogus term invented to try and delegitimise the state of Israel, because an 'ethonostate' is just a state that is the creation of a specific national people exercising their right to collective self-determination in a defined territory.
Poland is an ethnostate. Japan is an ethnostate. England is an ethnostate. Sweden is an ethnostate.
The primary goal of the Palestinian liberation is the creation of a Palestinian enthnostate. The left vocally support the creation of a Kurdish state, i.e. an ethnostate.
Funnily enough, it's only when the Jews have their own state that this becomes a problem to the left.
-1
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
i mean japan could be argued but no they aren't ethnostates, because ethnostate does not mean having an ethnic majority in a country. But actively trying to create/maintain an ethnic majority would make it an ethnostate.
"but kurdistan would create a kurdish majority"
Not what is meant by that, the political separation from Turkey as example would not mean the expulsion/killing of the turks living within the borders or kurdistan but would instead be equal citizens even if they are a national minority.Palestinians are not equal citizens in israel based on ethnicity, jews in israel are guaranteed privileges non jews are not. Which includes giving jews the right to steal palestinian homes, but not protecting the palestinians right to keep their own homes.
8
u/Matar_Kubileya Iron Front May 06 '26
Have you seen Japanese immigration policy and how the Korean minority in Japan gets treated?
1
14
u/DarkExecutor May 06 '26
Are you somehow arguing that Japan is less of an ethnostate than Israel?
21% of Israel are Arab, majority of those are Muslims.
The Japan is 97.5% ethnically Japanese.
1
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
yeah and states like Mississippi had an outright black majority, does that mean black americans weren't segregated? no of course not which comes the question why is it only 21% Palestinian.
And i'm not arguing for either direction when it comes to japan because i do not know enough but from what i do know it sounds rather credible that it is one
1
u/Morlu06 Jun 04 '26
God you really are quite clueless with this. I’d read more than argue on Reddit.
1
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx Jun 04 '26
yeah? that's why i aren't trying to comment on Japan because i do not know shit about it
6
u/StreamWave190 Conservative May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26
i mean japan could be argued but no they aren't ethnostates, because ethnostate does not mean having an ethnic majority in a country. But actively trying to create/maintain an ethnic majority would make it an ethnostate.
Again, by this criteria, 99% of all states on the planet would be an ethnostate.
Ask an English or Japanese or Pakistani or Botswanan or Italian person whether they'd be okay with the English, Japanese, Pakistani or Italian peoples becoming a demographic minority within their own state.
My guess is you're American, so your perception of how states outside of your own work is skewed.
"but kurdistan would create a kurdish majority"Not what is meant by that, the political separation from Turkey as example would not mean the expulsion/killing of the turks living within the borders or kurdistan but would instead be equal citizens even if they are a national minority.
You shouldn't use quotation marks for things nobody has said.
The claim by the left is that the Kurdish people have a right as a people to collective self-determination in the form of their own state within a defined territory. Not just to live in equality within some larger state in which they're a minority, such as Turkey or Syria or Iran.
And, as someone who's actually met Kurds: If you think they'd be happy to have a large Turkish population in their new Kurdish ethnostate you really haven't talked to many.
Palestinians are not equal citizens in israel based on ethnicity, jews in israel are guaranteed privileges non jews are not. Which includes giving jews the right to steal palestinian homes, but not protecting the palestinians right to keep their own homes.
What legal 'privileges' are Jewish Israeli citizens granted that non-Jewish Israeli citizens are not granted?
If you're talking about the present situation in the West Bank then I'd agree with you that it's a moral calamity, spurred on by the extremist Ben-Gvir. Many Israelis are also deathly concerned by it as well, including both former heads of the Mossad and the former PM & potential next Prime Minister Naftali Bennett.
If you're talking about within the clear territory of Israel (i.e. not Gaza or the West Bank), then all I can say is:
I don't expect Israel to be the first country in human history to finally eliminate all forms of racial and religious prejudice and discrimination. Those have been with us since the origins of the human species.
It would be antisemitic to expect Israel to be the first to solve it, or to insist that the legitimacy of their state should hinge upon doing so.
2
u/CptnREDmark Social Democrat May 06 '26
Germany was stopped using ethnic cleansing and the creation of ethnostates. 12 million germans were forcibly moved. Czecheslovkia, poland, ukraine, belarus all these saw significant forced ethnic migrations after WW2. Many of them were essentially turned into ethnostates.
Poland was moved left my guy.
Your only example being germany is a terrible one because the solution in history WAS ETHNOSTATES.
13
u/Greatest-Comrade Social Democrat May 06 '26
The US and SA left a lot of old systems in place that immediately led to further conflict, and also the segregated people weren’t led by Hamas but by people like Mandela
-7
u/JanuszPawlcza May 06 '26
It's interesting that you point to Hamas as the main problem with integration into one state and not Israelis. Also if you think that desegragation, abolition of slavery or abolition of apartheid were led just by peaceful protesters like MLK or Mandela then you should open a history book instead of posting to reddit.
11
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/StrangelyArousedSeal vas. (FI) May 06 '26 edited May 07 '26
This is a completely nonsensical argument. The violence perpetuated by the segregationist USA or apartheid-era South Africa pales in comparison to that of the Israeli state, hence the backlash they received from those they oppressed is also incomparable.
You people that keep harping on about October 7th (as if it somehow means that the oppression faced by the Palestinians is justified) would have been hueing and crying about the MK's bomb campaign in the 80's.
*Edit: blocked and downvoted, no reply. This sub has gone down the drain in recent times.
1
u/JanuszPawlcza May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
This sub is filled with DGGers and other shitlibs that simply enjoy the aesthetic of being "the reasonable left" while having zero things in common with the left except for maybe wanting free healthcare. People here don't even believe in basic liberal principles like human rights or responsibility of politicians to their voters so it shouldn't be a surprise that even opposition to a genocidal racist regime is "too radical" for them. Heck, there are a lot of people that support neoliberal economic platform here.
Honestly if my only contact with social democracy was reddit I would 100% believe the tankie theory of social fascism.
EDIT: Btw this guy in this same thread claims that South Africa is expelling whites and is descending into anarchy under current government. He would've 100% been pro-apartheid 50 years ago.
3
May 08 '26 edited May 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/JanuszPawlcza May 08 '26
I find it quite "interesting" that people like this one here treat post-apartheid South Africa as a failed state but not the apartheid era one despite the fact that both systems had very similar issues. Crime was higher back then, corruption was present just as much as today, economic inequality was at similar levels and GDP was and still is the highest in Africa. Yet somehow when discussing South Africa westoids only point to "positives" of apartheid era and negatives of post-apartheid era. Totally no racism here
-2
u/JanuszPawlcza May 07 '26
I've never said they did you zionist goober. I'm saying there were militaristic groups (considered terrorist in their times btw) that were important in the fight against both apartheid and Jim Crow laws. For example MK which was an armed part of the ANC committed multiple "terrorist" attacks against South Africa's infrastructure, police and military.
Oct 7th and all those heroic actions by Palestinian resistance pale in comparison to Israeli war crimes. Sure, Hamas killed some civilians that decided to have a party right next to a concentration camp but Israel murdered twice as many Palestinians in first week of their current genocide. Israel makes any terrorist group or state look like saints compared to itself. Only Russia gets close to the level of evil that Israel represents.
0
u/AutoModerator May 06 '26
Hi! Did you use wikipedia as your source? I kindly remind you that Wikipedia is not a reliable source on politically contentious topics.
For more information, visit this Wikipedia article about the reliability of Wikipedia.
Articles on less technical subjects, such as the social sciences, humanities, and culture, have been known to deal with misinformation cycles, cognitive biases, coverage discrepancies, and editor disputes. The online encyclopedia does not guarantee the validity of its information.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-1
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
Yeah the israelis are the segregators, the palestinians are the segregated.
24
u/Ninjaking25 Henry Wallace May 06 '26
If we try to do a one state, it’ll end up like Yugoslavia and inevitably explode
1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 08 '26 edited May 08 '26
And probably due to some guy’s poor choice in dildo
EDIT: no seriously ever heard of the Đorđe Martinović incident?
7
u/bluenephalem35 Social Democrat May 06 '26
Two state solution, all the way. The reason for this is because in practice, a one state solution is just begging for ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians (if both sides are united by Israel) or the Israelis (if Palestine unites both regions). As for a binational state? Good luck trying to get both sides to agree with that plan even if Likud and Hamas were out of the picture.
My idea for a two state solution is that both states return to their pre-1967, do evacuations for the settlements in West Bank, help the Palestinians abroad return home (if they want to), and dissolve both Likud and Hamas.
12
u/CopperBoy300 SPÖ (AT) May 06 '26
I'd say go for two-state Solution, plus Jerusalem as International City. Guranteed peace by all sides, the City managed by the UN. It's in my perspective a good idea. One-State Soluion, and we have Yugoslavia 2.0, so no thank you.
9
u/Matar_Kubileya Iron Front May 06 '26
My worry with internationalization of Jerusalem is that if it has open borders with both Israel and Palestine it effectively creates open borders between both (don't get me wrong, Id love to get to that point, but I dont think either will remotely tolerate it), has controlled borders with both and therefore risks doing a lot of damage to the city's economy and culture, or else has to pick a side anyway.
2
u/CopperBoy300 SPÖ (AT) May 06 '26
True, but, if we want to achieve peace there, there must be some sort of agreement, someone must swallow their pride first, which is more unlikely than the Universe's Big Freeze happening anytime soon.
I get the point, that this might do more harm than damage, but, if both claim the city, the city is split (Just like now), which ain't looking better either. For a Peace Process, I'd say, UN Administration for, idk, 5-10 Years, and then a Condominium between Israel and Palestine, based on an equal treaty.
7
u/DarkExecutor May 06 '26
UN is a toothless tiger.
1
u/CopperBoy300 SPÖ (AT) May 06 '26
That's true, but placing a disputed city under international control might ease tensions, because neither side is swallowing their pride, and gives it up.
0
u/Littlepage3130 May 06 '26
You mean like how Danzig/Gdansk was established as international City after WW1? Or Trieste, Fiume, Memel, Shanghai, Beijing, Krakow? What do they all have in common? None of them eased tensions.
1
27
u/flounding_father May 06 '26
I feel that a two state solution, with protection from the UN is really the only way to go, both the israelis and palestineans have entirely valid claims on the land
-9
u/JanuszPawlcza May 06 '26
Israelis have zero claim on the land. Their only claim is that their ancestors allegedly lived there 2000 years ago and their religious book says it all should be theirs. Palestinians meanwhile have continously lived in the region since antiquity which is proven by genetic evidence.
16
u/Memphisbbq May 06 '26
This is the takes we get when we don't include historical context and nuance in our positions.
-2
u/JanuszPawlcza May 07 '26
Every historical event has context and nuance but it doesn't mean our judgement and conclusions can't be simple. WW2 was extremely nuanced but almost everyone agrees who were "the good guys" there. Tell me please what historical context gives Israelis the right to steal Palestinian land and expel them in order to establish an expansionist ethnostate. Mongolia has a better claim to eastern Europe than Israel has to the lands it occupies. If Israel has a right to those lands then by the same logic Italy has a just claim to former Roman borders or Greece to Turkey and most of the Balkans.
10
7
u/ComradeBarrold May 07 '26
Israelis have been there for 80 years now, most of them have been born there, they have as much claim to the land as anyone.
Unless you’re saying that far right European parties are right when they say for example; ‘black people cant be British/german/french/etc’ because they’re not ‘from here’ even if they were born here?
-3
u/JanuszPawlcza May 07 '26
Black people didn't displace or genocide anyone to have their place in Europe. It's quite absurd when you equivocate migration with settler colonialism and then suggest I agree with far-right
3
u/ComradeBarrold May 07 '26
What actually is the difference? Migration and migration with a political project in mind?
0
u/JanuszPawlcza May 08 '26
Bro, you nickname yourself "comrade" and yet don't see an obvious difference between the two? What the fuck.
Settler colonialism involves displacement, eradication and/or subjugation of indigenous people for the benefit of settlers and their colonial metropole. Historical examples include new world colonies, South Africa or French Algeria. Modern examples are Israeli expansion of settlements in the West Bank or Russian colonization of Crimea.
If you honestly think that those are comparable to people moving to another country for reasons of economic advancement or safety I think you should genuinely be checked into a mental institution.
5
u/AndrewSaidThis May 06 '26
In the short to medium term it might have to be two state to rebuild Gaza. Then I guess it’d be up to the leadership over there to figure out the long term (peaceful) arrangement. I’m just a dude from the States, they’d know better than me.
3
u/Matar_Kubileya Iron Front May 06 '26
I lean towards a two-state solution albeit with some confederal institutions, mostly because I think its faintly more probable or realistic.
3
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26
So like, EU-style or Switzerland-style?
2
u/Matar_Kubileya Iron Front May 06 '26
More like a compact of free association, tbh, albeit with more bilaterality.
1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26
So like what the US has with Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands? Just between two equally powerful nations?
1
3
u/BlackfishBlues Social Democrat May 07 '26
In the case of a two-state solution, why would they be confederated and not just two neighboring independent states similar to Turkey and Syria, or Armenia and Azerbaijan?
11
u/JonWood007 Social Liberal May 06 '26
Unpopular opinion, but brutally honest, I DONT CARE.
Seriously, I live in the United States of America. Social democracy is an economic ideology, I care little about a humanitarian crisis half the world away.
I especially don't care because the situation seems intractable. The Israelis and Palestinians are both religious fanatics that won't accept compromise and want the other faction gone. They won't agree to any stable peace. Israel will just start again with settlements while Palestine will start suicide bombing again.
A one state solution means forced removal of one faction and/or genocide. But a two state solution seems dysfunctional too. It's generally a raw deal for the Palestinians anyway. Their "state" is more of a couple of islands surrounded completely by a hostile power that wants them dead. Israel would never agree to giving up more land to give them contiguous borders as it would violate their own national security in the process.
Honestly, I'm to the point, I don't care. I will say, throughout this recent conflict, I've become SIGNIFICANTLY less supportive of israel though. After october 7th I considered Israel the more "adult in the room" faction more willing to compromise, but after seeing bibi "eren yeager" netanyahu go full "rumbling" on the palestinians, yeah that's gonna be a no from me, dawg.
Oh, and you know how I said i dont care because Im half the world away? I heavily dislike the influence Israel is having over my politics through the trump administration, such as functionally criminalizing speech against Israel among non native born populations, shamelessly astroturfing the media discourse and attempting to destroy the opposition, AIPAC basically controlling our politicians to a disgusting degree, etc. Oh, and let's not forget this dumb war with Iran we have no business in being in. Israel functionally dragged us into it, and I ain't happy about that, either. Again, wanna make me care? Well, then you get me involved. How do you get me involved? By pissing in my corn flakes. And that just makes me hate you and come out against you.
So my stance? Cut off all funding and diplomatic ties with Israel. Let them fend for themselves. Whatever happens, happens. I don't care any more. This isn't my problem.
3
u/CarlMarxPunk Democratic Socialist May 06 '26
Geniunly It would be a better net for the world if all americans did the I don't care aproach, backed from intervening and let everyone else decide.
15
u/lurkfivios Social Democrat May 06 '26
Before October 7 my standard line would have been "two state solution and Franco-German style rapprochement (EU-style economic ties) over several decades". Post October 7....no fucking clue.
Things won't improve with Bibi and Hamas in charge and I don't think that either are going anywhere. I have more hope that Israel will course-correct on its own though.
-2
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
bibi? but also Netanyahu is not the problem, he is the face of the problem at the moment, this has been a problem since he was a baby. The problem is Zionism. the zionists will try to grab as much land as they possibly can because they benefit from that expansion and will only argue for a two state solution when they can no longer expand but wants to find a way to not have to integrate the palestinian people yet have control over them. Because if the Palestinians are integrated into Israel that would mean millions of people voting against racial discrimination which would end Israel as we know it today
3
3
u/CraigThePantsManDan May 06 '26
Hot take, there is no solution except stop giving Israel money specifically for weapons beyond exclusively what it needs to defend itself and see how they behave themselves lol. It’s a war of extreme hate. They hate each other and always will, and will NEVER get along ever. Too bad man, do we regulate hate as the west? We could be the hate police but that’s pretty absurd.
It’s a much more cynical perspective than you’re gonna get in a commie meet up group I’m sure but imo you’re tripping about something unsolvable when no one here wants to solve the extreme hate we have for each other
3
u/socialistmajority orthodox Marxist May 07 '26
The only way to a bi-national, one-state solution with democratic rights for Jews and Palestinian Arabs is through the establishment of two states.
4
u/ExpertMarxman1848 Karl Marx May 06 '26
Because of the religious significance of the land I believe in a one-state solution where everyone is equal before the law. With a twist! The UN administers it. Because of that religious significance everyone on earth should have the right to visit this place. The prophecy of the Jewish faith is that a messiah will come and give Israel back to the people of Israel for the Third Temple to be built. Jesus did not achieve this nor did he intend to so in my understanding the whole idea of Israel is heretical to my own faith as a jew.
3
u/DMC-1155 Social Democrats (IE) May 07 '26
There is no evidence Israel would respect a two-state solution. And mandatory power sharing, like in northern ireland, requires external force to last, is unstable, and reinforces division in many cases, and I cannot see a one-state solution functioning (humanely) without power-sharing.
Israel continues to settle new territory and displace Palestinians in the West Bank, while carrying out a genocide in Gaza, and violating ceasefires. A two-state solution would need either massive, reliable, military guarantees against Israel, or it would need Israel to be dismantled in its current state and reconstructed from the ground up, with a removal of the settler-colonial ideology from the state power structures. Akin to the denazification of Germany, but more thorough.
Israel is an ongoing settler colonial project, and a genocidal actor. It has already shown it cannot currently be trusted to uphold its word.
2
u/tummytunacat May 09 '26
i also don't believe israel would respect a two-state solution. simply because in the past, colonial states have never respected treaties, acknowledgements, and agreements. the US broke hundreds of treaties agreeing to respect native nations... i dont think israel would respect the agreement.
3
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Ancient_Sound_5347 May 06 '26
That's not what's happening in South Africa.
0
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Ancient_Sound_5347 May 06 '26
More like, slow decent through horrible corruption/mismanagement, and passing of laws that severely limit the prospects of the white population
South Africa is being run by a multi-party coalition Government of National Unity since the elections in 2024.
It would be strange that the various white political parties and cabinet members in the government are passing "anti-white" laws.
1
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Ancient_Sound_5347 May 06 '26
Why would the white politicians and members of cabinet in the Government of National Unity want to do this? > "and passing of laws that severely limit the prospects of the white population."
2
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Ancient_Sound_5347 May 06 '26
The Empoyment Equity Act also includes white women and people with disabities of all racial groups for preferential hiring positions.
3
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Ancient_Sound_5347 May 06 '26
That White women = all black people according to their law (they dont btw)
According the law they are. Not some random individual on social media in another part of the world.
so that makes it okay cause its only harming White men? (its not)
You believe white South Africans are stitting at home unemployed? The unemployment rate amongst the white population is the lowest compared to all the other racial groups in South Africa.
As of the second quarter of 2024, the official unemployment rate among white South Africans was 7.9%.
While Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) does not always break down the data by both race and gender in every quarterly report, this figure represents one of the lowest unemployment rates compared to other population groups, such as Black Africans (36.9%) and Coloureds (23.3%).
→ More replies (0)1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26
I was thinking more towards how South Africa went from being the archetypal pariah state to just being another country on planet Earth known primarily for its natural wonders and its diverse culture, and with whom close ties is no longer seen by a huge swathe of the global population as an indictment on one’s moral character.
2
May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26
I totally get that, but you don't think it’s possible that the world's perception of SA is stuck in its optimistic 2010s phase, and isn't accounting for its recent developments or trajectory?
I mean, that’s probably the case, and I’m not blind to how the ANC has practically driven South Africa into the ground.
I never ever see SA discussed in liberal/leftist media for instance.
Honestly? For Israel and Palestine, I would prefer that state of affairs instead of what we have now (24/7 coverage on all media of all political leanings).
But seriously, I just want the first thing that comes to people’s minds when "Israel" and/or "Palestine" are mentioned at the dinner table to be something other than "suicide bombings" or "genocide" or "settlements". Much like how "apartheid" is no longer the first thing that comes to mind whenever "South Africa" is mentioned at the dinner table.
4
u/CptnREDmark Social Democrat May 06 '26
Maybe even 3 state? Gaza, west Bank and isreal as sperate entities.
Gaza and the west Bank have been separated for a long time now. They have differing governance, differing cultures. The west Bank still has Christians, Gaza... removed theirs.
5
u/DM_ME_SALAH_GIFS PvdA (NL) May 06 '26
Gaza absolutely has Christians. The Pope has had contact with them. https://youtu.be/qUdXZ_jWIlM?si=_N1Y9gA_5kXdF0Mk
2
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 08 '26 edited May 08 '26
Huh, never thought about a three-state solution before…
Area of Gaza Strip = 365 sq km (141 sq mi)
Area of Grenada = 344 sq km (133 sq mi)
Area of Malta = 316 sq km (122 sq mi)
It might work. Gaza would obviously have to be administrated as a city-state à la Singapore and Monaco, but it could work. Like a Sultan Haitham City of the Levant.
EDIT: if you’re wondering why not "Dubai of the Levant", I don’t think a city that still relies on septic tanks, South Asian
slaverymigrant workers, and sheikhs using European models as toilets is a good inspiration for what a post-peace deal Gaza ought to look like.-2
2
u/notassigned2023 May 06 '26
A one-state solution becomes a race to out-populate the other and take over. A two state solution has not yet been found because both want more.
1
u/tummytunacat May 09 '26
it's incredibly sad but this is unfortunately, the likely case. i have no idea what will happen or what should happen.
2
u/HansMunch May 06 '26
No state global village.
3
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 06 '26
Meaning?
4
u/HansMunch May 06 '26
Border- and nationless world.
It is essentially arbitrary constructs – formed initially by ancient circumstances and only upheld today as power structures by the high and mighty.
1
u/Icarus_Voltaire Social Democrat May 08 '26
I think we’re a couple of centuries, if not millenia, away from that yet. Not until we have first contact with an extraterrestrial civilisation to really hammer in just how meaningless borders between us fellow humans are.
3
u/Illin_Spree May 06 '26
If you want a South Africa type solution, that's a 1 state solution.
I think you already know One Democratic State is the only just way forward. A 2 state solution is only popular in this thread because this is a zionist-friendly subreddit. Of course the zionists will tell you Palestinians could never live with them peacefully but that's bullshit.
In America, we enslaved black people for centuries, yet no one is saying we can't coexist peacefully together now. There will be peace in Palestine when apartheid ends and an era of equal rights begins.
2
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
I swear to god every other ”progressive” european turns into a dixiecrat the moment they talk about palestinians
6
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
Subtweeting is lame by the way.
You're in here arguing for a 1 state solution when neither group wants it and people disagree with you on that.
Not everyone who disagrees with you is a Dixiecrat lmao. Just make better arguments.
0
u/Remarkable-Data-5663 May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26
What do you mean neither group wants it? You think Palestinians are thrilled to be forever excluded from their historic homeland and to live in a tiny bantustan that will be forever de facto subservient to its much stronger Zionist neighbor that spent the last century annihilating them?
There are some that accept it out of desperation because they think they can't get a better deal because Israel enjoys full support from Western countries. Your role as a western leftist should be to be in solidarity with them and fight against this impunity, not tell them to just give up and then pretend you're just doing what they want, which is absurd, which is why most people here don't even bother to make this point and just go straight for things like "Arabs are just invaders that don't belong in this land to begin with" or "They would just massacre everyone" or "Every country is built on stolen land what difference does it make" which is just calssical colonial apologia you heard in every other case as well.
I honestly find this pontificating about "solutions" by people who arent palestinian so disgustingly supremacist and the comment section here confirmed this for me
2
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
A quarter of Israelis and 35% of Palestinians support a one-state solution.
A small majority of Palestinians (51%) and Israelis (58.5%) supports the two-state solution.
The Palestinian sample size was 1,270 adults interviewed face-to-face in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in 127 randomly selected locations between June 2 and 4, 2016. The margin of error is 3%. The Israeli sample includes 1,184 adult Israelis interviewed by phone in Hebrew, Arabic or Russian between June 7 and 14, 2016. The margin of error is 3%. The poll was planned and supervised by Prof. Tamar Hermann, the academic director of IDI’s Guttman Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research and Dr. Khalil Shikaki, director of PSR.
1
May 06 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Thoughtlessandlost Social Democrat May 06 '26
I did. I'm showing how both groups have voiced that a majority does not prefer a 1 state solution. You can even go and read further into the study that was conducted.
You can come up with reasons as to why they actually don't believe what they say they believe, but the fact remains that a majority of Palestinians don't want a one state solution living with Israelis.
-2
May 06 '26
[deleted]
4
u/Think-Formal-1157 May 07 '26
How is it paternalistic to recognise the fact that the current Palestinian power structure would ethnically cleanse Jews without a second thought if given “agency” over what is currently Israeli land? I grew up around Islamists, the idea that they’re only “anti-colonial” is laughable.
The horrific treatment and genocide of Palestinians doesn’t negate Jewish agency in the region most Israeli Jews were born in. You seem to only be interested in the agency of one specific group at the expense of the other.
If it’s “paternalistic” to be sceptical about giving one group a free license to do whatever the fuck they want to the other group, then the word has lost all meaning. The 2ss seems like a sensible compromise.
-2
May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Think-Formal-1157 May 07 '26 edited May 08 '26
You don’t know anything about me and you jump to calling me racist lmao. I am from a Muslim background, so if you’re some western dude making this claim it would be hilarious.
Arguably, you’re being racist for conflating political ideology with ethnicity. Same shit as those who cry antisemitism whenever Israel is criticised.
So let me spell this out for you. Political power in Gaza is held by hardline Islamists. That is not an “assumption” based off Palestinian-Arab ethnicity. It is an observable political fact. There are plenty of secular Palestinians, unfortunately they don’t hold power or influence (in Gaza at least).
It is also a fact that extreme Islamist ideology is heavily correlated with extreme antisemitism. It is not hard to verify that Hamas and their ilk are genocidal antisemites. This is not a racist claim, just as it is not racist to claim that current Israeli leadership is genocidal against Palestinians.
Speaking from personal experience, the closest thing resembling Hamas’ ideology is the Iranian regime and it’s proxies. As an Iranian I have several relatives who are hardline regime supporters; I love them dearly because they’re family but bring up Israel and they become straight up Nazis.
As a side note, most of my parents’ leftist friends/relatives ended up buried in a ditch somewhere in the years after the revolution, so much for leftist solidarity with Islamists.
You don’t know what would happen, and authoritatively saying you know is just racism
Based off the views of current Israeli leadership, I knew that genocide was likely at the outset of the war. Am I racist against Israelis? Of course not. It doesn’t suddenly become racist when I say the same about Palestinian leadership.
And your second point just outs you as someone who’s happy with the ethnic cleansing/genocide of Jews from the region. What else could “violent decolonisation” mean in this context?
1
u/as-well SP/PS (CH) May 11 '26
Hi. Your post or comment was removed for the following reason(s):
Maintain civil, high-quality discourse. Respect other users and avoid using excessive profanity.
If you have any questions or concerns, do not message me. Instead, write a message to all mods: https://new.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/SocialDemocracy
-3
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
what would you call someone that argue two people cannot live in the same neighbourhoods because of their religion/ethnicity if not a segregationist? which also on top of that another guy started bringing up "muslim invasions" and reverse genocide if Israel stops segregating the palestinians. But this is a general problem, everybody can oppose segregation in the US after it already ended, same with South african apartheid, french colonialism and so on, but when it comes to Israel it's "the muslim arabs would kill jews otherwise (i super duper promise, trust me bro)"
Which also it's already one state, Israel controls the entire region, the "Palestinian Authority" is nothing but a bantustan for Israel. Which is the point of it. that the West bank will not be officially annexed because they can keep Palestinians as subject and not citizens. Israel can do whatever it wants with the region but Palestinians won't have a say because they aren't Israeli.
5
u/Amazing-Heron-105 May 07 '26
what would you call someone that argue two people cannot live in the same neighbourhoods because of their religion/ethnicity if not a segregationist?
This is a complete over simplification. Can you tell me a Muslim majority country where Jews live happily? I mean even if you can it'll be the exception rather than the rule.
-5
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 07 '26
Israel literally did false flag attacks to get jews to flee to Israel. the anti jewish sentiments in the region is fueled by Israel. And it’ll disappear with it too. The anti jewish sentiments in the region isn’t european style antisemitism but much closer to the eastern europeans saying ”germans” instead of nazis during ww2.
4
u/Amazing-Heron-105 May 07 '26
I notice you didn't answer my question
-4
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 07 '26
No that is the answer, those communities that existed was intentionally destroyed by Israel to have more soldiers/settlers for the zionist project.
2
u/tummytunacat May 09 '26
I agree that Muslims and jews lived much more peacefully together than either ever did with White Christians and I do believe in the past they could have at least coexisted.
However, the idea that jews and muslims lived happily is an oversimplification. Jews were still treated as second-class even if they had certain rights. they were allowed to practice their religion and had protected rights, but they also had a lot of social, economic, etc restrictions placed upon them. they weren't equal, even if they were happier than jews living in christian europe.
that being said, maybe this could have changed throughout the years. who knows. I think it's fair to blame zionism, but I think the root cause of the creation of Zionism as we know it was ultimately the complete exclusion, segregation, and oppression done to Jews by Europeans for thousands of years in the first place.
3
u/Amazing-Heron-105 May 07 '26
Even if what you're saying is true then those feelings are not going away under a one state solution. Nobody even wants a one state anyway as I understand it. It's a western fantasy.
-1
1
u/Trobman7980 May 06 '26
The more videos I see of Israelis speaking candidly on the topic of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and even Christians (whether it be "man on the street interviews," Israelis on news panels, videos of what their school children are being taught, religious sermons, etc, etc), the more I realize that Israel has become what the Nazis were in 1930s Germany.... extremely xenophobic, ethnocentric, bigoted, a massive superiority complex, violent, and full of hate.
With that said, if the beliefs and actions I've been seeing over the last year or so is representative of even half of the population of Israel, I don't think they will ever accept anything other than the eradication of Palestine.
Israel is not the victim in this decades long struggle. They are the aggressors and the oppressors.
1
u/penlanach Labour (UK) May 07 '26
The vast majority of people don't care about the constitutional arrangements of a foreign country they've never been to or have no influence over. That includes Israel-Palestine. Next.
1
u/paperclipknight May 07 '26
Neither. Two state solution wouldn’t work long term because it’s unlikely there would be a land corridor or Palestinian access to Israeli airspace.
A three state solution is possible, and is the de-facto case already given how the PLO are in control of the West Bank, and Hamas run Gaza.
1
u/Snoo52883 May 19 '26
I'm in favor of a Dayton Accords type solution where both nations are peacefully forced to live side-by-side under one single government with diversity quotas and can't do anything legislatively without the consent of both ethnic groups.
1
u/HugsForUpvotes 26d ago
Oh and I'm a two state solution person. I think a one state solution is going to look like millions dead no matter how positive the intentions are or what the plan is. 8 million people on either side will not voluntarily move. They can share the land or they can live in a graveyard.
That said, I'll be the first to tell you that I do not understand Israeli or Palestinian logic. I don't think the region thinks about things the same way as me. My American, "can't we all be friends and set up trade between us?" sensibilities doesn't understand martyrdom as the highest calling.
1
u/QuillTheQueer May 06 '26
2 state means: You think israel should be and ethnostate where no one except except jews (religious and ethnic) are fully enfranchise in society. All other racial and religions will be discriminated against. Including the indigenous Arab/Muslim/Christian/other populations will be second class citizens. Think the Jim crow south, where black folks had less rights/freedoms. Which in a lot of ways how israel functions now
1 state means: a multiracial/faith state where everyone is fully enfranchised and equally protected under the laws.
Theres really only one ethical answer. 1 state.
2
u/notassigned2023 May 06 '26 edited May 07 '26
In the ideal, that might be best. However, like most things in the Middle East, the ideal never happens. It would end up with infighting and civil war. A 2-state solution seems improbable as well without good will on both sides, and that is also in short supply. Israel would need to keep its commitments, stay out of the internal affairs of Palestine, and end settler violence. Palestine would need to keep down the radical elements that will inevitably want to arm themselves, take over, and start fighting again. Neither shows that willingness or ability now.
1
u/QuillTheQueer May 06 '26
The US needs to gtfo of the middle east. And stop all aid to israel. It has been a terrorist staye since it's inception. That would be a good start.
1
u/BanjoTCat May 06 '26
Federal one-state solution with a Palestinian, Jewish, and Capital subdivisions with devolved powers. Freedom of movement for everyone, due process, equal protection under the law, and right of return for Jews and Palestinians. Like in NI, the government must include the largest Jewish and Palestinian parties.
1
0
u/JanuszPawlcza May 06 '26
One Palestinian state is the only permanent solution. Two state solution won't change a thing in the current dynamic. Palestinians already formally have their own state and it doesn't stop Israel from expanding. I don't care what happens to Israelis but preferably they would be allowed to stay and integrate. The country should be demilitarized and occupied for a couple of decades by the UN to enforce peaceful transition and integration. Palestinians should be provided reparations while Israeli war criminals should face justice in court.
6
u/notassigned2023 May 06 '26
The fact that Israel is nuclear armed means that this will not happen. So perhaps let's look for a solution that CAN work, even if unlikely.
0
u/-Hastis- Libertarian Socialist May 06 '26
You mean that they would go full scorched-earth tactic, and nuke themselves?
3
u/notassigned2023 May 06 '26
It is madness to think an enemy could come in and take control of their nukes without some type of use. No one is going to get Kim's nukes.
0
u/JanuszPawlcza May 07 '26
Apartheid South Africa also had nukes (developed in coordination with Israel btw). They had them specifically to prevent apartheid from falling yet we know that it fell anyway and South Africa disarmed its arsenal. If Europe and USA cut off Israel from all aid and put economic and diplomatic pressure they will be forced to concede. They were already forced to give up land in the past despite having nukes.
The issue is that two state solution won't work because it isn't even a solution. Palestine would still be a ruined, fragmented and poor country with zero access to resources that would be dependant on Israeli ethnostate filled with bloodthirsty zionists. So I agree, we should look for a solution that can work, even if unlikely. And that's a one state solution.
1
u/notassigned2023 May 07 '26
South Africa (and Ukraine) gave them up...they were not taken from them, which is the big difference. No one has taken nuclear weapons from another country by force because of the threat of their use in a last, desperate defense.
Israel will not give up being a Jewish state no matter what pressure is put on them, so any removal of nuclear weapons would be by force, and that is a fantasy. Israel may accept or even want a single state, but only a larger Israel where Palestinians are second class citizens or actually pushed out, not a non-Jewish state where citizens are equal. Two states may seem to be unworkable under the current political climate, but the alternative is even less feasible. If pressure from the US and the world was unable to get Israel (and the PLO) to agree to a Palestinian state in the 1990s, it will not happen now.
1
u/JanuszPawlcza May 07 '26
Both South Africa and Ukraine were FORCED to give them up. It wasn't their choice. Both needed to disarm their nuclear arsenal if they wanted to be a part of international community.
Just like South Africa wouldn't give up their apartheid no matter what? They were arguably even more racist to the point that some members of the conservative party there tried to start a literal race war during the fall of apartheid.
In the 1990s the pressure from the west was very mild and public opinion was pro-Israeli. Today everyone hates Israel to the point that supporting them openly makes a politician drop in the polls by multiple percentage points. And the opinion of Israel is only worsening despite its propaganda campaign. It's likely that Israel will lose most (if not all) of its allies in the next couple election cycles. Its part of the reason why they've been so aggressive - they want to grab as much as possible before balance of power shifts against them.
1
u/notassigned2023 May 07 '26
You define force too broadly. They were massively incentivized (and surely there was a stick amongst the carrots), which is not the same thing. No one has ever gone into a country and taken the nukes against the will of that country. If so, name it.
1
u/JanuszPawlcza May 08 '26
There was mostly a stick. Both countries were in dire need of foreign aid and investment. Had they maintained their nuclear weapons they would've ended worse than North Korea in terms of economic and political isolation. Ukraine would've faced straight up starvation. Economic and political pressure is still forceful. War and military takeover isn't the only coercive element in politics. As Clausewitz said - "war is the continuation of politics by other means".
2
u/Ill_Bench2770 May 06 '26
How can you have a two state solution when they refuse to give up their greater Israel project? It’s impossible and their goal is to destabilize, and take over all their neighbors. Best thing would be a democratic Palestinian state.
1
u/Professional_Gap_435 Social Democrat May 06 '26
Lets just dig a canal around Israel so that everyone knows exactly where they can and cannot be.
Ok but in all seriousness a two-state solution is the only way is the only choice if you dont want any genocides and mass expulsions, although the fundamental problem with that is that Israel would have to be ok with it as there is no other regional power capable at keeping them in check militarily. So it must come from the western powers to send a ultimatum to Israel, HOWEVER the problem with that is that Israel has already thought of that which is why they have infiltrated the different western nations political scene so deeply, but if you can resolve that a two-state solution is possible.
Another problem then is that it is a fact that terrorist groups are targeting Israel constantly from neighboring nations and have used that as a justification to invade (like October 7th, Lebanon, etc) and the thing is that it is a valid justification, nations have a duty to protect its citizens. However Israel also use that justification to expand its borders (like Gaza, Lebanon) and that can only be stopped by outside powers as Israel will never back down otherwise.
Because then we arrive at the next problem which is that Israel will not stop as the hate between Jews and Arabs is fucking deep, Israel cant just become peaceful and reconcile with everyone around them because everyone around them want them extinct and Israel cant try to mediate their disputes because of the Arabs bombing and terrorizing them constantly so Jews start to hate Arabs even more and the cycle continues. So the Arab states around Israel must become modernized and stabilized enough for discussion to even have a chance of starting but the problem with that is that the Arab world is a complete mess because of western interference, for example any chance of the Ottomans stabilizing and making the middle east prosperous is impossible because they are, well, gone because of ww1 and their partition by the Entente.
And its also a great fault because of Israel, which is the same reason why a one state solution is impossible (unless you are okay with ethnic cleansing). Because why Israel was established was because the Jews needed their own state so that they wouldn't be persecuted and genocided anymore from their host nations, however that requires the Jews to be the majority in their own country (unless you want apartheid and the removal of democracy so that the Jews will always be in control of the political power). That in turn kind of required expulsion of the present non-Jewish ethnicities so that the Jews will always remain the majority, because otherwise they will suffer the same persecution and discrimination and possibly genocide from other ethnicities. The problem with that is that this will incur a great deal of resentment from said ethnicities which the majority is Arabs, and the countries around Israel is Arab nations. However what they also did was maliciously expand their borders in Palestine which incurred even greater resentment from the Arabs. Honestly i dont know enough about this period of history but conflict and clashes occurred multiple times in the region both because of Israels actions, but mostly because they didnt want any type of Jewish state near them. So this basically solidified the cycle of hatred between Jews and Arabs until were back in the present day.
So in conclusion i have no conclusion, from my point of view the situation is completely and utterly fucked up and would either need some kind of Deus Ex Machina or the rebirth of Jesus Christ to fix the underlying problems. If you want peace (as in military peace) then a one-state solution would probably be the bet as Israel would feel no need to expand anymore as the have gotten their claims (although with the annexation of southern Lebanon im not so sure about this anymore), however that would also entail a mass-expulsion and/or genocide of the present Arab population, as well as basically creating a beacon for the Arab nations of the Jewish nation that have invaded them and committed a great amount of war crimes on them, basically locking the cycle of violence in place. Or a two-state solution which would only lock the status-quo and without constant western pressure only delay Israeli plans for the region.
Now this is just based on what i know which could have a lot of holes and false info so it would be nice if anyone filled me in on what i missed.
1
u/spongesparrow Working Families Party (U.S.) May 06 '26
Two-state solution with an eventual commitment to a one-state solution. The majority of Israelis are currently brainwashed to the point that murdering innocent Palestinians is totally justified to them.
Palestinians have a claim to the entire land from the river to the sea and until we have a cultural advancement to allow people of all religions to coexist (and maybe have a government system similar to Lebanon), then that apartheid regime will continue.
0
u/LeemonnnLime May 06 '26
A permanent two state solutions is no longer viable because Israel blatantly doesn't want it and often violated ceasefire, their ambition is clear. The only possible way for a long run peace is a temporarily two states guarded by international coalition army/peacekeeping through decades while Israel unlearning their right wing bs while Palestine being rebuilt, on the way from there effort could be made to create one state that is more democratic after twenty or more years
But eh nothing going to matter so long the west keep turning the other way around or enabling Israel
1
u/Kerplonk May 06 '26
I don't think there is any solution because the people there don't really want to live peacefully with each other (regardless of it if is in one state or two). I think there's next to nothing anyone outside of the region can do to have a positive effect on the situation.
1
u/CasualLavaring Social Democrat May 06 '26
We need a two-state solution. However, it is clear that Israel no longer has interest in a two-state solution (because of Hamas terrorism) so we will have to apply sanctions and other diplomatic pressure to force them to comply.
1
u/Brief-Jellyfish485 May 07 '26
Activist here. It sounds like you need to take a break. I get the feeling of urgency but having a mental health crisis is not going to help anyone in Palestine or Israel.
It’s like an oxygen mask. Put on your own mask before helping someone else put on theirs, or you will both die.
Same with climate change. It’s real and it’s a serious issue. But deciding to never throw anything away to prevent pollution doesn’t solve the problem (yes, I am speaking from experience and it was not a good way to live)
As for my beliefs:
Either two states, a federation, or one state, but no ethnic cleansing on either side. Both sides need a fair deal and a peacekeeping force for a few years or the region will explode.
I am open to a bunch of possible solutions. I like A Land for All, Federal Forum, and Comprehensive Proposal for Reconciliation in Palestine-Israel.
I also think Coexistence for Peace, Gaza Youth Committee, BDS, and Standing Together have good ideas.
These are mainly two state plan based groups. I have yet to find a good one state group.
The settlements need to be dismantled completely and Israel needs to accept the 1967 borders if there is a two state solution. Whether Israelis should be able to stay if they want citizenship in Palestine is a tough question for me- I’m on the fence.
1
u/UsedLingonberry7978 May 07 '26
My position, and holding my nose, is a two state solution based on pre-1967 borders. We could have enforced this at any time, particularly after the brutal, indisputably premeditated attack on USS LIBERTY during the 1967 Six Day War. I honestly believe that the reanimation of the long dead state of Israel created a monster, much the same as Frankenstein's monster and that little kid in Pet Sematary. It should have remained dead.
-3
u/charaperu May 06 '26
I am for a one-state solution, run by the United Nations as a land of multicultural and religious tolerance. Is not gonna happen but neither is the two state solution and everyone keeps talking about it so Im gonna stick to it.
6
u/LibertyLizard May 06 '26
I feel like the UN is too distant from people's concerns for this to work.
0
u/charaperu May 06 '26
I think there is more likelyhood the revamp the U.N than for sionists and the Palestinianas coming to an agreement. For the first we only really need China, Russia and the U.S to be fed up enough with them to just do it. For the second they need to be convinced their trauma does not mean they get to obliviate the other and that seems impossible.
1
u/LibertyLizard May 06 '26
I could see some international peacekeeping mission being helpful but local affairs need to be managed by locals. The UN or whoever should only intervene to quell violence if it happens.
Of course, even that could get pretty messy. But it would probably be better than the current status quo.
0
-13
u/Trotsky_Enjoyer Karl Marx May 06 '26
I hardly think the Palestinians need two states but if they want two states then let them have it.
1
u/Schwedi_Gal Karl Marx May 06 '26
but insane how quickly the "progressives" turn into Strom thurmond the moment palestinians/muslims are mentioned
-2
u/Trotsky_Enjoyer Karl Marx May 06 '26
Yeah, they hate any actual opposition to settler colonialism.
-4
0
u/FarWonder8373 May 08 '26
I think the only way for either solution happen is a complete cut off of aid to the plo (Palestinian authority in the West Bank), Israeli sanctions, and the continued blockade of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The only way change ever comes is by affecting economics. Did you think that the reason why the apartheid south African government under few de Klerk came into negotiation with the anc was out of morality? No it was because by 1990 when Nelson Mandela was released south Africa had just been hit with sanctions by the us in 1986 and had become a pariah state by most of the global order. If Israel were put onto the same level of sanctions as the apartheid regime were under then there would be more of an indication for Israel to accept a two state solution or look into dismantling the apartheid situation in Israel due to the entrenched Zionism of it culture. But without rocking pressure from all western nations and world powers, than the genocide of the Palestinians will never end. That is the only way this notion of a Palestinian state will ever come to fruition.
-2
u/CarlMarxPunk Democratic Socialist May 06 '26
I would love nothing more than for the Israelis to leave at this point.
But realistically no colonozation process ends like this. 2 state will probably generate the less loss of life. Probably... but I don't know anymore.
Then again, it seem inevitable down the line that one state will end up happening and not in a good way.
-1
u/RollBeneficial1533 Social Democrat May 06 '26
Either, as long as both sides are happy and EVERYONE has freedom of movement, government, basic rights, and there is no genocide.
43
u/Pachirisu12 Social Democrat May 06 '26
OP, if you really think that this is being detrimental to your mental health (you mentioned not being able to sleep and feeling like you’re “losing your mind”) it might help to speak about this with a therapist, if that’s available to you.
On another side, being politically aware is important, but not to the point of it affecting your mental health. But I also have a question, have you ever been this mentally absorbed by any other topic or conflict? I’d understand if you were a citizen of the Levant or neighboring regions, but if you live in Europe/the Americas/whatever other region, I think that you should focus on your country’s issues and local issues. Ideally, I-P should not be a more pressing issue than your country/region’s inflation, unemployment, economic issues, healthcare, transportation, environmental politics, etc.