“Two states for two peoples” - all over the world they again discuss the plan for the reloading of relations between Israel and Palestine

Will it help to avoid new wars or the idea is utopian? Explains "New Europe"

Although the new war in the Middle East is still far from the end, the world community is increasingly discussing how to construct the world in the region so that neither the terrorist attacks on the Israelis, nor the mass victims among the peaceful population of Palestine due to the blows of Tel Aviv along the gas sector.

Paradoxically, the most popular approach today is the attempts to realize for more than half a century unsuccessfully - "two states for two peoples." We tell you when this idea appeared and why politicians from around the world continue to believe in it.

The formula of coexistence

“Two states for two peoples” (Two-State Solution) is the most widely discussed option for the end of the war in the Middle East. Its essence is to create two independent national states - Israel and Palestine, which would coexist in the region peacefully, since neither Palestinians nor Jews can achieve sufficient levels of political representation (for example, at the level of parliament) and security within the framework of one state.

At the same time, the approach implies that the Palestinian national state should also become a home for Palestinian refugees and their descendants, who left their native places because of the Arab-Israeli wars of 1948 and 1967 and the subsequent Israeli occupation. Their number can reach a million people, and they are resettled mainly in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

With which borders these two states should be created - a key question. But most of the supporters of this decision from the international community believe that the Palestinian state should be created along the boundaries of those territories that were occupied by Israel as a result of the Arab countries in 1967. They include the territories of the Gaza sector, the western bank of the Jordan River and East Jerusalem.

Half a century of wars and agreements

For the first time, the idea of ​​creating a Jewish and Arab state in the territory of the historical region of Palestine was enshrined in the international community as a preferred approach to the UN General Assembly in 1947. Among other things, it was proposed to make Jerusalem - now fully controlled by Israel - an “autonomous unit using a special international regime” under the control of the UN.

However, the implementation of this approach was almost impossible: after the First Arab-Israeli War of 1947-1948, the territory of the potential Arab state was taken under control by neighboring Lebanon and Jordan, and Jerusalem was actually divided between Jordan and Israel.

The next attempt to realize this plan was made after 20 years. In 1967, Israel conducted a military operation against the coalition of the Arab states - the United Arab Republic, Iraq and Jordan. As a result of the territory of Palestine were occupied by Israel. On November 22, 1967, the UN Security Council by all 15 votes adopted a resolution of 242 with a demand for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from employees during the land conflict. In addition, the need to “ensure territorial inviolability and political independence” of each state in the region was again affirmed.

But over the next 11 years, neither a dectication or the creation of two independent states occurred.

On the contrary, another war happened - the War of the Judgment Day of 1973, when the coalition of the Arab countries tried to win back the territories occupied by Israel, but was again defeated.

In fact, the dectication became possible only after the signing of the 1978 Camp-David agreements between Egypt and Israel through the mediation of the United States. The parties confirmed that the process of peaceful settlement in the region should be based on the principles of resolution 242 of the UN Security Council and that the Palestinian people have the right to independently dispose of their own fate. It was assumed that Palestinian representatives will be involved in negotiations on the status of the western coast and gas sector and the local administration and the police will be created.

In fact, only those clauses of the agreement that concerned Egypt were made: the Israeli occupation of the Sinai Peninsula was removed. Palestine's deaccuration did not occur in fact. Moreover, relations between Jews and Palestinians continued to hesitate. In 1987, the first intifada began - the uprising of the Palestinians in attempts to achieve independence. The uprising was defeated, but once again attracted the attention of the world community to the situation with the rights of Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Finally, once again the issue of creating two states was raised in 1993-1995 when signing agreements in Oslo - this time already between representatives of the state of Israel and Palestine through the mediation of the United States. An important symbolic step was the mutual recognition of the parties: Israel recognized the organization of the liberation of Palestine (OOP) as representatives of the Palestinian people, and the OOP, in turn, recognized the state of Israel.

The parties agreed to create the Palestinian National Administration as a temporary body so that it gradually adopted administrative functions in the Palestinian territories. In addition, a planalized plan of the phased de -captain of the Palestinian territory and a plan of action on an “intermediate” five -year period were finalized. At the end, it was supposed to continue negotiations and discuss among other things the status of East Jerusalem.

In part, the plan really began to be implemented. A temporary Palestinian National Administration, led by Yasir Arafat, was created, the transfer of powers and the gradual withdrawal of the Israeli troops began. But after the murder in 1995, the Israeli fundamentalist of one of the main supporters of the reconciliation of the Israeli President Izhak Rabin and the arrival in 1996 to power in Israel of the Likud’s extreme right -wing party again stalled.

A solution that is no longer believed

Despite the fact that the decision to create two independent states - Palestine and Israel - enjoys international support, today it is not very popular “on Earth”. In December 2022, the Palestinian Center for Political and Research in Ramalle conducted a survey in Palestine and Israel, which also included an assessment of the popularity of various settlement approaches.

The idea of ​​creating an independent Palestinian state received the greatest support among the Arab population of Israel - 60% of its representatives approved this approach. Among the Jewish population of Israel, however, this indicator amounted to only 34%, and 52%opposed.

Among the Palestinians themselves, only 33%support the decision to create an independent Palestinian state, while only 28%on the western coast. A significant number of Palestinians (66%) spoke out unequivocally against this approach. Moreover, his support over the past decade has only declined . So, back in 2017, about half of the Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews spoke in favor of the creation of two independent states.

To understand the reasons for this relationship, researchers themselves propose to evaluate how fulfilling it is considered to be fulfilled. Only 7% of Palestinians think that this decision has a chance of implementation. A similar picture is also observed among Israeli Jews. Among the Israeli Arabs, a little more optimism, but still few - only 20%are confident in a positive outcome.

The problem lies in the fact that neither Palestinians nor Israeli Jews, in general, see a clear alternative to the decision “two states for the two peoples”. Researchers proposed to interviews two more options: a single democratic state with equal rights of peoples and a single state with unequal rights (that is, with the dominance of Arabs or Jews). Among the Palestinians, none of these options became more popular than the solutions of the “two states”. Among the Israeli Jews, a state of state with unequal rights of peoples (37%) is somewhat more popular, but such a low indicator hardly indicates consensus.

These data suggest that both the Jews of Israel and the Palestinians look at existing options for resolving the conflict with a sufficient share of hopelessness. As they come to life, some of the approaches, of course, may change. But now none of them has sufficient folk support.

Netanyahu against

After the events of October 7, the current prime minister of Israeli Benjamin Netanyahu took an extremely tough position on the creation of a fully independent state of Palestine. He opposes the spread of the power of the Palestinian National Administration to the territory of the Gaza Strip - even after the end of the military operation.

The Likud party, which is represented by Netanyahu and which came to power in Israel in 1996, has always been sharply against the Oslovsky agreements and considered them a national betrayal. Netanyahu himself was also never a supporter of the decision “Two states for two peoples”.

And soon Hamas came to power in the gas sector - after the victory in the elections in 2006 and the fighting from Fath in 2007, the organization took control of the whole city and the surroundings.

After that, Netanyahu was much more preferable to the classical strategy “Separate and conquer”. “Those who want to prevent the creation of the Palestinian state should support Hamas strengthening and the transfer of Hamas money,” Netanyahu said at a meeting of the Likud faction in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy for the differentiation of Palestinians in Gaza and Palestinians in Judea and Samaria,” the prime minister added.

At the beginning of 2023, Netanyahu spoke in favor of the creation of the Palestinian state, but with limited sovereignty. The restrictions, according to the prime minister, should extend to safety: Palestine cannot threaten Israel, which means that all safety control should be in the hands of the Israeli armed forces.

Who will represent Palestine

On the Palestinian side, the question is not even what political group the implementation of which scenario considers preferable, but that it is previously necessary to understand who exactly can politically represent the Palestinians after this war.

The first suggestive answer is the Palestinian National Administration under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas himself believes that the OOP, which includes Fath and which he leads, is the only legal representative of the interests of the Palestinian people. But in the gas sector, FATH support is low and is only at the level of 30%. It’s low assessment of the activities of the Abbas and on the western shore - in 2022, only a quarter of the respondents approved his activities as the head of the administration.

Another option for expanding representativeness was proposed by Salyam Fayyad, the former head of the Palestinian National Administration. He believes that for negotiations, both Hamas and Islamic Jihad should be included in the OOP. These organizations are some kind of popularity in the gas sector: 27% support Hamas, and about 6% - Islamic jihad. This would increase the legitimacy of the representative office. However, it can be expected that not everyone will like Hamas. Yes, and it is not clear in what form Hamas will exist after the end of the military operation in Gaza.

Finally, there is another option - to hold elections. In favor of this approach, for example, was the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrel at a meeting with representatives of the Arab states on November 27. According to the Boar, the Palestinian National Administration should receive the authorities in Palestine, but at the same time it should hold new elections throughout Palestine.

There are no options

Despite the fact that the approach “two states for two peoples” has many problems and obstacles, the world community still considers it as the main one. A variety of groups speak out in favor of him - and supporters of Israel, and supporters of Palestine, and conditionally neutral states. He is supported by Arab countries , Brazil , China , Russia .

Supported this approach on October 20 in contacting the American nation and US President Joe Biden:

“No matter how difficult it is, we must continue to fight for the world. We cannot refuse to decide on the coexistence of the two states. ”

In favor of this decision, most of the European politicians are also expressed. In particular, on November 24, the head of the European Commission Ursula von der Layen said : “We must prevent the spread of violence. Peaceful coexistence is possible only with the decision “two states for two peoples”.

In addition to wide support, the approach is backed up by numerous international treaties and UN decisions, that is, it already has legal grounds in the current international law.

But in order for the new agreements not to remain on paper, the world community will have to make a lot of efforts to convince the advantages of the updated formula “two states for two peoples” and both warring states, and both for years of conflicting people.