A Reader Writes – ‘The Two-State Solution Fraud’

W&Y Reader Nehad Ismail.

In his speech on 24 June 2002 launching the “Roadmap for Peace” US President George W. Bush called for an independent Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace. Essentially the Roadmap for Peace was a plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict proposed by the Quartet on the Middle East: the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations.

The final text was released on 30 April 2003 but the process reached a deadlock early in phase I and the plan was never implemented. Ariel Sharon the then Israeli Prime Minister raised some fourteen reservations which scuppered the plan. In an opinion piece in the New York Times 24 September 2003 the Israeli historian Professor Avi Shlaim noted: “The Palestinian Authority embraced the road map and started implementing it even before it was issued. Sharon obtained from Bush three delays in issuing the road map and then submitted 14 amendments designed to wreck it”.

Many observers of the Middle East believe that the entire peace process was a charade and a fraud. The Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has exposed the fraud publicly. According to a recent Washington Post report “Netanyahu made the sensational promise that he would not support the creation of a Palestinian state as long as he was prime minister, a stunning reversal of his earlier stance supporting a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict”. Many people are convinced that this has been Netanyahu’s position all along and by re-electing him the Israeli electorate has effectively rejected the two-state solution.

Palestinians and their supporters still believe the entire exercise has been a fraud including in the years Tony Blair has been envoy for the Middle East Quarter. Blair took up the post in 2007 and during his eight years as a peace envoy achieved very little. Sir Oliver Miles, the former UK ambassador to Libya told the media: “Tony Blair should never have been made Middle Eastern peace envoy”. Sir Oliver, who used to run the Foreign Office’s Near East and North African department, said the former prime minister had achieved “very little” in the post and his appointment was a “mistake”. “I think he’s not been able to do the job. I think he’s the wrong man and I also think it’s the wrong job”.

Most Palestinians had already given up on the so-called peace process and have been convinced that the Israeli leaders were not serious about peace. They argue that it is impossible to talk seriously of peace and a two-state solution when the government is confiscating ever more Palestinian lands to build its sprawling settlements. The entire world appeared happy to accept the Israeli narrative that the Palestinians had no interest in establishing a working peace until Netanyahu boldly announced that as far as he was concerned that there will be no two-state solution on his watch. A New York Times editorial on 17 March put it this way: Netanyahu’s behaviour in the past six years — aggressively building Israeli homes on land that likely would be within the bounds of a Palestinian state and never engaging seriously in negotiations — has long convinced many people that he has no interest in a peace agreement. But his statement laid bare his duplicity, confirmed Palestinian suspicions and will make it even harder for him to repair his poisoned relations with President Obama, who has invested heavily in pushing a two-state solution. Since the Oslo Accord in 1993 the interminable Middle East “peace process” has been a process but without peace – just a permanent process with no-end in sight.

By 2002 the list of failures and missed opportunities had continued to lengthen. Today, confiscation of Palestinian land and the construction of settlements continue unabated. The creation of irreversible facts on the ground has been a deliberate Israeli policy to thwart the establishment of a contiguous Palestinian state.

Writing in the Israeli daily Haaretz in June 14, Kobi Richter was blunt about Netanyahu’s mendacity: ‘The dust is beginning to settle from the collapse of Benjamin Netanyahu’s peace fraud. Three of the architects – Netanyahu, Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Lieberman – are trying to convince one another, and us, that you can sell the world the story of the Palestinians being responsible for the failure of the diplomatic process’.

One is tempted to pose the question: will the failure of the two-state solution project open the way for the one-state solution? Could the model adopted by South Africa, of one democratic state for all with a one-person one-vote option open to everyone regardless of religion or ethnicity, where Arab and Jew can choose to live anywhere they please within the new Israeli/Palestinian state? In an interview published in November 2007 in Haaretz, Netanyahu’s predecessor, Ehud Olmert, declared firmly: “If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights . . . the State of Israel is finished.”

Nehad Ismail Tweets as @nehadismail


14 Comments on "A Reader Writes – ‘The Two-State Solution Fraud’"

  1. Stacey McGill | 15th May 2015 at 11:44 pm | Reply

    Noticing the date this piece was written, I had the feeling Tim was playing a joke on his visitors.I have yet to see a bigger load of codswallop on what claims to be a site of serious analysis.
    The writer likes to quote at length from such organs of the free press as the “New York Times” or “Ha’aretz”. Expecting newspapers such as these to print fair and balanced articles is like expecting “The Guardian” to write a puff piece extolling the virtues of Thatcherism. The phrase about “hell freezing over” springs to mind.
    It gets better: the writer goes on to describe a Utopia where “Arab and Jew can choose to live anywhere they please within the new Israeli/Palestinian state”‘ – except of course in the West Bank which must remain “judenrein” (jew-free) and unless you happen to be an Israeli citizen anywhere – no matter what age or gender – then you are fair game for any Arab with a death-wish.
    Furthermore the author writes: “many people are convinced that this has been Netanyahu’s position all along and by re-electing him the Israeli electorate has effectively rejected the two-state solution”, a serious piece of analysis mught ask why that should be, rather than trotting out old and tired anti-Israel canards. Perhaps Hamas tunnels under the border and mortar bombs that kill four-year-olds have something to do with it. The idea of doing away with the “Zionist Entity” has been a wet dream for many since the State of Israel was founded and using the demographic path is not beneath them; the “one man,one vote” cliche (including anyone who can still breathe – no matter from where as long as they are not Jewish).
    Tim, if you want to be taken seriously, get serious and stop publishing garbage.

    • nehad ismail | 15th May 2015 at 11:44 pm | Reply

      I appreciate Stacey’s remarks. I quoted Israeli sources Kobi Richter, Avi Shlaim and Ehud Olmert. I deliberately avoided quoting Arab or Palestinian sources. Stacey says: “Tim, if you want to be taken seriously, get serious and stop publishing garbage”. In other words Tim please publish only stuff I agree with.
      Thanks you Stacey for taking the trouble to read the article.

  2. Tim Marshall | 15th May 2015 at 11:45 pm | Reply

    Hello Stacey. Have a look at the piece ‘Israel and the genocide myth. There are people who would feel as strongly against that as you do about this piece. I can’t just print stuff about which I, or indeed you, agree. I don’t want a site which just re-inforces my prejudices. That’s too easy. The W&Y is a broad temple.

    • Stacey McGill | 15th May 2015 at 11:45 pm | Reply


      I respect you and your writing but there is a difference between “being a broad temple” as you put it and blithely reinforcing older and less pleasant prejudices than your own.

      When will you publish a piece by the same, supposedly neutral writer, “Israel and the Palestiniuan myth”?

      I won’t hold my breath.

      Happy Passover/Easter.

  3. Mahatmacoatmabag | 1st July 2015 at 11:45 pm | Reply

    Nehad Ismail that is a nice piece of Arab 1001 nights fiction you have written. The basic premise of your piece, the existence of an Arab Palestine / a separate distinct Arab Palestinian people is just that – pure fiction, they have admitted it themselves:
    ” The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.”
    Zahir Muhsein, PLO executive

  4. Mr Mahat – you don’t take into account that things change over decades. There is certainly a Palestinian identity now even if there was not one 100 years ago. quoting one official does not mean ‘they have admitted it themselves’. Other Palestinians are available.

  5. Mahatmacoatmabag | 2nd July 2015 at 9:28 am | Reply

    Tim, the creation of the 20th Centuries greatest myth, the existence of an Arab Palestine started in earnest with the creation by Nasser, Arafat,Ahmad Shukeiri & Abbas of the PLO at the Arab League Cairo Summit in May 1964 & its formal founding on 2nd June 1964 in illegally occupied East Jerusalem ( illegally occupied by the by the British officered Arab Legion of Jordan since 1948 ). Fiction alone does not create nations, even the Grand Mufti claimed that the Arabs of Mandatory Palestine were citizens of a greater Syria, what has created Palestine is 1) Arab oil money 2) Arab hatred of Jews & Israel and 3) The international left ( including the Israeli left ) & its tame media and academia in adopting Palestine as its great cause , its mantra, its raison d’être . Arab Palestine has no history, no archaeological records, no national bird, no kings or princes, no currency & no achievements other than terror, death, destruction & massive welfare fraud of international aid agencies since 1948. Even under the Ottoman Turks the Arabs of the Levant were not citizens but subject people without national status & many were classed as stateless nomads. This fact was recognized in the 1920 San Remo treaty giving Great Britain the Mandate to create a Jewish state, only authorizing GB to create the aforementioned Jewish state & grant Palestinian Citizenship only to the Jews, the status of the Arabs was to remain as it had been under centuries of Turkish rule

  6. nehad ismail - United Kingdom | 2nd July 2015 at 10:33 am | Reply

    I am glad Mahatmacoatmabag has been entertained by my article (1001 night fantasy). It is your view that the Palestinian people do not exist. If this is a fact, then why the USA the undisputed friend and supporter of Israel has invested so much energy trying to resolve the conflict since the early 1970? Why the Bush and Obama administrations got themselves heavily involved in the idea of a 2-state solution? Were Bush and Obama playing games and wasting everyone’s time? Why the UN found it necessary to pass dozens of resolutions relating to the Israel-Palestinian Issue? Why bother if Palestinians did not exist. Are all those people I quoted in the article fictional characters from a Disney Film?

    I quote the following sentence from “The Balfour Declaration 2nd November 1917” — it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. (This is a letter from the then British Foreign Secretary to Lord Rothschild promising to help in the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.) The letter specifically refers to existing non-Jewish communities which suggest that Palestine was inhabited by Palestinians Muslims and Christians not aliens.

    You seem to put too much emphasis on what Zahir Muhsein (Zuheir Mohsen) said. Yes he was a Palestinian too closely allied to the Baathist regime in Syria. The Baathist ideology believes in a Pan-Arab Identity which doesn’t distinguish between Iraqis, Syrians, Egyptians, Palestinians etc. It would be unwise to use it as a basis for denying the rights of Palestinians. Zuheir Mohsen was shot in the head on July 15, 1979, as he returned to his flat in Cannes, France. At the time the Mossad was suspected of carrying out the assassination.

  7. Mahatmacoatmabag | 2nd July 2015 at 2:51 pm | Reply

    Nehad Ismail, Were Bush and Obama playing games and wasting everyone’s time? Yes.
    The 1920 San Remo treaty incorporated the Balfour declaration & superceded it
    The British Mandate For Palestine
    San Remo Conference, April 24, 1920

    Confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922
    Came into operation in September 1923.

    “The Council of the League of Nations:

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

    Whereas the Principal Allied powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

    Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

    Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

    Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

    Whereas by the aforementioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall he explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations;
    Note that there is No mention of Palestinian Arabs in the treaty ‘nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine’ they are simply called existing non-Jewish communities, in other words the former subject people of the Ottoman Empire both Muslim & Christian Arabs, Druze, Circassians, Samaritans & European Christians

  8. nehad ismail - United Kingdom | 2nd July 2015 at 3:57 pm | Reply

    Dear Mahatmacoatmabag
    you are entitled to dig up bits and pieces from 4000 BC until 1948. It doesn’t change the contemporary realities one iota. The entire world recognizes there are two peoples living between the shores of the Mediterranean and the River Jordan. The world recognizes (with one exception or two if you care to include “Micronesia”) that the land must somehow be shared between the two peoples according to UNSC Resolutions 181, 194 242, 338 and many others. Such facts are vigorously debated in the Israeli press and the Knesset because they know better than me and you. They live there and are more aware of the situation.
    If you wish to convince yourself otherwise, fair enough but I cannot engage indefinitely with a futile argument. Your mind is made up to cancel out the “Palestinians” from the equation to suit your way of thinking. The problem will not go away until the conflict is resolved according to international legality.

  9. Mahatmacoatmabag | 2nd July 2015 at 7:19 pm | Reply

    Dear Nehad Ismail first before I forget , I want to wish you & your family well over the Ramadan fast.
    You wrote ‘The problem will not go away until the conflict is resolved according to international legality.’ There is no such thing as international legality or international law , only treaties between nations & only those that are ratified are valid. Thus the Oslo accord is legally null & void since the Palestinians failed to cancel the part of the PLO charter calling for Israels destruction & the Palestinian Assembly has never in fact ratified the accords, the only thing saving the Palestinian Authority from being ejected is the pressure of the USA on Israel & the weakness of Israels leaders of all political shades. IMO the only resolution of the Palestinian problem is military, a full defeat of the PLO & Hamas followed by the expulsion of the illegal occupiers of the Land of Israel to the surrounding illegally created Arab states of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon & Jordan .It is a harsh solution but the refusal of the Arabs to make a genuine peace with Israel means it comes down to you kill us or we kill you that is if we don’t have a nuclear war with Iran first in which any Iranian nuke fired at Israel will kill not just us Israelis but most of the Palestinians too from blast or radiation followed by Israels nuclear counterstrike which will wipe the entire mid-east off the map both Iran, all the Arab states & Turkey just for good measure

  10. nehad ismail - United Kingdom | 2nd July 2015 at 8:03 pm | Reply

    Thank you Mahatmacoatmabag. I am against Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. I have written extensively about this since 2013. Have a nice weekend and best wishes to you and your family.
    Just a little note, I am not against Jewish people. Some of my best friends are Jews and I worked with some of them for many years lobbying for a just peace for all Jews, Arabs and whoever happen to live in that piece of land.

  11. One state solution will never happen, Jews and Arabs have different language religion and culture. Plus Jews dont like to mix with other ethnic groups specifically their cousins the Arabs. EOS. Ben , Tel Aviv.

    • mahatmacoatmabag | 8th September 2015 at 12:08 pm | Reply

      Ben I mix with Arabs both Muslims & Christians every day at work in Tel Aviv. Nice of you to drop in on here but please don’t try to paint us Jews as racists but the solution to Arab self determination lies elsewhere outside the borders of our tiny embattled land, possibly across the river Jordan in the 77% of our rightful territory stolen by Great Britain in defiance of the 1920 San Remo treaty that only authorised the creation of a Jewish state in the Levant, to reward the ousted Hashemite dynasty of Saudi Arabia with an artificially created country called Trans-Jordan, unique among Arab states in that it is named after a Hebrew river

Leave a comment

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please consider if you're contributing to the discussion before you post. Abuse and general negativity will not be allowed to appear on the site. This might be the Internet but let's try to keep things civil.

Your email address will not be published.