PLO chairman Yasser Arafat shakes hands with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin as U.S. President Bill Clinton stands between them after the signing of the Israel-PLO peace accord at the White House in Washington on September 13, 1993.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

The story so far: Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack in Israel and the latter’s continuing war on Gaza have brought the Palestine question back to the fore of West Asia. As the war has destroyed much of Gaza and killed 36,000 of its people, the world has also seen more countries voicing strong support for a future Palestine state. Recently, three European countries, Spain, Ireland and Norway, recognised the Palestine state. Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Jordan, say there wouldn’t be lasting peace in the region unless the Palestine question is resolved. An internationally recognised solution to the crisis is what’s called the two-state solution.

What’s the two-state solution?

The short answer is simple: divide historical Palestine, the land between the Jordan River on the east and the Mediterranean Sea in the west, into an Arab state and a Jewish state. But the long answer is complicated. Israel, a Jewish state, was created in Palestine in 1948. But a Palestine state is not yet a reality. Palestinian territories have been under Israeli occupation since 1967. So, a two-state solution today means the creation of a legitimate, sovereign Palestine state, which enjoys the full rights like any other nation state under the UN Charter.

What are the origins?

The roots of the two-state solution go back to the 1930s when the British ruled over Palestine. In 1936, the British government appointed a commission headed by Lord William Robert Peel (known as the Peel Commission) to investigate the causes of Arab-Jewish clashes in Palestine. A year later, the commission proposed a partition of Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state. At that time, Jews accounted for some 28% of Palestine’s population. According to the Peel Commission proposal, the West Bank, Gaza and Negev desert would make up the Arab state, while much of Palestine’s coast and the fertile Galilee region would be part of the Jewish state. Arabs rejected the proposal.

After the Second World War, the U.N. Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) put forward another partition plan. It proposed that Palestine be divided into three territories — a Jewish state, an Arab state and an international territory (Jerusalem). Jews, who made up roughly 32% of Palestine’s population, were to have 56% of the Palestine land as per the UNSCOP plan. The partition plan was adopted in the U.N. General Assembly (Resolution 181). Arabs rejected the plan (India voted against it), while the Zionist leadership of Israeli settlers in Palestine accepted it. And on May 14, 1948, Zionists unilaterally declared the state of Israel. This triggered the first Arab-Israeli war. And by the time an armistice agreement was achieved in 1949, Israel had captured some 22% more territories than what the U.N. had proposed.

How did it get international legitimacy?

In the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria (Israel continues to control all territories except the Sinai which it returned to Egypt after the 1978 Camp David Accords). Palestine nationalism emerged stronger in the 1960s, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

The PLO initially demanded the “liberation” of the whole of Palestine, but later recognised the two-state solution based on the 1967 border. Israel initially rejected any Palestinian claim to the land and continued to term the PLO as a “terrorist” organisation. But in the Camp David Accords, which followed the 1973 Yom Kippur War in which Egypt and Syria surprised Israel with an attack, it agreed to the Framework for Peace in the Middle East agreement. As part of the Framework, Israel agreed to establish an autonomous self-governing Palestinian authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and implement the U.N. Resolution 242, which has demanded Israel pull back from all the territories it captured in 1967. The Framework laid the foundation for the Oslo Accords, which, signed in 1993 and 1995, formalised the two-state solution. As part of the Oslo process, a Palestinian National Authority, a self-governing body, was formed in the West Bank and Gaza and the PLO was internationally recognised as a representative body of the Palestinians. The promise of Oslo was the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state which would live next to the Israeli state in peace. However, this promise has never been materialised.

What are the hurdles to achieving the two-state solution?

The first setback for the Oslo process was the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli Prime Minister who signed the accords, in November 1995 by a Jewish extremist. Rabin’s Labour party was defeated in the subsequent elections and the right-wing Likud, under Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership, came to power. The rise of Hamas, the Islamist militant group that opposed the Oslo Accords saying the PLO made huge concessions to the Israelis, also contributed to the derailment of the peace process. After the collapse of the Oslo process in the 1990s, there were multiple diplomatic efforts to revive the two-state plan, but none of these made progress towards achieving the goal.

Multiple reasons could be identified for this failure. But there are specific structural factors that make the two-state solution unachievable, at least for now. One is the boundary. Israel doesn’t have a clearly demarcated border. It is essentially an expansionist state. In 1948, it captured more territories than it was promised by the UN. In 1967, it expanded further by taking the whole of historical Palestine under its control. From the 1970s, Israel has been building illegal Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories. While Palestinians say their future state should be based on the 1967 border, Israel is not willing to make any commitments.

Two, the status of settlers. Roughly 7,00,000 Jewish settlers are now living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. If Israel is to withdraw to the 1967 border, they will have to pull back the settlers. The settlers are now a powerful political class in Israeli society and no Prime Minister can pull them back without facing political consequences. Three, the status of Jerusalem. Palestinians say East Jerusalem, which hosts Al Aqsa, Islam’s third holiest mosque, should be the capital of their future Palestinian state, while Israel says the whole of Jerusalem, which hosts the Western Wall, the holiest place in Judaism, is Israel’s “eternal capital”. Four, the right of refugees to return to their homes. Some 7,00,000 Palestinians were displaced from their homes in 1948 when the state of Israel was declared. According to international law, they have a right to return to their homes. Israel says it won’t allow the Palestinian refugees to return.

While these are the structural factors that make the two-state solution complicated, on the ground, Israel’s rightwing leadership shows no willingness to make any concessions. Israel wants to continue the status quo — the status quo of occupation. The Palestinians want to break that status quo.

U.S. President Joe Biden.
| Photo Credit: REUTERS

The White House said on May 22 it opposed “unilateral recognition” of a Palestinian state after Ireland, Norway and Spain announced they would establish relations but warned Israel against withholding funds in retaliation.

President Joe Biden “has been on the record supporting a two-state solution,” his National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, told reporters.

“He has been equally emphatic on the record that that two-state solution should be brought about through direct negotiations through the parties, not through unilateral recognition,” he said.

He stopped short of criticizing the decision to formally recognize the State of Palestine by the three European countries, all close allies of the United States.

“Each country is entitled to make its own determinations, but the U.S. position on this is clear,” Mr. Sullivan said.

Israel has responded angrily, including by withdrawing envoys, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accusing the European nations of offering a “reward for terror.”

Far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich told Mr. Netanyahu that he wants to take retaliatory action including severing an arrangement in which Norway handles funds intended to the Palestinian Authority.

Under peace agreements brokered in part by Norway in the 1990s, Israel collects money for the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited autonomy in parts of the West Bank.

But Israel has blocked transfers since the aftermath of the October 7 attacks by Hamas, which runs the Gaza Strip.

Mr. Sullivan said that funds should keep going to the Palestinian Authority which the Biden administration wants to strengthen in hopes it can assume control of Gaza from Hamas.

“I think it’s wrong on a strategic basis, because withholding funds destabilizes the West Bank,” Mr. Sullivan said of Israeli moves to stop funds.

“It undermines the search for security and prosperity for the Palestinian people which is in Israel’s interests, and, I think, it’s wrong to withhold funds that provide basic goods and services to innocent people,” he said.

Mr. Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have been pushing Israel to move forward on a timeline for a Palestinian state, in part by dangling the prospect of Saudi Arabia normalizing relations with Israel.

But Washington vetoed a recent UN Security Council bid to recognize the State of Palestine, saying that recognition could only come through negotiations that take into account Israel’s security interests.

Palestinians carry mock large keys during a mass ceremony to commemorate the Nakba Day, Arabic for catastrophe, in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Wednesday, May 15, 2024.
| Photo Credit: AP

As Israel keeps up its campaign against Hamas, Arab leaders are mapping out ways to support post-war Gaza, placing one major condition on their involvement: a pathway to Palestinian statehood.

Major obstacles lie ahead in gaining the support of both U.S. President Joe Biden and the Israeli government, which is currently led by hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a staunch opponent of the two-state solution.

Also read: Israel’s Netanyahu rejects UN backing of Palestinian statehood bid

But the Arab quintet of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and Egypt have made clear that their financial and political support, which would be crucial to the future of the shattered Gaza Strip, comes at a cost.

“We have coordinated on this closely with the Palestinians. It needs to be truly a pathway to a Palestinian state,” Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan told a World Economic Forum meeting in Riyadh last month.

“Without a real political pathway… it would be very difficult for Arab countries to discuss how we are going to govern.”

It is not the first time Arab leaders have come together to chart a path towards a two-state solution, the cherished goal that they believe could defuse tensions in West Asia and help usher in a period of prosperity.

But with the Israel-Hamas war hobbling regional economies and spilling over into neighbouring countries, there is both urgency and opportunity.

Last month, on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum, European and Arab Foreign Ministers met to discuss how to advance the two-state solution.

Gaza will also be top of the agenda when leaders from the 22-member Arab League meet in Bahrain on Thursday.

Two goals

Arab countries are “pressuring the United States to achieve two things: establish a Palestinian state and recognising it in the United Nations”, said an Arab diplomat who is familiar with the talks.

“What is currently hindering these intensive efforts is the continuation of the war and Netanyahu’s intransigent rejection,” said the diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Arab leaders “have been trying to work with the Biden administration to mutually support the so-called day after” plan, said Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at Britain’s Chatham House think tank.

Central to their plan is the reform of the Palestinian Authority (PA) to clear the way for a reunified administration in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The PA has had almost no influence over Gaza since Hamas militants wrestled control of the territory from the Fatah movement of President Mahmud Abbas in 2007.

“,””],
responsive:{
0:{
loop:false,
autoplay:false,
nav: true,
dots:false,
touchDrag:true,
mouseDrag:true,
items:1
}
}
});
});

India has voiced hope that Palestine’s bid to become a full member of the United Nations, which was blocked by the U.S. last month, will be reconsidered and its endeavour to become a member of the world organisation will get endorsed.

The U.S. vetoed a resolution in the UN Security Council on a Palestinian bid to be granted full membership of the United Nations last month. The 15-nation Council had voted on a draft resolution that would have recommended to the 193-member UN General Assembly “that the State of Palestine be admitted to membership in the United Nations.”

The resolution got 12 votes in its favour, with Switzerland and the UK abstaining and the U.S. casting its veto. To be adopted, the draft resolution required at least nine Council members voting in its favour, with no vetoes by any of its five permanent members – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

“While we have noted that Palestine’s application for membership at the United Nations was not approved by the Security Council because of the aforesaid veto, I would like to state here at the very outset that in keeping with India’s long-standing position, we hope that this would be reconsidered in due course and that Palestine’s endeavour to become a member of the United Nations will get endorsed,” India’s Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Ruchira Kamboj said here.

India was the first non-Arab State to recognise the Palestine Liberation Organization as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in 1974. India was also one of the first countries to recognise the State of Palestine in 1988 and in 1996, Delhi opened its Representative Office to the Palestine Authority in Gaza, which later was shifted to Ramallah in 2003.

Currently, Palestine is a “non-member observer state” at the UN, a status granted to it by the General Assembly in 2012. This status allows Palestine to participate in proceedings of the world body but it cannot vote on resolutions. The only other non-member Observer State at the UN is the Holy See, representing the Vatican.

Addressing a General Assembly meeting on Wednesday, Ms. Kamboj underlined that India’s leadership has repeatedly emphasised that only a two-state solution achieved through direct and meaningful negotiations between Israel and Palestine on final status issues will deliver an enduring peace.

“India is committed to supporting a two-state solution where the Palestinian people are able to live freely in an independent country within secure borders with due regard to the security needs of Israel,” she said.

Ms. Kamboj stressed that to arrive at a lasting solution, India would urge all parties to foster conditions conducive to resuming direct peace negotiations at an early date.

On April 2, Palestine sent a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres requesting that its application for full U.N. membership be considered again. For a State to be granted full UN membership, its application must be approved both by the Security Council and the General Assembly, where a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting is required for the State to be admitted as a full member.

Ms. Kamboj noted that the latest conflict in Gaza has been ongoing for over six months and the humanitarian crisis that it has triggered has been increasing.

“There is also the potential for growing instability in the region and beyond,” she added.

Underlining India’s position on the conflict, Ms. Kamboj said the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas has led to a large-scale loss of civilian lives, especially women and children, and a humanitarian crisis, which is simply unacceptable. India has strongly condemned the deaths of civilians in the conflict.

Ms. Kamboj said the terror attacks in Israel on October 7 were shocking and deserve “unequivocal condemnation.

“There can be no justification for terrorism and hostage-taking. India has a long-standing and uncompromising position against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. And we demand the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages,” Ms. Kamboj said.

India stressed that it is imperative that humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza be scaled up immediately in order to avert a further deterioration in the situation. “We urge all parties to come together in this endeavour,” Ms. Kamboj said, adding that India has provided humanitarian aid to the people of Palestine and that it will continue to do so.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), citing Gaza’s Ministry of Health data, said that from October 7, 2023, till now, at least 34,568 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza and 77,765 Palestinians injured.

OCHA said that between the afternoons of April 28 and May 1, two Israeli soldiers were reported killed in Gaza. According to the Israeli military, 262 soldiers have been killed and 1,602 soldiers have been injured in Gaza since the beginning of the ground operation. In addition, over 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals, including 33 children, have been killed in Israel, the vast majority on October 7, when Hamas attacked Israel.

As of May 1, Israeli authorities estimate that 133 Israelis and foreign nationals remain captive in Gaza, including fatalities whose bodies are withheld, it said.