Palestine

The Case Against a Two-State Solution

Morning Comrades.

This dispatch is as much for me as it is for you, in the sense that I have had varying understandings of Palestine throughout my life. Sure, having been, a decade ago, in the West Bank to work on what was needed, was a life changing event that no text, no book and no story cold have achieved but this isn’t about that. I was angry at myself for not being able to formulate a position to the ongoing apartheid-style occupation of Palestine by the Israeli State, even in my own mind for decades, be it out of fear, indoctrination, ambivalence when I was young and most definitely a lack of understanding on what is what. I cannot claim that I know all, I never will, but I know enough and I have grown enough, to, at the very least, offer a position that I consider not only the logical position on the matter, but as of today, the baseline for my own relations on that matter.

The two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long dominated international discourse, touted as a "realistic" compromise that balances Israeli statehood with Palestinian aspirations for sovereignty. Yet, the repeated failure of negotiations, intensifying settler-colonial dynamics, and the persistent denial of Palestinian rights expose the two-state paradigm as neither just nor feasible. With that, I will argue against the viability and morality of any two-state solution and instead advocates for the restoration of a unified, democratic Palestinian state based on the pre-1947 reality, a state in which Muslims, Christians, Jews, and others coexisted before Zionist partition. Drawing from historical, legal, and critical scholarship, let us present the two-state framework as a colonial artifact that entrenches apartheid and ethnic supremacy, and counters it with a vision rooted in decolonisation and justice.