One State, Two State, Three State, Four: How in the world will do we solve the Israeli-Palestinian problem?

     The Arab-Israeli conflict, perpetuating for decades, has everyone begging for peace. However, the means of peace are still a question considering the stubbornness of both the Israelis and Palestinians in their claim to land east of the Mediterranean Sea. Although many solutions are suggested, neither nation can agree due to the desires of each and their vision of how the area is laid out. Notwithstanding, the viability of a two-state solution is declining as continued bad behavior and unreasonable demands by the Palestinians has swayed Israel public opinion against a solution.  Instead, more creative one state solutions are being considered. While these solutions will surely be unacceptable to Palestinians, they may represent the only opportunity to alter the ugly realities of this situation which have persisted for half a century.
     First, the terrorism committed by Palestinians has eroded the Israeli population's trust in the ability of Palestine to function as a reasonable, secure and rational state. Palestinians frequently celebrate their people who kill Israelis through dedicating public structures to them and paying terrorists for committing crimes against Israelis (Abrams 20). Also, the existence of Hamas, who is openly hostile to Israel and even denies its right to exist, has caused angst and concern amongst the Israeli population (Kershner). This has manifested itself through increased security measures, more scrutiny of Arabs or Palestinians who are Israeli citizens, and the expansion of settlements into territories that the Palestinians consider their rightful land (Bryant 28).
     In addition, Palestine continues to have unreasonable expectations about what concessions Israel will make to achieve a two-state solution.  For example, they still expect to gain control of Jerusalem (Kershner) and have additional aspirations for territorial expansion that Israel will not concede without military defeat. These outlandish requests diminish Israel's confidence that Palestine is a rational actor.
     Finally, the election of a more pro-Israel United States President further strengthens the position of Israeli conservatives who are ardently opposed to a two-state solution. With the Israeli populous growing more conservative and without international pressure that was more prevalent during the Obama administration the likelihood of achieving a two-state solution is extraordinarily low (Bryant 28). Also, the increasing amount of settlers moving into Palestinian territories makes the task of drawing borders in a two-state solution even harder. If carried through, 30,000 families will be displaced and have to be compensated along with switching borders around to best divide Israelis and Palestinians into their territory (Kershner). Thus, Israel is exploring creative one-state solutions which will provide more autonomy of Palestinian citizens while maintaining a security apparatus that ensures Israeli citizens will not be harmed.
     With no one solution perfect, it is crucial to evaluate all possible realities for Israel and Palestine. Aside from annexing Palestine or creating two states, another option would be to join the two nations under one rule. However, this idea is quickly shot down because Arabs would outnumber Israelis, then making the state an Arab majority and defeating the purpose of the creation of Israel (Bryant 32). The final most discussed answer is to leave the two nations as they are, but this makes the fighting persist with no hope of a peaceful future as the uncertainty of what will happen to Palestine is hanging over everyone's head (Kershner).
     In conclusion, any one motion of either creating or joining territories will result in more conflict and fighting as a perfect solution to satisfy both sides is obviously not feasible. However, the smartest long term decision to keep parties somewhat a bay would not be a two-state solution. The unreliability of the Palestinians would put Israelis at great risk for more wars and deaths as well as prolonging the Palestinian nationalist movement. Although alternate solutions have their cons, the clear decision that will ensure the safety for the majority is to not create two tense states in extreme proximity to each other.

Works Cited

Abrams, Elliott. “Stop Supporting Palestinian Terror: Why Congress Should Pass the Taylor Force Act.” National Review, 17 Apr. 2017, pp. 20-22. Global Issues in Context. Accessed 15 May 2017.

Bryant, Christina Case. “Why Israel Digs In.” The Christian Science Monitor Weekly, vol. 109, no. 14, 20 Feb. 2017, pp. 27-33.

Kershner, Isabel. “Is 2-State Solution Dead? In Israel, a Debate Over What’s Next.” The New York Times, 16 Feb. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/world/middleeast/israel-palestinians-two-state-solution.html?_r=0. Accessed 22 May 2017.