NYN | Reports and Analyses
As Israeli crimes against civilians in the Gaza Strip intensify and the push toward complete occupation of the territory escalates, the two-state solution has resurfaced as a central topic in headlines and international statements. This resurgence comes amid heated debate over its viability and true objectives.
This proposal, re-emerging at such a critical moment, brings to mind the long history of manipulation of the Palestinian cause, particularly the Oslo Accords signed in 1993 and 1995 between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), represented at the time by Yasser Arafat, and Israel, represented by Foreign Minister Shimon Peres.
Although the agreements called for mutual recognition—with the PLO recognizing the State of Israel on 78% of historic Palestine, and Israel recognizing the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people—the reality of implementation was completely different.
Today, Jerusalem—its east, west, north, and south—is under full Israeli control, while the Israeli project for establishing “Greater Israel” continues, with ambitions extending into Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia—a vision declared openly before the international community.
The irony—or trap—of the Oslo Accords was in Israel’s condition to provide “security” for Palestinian areas, while Palestinians remained defenseless, stripped of any real means of protection. This exposed the two-state solution as nothing more than a sedative, aimed at liquidating the Palestinian cause and erasing the goal of liberating the land and Islamic holy sites.
Now, as the Israeli assault on Gaza worsens, the double standards of the West have become glaringly obvious.
The same countries that present themselves as guardians of peace and international justice are now repackaging the two-state solution as a diplomatic escape route—to justify their positions and avoid confronting the reality of Israeli violations.
In this context, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s response made it clear: Israel rejects all external pressure to accept a Palestinian state. He stressed that Israel would not accept any “dictates” from the international community, promising a firm response upon his return from the United States—a thinly veiled reference to the annexation of the West Bank. This is a clear demonstration of the coordination between the occupation and Western powers, who pretend to push for a settlement while enabling further Israeli expansion.
Accordingly, recent moves by some countries to recognize the State of Palestine appear to be part of this broader agenda—an effort to reshape the global political narrative without altering the real situation on the ground, where the two-state solution has never been a genuine path to liberation or justice, but rather a political tool to keep the Palestinian cause trapped between the illusion of peace and the ongoing sacrifices of its people.
Meanwhile, the roles of Saudi Arabia and the UAE in promoting the two-state solution within the Arab region seem like an attempt to cover their complicity in Israeli crimes. The scale of these atrocities has grown so horrifying that even the United Nations has gone beyond expressing “concern”, while official Arab regimes—except Sana’a—remain unmoved.
It appears that these regimes—led by Saudi Arabia—are rushing toward normalization with Israel under the guise of recognizing a Palestinian state, a state that has no real presence on the map or in reality. Their priorities seem focused on pleasing former U.S. President Donald Trump and key decision-makers in Washington, rather than standing with the Palestinian people.
