The One-State Solution: An Alternative Approach to the Palestinian- Israeli–Conflict Management.

The One-State Solution: An Alternative Approach to the Palestinian- Israeli–Conflict Management.

Rusnawati Ismail & Che Mohd Aziz Yaacob

School of International Studies, College of Law, Government and International Studies, Universiti Utara Malaysia  

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2023.71013

Received: 08 August 2023; Revised: 10 September 2023; Accepted: 14 September 2023; Published: 15 October 2023

ABSTRACT

“One-state solution” as an alternative approach to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict where it will create the bi-national state, with two people in one state that have same equality. Under this idea, Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip will be put together into one big country. It comes in two different versions. First, it will create a single democratic country, advocated by some leftists and Palestinians. Arab Muslims would outnumber Jews, putting an end to Israel as a Jewish state. However, this approach may involve many obstacles. Even though, there’s a lot of debate and discussion on one state-solution has taken place, majority of the western politician cannot accept this solution. Moreover, the United Nations and the fives veto power still stick to the two-state solution. Even though it seems like the one-state solution can solve the conflict between Israel and Palestine, we cannot predict the effectiveness of this solution, as the reality and the theoretical aspects were different. It’s hard to anticipate exactly how it would work. The great advantage of the one state solution is that it encourages all peoples to live freely within the whole state, enjoying equal individual and collective rights, while maintaining their own ethnic and cultural identities. Through this solutions Israel can recover its image in international community. Israel has suffered from a negative image and received a lot of criticism, boycott and sanctions from countries around the world because of the policies that they implemented on Palestinian. United Nations should play a role in this solution, in order to offer Israel and Palestinian opportunity to create a peace and stable country.

Keywords: Israeli-Palestinian conflict; “One-state solution”; approach; international community; United Nations

INTRODUCTION

Palestinian Territory was originally ruled by the Ottoman Empire for 400 years, then fell into British hands in 1914. As a result, opened wide opportunities to play the role of Jews to colonize Palestine. British engineering divides the Ottoman empires and deceives the Arabs. Britain promised the leaders in Mecca, Sharif Hussein that the Arab nation will be liberated from Turkish territory, provided they help Britain dropped the Ottoman Empire allied to Germany in the First World War. The agreement between Sharif Hussein and Britain was evident in his letter to Britain to make Sykes-Picot and Balfour Declaration difficult. These two difficult covenants have opened the door of the Palestinian state to colonization. The Arab-Israeli conflict seems at times to be never ending and remains complicated and difficult to solve. The counties in the world have wildly divergent stands on this issue, and thus, have been the theme of many international conferences to try to find a road to peace. The Arab-Israeli conflict involves many states but for the purpose of this report, we shall focus on the struggle between Israel and Palestine.

The conflict started during the First World War when Jews from Russia and Eastern Europe migrated to Palestine to make a new settlement because their country collapsed politically and socially even though Russia was part of the victorious Allies. These Jews also came to Palestine because they believed that Palestine is a holy place and it was their destiny to return to their homeland. The conflict becomes complicated because the homeland the Jews wanted to return to was also the home of Palestinian (Herzog, 1984).

THE PALESTINE ISRAEL CONFLICTS : A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 between Britain and France has changed the political map of the Middle East region which includes Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria (see map 1) to be divided into two imperialist countries concerned. The second agreement was the Balfour Declaration, a secret agreement between British Foreign Secretary Lord Athur James Balfour and Zionist leader Edmond de Rothcild. The treaty is contained in a letter dated November 2, 1917 from Balfour to Rothcild which contains the consent of the British government on the formation of the National Palestine for the Jews. The British government also pledges to work to make that a reality a reality (See Map 1). The Middle East consists of the lands around the Southern and Eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, extending from Morrocco to the Arabian Peninsula and Iran and sometimes beyond (Ahmed F, Aman J, Saud, M (2018:2).

Map 1:  Palestine (Or Palestinian Territories, Feb 15, 2016)

(http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/asia/lgcolor/palestinianlinks.htm. 6 Mac 2017).

The foundations of the Israeli state began from a resolution on November 29, 1947 named Resolution 181, the United Nations Separation Program (PBB) allowing Israel to set up an Israeli state in Palestine of 10,163 square miles in 1948. The United Nations Conference on November 29, 1947 also produced a resolution for divide Palestine into two parts for Israel and Palestine (Kirdi Dipoyudo, 1977: 177). The border of Israel was set in three Arab-Israeli Warfare. The ceasefire agreement that ended the first war (1948-1949) enabled Israel to control a territory of 20,780 km or 2/3 of the Palestinian territory wider than that set by the resolution of 181 in 1947. The second war of the Suez War which erupted in October to October 1956 Israel with the help of Britain and France has attacked Egypt. In the third war (1967), Israel succeeded in occupying a territory four times wider than ever. The region includes the Gaza Strip, the western edge of the area of ​​5,601 km. This means that all Palestinians are controlled either as their own territory or encroachment territory.

Underlining this Palestinian-Israeli conflict since World War One, Britain took responsibility for Palestine during the period of ongoing conflict between 1920 and 1948 and later submitted it to the United Nations. The State of Israel thus owes its existence to Britain and the United Nations. There are many resolutions issued in the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council but are largely neglected and only a plan.

Organized use of violence/Intifada’s

The terms of the intifada (uprising) has sparked two early phases, in 1987-1993 and 2000-2003 failed to achieve its goal of obtaining autonomous power or independence. The first stage was known as a stone war by the Palestinian people on Israel’s military and police force that took place almost every day. This opposition earned the attention of top leaders for disrupting Israel’s strategic interests and holding peace talks with PLO leaders. The second intifada broke out after Ariel Sharon’s visit to the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Baitulmagdis (Jerusalem) in 2000. At present the battle pattern has changed with guns, suicide bombings and terrorist activities. This has resulted in the construction of a security wall separating the Israeli population from smuggling and attacks from Palestinians people (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast).

Step Taken for The Solution (The two-state solution)

The primary approach for the conflict in Israeli-Palestinian is so-called “two-state solution” where Palestine and Israel living side by side in unity. It would establish Palestine as an independent state in Gaza and most of the West Bank, leaving Israel with the rest of the land. This is because Israel and Palestinian want to run their own country where Israelis want a Jewish state, and Palestinians want a Palestinian one. In 1993, the Israeli government and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) agreed on a plan to implement a two-state solution as part of the Oslo Accord, leading to the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Oslo Accord is the agreement between the governments of Palestine and PLO. Through this Accord, it said that Israel should withdraw from West Bank and Gaza strips and Israel should gave the sovereignty to the PA.

However, it likely failed to resolve the conflict between Israel and Palestine. This is because Israel has violated the rule by expanding illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Palestinians have warned that it would ruin the peace process if Israel extended control to the settlements. However, Israel do not treat Palestinian as negotiating partners and deny Palestinian sovereignty. This show that the establishment of Palestinian state was difficult as Israel has deepens its power in Palestine. In 2000 Camp David Summit, the United States President Bill Clinton, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat, negotiating on the final status issues for a hoped-for final peace agreement between the parties. However, the Camp David summit end without any agreement. This is because Yasser Arafat mistrusted Israel who has breach the previous agreement (Agha, 2001).

The two-state solution that has been the dominant paradigm of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute settlement and introduced an alternative approach which is one-state solution. This topic is important as Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the world most controversial conflict (Bao, H. P. :2018). Under this conflict, lots of Palestinians people were killed and fled or expelled from their home. Tangible steps are needed urgently to reverse a negative trajectory in the conflict between Israel and Palestine. The United Nations Security Council in a conference urges the Member States to do their utmost to achieve sustainable peace (United Nations, 2019). The time has come for all interested parties to instead consider the only alternative with any chance of delivering lasting peace: equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis in a single shared state. (Foreign Affairs)

Two-state solution was not weaken the Israeli occupation in Palestinian, instead it maintain and strengthening Israeli powers. This is because Israel has destroyed the Palestinian economy and social during the peace process. This can been seen where Israeli closed all the roads, confiscated Palestinian land and expanding their settlements for their own interests. Moreover, during the revolt against the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, the unemployment and poverty in Palestinian increased (Roy, 2004). The failure of two-state solution also can be seen through the international relations. Since 1960, Israeli was getting a strong support from the United States (US) in term of military and economy. US has supported Israel in the creation of the Jewish homeland in Palestinian and US also not recognized the State of Palestinian. In 2017, US President Donald Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israeli’s capital and expressed his idea to move US embassy to Jerusalem. According The One State Solution, it said that the peace process through two-state solution actually just a mere idea to shut the world up on this conflict.

The One State Solution

In this context, a new initiative based on an old idea has emerged, aiming to give a full and complete voice to the one-state solution. On March 1, 2018, the One State Foundation was launched, a Palestinian–Israeli initiative with an agenda to broaden debate and ultimately gain support for a one-state solution. It holds, first, that the current situation in Palestine and Israel is untenable; second, that the negotiating process that emanated from the Madrid Peace Conference and Oslo Accords on the basis of a two-state solution has reached a dead end as the final status issues degraded to become effectively non-negotiable; third, that this obstructs the realization of the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian and Israeli peoples; fourth, that the time has come to rethink the question in its entirety; and, fifth, that any new thinking has to reflect realities on the ground and, above all, the reality that more than fifty years after the Israeli occupation of the whole of Palestine, a form of unity over political, economic, and security matters already exists.

Considerable literature has also been published, by both Israelis and Palestinians, calling for a one-state proposition. Saeb Erekat, the former chief Palestinian negotiator, has suggested that the one-state option might be a workable alternative if the two-state solution fails. In an article appearing in the New Yorker in August 2017, with the headline, “The End of This Road: The Decline of the Palestinian National Movement,” Hussein Agha and Ahmad Khalidi posit two central ideas. First, the Palestinian national movement borne on the shoulders of Yasser Arafat, Fatah, and the PLO has faded and there is no one to take their place. Second, despite their mournful situation, Israel’s Palestinian citizens, who have demonstrated an ability to learn from and interact with Israeli political realities, may now be in a position to present a new direction for Palestinian nationalism that could constitute a “remarkable transformation” in its political nature (Abdel Monem Said Aly: 2019. https://www.thecairoreview.com/essays/the-case-for-the-one-state-solution/)

According to Bao, H. P: 2018, two-state solution cannot resolve the dispute between Israel and Palestine. The two-state solution is in jeopardy after the bombardment of Gaza, expansion of Israel settlement in West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the ethnic cleansing of the Palestine happened. As I said before, the two-state solution only strengthen the Israel occupation in Palestine, where they confiscated and annexed the Palestinian lands, and left the Palestinian people in poverty.

Palestinians in the West Bank live under a system that was supposed to last just five years – an agreement made 25 years ago as the first step towards a self-governing country alongside Israel. Under the Oslo accords, an interim government called the Palestinian Authority (PA) was given limited control over small pockets of land, almost exclusively towns and cities, while Israel maintained control of the remainder. Fadi Quran, the activist, is wary of calling himself a “one-stater”. He knows that for many Israelis, it’s a scary phrase, as it would lead to the end of Zionism in its current form. Under one state, Palestinians might make up approximately half or more of the population. That would mean Israel could cease to be a majority-Jewish country. But his hopes that everyone in this area to live under the same constitution and same social contract that provides them with freedom, justice and dignity for all.” (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/13)

Bao, H. P.  introduced “one-state solution” as an alternative approach to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict where it will create the bi-national state, with two people in one state that have same equality. Under this idea, Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip will be put together into one big country. It comes in two different versions. First, it will create a single democratic country, advocated by some leftists and Palestinians. Arab Muslims would outnumber Jews, putting an end to Israel as a Jewish state. The other alternative, favored by some rightists and Israelis, would include annexing Israel to the West Bank (Beauchamp, 2018). The proponents of a one-state solution firmly believe that a single unified state with full equal rights of citizenship regardless of race, ethnicity or religion, based on freedom with less xenophobic nationalism on both sides. There also a model for a single bi-national state that recognizes both individual and collective rights through a multicultural approach. They share the same land but remain nationally separate (Palestine- Israel Journal).

However, this approach may involve many obstacles. Even though, there’s a lot of debate and discussion on one state-solution has taken place, majority of the western politician cannot accept this solution. Moreover, the United Nations and the fives veto power still stick to the two-state solution. Moreover, Israel and Palestine were not ready to accept this approach. This is because a lot of Palestinian people especially the elites adhere to the two-state solution. Israel especially don’t want to accept it, as two-state solution was an agreement from them. If they approve the one-state solution, Israel is in verge of destruction. This is because all the political, economic and social structure between Israel and Palestine need to be remove and restructure. Even though it seems like the one-state solution can solve the conflict between Israel and Palestine, we cannot predict the effectiveness of this solution, as the reality and the theoretical aspects were different. It’s hard to anticipate exactly how it would. work (https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/02)

On both sides, the notion of a single state is not new. It was espoused by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in its original charter in 1964, which called for the establishment of a single, democratic, and secular state for Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike. According to the Ksenia Svetlova 2020 (fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya and director of the program on Israel-Mideast relations at Mitvim). She previously worked as a senior analyst and reporter on Middle East affairs for Israel’s Channel 9 )more Israelis, Palestinians support the ‘one-state’ solution with more and more settlements constructed, the ‘one-state’ solution might be the only feasible one(https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/authors/ksenia-svetlova.html#ixzz6f7sFMN9Q).

Figure 1: A general view shows the Israeli barrier and, behind it, East Jerusalem neighborhoods, Jan. 29, 2020.  Photo by REUTERS/Ammar Awad.

ANALYSIS

The two-state solution is a proposed UN proposal in 1947 but has been rejected by Palestine and all Arab countries as they feel it is done without negotiation and also because of the fragmentation of the land that is perceived as unfair. But in 1988 the PNC in Algiers wanted to review the original goal of receiving the state of Israel and taking a two-state solution. Construction of the Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza that only gives them the sovereign rights of twenty-two percent of land. The dissatisfaction in granting them rights has led to the problem of opposition to the Israeli occupation. One of the ways in which Israel is able to guarantee its safety is to make peace with Arab countries and the way it thinks today is for Israel to give up to Palestine by giving them the right to seize.

The two-nation solution in view is too idealistic and ineffective and requires much compromise from Israel. This only shows that Israel has proven to be justified by the whole world to go beyond the West Bank and Gaza since 1967. The two-state solution is no longer the ideal path to achieving peace (O ‘Malley, 2015). In the current situation, the Palestinians feel the only alternative available is the intifada movement is only the only hope of solving the problem. It is thus the responsibility of the international community to find a way to convince both parties that only with the framework of two separate countries will be able to create peace. Therefore, it is appropriate that other approaches should be applied in the management of conflict in order to continue the peace effort.

Generally dealing with conflict is not easy and subjective. Something that is a side-by-side desire does not necessarily mean the same thing to the other party. Various endeavors need to be sustained by the various continents although the results may be quite thin. According to Fischer, Dietrich. Nolte, W & Oberg, J. (1989) if both parties do not want to face up and make peace, there are other channels that can be used as a follow up effort. Among them is the possibility of using communications through officers or representatives of both parties, intermediary services, arbitration, and imposing international law. Using communication among the representatives often gives confidence to both parties. The rumors that make them feel uncomfortable to face them but if they are managed by a trusted third party, they can help them communicate indirectly. This is what happened in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when Palestinians used their representatives to talk with Israeli representatives. Finally, positive developments in which they (Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin) agree to meet and negotiate which ultimately leads to peace reconciliation.

In addition, if the conflicting parties are unable to find their own solution, the role of third parties as an intermediary is necessary not only as carrying messages from both sides or organizing meetings and negotiations, but they also need to take initiatives to provide recommendations to address conflicts. Sometimes the proposals will lead to an agreement determined by the conflicting parties. This is the role that intermediaries must play and to ensure its success, it is important to find creative solutions that have something interesting and important to both sides who can build compromise together.

There is also a situation where for some cases, even involving intermediaries, the conflict is still unresolved and should be brought to the Arbitration Council. They need to reach agreement to choose arbitrage which is believed to be able to act fairly for both parties. If conflicts disagree with arbitration decisions, a party or both may possibly express their dissatisfaction with the World Court in The Hague, the Netherlands. Legislative processes will be more formal than arbitrary. The court will examine the evidence presented and both parties are allowed to provide lawyers in the trial and the process takes a long time.

United Nations and the veto power should rethink its support for a two-state solution and shift towards a one-state solution. It was their idea that a two-state solution will ensure the peace between Israel-Palestinian conflicts. While the Oslo Accords supposedly laid the groundwork for a new Palestinian state, in fact, none of the parties remained faithful to the agreement. The Israel keep expanding and sending their force in the occupied territories. Today, more than 1.8 million Palestinians were crammed into Gaza, including 1.2 million refugees. Israel’s settlers are still heading to the West Bank, and there are no signs of a halt in growth. The idea of a two-state solution undermines the peace process, whereas a one-state solution makes it possible to respond more preventively to future conflicts.

Although, it’s hard for both country to accept this new solutions. However, it has an advantage. The great advantage of the one state solution is that it encourages all peoples to live freely within the whole state, enjoying equal individual and collective rights, while maintaining their own ethnic and cultural identities. In addition, a single state could theoretically put an end to years of acrimonious conflicts over land, population and historical injustices, creating a real possibility of peace in an often violent and unstable area. By having the two peoples live together, it establish a degree of mutual interdependence, invariably leading to the conclusion that sharing the land and a future will generate a variety of long-term benefits for both countries. Moreover, through this solutions Israel can recover its image in international community. Israel has suffered from a negative image and received a lot of criticism, boycott and sanctions from countries around the world because of the policies that they implemented on Palestinian. As a conclusion, United Nations should play a role in this solution, in order to offer Israel and Palestinian opportunity to create a peace and stable country.

CONCLUSION

In dealing with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict there is truth and similarity behind the realism that conflict is an instinct in inter-national relations. Existing states show there is competition between the two countries concerned to increase their respective powers. The best way is to pursue and pursue diplomatic efforts to create a balance of power between the two parties that is a more appropriate policy and should be implemented by the country in the international system. While it is difficult, but if this situation is to be created, peace (at least no terrorist activity) is likely to result in a more intense clash between the two parties claiming the same land.

If this movement toward a one-state solution does not signify that the idea has taken root and spread, it does indicate that the idea has gone beyond the phase of opinion polls or uncommitted acknowledgment of new developments on the ground on the part of politicians or strategic thinkers. This growing acceptance involves bringing the idea of the one-state option into the public space in a systematic way and taking it beyond its primary environment among liberal Jewish communities abroad (in the United States and the Netherlands) and some few Palestinian communities inside Israel. This effort will require more deliberation and study, which takes as its starting point the recognition of an unacceptable status quo (Abdel Monem Said Aly, 2013).

Finding a way to achieve peace is a tough battle against wars and decisions that are often accomplished often do not meet what is required. There are various parties representing conflicting parties expecting different goals by using various means. As a result, the effort to build peace is difficult and requires patience while looking forward to a good future for both parties. It requires the involvement of various parties and is followed by effective action by all parties to achieve the desired peace efforts. There is no way of resolving conflicts or specific interference that is appropriate for actors in all circumstances. The use of different approaches or methods is indispensable under the circumstances of how conflicts change and subsequently finding appropriate solutions from time to time. However, security will not be fully achieved, it is not static but is a continuous process in the development of relationships.

REFERENCES

1. Abdel Monem Said Aly (2013). Arabs and Israelis: Conflict and Peacemaking in the Middle East 2013th Edition, Kindle Edition. Red Globe Press.
2. Agha, R. M. (2001, July 20). Camp David: a tragedy of errors. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jul/20/comment.
3. Ahmed F, Aman J, Saud, M (2018). Palestine-Israel Conflict: Post 2000 Obstacles in Peace Making Process. Journal of Political Sciences and Public Affairs: 6: 330.doi.
4. Bao, H. P. :2018. The One-State Solution: An Alternative Approach To The Israeli–Palestinian Conflict? Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies 2018, Vol 12, No. 3. 328-341.
5. Beauchamp, Z. (2018, May 14). What are the “two-state solution” and the “one-state solution”? Retrieved from VoxMedia:https://www.vox.com/2018/11/20/18080094/what-are-the-two-state-solution-and-the-one-state-solution.
6. Bohmelt, T. 2010. The Effectiveness of Tracks of Diplomacy Strategies in Third-Party Interventions. Journal of Peace Research. 47 (2): 167-178.
7. Fischer, D., Nolte, W. & Oberg, J. 1989. Winning Peace: Strategies and ethics for a Nuclear-free World. New York: Crane Russak.
8. Herzog, C. 1984. The Arab-Israeli Wars. Tel Aviv: Steimatzky.
9. Kirdi Dipoyudo. 1977. Timur Tengah dalam Pergolakan. Jakarta: Centre For Strategic and International Studies.
10. O’ Malley. P. 2015. The Two State Delusion: Israel and Palestine- A Tale of Two Narratives. USA: Viking Penguin.
11. ……………. 2017. Iarael and Palestine: The Demise of The Two State Solution. New England Journal opf Public Policy. 21 (1): Article 12.
12. Roy, S. (2004). The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict and Palestinian Socioeconomic Decline: A Place Denied. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 17(3), 365-403.
13. United Nations. (2019). Israeli-Palestinian Conflict ‘Locked in a Dangerous Paralysis’, Under-Secretary-General Warns Security Council, Urging Political Will, Leadership to Change Course. United Nations Security Council.

INTERNET

1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/10990699/Israel-Gaza-conflict-What-is-an-intifada.html retrieved Jan. 17, 2017.
2. http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/country/asia/Igcolor/palestianlinks,htm. Retrieved 6 Mac 2017.
3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/13/one-state-solution-gains-ground-as-palestinians-battle-for-equal-rights. Retrieved 29 Nov 2020
4. https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/authors/ksenia-svetlova.html#ixzz6f7sFMN9Q). Retrrieved 29 Nov 2020.
5. https://www.thecairoreview.com/essays/the-case-for-the-one-state-solution . Retrieved 29 Nov 2020.
6. (https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/02/israel-palestinians-west-bank-two-state-solution-one-state.html#ixzz6f7ri94cS. Retrieved 1 December 2020.