Quote:
Originally Posted by FlameOn
This is entirely what a two state peace solution was meant to address. A stabilization of national borders between both Palestine and Israel. It would have recognized both Israel and Palestinian thousand year connections to the area and established shared governance of Jerusalem proper. Palestine under would have been defined as all of Gaza, 95-97% of the West Bank with the remaining 3% under paid lease by any remaining settlers and the evicting of the remaining 500K illegal Jewish settlers. There would have been no more gradual encroachment and a lot of Jews would have had the pain of being removed from what they considered their land as well. Hamas torpedoed this effort and started a civil war to stop it. It was the best solution possible for the mess left by the British mandate and would have done a lot to stabilize the regions.
|
While Israel has supported a two-state solution, they have always maintained that Palestine needs to be de-militarized/weaponized.
Obviously, we can see why they would want that; however, given the encroachments into Palestinian land, I can see why Palestine would balk at that caveat as well.
Perhaps a DMZ would alleviate some concerns. Or maybe an international force in Palestine (paid for by Israel)?