The Two State Solution: A Western Fantasy
Editor’s note: The Scoop has received and asked for several different perspectives on the conflict between the State of Israel and Hamas. We do not prescribe an attitude and over the next few weeks different perspectives on the conflict will be published. Our aim is not to sensationalise a still ongoing conflict which has a still increasing death count, but to provide a space for students to have a conversation. As such the editorial approach has been light and the conflicting accounts make fact checking very difficult at this stage. For a more official and factual account check the news section for any updates. The opinions noted in these articles are not the official stance of The Scoop or Queen’s Radio
By Ryan Hoey
In the aftermath of the horrifying Hamas attack on Israel on 7th October, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Two State Solution, which many in the Western world have clung to in hope, is never going to happen. The events of 7th October, which marked the worst single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, shook the foundations of the aspiration for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. The attack, in which 2,500 Hamas terrorists pierced Israel’s secured border resulted in nothing short of a massacre which included the deaths of 260 young people at a music festival. The toll was staggering, with approximately 1,200 Israelis losing their lives, whilst a further 120 were taken as hostages back to Gaza.
The current situation can be traced back to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s decision, in 2005, to withdraw from Gaza. This decision resulted in the uprooting of thousands of Israelis who were relocated to mainland Israel. While the move held the potential to transform Gaza, given its young and enterprising population, into the Dubai of the Mediterranean, the subsequent election of Hamas swiftly dispelled this possibility. Hamas has instead used Gaza as a launching pad for relentless attacks on Israel. Hamas has embedded itself among the civilian population of Gaza, built tunnels into Israel, and diverted humanitarian resources, including water pipes, for military purposes.
I travelled to Israel in December 2018, and this provided me with an opportunity to gain a better understanding of the conflict. As I toured the country, including the Golan Heights, Jerusalem, and Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), my initial encounters included an insightful conversation with a tour guide from Tel Aviv. He offered a nuanced perspective of Israeli politics, expressing his opposition to the Netanyahu government, and his disapproval of the settler movement and the special treatment of the ultra-Orthodox in Israeli law, including their exemption from conscription.
Upon reflection, what resonated with me most profoundly was the pessimism my guide exhibited regarding the prospect of reaching any peace agreement . This pessimism, as I later discovered, was a result of a laundry list of failed negotiations. The rejection of offers in 2000 and 2008 to cede around ninety percent of Israeli controlled land in the West Bank (with the final 10% being achieved via a system of land swaps), underscored to him the Palestinian leadership’s consistent unwillingness to reach a compromise position.
Following the horrific attacks by Hamas, I believe that there has been a misguided attempt from some in Ireland and Northern Ireland to compare the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to our own troubled history. The Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement has been offered as a template for peace. Such analogies fundamentally misunderstand the motivations of a group like Hamas. Unlike the IRA, whose objectives were primarily territorial, Hamas is also driven by religious hatred and virulent anti-Semitism. While the IRA carried out many atrocities in the Troubles, they did not perpetrate the type of targeted massacre of civilians we have seen from Hamas. I struggle to see how it could ever be possible to negotiate peace with a group like this.
As I reflect on my trip to Israel in 2018, which already led me to the conclusion that the Two State Solution is a Western fantasy, I find my view that alternatives must be explored reinforced by recent events. The 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, in some ways an important test case for the Two State Solution, has yielded results that are nothing short of disastrous, with a full-fledged terror state now established on Israel’s southern border. For Israel, surrendering security control of the West Bank would likely yield similar results and further endanger the world’s only Jewish state.
For peace to be a realistic prospect, it is imperative that Hamas no longer controls Gaza and that the Palestinian territories are demilitarised. Western states should abandon the idealistic notion of the Two State Solution and recognise the need for Israel to maintain a security presence throughout the area, including the Jordan Valley. Once these prerequisites are achieved, the possibility of more flexible arrangements could be explored, allowing the Palestinians to govern their own affairs without posing a threat to Israel’s security. Over time, this could foster a climate conducive to building a deeper partnership to deliver greater security and economic prosperity.
In the wake of the Hamas attack, the need for a sober reassessment of the West’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has never been more pressing. The events of 7th October serve as a stark reminder of the grave challenges that confront Israel and how it must be constantly vigilant to maintain its security. I believe that the path to peace lies not in idealistic dreams but in a pragmatic solution. One which is rooted in the on the ground reality, which would have a much better chance of succeeding, and delivering security and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians alike.
Edited by: David Williamson
Ryan Hoey is a Queen’s University Belfast Politics Graduate. He is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel.