Two-state solution in Palestine appears unfeasible

|
Whoever talks about the Palestinian-Israeli question from the United States to China and from the …
  • The Biden administration has been under pressure, as reported in the media for some time, to bring an end to military operations, facilitate humanitarian aid, and address the post-war governance of Gaza, especially considering the lack of positive response from the Netanyahu government. Reports suggested that Netanyahu's government did not respond positively to these requests, and there were indications that Washington's patience was wearing thin. The latest news, where Biden reportedly told Netanyahu that the ultimate solution is a two-state resolution, was quickly countered by Netanyahu stating that this possibility is not on the table, creating a significant setback for Washington. With these statements, Netanyahu not only declared the obvious but also made it clear that under his leadership, there would be no genuine peace process, embarrassing the American President, his biggest supporter, in the eyes of the public.
  • This paper argues that the al-Aqsa Flood operation launched by the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades –the military wing of Hamas– on the morning of October 7 has led to a psychological and epistemological rupture in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and Middle East politics as the operation marked a paradigm shift in the philosophy of the resistance. The infiltration of al-Qassam into the occupied territories by land, sea, and air was a clear sign of a change in the strategy of the resistance to continue the active struggle against the aggressive expansionism and aggression of the Zionist Israeli government. In this context, the study tries to frame Operation al-Aqsa Flood and analyze the dimensions of the rupture. Besides this, it will also outline the possible impact of the operation on global and regional politics, considering that the ongoing process will change the political balance in the Middle East.
  • This article delves into the legal discussions surrounding the crisis unleashed by the military operation launched on October 7, 2023, in Southern Israel by Palestinian forces of the resistance based in Gaza. Israel considered this a “terrorist attack,” asserted the right of self-defense, declared war on Gazans, and started the continuous and indiscriminate bombardment of Gaza. As a result, Gaza has become the new Dresden, in which thousands have been killed and tens of thousands injured. This article is an attempt to answer the following questions to illuminate the legal issues surrounding the current crisis and the broader context of Israel’s legal status as a state and its territorial claims: Was the Palestinian offensive in Southern Israel an instance of terrorism and/or an act of aggression? Which side of the conflict can rightfully claim the right of self-defense? Did Israel commit genocide in Gaza? Do Israel’s statehood and territorial claims rest on firm legal grounds? Is it legally sensible to argue that Israel is a threat to international peace and security?

Bu Konuda Daha Fazla

  • The current Western governments have been giving full and unconditional support to Israel’s oppressive policies and atrocities. Pro-Israeli Western governments do not take into account their citizens’ views on the latest developments in Palestine. They prefer to support the Zionists but not their people. However, they know that their pro-Israeli positions damage their relations with other countries.

  • During his visit to Israel, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin reiterated the Biden administration's support but conveyed the message that operations should be more limited. Austin, who previously stated that Israel faced the risk of 'strategic defeat,' is believed to be delivering the message that winning the war in urban combat requires gaining civilian support. The U.S. administration reportedly urged Israel to reduce the intensity of operations by the end of the year and increase humanitarian aid passages. While continuing support for Israel, the Biden administration seems to be trying to limit the political cost generated by the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

  • Biden, in a ceremony where he criticized antisemitism this week, recounted the political pressures he faced for stating 35 years ago, 'Being Jewish is not necessary to be a Zionist. And I am a Zionist.' Biden has previously used expressions like 'If there was no Israel, we would have to invent it' and linked the security of Jews to the existence of Israel. It can be politically surprising that Biden, in his second term, insists on his Israel policy, risking American national interests. The only explanation for Biden's insistence might be an irrational and ideological perspective based on assumptions that many Jews might not accept.

  • While state universities in the American higher education system are obliged to adhere to constitutional provisions, private universities, like Harvard and MIT, aren't directly bound by the First Amendment, which safeguards freedom of speech. Private institutions can establish their rules and regulations, often attempting to extend freedom of expression in the name of academic freedom. However, they have, in the past, canceled programs and events deemed provocative or likely to incite disturbances, fostering a perception that such restrictions disproportionately favor conservative groups. Even on liberal campuses like Columbia, limitations and even bans on pro-Palestinian demonstrations have been observed.

  • The current situation amounts to a collapse within. Both Democrats and Republicans help create an atmosphere of repression as criticizing Israel and supporting the Palestinian resistance become subject to prohibition. Indeed, university presidents are being questioned and forced to resign over their supposed failure to prevent calls for genocide. The presidents of some of America’s leading universities – UPenn, MIT and Harvard – were recently reprimanded by members of Congress and were asked to step down.