The 2-State Stalemate and Abraham Accords are Linked to the Gazan ‘Day After’
As appeared in my Times of Israel blog.
“Israel has begun to pay increasingly exorbitant prices for its hostages” writes Amit Segal, a well-respected Israeli political commentator, in his recent January 23, 2025, Wall Street Journal article. For at least the second time in less than 15 years, Israel is in the midst of an on-going extortion agreement with an Islamic Jihadist terrorist group for return of mistreated (alive and dead) hostages abducted on October 7, 2023, in return for release of a disproportionate number of convicted terrorist murderers. As was Gilad Shalit’s exchange (after more than five years of captivity), in October 2011 for the release of more than 1,000 Palestinian terrorist prisoners, including Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader behind the horrendous October 7th attack on Israel.
To lessen the chances of this from happening once again, let’s look at two parallel subjects: The Abraham Accords and the Two-State Solution based on history, facts, and logic.
The Two-State Solution. Since 1920, Arab countries and other entities, such as The Palestinian Authority (PA), have been repeatedly offered different versions of a “two state solution.” Starting with Winston Churchill slicing off 70% of the original League of Nations Mandate territory to create Trans-Jordan to the United Nations Resolution 181 in 1947, further dividing the remaining 30% of the Mandate into an Arab (not “Palestinian”) and a Jewish state. The Jews agreed, but the surrounding Arabs states invaded with the genocidal intent of wiping the newly founded modern State of Israel off the map.
Actions speak louder than words. Successive Arab wars, on-going terrorist activities, and at least five rejections of two-state solution offers clearly demonstrate the Arab goal. Even The Palestinian National Charter, which is rife with historical and factual inaccuracies, repeatedly advocates violence “aim[ed] at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.”
What to do with the Palestinian refugee problem? Perhaps the question should be “Why is there a Palestinian refugee problem?” After all, from the tens of millions of refugees from World War II, there are none remaining. In addition, there are no Jewish refugees after the shocking expulsion of 850,000 Jews from Arab lands in the early 1950’s, where Jews had lived for over one thousand years.
The answer to the Palestinian Refugee problem can be found in the different objectives of the UN Refugee Agency and UNRWA. The former is focused on caring for and settling refugees to become productive citizens of the countries where they and their descendants take refuge. However, the latter’s objective is to use the unique generational refugee status (where 3rd and 4th generations later are still considered refugees) as a tactic to achieve the Islamic Jihadist goal of world religious domination and rule. Proof of UNRWA’s complicity in this violent objective can be found at UNwatch.org.
The two-state solution is actually a “two step” solution for Arabs who call themselves “Palestinians” to establish a free Palestine from “the (Jordan) river to the (Mediterranean) sea”, effectively erasing Israel and Jews off the map, as stated in the PA’s founding and guiding charter. There is no stated goal of living in peace with their neighbor Israel. In fact, the official stated Palestinian goal is the opposite. [An interesting side question is “What is the origin of the word ‘Palestine’?” The answer might surprise you as to who are the original real Palestinians.]
Here is a possible two-step solution to the insolvable “two-state solution.” First, redefine Palestinian Refugees to conform with the accepted term of “refugee” under the UNHCR, rather than the unconventional multi-generational definition found in the PA Charter and UNRWA. As all other refugees and their descendants have historically done, they would retain their ethnic identity but become citizens of their adopted country. In this case, many would be Arabs settling in Arab countries (same language, plus similar culture and religion).
Second, look at a map of the Middle East and compare the land
mass of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, and Egypt. With a
monetary incentive, incentivize all “Palestinian” refugees from Gaza to
go to areas in the vast underpopulated Arab countries that have
potential to take in Gazan refugees for citizenship and true ‘nation
building.’ (While President Trump just announced this option for
Palestinians living in Gaza, perhaps it should also apply to all
“Palestinians” living in Yehuda and Shamron, America, and Europe, so
that the “Palestinians” can live together as one Arab peoples.)
This would create a real two separate state solution allowing “Palestinian”-Arabs to build and live in a truly Arab state.
The Abraham Peace Accords consist of multiple agreements signed between Israel and several Arab states which encourage a vision of a Middle East that is stable, peaceful and prosperous, for all. The current signatories are UAE, Bahrain, Suda, Morocco, and Israel.
Since its signing in 2020, trade and tourism between these countries has grown to billions of dollars. Diplomatic relations have grown, as well.
Saudi Arabia is considered by many to be the leading influential Arab state, and its participation in the Accords would be transformative. It is said that the Saudis have not signed the Accords for a few reasons, ranging from seeking greater leverage on certain issues such as the Palestinians or other commitments from the United States, also a key player in forming the Abraham Accords.
It should be noted, as the Saudis drew very close to signing onto the Accords, Iran and its proxies began a war to try and prevent it. Hence, the timing of the Iran sponsored, supported, and funded inhumane horrendous attack of October 7, 2023, successfully created a world-wide crisis. It also accomplished Iran’s nefarious goal of stopping the Saudi’s from signing onto the Abraham Peace Accords. While the Israeli war against Iran and its proxies is not over by far, the recent election of US President Trump, and his incoming administration, might present an opportune time to revisit two sub-texts but key components of the Abraham Accords: Jerusalem and the Palestinian statehood.
The Abraham Peace Accords do not directly address the status of Jerusalem, the Temple Mount, or Judea and Samaria (aka West Bank). The Accords effectively sidestep this issue, allowing normalization without resolving the dispute over Jerusalem. Some critics believe the Accords potentially weaken the Arab world’s leverage on the recurring issue of the push for a two-state solution, by agreeing to live in peace instead of war with Israel as the agreements focus more on normalizing relations between Israel and Arab states, rather than directly addressing these specific territorial issues.
Actions speak louder than words. The almost routine action of the United Nations to unsubstantially and repeatedly condemn Israel with complete inaction of not condemning Hamas, Hezbollah, or their puppet-master Iran, for their heinous and barbaric terrorism, has been going on for decades. Including the September 2024 Palestinian Authority’s UN resolution condemning Israel. The resolution’s list of sponsors and supporters, are a perfect example of taqiyya, an Islamic concept that allows lying with the aim of confounding and defeating enemies through deception.
It’s notable that three of the four Arab countries, who are signatories to the Abraham Peace Accords, were among the sponsors of the above-mentioned PA’s UN anti-Israel resolution and all four voted for the PA resolution. This dichotomous behavior is not surprising. Just look back to the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords (agreements between Israel and the terrorist Palestine Liberation Organization that established a peace process). Shortly after signing the accords, Yassar Arafat gave a speech in a mosque, where he referenced taqiyya and called for a jihad (an order to destroy Israel and kill the Jews). He explained that his signing of the peace accords with Israel was only a tactical step that could be reversed.
How then can Israel, the United States, or even the world, trust the signatories of the Abraham Peace Accords where Israel’s “partners in peace” supported anti-Israel resolution in the UN, which clearly demonstrate this taqiyya duplicitous stance?
The Abraham Peace Accords need a new clause. One suggestion to ensure all signatories are truthful and have signed the Accords in good faith, is to revise the Accords to include a clause that conveys this condition: “By signing this agreement, the signatory government accept the validity of the ancient and modern State of Israel, with its long, continuous history and heritage of the Jewish faith and people. This includes recognizing and accepting of Israel’s sovereignty and borders, including the ancient and modern capital of Jerusalem, the Temple Mount, Yehuda and Shomron.” To demonstrate equality, this can also be included: “Israel, in return, acknowledges the rights and borders of the Arab state signing below.” Perhaps these suggestions won’t stop taqiyya, but it will call attention to any political or military actions that would be counter-productive to the peaceful stability intent of the Abraham Peace Accords.
# # #
About: David S. Levine, MBA, is the author of the recently released “Revolutions: In Their Own Words, What That Really Says About Their Causes”. Map source: https://gisgeography.com/middle-east-map/#Country-Map
Comments
Post a Comment