The polls show that 80% of Israelis oppose a Palestinian state. They say that granting them statehood would show that Hamas’s tactics- terror, massacre, and rape- work. They win victories for Palestinians that nonviolent political action never attained.
At one time, 80% of Israelis supported a two-state solution (as in 1948, post-1967, and other times). One can guess that the 30% of those against it are settlers, their allies, and Right-wingers implacably opposed to any Palestinian state.
However, 50% of the switchers are Israelis who were convinced by the October 7 massacre that the Palestinians will never live in peace with Israel, especially as polls showed that 80% of Gazans and West Bank Palestinians initially approved of Hamas’s tactics. They considered October 7 a great victory over Israel.
Therefore, a Palestinian state would be a terrorist dagger pointed at Israel’s heart from Ramallah, 21 kilometers from Jerusalem, as opposed to Gaza, which is five times farther away.
The international community of nations overwhelmingly supports a two-state solution
On the other hand, the international community of nations overwhelmingly supports a two-state solution and has been reinforced by many of Israel’s past allies – such as Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia – who, out of sympathy for Palestinian casualties in the Israel-Hamas War, have come out in support of a Palestinian state.
Saudi Arabia is willing to normalize relations with Israel and support its integration into the Middle East on the condition that Jerusalem gives the Palestinians some path toward future statehood and self-determination.
Even the United States, Israel’s closest ally under President Donald Trump, has said that to win the Palestinians away from Hamas, there must be some eventual political horizon for the Palestinians (point 19 of Trump’s 20-point peace plan).
Is there some way Israel can give the Palestinians political hope without granting the Palestinians a state that will endanger Israel’s existence?
At present, the Palestinians’ national narrative is based on eliminating the Jewish state. This was shown in 1947 when the UN voted for establishing a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Israelis accepted. However, the Arab nations’ armies invaded, trying to destroy Israel rather than set up a Palestinian state.
From 1948 to 1967, when Jordan controlled the West Bank, the Arab nations waged all-out political and economic war on Israel, but no Palestinian state was established. In 1970, the Arab League refused to negotiate or make peace with Israel’s existence, even though Israel was prepared to exchange land for peace and to allow a Palestinian state.
Israel offered to allow the establishment of a Palestinian state on 95% of the West Bank – in 2000 by prime minister Ehud Barak and in 2009 by prime minister Ehud Olmert – but it was not accepted by the Palestinians because they would not accept a permanent Jewish state alongside theirs.
THE GOVERNMENT should state unequivocally that no amount of pressure or sanctions can force Israel to accept a Palestinian state, as currently, Palestine would be an existential threat to our state. The Palestinians cannot get a state without the approval/support of the Israeli people, and 80% of Israelis are currently opposed to a Palestinian state and are convinced that Palestinians will not live in peace with the Jews.
Still, the Palestinians can take steps to persuade the Israeli people to allow a two-state solution.
The Biden administration and the governments of the United Kingdom and France recently said that only a reformed Palestinian Authority can attain statehood. The Palestinians need to undertake three fundamental reforms on their own:
Democratization
The PA should open up the electoral process and political party formation. This would allow for new political leadership – committed to peace and coexistence – to gain Palestinians’ support and win Israel’s trust.
We will not accept an undemocratic Palestinian state because when a serious political or economic crisis erupts, a dictatorship will garner national unity by rallying the people against a demonized external enemy. They will blame the State of Israel for all problems and direct hatred toward it.
A better economy
The best years of Gaza’s history were from 1967 to 1991, when Israel controlled the area. It allowed the economy freedom to flourish. Electrification of Gaza surged from 10% to 85%. There were 10 times more tractors for a flourishing agriculture. Universities grew from one to seven, and civil society flourished.
The Palestinian Authority takeover reduced economic growth because of widespread corruption and bureaucratic interference. The PA received one of the highest rates of foreign aid in the world but spent its energy on undermining Israel internationally, while Arafat and other leaders siphoned off billions for their personal benefit. Stopping the corruption and letting the economy grow freely would give the Palestinians a better quality of life and an incentive to live in peace because they would have something to lose in conflicts.
Nonviolent pursuit of statehood
Despite the PA’s ongoing cooperation with Israel’s security forces to prevent terrorism, there has been a continuous low-level trend of terrorism, with occasional serious flare-ups (as in the First and Second Intifadas). While not all Palestinians are terrorists, public sympathy and attitudes translate into the growth of Hamas, committed to obliterating the Jewish state, and ongoing individual and group terror activities.
If the Palestinians truly turned away from violence, the terrorists’ actions would drop to zero. Families would report any attempted terrorist attack, and public opinion would condemn and despise terrorists out of knowledge that every successful murder or shooting only delays the day when a Palestinian state might emerge.
IF THE Palestinians execute these strategies successfully, their leadership could approach the Israeli government and ask for statehood. There would be a national Israeli referendum. If the Palestinians pursued these policies for years, they would earn back the trust of Israelis and would get the approval they seek. After all, Zionism is founded on the principle that every people is entitled to self-determination and nationhood.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could sell this offer to his extremist coalition by telling them that the Palestinians will fail this test. He would try to convince the hard-Right that, in fact, democratizing and turning away from vengeance is probably beyond the capacity of the Palestinians, so don’t worry, the offer would not lead to a Palestinian state.
However, it would reduce or end international pressure on Israel to accept a two-state solution. If, by some chance, the Palestinians do carry out these three reforms, well, then they would pose no threat to Israel’s existence.
Admittedly, this approach requires the Palestinians to take a leap and trust the Israelis’ sense of justice and fairness. Still, going through the Israelis is the only hope of ever getting their own state. This strategy puts their fate in their own hands. This policy can succeed, whereas the failed policy that their proxies and allies would destroy the Jewish state or force Israel to accept a two-state solution did not.
Such an offer would be sufficiently responsive to the need for a Palestinian path to statehood to enable Saudi Arabia and other Muslim states to normalize relations with Israel. This could set off a virtuous cycle of constructive economic and social advance, national investment, and security alliances for the whole region.
The writer is an oleh and senior scholar-in-residence at the Hadar Institute of New York and Jerusalem.