The obsession of many international politicians with a two-state solution in the Middle East is largely motivated by cynical, domestic political damage control. As a solution, the two-state solution is dead on arrival.

I am very pessimistic about the attitude of most politicians towards military conflicts and political or other crises abroad:

They make proposals for solutions that will not work but are meant to show their voters that they (the politicians) are not just sittin on their behinds and perhaps also bring a short-term relaxation so that the terrible images disappear from their voters’ TV screens, and which ideally do not produce any domestic political problems. Whether these “solutions” are viable in the long term or even worsen the situation in the longer view is not so important, because “by then I will have long been out of office, and others may worry about it.”

We see this in the attitude of many politicians and governments towards the current conflict in Gaza and their proposed solutions:

Apart from the absolutely necessary short-term measures to avert a hunger disaster (and the delay of which is primarily blamed on Israel, although the well-known facts suggest otherwise[1]), nearly all major international actors (USA, EU, UN, etc.) are pushing the so-called “two-state solution”, which would give the Palestinians their own state (in Gaza and the “West Bank”). This approach has only one serious disadvantage that will torpedo its implementation from the outset:

The “two-state solution” is rejected by the majority of both the Israeli and Palestinian populations (with over 70% each) — this according to current surveys by Israeli and Palestinian pollsters.

Palestinian leaders repeat—almost  like a mantra—the supposed command of the Prophet to annihilate the Jews and their own claim to the land “from the river to the sea” — but only on Arabic media channels, to the West they convey a different image. According to a current survey – by Palestinian pollsters – 73% of the population of Gaza approve of the massacre on October 7th, despite the immense suffering it has brought over them[2].

The Israeli population was predominantly in favor of a two-state solution in the 1990s; the continued Palestinian refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist, as well as about 30 years of continuous shelling of Israeli villages and cities and countless other terrorist attacks, with the climax on October 7th, have turned this approval into rejection: The trust of Israelis of all political stripes that there could be a relatively peaceful coexistence or even just cohabitation with a Palestinian state is virtually at zero. A survey from February showed that 44% of Israelis believe that terrorism would increase if a Palestinian state were realized; in a survey at the beginning of this month, 79% of Jewish Israelis and 39% of Arab Israelis agreed with the statement, “There is no chance for a peace agreement with the Palestinians in the foreseeable future.” After October 7th, a two-state solution is seen as a reward for terrorism.

The obsession of many international politicians with a two-state solution clearly contradicts the will of the Israeli public and certainly does not match what the Palestinians want. It is primarily motivated by a cynical desire for domestic political damage limitation[3].

Sources for this article: “Who Wants a Two-State Solution? Not Israelis or Palestinians” by Israel Kasnett in “Israel Today“, March 22, 2024, as well as my extensive reading and media following on the topic.

1. Israel’s position is clear and justified: a ceasefire and thus easier provisioning in exchange for the release of the hostages from October 7th; so far, Hamas has demanded a permanent end to hostilities; there seems to be some movement on this issue now. Moreover, blaming Israel seems to be generally de rigueur: Although it is an open secret that Hamas embeds its terror infrastructure within civilian facilities and residential areas, and partly prevents the civilian population from seeking safety in order to propagandistically exploit the inevitable civilian casualties, and that Hamas seizes a significant portion of the international aid payments and deliveries to arm themselves and supply their fighters, and although the civilian casualty numbers, as published daily by the Health Ministry in Gaza, are statistically impossible and therefore unlikely (after all, the Health Ministry, like all official Gaza, is in the hands of Hamas), everything that comes from there is taken at face value by most international media and politicians, and Israel is blamed for the suffering of the civilian population[↩]
2. From the Palestinian perspective, what was done on October 7th was simply obeying what they believe to be the Prophet’s instruction (namely, killing Jews), so they naturally see the Israeli counterstrike as completely unjustified.[↩]
3. Currently in the USA, it’s about limiting the loss of votes in the presidential election in November ’24.[↩]

Die Obsession vieler internationaler Politiker mit einer Zweistaatenlösung in Nahost ist größtenteils von zynischer, innenpolitischer Schadensbegrenzung motiviert. Als Lösung ist die Zweistaatenlösung eine Totgeburt.

Ich bin sehr pessimistisch, was die Einstellung der meisten Politiker zu militärischen Konflikten und politischen oder anderen Krisen im jeweiligen Ausland anlangt:

Sie machen Lösungsvorschläge, die zwar keine langfristige Lösung bringen, die aber zeigen sollen, daß sie (die Politiker) nicht untätig sind und die vielleicht eine kurzfristige Entspannung bringen, damit die schrecklichen Bilder von den Fernsehschirmen der Wähler verschwinden und möglichst keine innenpolitischen Probleme produzieren. Ob diese “Lösungen” langfristig taugen, oder ob sie die Situation auf längere Sicht sogar noch verschlimmern, ist nicht so wichtig, denn bis dahin bin ich schon lang nicht mehr im Amt und es mögen andere sich den Kopf darüber zerbrechen.

Wir sehen dies an der Einstellung vieler Politiker und Regierungen zum aktuellen Konflikt in Gaza und ihren Lösungsvorschlägen:

Abgesehen von den absolut notwendigen kurzfristigen Maßnahmen zur Abwendung einer Hungerkatastrophe (und deren Verzögerung primär Israel in die Schuhe geschoben wird, obwohl die – durchaus bekannten – Fakten etwas anderes belegen[1], pushen fast alle wichtigen internationalen Akteure (USA, EU, UN, etc) die sogenannte „Zweistaatenlösung“, die den Palästinensern ihren eigenen Staat (in Gaza und im „Westjordanland“) geben würde.  Das Ganze hat nur einen gravierenden Nachteil, der die Umsetzung von vornherein torpedieren wird:

Die „Zweistaatenlösung“ wird sowohl von der israelischen als auch von der palästinensischen Bevölkerung mehrheitlich (mit jeweils über 70%) abgelehnt — dies laut aktuellen Umfragen jeweils von israelischen und palästinensischen Meinungsforschern.

Palästinensische Führer wiederholen fast gebetsmühlenartig den angeblichen Auftrag des Propheten, die Juden zu vernichten sowie ihren Anspruch auf das Land „vom Strom zum Meer“ – allerdings nur in arabischen Sendern, dem Westen vermittelt man ein anderes Bild. Laut einer aktuellen Umfrage – von palästinensischen Meinungsforschern – finden 73% der Bevölkerung von Gaza das Massaker vom 7. Oktober gut und richtig – trotz des immensen Leides, das es über sie gebracht hat[2].

Die israelische Bevölkerung war in den 1990er Jahren mehrheitlich für eine Zweistaatenlösung; die palästinensische Weigerung, Israels Existenzrecht anzuerkennen, sowie rund 30 Jahre Dauerbeschuß israelischer Dörfer und Städte sowie unzähliger anderer Terroranschläge mit dem Höhepunkt am 7. Oktober hat diese Zustimmung in Ablehnung umgewandelt: Das Vertrauen der Israelis jeder politischen Couleur, daß es mit einem Palästinenserstaat ein einigermaßen friedliches Mit- oder auch nur Nebeneinander geben könnte, ist praktisch auf dem Nullpunkt. Eine Umfrage vom Februar ergab, dass 44 % der Israelis glauben, dass der Terrorismus zunehmen würde, sollte ein palästinensischer Staat verwirklicht werden; in einer Umfrage Anfang dieses Monats stimmten 79% der jüdischen Israelis und 39% der arabischen Israelis der Aussage zu, „Es gibt keine Chance auf ein Friedensabkommen mit den Palästinensern in absehbarer Zukunft.“ Nach dem 7. Oktober wird eine Zweistaatenlösung als Belohnung für den Terrorismus gesehen.

Die Obsession vieler internationaler Politiker mit einer Zweistaatenlösung widerspricht eindeutig dem Willen der israelischen Öffentlichkeit und entspricht ganz sicher auch nicht dem, was die Palästinenser wollen. Es ist primär motiviert von einem zynischen Wunsch nach innenpolitischer Schadensbegrenzung[3].

• Quellen für diesen Beitrag: „Wer will eine Zweistaatenlösung? Weder Israelis noch Palästinenser“ von Israel Kasnett in „Israel Heute“, 22. März 2024, sowie meine breite Lektüre und Medienverfolgung zum Thema.

1. Israel’s Position ist eindeutig und gerechtfertigt: Waffenstillstand und damit einfachere Versorgung im Gegenzug für die Freilassung der Geiseln vom 7. Oktober; die Hamas hat bisher ein permanentes Ende der Kampfhandlungen verlangt; da scheint sich inzwischen etwas zu bewegen.  Die Schuldzuweisungen an Israel scheinen außerdem generell de rigeur: Obwohl es ein offenes Geheimnis ist, daß die Hamas ihre Terrorinfrastruktur in Zivileinrichtungen und Wohngebieten “einbettet”, und die Zivilbevölkerung teilweise daran hindert, sich in Sicherheit zu bringen, um die dadurch unvermeidbaren zivilen Opfer propagandistisch zu nutzen, und daß sich die Hamas einen Gutteil der internationalen Hilfszahlungen und -lieferungen unter den Nagel reißt, um damit aufzurüsten und ihre Kämpfer zu versorgen, und obwohl die Zivilopferzahlen, so wie sie vom Gesundheitsministerium in Gaza täglich veröffentlicht werden, statistisch unmöglich und daher unwahrscheinlich sind (schließlich ist das Gesundheitsministerium, wie das ganze offizielle Gaza, in den Händen der Hamas), wird alles was von dort kommt von den meisten internationalen Medien und Politikern für bare Münze genommen und Israel die Schuld am Leiden der Zivilbevölkerung gegeben.[↩]
2. Nachdem aus palästinensischer Sicht am 7. Oktober letztlich nur das getan wurde, was ihnen der Prophet aufgetragen hat (nämlich Juden töten), sehen sie den israelischen Gegenschlag natürlich als völlig ungerechtfertigt.[↩]
3. Aktuell in den USA, geht es um die Begrenzung von Stimmenverlusten bei der Präsidentenwahl im November ’24.[↩]

Obwohl ich ganz klar auf der Seite Israels stehe, und vielleicht sogar gerade deshalb, finde ich die zunehmende Gewalt jüdischer Siedler gegen die palästinensische Bevölkerung im Westjordanland seit dem Hamas-Massaker sehr problematisch und besorgniserregend.

Der Wunsch nach Rache für die Grausamkeiten, die Hamas am 7. Oktober gegen unschuldige Frauen, Männer und Kinder, darunter Säuglinge und alte Menschen, verübt hat, ist menschlich gesehen verständlich – aber die Täter kamen nicht aus dem Westjordanland,  und Selbstjustiz, die von Polizei und Militär unbehelligt bleibt, ist verkehrt und gefährlich.

Indem Israel diese Gewalt ignoriert, statt dagegen vorzugehen, riskiert es, auf das moralische Niveau seiner Feinde zu sinken, und die Unterstützung seiner Freunde zu verlieren.

Der moderne Staat Israel ist zwar ein sekularer Staat; die Siedler im Westjordanland berufen sich aber darauf, daß Gott das Land Israel verheißen hat; sie sollten daher nicht vergessen und ignorieren, was der selbe Gott gesagt hat: „Die Rache ist mein, ich werde vergelten.“

Despite my support for Israel, and perhaps even because of it, I deplore the increase of Israeli settler violence against the local Palestinian population in the West Bank since the Hamas massacre.

While the desire to exact revenge for the atrocities committed against innocent men, women and children, even babies and old folks, on October 7 is humanly understandable, the folks in the West Bank were not the perpetrators, and vigilante-style violence unchecked by police and military is wrong and dangerous.

By tolerating it rather than cacking down on it Israel risks joining its enemies in the moral gutter, and also risks losing the support of its allies.

While Israel is currently a secular state, the settlers in the Westbank appeal to God’s promise of the Land to the people of Israel; they should not forget and ignore that the same God said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.”

We read a lot about the hostages and other victims of the Hamas massacre in the south of Israel; here is an account how one resident of Jerusalem experienced October 7 and the days following it.

Tania Hammer[1] writes from Jerusalem:

For I desire loving kindness, not sacrifices;
devotion to God, rather than burnt offerings.
(Hosea 6:6).

Seven years ago, I moved from New York to Jerusalem. In these good years, I have hosted thousands of sabbath meals for travelers from every part of the world. Christians from the United States, participants in the Shabbat of a Lifetime program, have sung in my garden. A young Muslim man, a “lone soldier”—a member of the IDF without family in Israel—adopted me, or rather, I adopted him. People without family or connections are cherished in my home. Israel has welcomed me as a daughter, and I welcome newcomers as a sister. 

On October 7, the sabbath of the Rejoicing of the Torah, I wake early, to pray in quiet as the sun rises over the holy city. At 6:30 a.m. a siren sounds. I have heard only one siren in my seven years in Jerusalem. Another siren sounds at 8:30 a.m. I knock on a neighbor’s door. She has tears in her eyes; the television is at full volume. Even though I am a religious Jew and we do not watch television on the sabbath, my eyes are on the screen. Hamas has invaded the south. The impenetrable fence built to protect our communities on the Gaza border is gone.

The screen delivers its deluge. Mutilated, Be’eri, rapes, Nirim, hostages, Nova music festival, burned alive, Alumim, decapitations, Re’im, Hamas, dead babies. Words and sirens swirl in my head as I hide in the secure room. Another siren. Another. Another. Twelve in all. 

By Saturday night we are in the midst of a Jewish catastrophe. Fourteen hundred of our people are dead. Five thousand wounded. About 242 abducted, held hostage.  

Sunday, October 8. I rise early, as always, to pray. The country is mobilizing—three hundred thousand soldiers. The women in my neighborhood and I will mobilize loving kindness.

We decide to pack essentials for our people in uniform. They left home on the sabbath with nothing; we will fill their bags with things and with love. My women and I go to a pharmacy warehouse to get soaps, shampoos, feminine products, toothbrushes, toothpaste, wet wipes, and protein bars. I think fifty of each will do the trick. “Let’s get a hundred and see how we go,” one friend says.

We unload everything into my sukkah, the temporary dwelling I had built for the Festival of Tabernacles. The sukkah reminds us of our impermanence on earth. It is a reminder that we now understand, perhaps for the first time. 

I put a notice online that I am collecting essentials for our defenders in uniform. Within an hour, I receive substantial contributions from people who want to be a part of our “Packages of Love.” That’s what my women and I decide to call our project. One hundred bars of soap turn into one thousand. Hundreds of volunteers come in and out of my house, my garden, the sukkah. By nightfall, we have over a thousand packages.

Israel conscripts women. I decide that their packages will be wrapped in bright pink shopping bags from Rami Levi, a large chain store. They need their own things, and they’re going to have them in pink. We deliver the packages to the Lone Soldier centers for distribution.

Monday, October 9. Through the night and into the morning, supplies arrive at my doorstep. Volunteers from all over the world come and contribute their time and money, people I haven’t seen in a decade or have never seen before. School is canceled and we give the children paper and colored pens to write to our women and men in uniform. Our sisters, daughters, sons, brothers, uncles, aunts, cousins. This is not a war in a remote region—it is a war waged by our families at and in our homes, a war for our existence. 

Thousands of tourists who have come on pilgrimage for the Festival of Tabernacles are stranded, their flights canceled. The peaceful country they came to visit has become a country at war. They arrive at my home with gifts. We crank up the music; adults and children are happy to be doing something good in the face of evil, to have purpose. 

I receive a picture of our young people in uniform holding my packages. My heart sings. 

As new images of Hamas atrocities are broadcast, morale in the country and in my micro-operation falls. Though I am exhausted, I redouble my efforts. 

At Rami Levi, Arabs are joking with Jews, workers and customers alike. I tell everyone my shopping cart is for our defenders. An Arab tells me, “My son is fighting for Israel in Gaza now, pray for him too.” I show the cashier the packages we have made, and she tears up. “Your son will get a package too,” I tell her. She gives me a hug.

Monday ends. One thousand more packages. 

Tuesday, October 10. We are setting up tables, preparing for volunteers to begin. Even when we are quiet, our thoughts are with the fallen, the hostages, those incomprehensible images, our grieving people. Holy Bagel arrives with meals for all of us, gifted by a volunteer. British visitors come with more bagels for lunch. A volunteer from yesterday finds me in the kitchen and hands me a beautiful bouquet. 

I go outside to see how things are progressing and find men of all ages bagging pads and tampons neatly for the women’s pink packages. They are chatting away. These men are professionals visiting from New York, “stuck” here until they can get a flight out. They are putting themselves to good use. 

Volunteers come and go between funerals and shiva houses of mourning and blood drives. One is going to an “emergency” wedding. The couple was supposed to get married next month, but they moved up the wedding so that the groom wouldn’t get drafted. His wedding was supposed to be a lavish affair, with over three hundred guests. Instead, there are fifty people with bread rolls and dips.

At the end of the day, three hundred more boxes of supplies arrive, all donated. More are expected to arrive tomorrow. 

Wednesday, October 11. The exhaustion is unlike any I have experienced. This project was as much for the volunteers as it was for our defenders. Whether people arrived with one toothbrush or a truckful, whether they stayed for a half hour or came every day, every single one of them made a difference. The project grew wings. 

Four days. Over five thousand packages, over $25,000 donated, over five hundred volunteers. 

On Thursday, October 12, I reclaim my house, tidy and clean, listen to music. On Friday, I go shopping on the Bethlehem Road and buy something from every shop. I want to support my local businesses, which will be devastated by this war. I go to my newspaper shop and the son of the proprietor who helps him on Fridays is there. He might be drafted next week, but for now he gets another sabbath with his family.  

I wish a Shabbat shalom, a sabbath of peace, to all of Jerusalem. I light the usual candles and an an extra one for the precious kidnapped souls in Gaza. We are at war, but these past few days of witnessing the love and gratitude of all who volunteered fill me with a bit of peace. “Be strong and resolute; do not be terrified or dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go” (Josh. 1:9).

This article was first published on November 14, 2023 by First Things.
Copyright © 2023 by Tania Hammer and First Things. Used by permission.

1. Tania Hammer grew up in Sydney, Australia, moved to New York when she was 22 and found herself in Israel for her 50th birthday – an Aliyah dream come true! She works at a gallery in Jerusalem and is a student of life. Tania is an Orthodox woman with a progressive take on Torah. She started a popular Facebook group for Anglo divorcees and widow/ers called SDEI. But her crowning glory is her daughter on whose footsteps she followed to come to Israel.[↩]