Over the past few weeks, several countries have recognized Palestine as a country within the US imposed two-state narrative.
As western enablement of Israel’s genocide in Palestine continues, it becomes essential for western regimes to peddle the recognition of Palestine in sensationalist terms.
Prior to explaining the devious agenda behind this sensationalist ploy, let us briefly look at the background of the political charade underway.
As pointed out by the Israeli publication Ha’aretz, “Palestinian state began not with recognition of its existence but with a declaration of its right to exist. This occurred in November 1974 with the passing of UN General Assembly Resolution 3236… By the end of 1988, Palestine was recognized as a state by 78 countries…The Palestinians themselves have a network of embassies and diplomatic missions in 94 countries worldwide. The European Union, Jordan, Canada and the United States have all signed trade agreements with them.”
The two-state solution narrative was officialised via the Oslo Accords signed in 1993.
One of its staunchest critics was a prominent Palestinian academic, the late Edward Said, who is regarded as the leading intellectual authority on Palestinian matters globally.
As quoted by the Qatari government news channel Al-Jazeera, Said stated that the Oslo Accords were “an instrument of Palestinian surrender, a Palestinian Versailles.”
The-two state narrative never clarifies what specific elements of statehood it offers to Palestinians.
Since the Oslo Accords were signed, apartheid Israel has not even fulfilled its general aspects.
Since 1993, the region and the world’s geopolitical realities have changed dramatically.
The implementation of a two-state solution will not meet the basic realities of 2024.
Let us ask some fundamental questions.
Even if the two-state solution is implemented, it cannot address simple, on the ground realities.
Apartheid Israel has been murdering Palestinians on an industrial scale for decades.
Thus, if Palestinians were to demand, that for the sake of their safety, a future Israeli state must be completely demilitarized, will the zionist Israel accept this?
It is clear, the answer will be, “no”.
Palestinians will naturally ask for the right to build themselves up militarily, as all sovereign states do.
Will Israel accept this reality?
Again, the answer is an emphatic “no”.
A future Palestinian state is likely to have strong economic and military relations with Islamic Iran.
Will Israel accept this reality?
The answer to this question is also self-evident.
A Palestinian and Israeli state under the two-state scenario will have major opposing geopolitical priorities.
When this happens, states usually enter into intense security competition, which often leads to war.
This is even more acute in case of states that have a common land border.
No matter how western regimes spin the two-state solution, it does not fulfill the geopolitical realities of the present times.
This leads to the key question: Why are some western countries recognizing Palestine with such fanfare now?
Suh superficial political tokenism allows western regimes to play the “neutrality” card.
It creates space for socio-political maneuverability for regimes enabling Israel to continue the mass slaughter of Palestinians.
Israel is now widely recognized as a pariah.
The negative impact of this reality does not affect Israel alone but its western enablers as well.
By backing the Israeli genocide in Gaza, western regimes, specifically EU member states, have obliterated their own soft power.
This fact is acknowledged even by scholars of the European Council on Foreign Relations.
Recognition of Palestine as a state on paper gives EU the opportunity to wear the “objectivity” mask.
It should also be remembered that recent partition/two-state “solutions” do not create durable and lasting peaceful answers to deep problems.
Examples of Karabakh in Azerbaijan, Idlib province in Syria, Eastern Ukraine between 2015 and 2022, Sudan or even the two Koreas illustrate this point clearly.
On other hand, post-apartheid South Africa’s example, despites its gross economic mismanagement, provides a much better political solution compared to the above scenarios.