The “Two State Solution”

The language we use to discuss political solutions is crucial, and the phrase “two-state solution” has long been at the center of debates concerning Israel and Palestine. However, this terminology is problematic and requires reconsideration, especially in light of recent events and historical context.

After October 7th, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used the term “cleanse,” a word that should be eradicated from our vocabulary given its association with “ethnic cleansing.” This choice of language is not only insensitive but also deeply troubling. Ethnic cleansing is a grave crime against humanity, and using such terminology in political discourse is both irresponsible and inflammatory.

The idea of the “two-state solution” is also fraught with issues. The notion that the establishment of a Palestinian state is a “solution” to a “problem” is fundamentally flawed. Palestinians are not a problem to be solved; they are a stateless people whose right to self-determination must be recognized. The current framing suggests that both states—Israel and a potential Palestine—are on equal footing, when in reality, there is already an established Israeli state. The issue at hand is the recognition and establishment of a Palestinian state.

Referring to it as a “two-state solution” overlooks the existing imbalance of power and the historical context. The focus should be on the recognition and creation of a Palestinian state, addressing the needs and rights of the Palestinian people who have been stateless since being displaced from their land between the river and the sea.

Therefore, the conversation should shift from the ambiguous “two-state solution” to a more precise dialogue about recognizing and establishing the State of Palestine. This reframing acknowledges the historical injustice faced by Palestinians, the current genocide and urgent need to address famine, destruction and everything else Israel has perpetrated on innocent civilians and emphasizes the necessity of their right to statehood without implying that their existence is a problem needing a solution.

Recognizing the State of Palestine is not a “solution”; it’s a response to their state being taken for the founding of Israel and historic displacement of a whole people-a fundamental step toward justice and equity in the region. This perspective is often seen as controversial, but upon examining the history and the language used, it becomes clear that a shift in discourse is essential. The establishment of a Palestinian state should be viewed as an imperative step towards peace and justice, rather than a contentious solution to a perceived problem.