GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
we should have a one state solution, but covering the entire world
we should have a one state solution, but covering the entire world
Not just King Jordan but this is the International position. The UN mandate for the two states of Israel and Palestine to coexist is what every country in the world including USA (until Trump era) has been firm on. Now Trump whether intentionally or not has changed the equation a little bit. He did state last year that he doesn't really care about one state or two state. Like everything with Trump, it's hard to say whether what that means in some sort of a meaningful/policy shift/structural way or it's just Trump being Trump.King Abdullah of Jordan disagrees with me
Right, Trump's position could actually turn out positive if it involves:Not just King Jordan but this is the International position. The UN mandate for the two states of Israel and Palestine to coexist is what every country in the world including USA (until Trump era) has been firm on. Now Trump whether intentionally or not has changed the equation a little bit. He did state last year that he doesn't really care about one state or two state. Like everything with Trump, it's hard to say whether what that means in some sort of a meaningful/policy shift/structural way or it's just Trump being Trump.
Trump recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has to a large extent muddied the waters for a two state solution now. Australia is considering it. In a few years, we might even see UK and Europe consider it. If this happens, then the original two state solution with East Jerusalem going to Palestine is over.
I think every Arab country in the world or any country really other than USA and to an extent Australia at the moment can see just how dangerous this can potentially be for the region so King Abdullah's position is not surprising. But we are in crazy times with a crazy man at the helm and things can change very fast
Right, Trump's position could actually turn out positive if it involves:
a) Palestinian refugees being considered as refugees under UNHCR like every other refugee in the world, rather than UNRWA
b) The recognition that 600K settlers in the West Bank, with no intention to pull out has completely invalidated the two state idea to begin with.
Unfortunately, the other way it could go (and it's seemingly more likely) is to:
a) Force Palestinian refugees to give up any right to return
b) Mean the complete dissolution of any Palestinian representation
c) Entrench apartheid in the West Bank, and embolden Israel's policies further.