In case of failure of the "Two States for two peoples solution", we should have already prepared a "Plan B" to save the situation. Otherwise we risk falling deep into chaos.

My idea is a special federal solution:

Three states for two people in one land: 
One federal state which has supranational sovereignty on the undivided land and over two independent nation-states, each one ruling on their citizen personally.
There will be no demographic problem anymore: every citizen could live wherever he wants and will vote only for its own national parliament.
The federal government will be composed on a parity basis.
Jerusalem will have a special status as the capital of the Federation.
Like the conflict itself, this solution has no real precedent, but will become a living reality if you want so.

Here are more texts about this solution:

What do you think about it?

Views: 104

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I realy agree with your idea Yeuda, but my question is will the politians of the two states be flexble for this miningfull idea?
i dought.
Thank you dear Higiro for your answer.
You are right, the politicians are probably not ready for this solution now. But they depend on their respective public opinion. When the two peoples will be ready, politicians will follow.
We have to begin and to make this idea known. When everyone will understand that there is no other solution, it will be ready waiting for them!
I do not think that he two state solution will fail , but what you call "Plan B" should be part of "Plan A" - we need a conffederation as both state and both societies will benefit from a confederation.

to have confederation we need first to have two state stage where the Palestinian society will be stregnthen socially, economically and have the organizational capcity to get the level of productivity and social services we have in Israel. then it will be more reasonable to make the confederation.
Hi Neri, thank you for your reaction.
What you say is very logical and the best option.
But you know that our Middle East is not very rational.
Even if a palestinian State will be created in the West Bank, it will be militarily controlled by Israel for reasons of security, and to prevent a Gaza situation in Jerusalem. It will be no more than a new kind of Bantoustan. We can't expect it to be developped like Israel.
On the contrary, if Palestinians will be citizens of a federation, their level of life will quickly become close to the one of Israeli palestinians.
It is important I think to have a federation, and not a confederation: it will be the only soveign on the territory, and only one army will control it. So it will be possible to prevent future nationalist conflicts.
After touring today in the rural surroundings of Nablus, ( with Combatant for Peace)and looking at the so many settlements which tearing the area into strips - so that no whole state would be able to be founded there...I feel I like your idea, Yehuda. I am not sure how it can be done, but it is worthy being consider and be thought of.
Hi Hirit!

Thank you for your encouraging answer.
The idea of Federation Israel-Palestine not only answers the situation in the West Bank, it will give to the Palestinians Israelis too a country where they feel at home without loosing any of the rights they enjoy today.

It deals with the deaper religious level of the conflict too: the Hamas says that "All the land of Palestine is Waqf, belongs to Allah". The idea of a supranational sovereign has the same meaning. But don't we have the same God? So we could speak with Hamas, or a part of it.

It is not contractitory with the two states solution either: if Obama will succeed at imposing a peace ageement, the Palestinians will find themselves anyway in a kind of Bantoustan controled by Tsahal. A federation still would be necessary to lift the walls of fear and mistrust.

You are invited to read more, to support by signing up at the Facebook group and blog, and more actively if you want!

Shavua tov and regards,

I forgot:

I have not been in the Territories for a long time. Could you tell me if you go back touring there?
I am not sure that you have received the links:!/group.php?gid=13085766625&ref=ts
I like this idea. I also doubt that the two state solution can work. I would like to know, what do the Palestinians here on the forum (and in general) think about this?
Thank you for your answer dear Basil.

An agreement based on the pre-1967 with some land swapping as been agreed by Israel in Taba, and the last time by Olmert to Abbas
The main point is not the past and who is guilty of the failure. Both sides probably:
Anyway the two states solution wouldn't have solved the problem of Palestinians of israeli citizenship who live in a country who define itself jewish. Nor the problem of the refugees. And 22% of territory state would have left enough people unsatisfied, violente opposition would have resulted in the return of military control by Israel:
You said rightly : The two states solution is basically dying. That what counts. So what next?
Do you agree with the idea of federation.

If you do, you are invited to sign up:!/group.php?gid=13085766625


Why do you claim that "The two states solution is basically dying" when we have proxiimity talks, and settelments freeze?
I agree that the Arab Israeli issue willnot be solved easily within Israel, but making them one with the non-israeli arabs of palestine can make more problems and create more tenssion. and Israel has its own need to change, the Jewish israelis too need to change their world view as many jewish israelis are aware of the jewish-democratic paradox.

I think that federation has a lo of advantages, but we must have two state stage for the sake of the palestinians for thier ability to developed post-occupation free democratic all inclusive political system and economic strength. calling for federation before the two state stage harm the huge effort needed for that stage and work against our effort to change our reality.
Hi Neri!

Because we have been trying for 20 years now and because the situation on the ground is worse than ever: The West Bank became an archipelago of small islands, severed from Gaza, where Hamas has taken the power and will keep it.

Having only indirect talks is a sad regress comparing to the previous direct negociations.

Hamas is storing weapons in the West Bank and is very strong in East-Jerusalem.
As soon as the PA will become a state, Hamas will launch the seconde phase of its civil war against PLO. Everything that Fayad has achieved those last years with israeli cooperation will be destroyed. So it would be much safer precisely to move directly from the current quasi-state autonomy to the federation. Sorry for not being more optimistic, I think that my analysis is realistic.

Anyway, the federation is not contradictory with the two-states solution. The opposite is true: in my view the Federation means two real states plus one state, two non-territorial nation states with a federal state capping over; the protection of the Federal Army of Defense will ensure what you rightly wish, "their ability to developed post-occupation free democratic all inclusive political system and economic strength". All the efforts already done for a palestinian state would be included in the Three States federal solution and not lost at all. The previously israeli palestinians could seemingly help a lot their brothers from the Territories with teir experience of democracy.
Thank you for your answer, Basil. I hope more Palestinians will comment as well.



Latest Activity

Mauricio San Miguel Llosa updated their profile
Oct 4
Amir Salameh updated their profile
Jun 25
Fredda Goldfarb updated their profile
Apr 15
Dr. David Leffler posted a blog post
Apr 9


"Like" us on Facebook

Promote MEPEACE online



© 2019   Created by Eyal Raviv. Supported by One Region, One Future.   ..

Feedback | Report an Issue  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service