United States President Donald Trump said he would accept what both parties like and that he could live with either, but can the two relevant parties do likewise, and which format are they supposed to choose, asks the Saudi Gazette.
“Trump’s comments urging [Benjamin] Netanyahu to ‘hold back on colonies for a little bit’ might not be too much of a sacrifice for Netanyahu, not after the recent surge of pro-colonies moves, including the approval of 6,000 new housing units and a highly controversial legalisation bill aimed at regularising nearly 4,000 illegal outposts on the West Bank. The Right is pushing Netanyahu to increase the colonies in the West Bank, while accelerating construction in [occupied] East Jerusalem. Israel prefers the status quo to making the politically painful concessions that a negotiation would require. That makes the odds of meaningful negotiations, over one or two states, remote and much less an actual agreement.”
By stating that he would be content with whatever the Israelis and Palestinians liked, Trump trampled over decades of consensus on a two-state solution, and mildly asked Netanyahu to ease back on colonies, said Lebanon’s Daily Star.
“Such language only emboldens Israel, which, relying on the US veto has repeatedly proven that it can ignore the international community and every Security Council attempt to rein in its violations. The new US administration has put the Palestinians in a corner and at a crossroads tantamount to waging political war on their aspirations and justified expectations from the US and the international community, taking into consideration the futility of any action by the latter or the Arab League.
US President Donald Trump’s administration seems to be indifferent to the idea of two states with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, suggesting that it is not the indispensable solution, said the Jordan Times. “All those who recklessly dismiss the two-state solution should at least come up with ‘alternatives’ that are viable and sustainable. The choice for Israel is simple: Either two states living side by side in peace and harmony or one country in which Israelis and Palestinians would have to be governed democratically. If, as Netanyahu hinted, Israel would settle for two systems for two peoples, that would be blatant apartheid. A real democratic state, on the other hand, cannot have the Jewish character Israel seeks — an idea Trump parroted, making is a precondition for any peace “deal” — and on which it does not seem to want to compromise. The one-state solution would, therefore, be a prescription for perpetual conflict between the two different people and religions, an outcome no one in his right mind would want to see happen,” the paper said.
The press conference of Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu basically ‘mourned’ the ruse that is the ‘two-state solution, said Oman’s Al Watan. “The so-called two-state solution only served to speed up the cancer of colonisation to unprecedented rates, bringing about many changes to the reality on the ground, and leading to the judaisation of Palestinian areas, lands and sacred sites. It is actually a ruse for implementing a one-state solution, in which two million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip will join the unitary and Jewish state of Israel. What Netanyahu relied on when announcing the one-state solution alongside Trump is that there is a change in the Arab world and a normalisation movement, as Arab countries now view the Israeli entity as an ally in the fight against Iran.”
_resources1_16a31069e4e_small.jpg)
