The Three-Option Plan for Exploring Simultaneous Palestinian Statehood and Relocation
Why simultaneously exploring two opposing options may hold a next-level solution
Photo By Pixabay / Wikilmages
The Three-Option Plan for Exploring Simultaneous Palestinian Statehood and Relocation
By Daniel Ben Abraham
The recent phone calls between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu after the Prime Minister’s statements opposing a two-state solution present the need for a new idea. Israel’s approach, and the entire world’s approach to the Palestinian problem needs a new perspective.
Israeli officials have effectively said all of the following in recent weeks:
- that Palestinians should be relocated,
- that Israel has no intention of relocating them,
- that Israel must control security from Jordan to the sea,
- that there will be no Two-State solution, and,
- that a Two-State solution is not completely off the table.
Even amongst Israel’s allies, frustration with Israel is growing, and support weakening, after Netanyahu’s comments. Still, Israel cannot be expected to shoulder the burden alone of a global problem instigated by outside forces.
And meanwhile, Iran is taking full advantage in instigating more conflict while expanding its nuclear program.
As reported by the Jerusalem Post, President Isaac Herzog recently said in Davos, “If you ask an average Israeli now about his or her mental state, nobody in his right mind is willing now to think about what will be the solution of the peace agreements.” And that Israelis have, “lost trust in the peace processes because they see that terror is glorified by our neighbors.” Most Palestinians don't want a two-state solution either, only 17% according to a November 14th Survey by the Arab World for Research and Development, with 74% wanting a Palestine "from the river to the sea".
The world is likewise polarizing around this conflict, as the international community doesn't understand that any Palestinian state under the current Palestinian ideology would just be a means to "bring in the heavy artillery" - a stepping stone to better attack Israel from. A Palestinian capitol in East Jerusalem or militarized state would just be an excuse to bring in a million soldiers and start an all out war against Israel that would draw the whole world in. The past 16 years in Gaza is proof of what the Palestinians would do with full statehood. Yet, the status quo cannot continue forever either.
Netanyahu is under increased international pressure to accept a pathway to a Palestinian state, by an international community who do not understand or care that most Palestinians’ goal is to destroy Israel, not live alongside her in peace. Meanwhile, the Jewish people are a moral people, who neither want to control Palestinians nor accept their terrorism.
So, here’s one possible solution. Israel need not choose between Palestinian statehood or relocation; it can explore both options simultaneously. If the Palestinians continue to oppose Israel, under such a plan, they will increasingly create a global momentum for their relocation into the Sinai. At some point, any idea will be better than continuous war with no plan whatsoever. Especially, as allies like Saudi Arabia, regardless reality, demand some path forward to be able to unite with Israel to focus on Iran’s imminent nuclearization.
A new perspective of the problem:
Humanity approaches the potential resolution of all wars incorrectly, per theories I discuss in my article, “Humanity is in its Infancy in Understanding War.” The problem is not so much individuals nor their leaders, but the ideological dynamics of the group collective psyche, which controls both, and is the true reason for all war. Since the dawn of mankind, humans are tribal, and face threats in groups on a subconscious, primal level. These collective group “hive” mindsets are the primary motivators of human group conflict, and rational analysis of individuals a distant secondary. Abbas and Arafat were unable to make peace as adherents controlled by the broader ideological entity, the "Palestinian cause." While often tribally-defined in the region, groups can actually form around nearly any shared interest or ideology.
The Palestinian problem is not ultimately about land, nor money, nor religion, though many Palestinians hate Israel because it is Jewish. The problem ultimately is the dynamics of the group’s ideological in-group versus out-group polarization, which I explain in my writings is the key to all war. The problem is not one of making peace with leaders, but one of ideological momentum, and must be dealt with on a metaphysical level, according to principles I am developing within the PeaceMatrix™ system called PeaceMatrix™ Entitativity theory. These principles resolve conflicts by strategically addressing the ideological dynamics of the parties’ collective mindsets.
A key cause of the current paradigm is that today those who merely want to alleviate Palestinian suffering are ideologically aligned with those who want to destroy Israel. They have the same initial goal - a Palestinian state. This problem exists across the Palestinian territories, the broader Arab community, the broader Muslim community, and the even broader international global community. Without a political process, the Palestinians have nowhere to direct their inherent, tribal, ideological in-group versus out-group polarization except at Israel. They can’t be constructive in improving their own lives when their focus is opposing Israel. Anyone who attacks Israel whether verbally or militarily, like Hamas, is elevated within Palestinian society, because the broader ideological collective psyche’s dynamics channel status, power, resources, and benefits to those who instigate opposition to Israel.
The pressure from this global problem is wrongfully laid on Israel’s shoulders; not Iran for sponsoring terror, not Arab states for not helping more, and not the broader international community for accepting terrorism and making unreasonable demands. The international community can no more demand a Palestinian capitol in East Jerusalem than demand that India make half of New Delhi a capitol of a new Islamic state; or half of London, or half of Paris, or half of Moscow, or half of Beijing be capitols of new Islamic states in those countries. Since a main reason for the current paradigm is that those who genuinely want to help the Palestinians are united ideologically with those who want to destroy Israel, the first thing we need to do is separate those two viewpoints and groups. The strategy must help one at the expense of the other.
A second reason for the current situation is that with every peace offer in the past 75 years, Palestinians have felt they had nothing to lose, and believed they had only to gain from continuing the conflict. It’s “try to conquer Israel”, or, “stay at the status quo”. Like a mugger to whom you must return his weapon after you thwart his attack, he has nothing to lose from trying again. Culturally, there is no equivalent word in Arabic for the concept of “compromise,” only "resistance", and "more", whether they have 1% of the land, or 99.6%, which Arabs already control of the Middle East anyway. Approximately 72% of Palestinian support October 7th style terrorism, and the vast majority support never-ending war against Israel until Israel no longer exists. Gaza has been its own de facto independent Palestinian state for 16 years and all it has done is wage war against Israel. Some say it is still less moral to keep the Palestinians in that predicament than to relocate them, not just for Israel, but for other Arab states not taking Palestinian refugees also. We must therefore also utilize a carrot and stick approach, that provides some consequence, alternative route, or both, if Palestinians reject the offer or fail to meet reasonable requirements.
A third understanding is that the Palestinian “cause” is a living ideological entity, and if peace were made, the Palestinian cause would die, and it doesn’t want to die. See more on PeaceMatrix™ Entitativity theory in my other writings. So, the third thing we must do, is address the fact that the Palestinian cause ideology wants to continue, in some form.
The solution:
(Subscribe for more)