Tel Aviv, Israel. January 5, 2018.: Israel and Palestine’s Two state solution is an opening in a continuous revolving door of opportunity for world leaders to bridge existing gaps in modern era development policies. To strengthen cross-border international ties, permanently, fortifying sustained regional growth for Middle-East states.
Land is a limited resource; however plentiful religions and people become, that single fact remains definitely certain.
More land for Israel does not mean less recognition of a Palestinian state. Or less acknowledgment of Arab statehood. Or less Islamic religious existence.
Just a sifting continuum.
US Israel Relations
President Trump’s December 6th, 2017 announcement to move US Israel embassies to Jerusalem, creating Israel’s new de facto capital was a major stepping stone toward solving a critical diplomatic problem in Middle East peace negotiations. A wise political decision, other nations theoretically embrace.
“It would be folly to assume that repeating the exact same formula would now produce a different or better result. Therefore, I have determined that it is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.” President Trump said.
Congressional Republican Mia Love also showed her support for Israel and Trump’s decision:
“I’m proud that the United States stands by, appreciates, and recognizes the sovereignty of our good friend and ally, Israel.””
Every White House since Harry Truman’s Administration wrestled with this Jacobian predicament of Middle East development and seemingly unquellable tensions between two of Jerusalem’s not too distant philosophical and historically neighboring cousins.
As world leaders pick sides on statehood for both Israel and Palestine, people of that region are unfairly categorized as being for or against progress. Of what is described as separate world orders, as struggles for leadership and recognition bubble into the climatic destruction of detrimental proportion evidenced by terrorism, senseless violence, endless bloodshed, ultimately creating a sea of catastrophic havoc.
Gaining US support
At its defining moment, amidst its tumultuous past, Israel attained US support for a Jewish state due to strong pre-existing community ties within American society, its willingness to proactively accelerate development, and lasting sympathies for numerous abhorrent atrocities endured during World War II under Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich. These unique conditions solidified US Israeli relations at a pivotal time in its fledgling development, providing sound organizational footing for future expansion of military, trade, and economic relations overseas.
US Foreign Aid to Israel, in 2017, amounted to a total of 3.1 billion dollars. And despite budget cutbacks, US aid remains undiminished, namely because Israel forms stable developments considering overall regional volatility among border states Jordan, Egypt, and most notably war-torn Syria. Governance changes hands peacefully, providing a unified global partner to ally with.
Investing in Israel paid off. Development of USB storage, Intel’s first PC processor, and Google’s suggest function are all Israeli pioneered inventions. Even Israels Uzi submachine gun is highly coveted for its accuracy, precision, and unflinching recoil system.
Arab Israeli Relations
Palestine and Israel, formed out of a single geo-political arena, both vie for global acceptance in a new age of increased media presence fostered by permanent ever demanding trappings of globalization.
Palestine’s organization is bifurcated priotizing development on a less rigid and more insulated scale. It declared its independence in 1998. And for decades, two groups: Hamas and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which gave way to Palestinian National Authority (1993) effectively represented opposition to Israeli governance throughout different forms of diplomatic negotiations.
The State of Palestine, a United Nations non-member observer state, effectively represents both groups, as of 2013.
Muslims, albeit extreme fundamentalist groups within Islam’s faith, openly threatened to eradicate both Jews and Israel. In contrast, a two-state compromise, for some Arabs (97% Muslim), appeared an unjustified covenant between people who genetically makeup separate and yet distinctly equal parts of a developmental template carved from Mediterranean shores.
With Isreal’s elimination as its counterbalances, a two-state compromise become a more feasible choice for economic change and progressive development.
A two-state solution works best
Structurally renovating a once unified empire into a modern state takes a bit of environmental manipulation and some dislocation of communities.
People’s decisions are generally polarized by surrounding individuals. All decisions, whether to work, eat, sleep, or play are determined on two levels: one communal and two individual. The communal level is most prominent in overall development because its structure precedes individual existence; and religious ties are society’s fundamental communal level relationship, affecting individuals to an even greater extent than simple geographics alone.
Making a two-state solution more effective at completing substantial economic improvement because religious similarities unify individuals easily.
One can be born into either (geography or religion), move into and out of either, and somewhat limited by both; and yet religion has such a compelling nature over human choices that geography by itself cannot seem to garner ultimate control over it. Does religion make one more personally accountable? Maybe, maybe not. Religion, however, has a purely human aspect that geography does not. Geography exists without individuals. Religion cannot. That simple fact places it in as a supreme response mechanism to most other socio-economic ties formed amongst mankind.
Second, Israel has no civil war history in its 70 years of existence, come May 14, 2018. That is internal conflict mounting on disrupting underlying government power structure and stability of day to day commerce. While regionally, beset with conflict -both historical and modern day, attempting to shift its economic ideals, Israel remains permanently steadfast.
History and the future of a two-state solution
According to Henry Kissinger, a man whom most individuals agree with on foreign policy:
A serious peace process presumes a reciprocal willingness to compromise.
At least six attempts at a two-state solution failed. And while it appears daunting, so too was creating a nation-state of Israel to begin with.
Even physical science, not just political science, historically recognizes failed attempts, before achieving emphatic success. Take WD-40. Its inventor tried and failed 39 times, learning from each mistake, until finally achieving success.
Resettlement of refugees is a major sticking point that negotiations ultimately hinge upon. Israel refuses admittance of Palestinian refugees into Israel. However, dislocated people still multiply. Even under meager circumstances.
Negotiations on a two-state solution can either take shape in a conversation of how much land and how many refugees. Or it can be about an equal trade-off of one for recognizing Israel and normalizing government relations i.e. ending Palestinian terror attacks on Israeli citizens.
Both targets are critical for regional prosperity. Independent and integrated societies provide added safety net and stabilized economic growth everyone depends upon.