Hassan ImranAbstract: The two-state solution and the logic of partition between an Israel and a Palestine has come to be widely considered outdated, and we have witnessed the re-emergence of the one-state logic that had itself fallen out of favor with the Oslo Accords and the negotiations that followed.[i] The paper explains the theoretical frameworks of some of these proposals (binationalism, cosociationalism, multiculturalism, and confederalism) and then divides them into four categories based on the solutions they offer to the major contested issues, such as Jerusalem and the refugee issue, as well as the political positions of those who have proposed them. This paper suggests a division into four categories: first, Israeli proposals for assimilation that aim to eliminate Palestinian identity and reinforce the status quo of One Israeli State with first class citizenships for Jews and, at best, second or third class citizenships for Arabs; secondly, confederal proposals aiming to share the same land while maintaining each community’s separate identity; thirdly, unitary proposals suggesting fusing the identities of both and orchestrating a new mutual identity; and finally Palestinian original proposals based on the British unkept promise in the 1939 White Paper and the PLO’s original stance of One Palestinian State for both Arabs – whether they be Muslims or Christians – and Jews. The paper goes on to scrutinize these solutions based on various different criteria. Finally, the paper deals with possible scenarios based on a general reading of the current course of action.
[i] See: Edward Djerejian, Marwan Muasher, Nathan Brown. (2018). Two States or One? Reapprising the Israeli-Palestinian mpasse. Washington: Carnigie, Baker Institute.