President Trump, in an off-handed manner, brought up the possibility of a one-state solution for Israel/Palestine. For years, the two state solution has been the dogma of international diplomacy.
At first I thought, Oh No. But let’s think about it.
The NY times commented on the idea, “There is no conceivable one-state solution that both parties will like.” But maybe that’s a good thing. At various times, depending on the circumstances, either Israel or Palestine has favored the two state solution. If one side wants it, the other side doesn’t. The timing is never right for both sides.
What would be the consequences of a one state solution? In 2015 there were 6.22 million Palestinians and 6.34 million Jews in the geographic area. The concern is that Palestinians have more children than Jews, but I suspect economic concerns will ameliorate the disparity. So we would be left with a 50/50 split. Boy, they might have to work together for solutions. Would this be any worse than the US split? Hamas and Likud might have to back off.
What about settlements, either Jewish or Palestinian? Such discussion would have to be handled jointly. The government leader might, on occasion, be Arab. Jerusalem would be truly an international city.
Another little secret. They are both Semitic peoples.
