How the Two-State Solution Is Working Out

Family and friends of siblings Noa and Gideon Chiel, who were killed in the Nova party by Palestinian militants, mourn during their funeral on October 18 in Achuzat Barak, Israel.
Amir Levy/Getty Images

How the Two-State Solution Is Working Out

The current terror war shows why the peace process was doomed from the start.

Hamas’s attack on Israel has great symbolic meaning. The day before was the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War. But this wasn’t the only important recent anniversary. September 13 was the 30th anniversary of the Oslo i Accords, the basis of the modern Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Oslo i was supposed to culminate in the “two-state solution”—where Israel and an independent State of Palestine composed of the West Bank and Gaza would coexist peacefully.

Thirty years on, this is what the two-state solution looks like:

In the aftermath of Hamas invading Israel and rampaging from town to town, raping women, beheading babies, and carting hostages back to Gaza, one would think a “two-state solution” would be the last thing on the minds of the international community. Yet since the attack started, leaders from around the world have been bringing up just that:

  • “The fundamental way out of the conflict lies in implementing the two-state solution and establishing an independent State of Palestine.” (China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • “Even at this tragic moment, we recall the importance of working towards a lasting and sustainable peace through the reinvigorated efforts in the Middle East Peace Process.” (Josep Borrell, European Union foreign policy chief)
  • “Denial of the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people, particularly that of an independent and sovereign state, is the main cause of the permanent Israeli-Palestinian tension.” (Moussa Faki Mahamat, chairperson of the Commission of the African Union)
  • “The breakout of renewed violence in Israel-Palestine is regrettable. Why don’t the two sides implement the two-state solution?” (Yoweri Museveni, president of Uganda)

Is there any chance of the two-state solution being salvaged? Would it work?

The truth is, it has already been implemented for years—in Gaza.

Per the Oslo Accords, Israel agreed to withdraw from certain Palestinian territories. The West Bank became a patchwork of lands, some controlled by Israel and some by the new Palestinian Authority (PA). But Gaza was a different story. Under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2005, Israel completely withdrew from Gaza. From 2005 to now, none of Gaza was under the control of the Israeli military. Calling Gaza “occupied territory” ignores the fact that Israel hasn’t controlled Gaza for almost 20 years.

The PA is run by Fatah, a socialist party with terrorist roots less radical than Hamas. After a power struggle that culminated in war, Hamas took full control of Gaza in 2007. Since then, it has ruled the territory as a de facto state under an Islamist government, and Israel let it be.

Hamas has its own government, laws, military and foreign policy. It has its own border force monitoring who comes in and out of Gaza. It has its own economy—mainly comprised of humanitarian aid and clandestine funding from Iran and Qatar. The only things Israel shared with Gaza were the shekel as currency and use of some utilities.

Compared with the West Bank, Gaza’s relations with Israel were much more straightforward. There were no squabbles on who controlled which sectors. There were no conflicts between Gazans and Israeli settlements; all Israeli settlements were abandoned in 2005. There were no disputes on who would control holy sites on the border. Israel treated Gaza as an independent state. And if Gaza would have declared independence and peace, Israel would have recognized it in a heartbeat.

Gaza doesn’t exist as a diplomatically recognized entity mainly because that would imply recognition of Israel, something Gaza would never do. Hamas also wants control of the West Bank, but its priority is the destruction of the “Zionist regime.”

The premise of the two-state solution is that the Arab-Israeli conflict is about land. Israel gave Gaza everything it asked for—despite the constant barrage of rockets over Ashkelon and Ashdod, despite Hamas terrorist cells in the West Bank, and despite the millions of dollars’ worth of funding from Iran.

Yet we are still getting videos like this:

Hamas isn’t opposing Israel out of resistance to a nonexistent occupation. The scenes above happened because Hamas hates Jews, pure and simple.

Why doesn’t the two-state solution work? Because Hamas doesn’t want a two-state solution. It wants a one-state solution where all Jews are drowned in the Mediterranean and the territory from Dan to Beersheba is turned into a Taliban-esque jihadist state. And plenty of supporters on the Palestinian street wholeheartedly agree with Hamas’s end goal.

There can never be peace with this kind of adversary.

Hosea 5:13 is a prophecy that the two-state solution would be a lethal quagmire Israel would trap itself in. It reads: “When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb: yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound.”

Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry writes in Jerusalem in Prophecy:

Studying this verse in the original Hebrew reveals that both Ephraim (Britain) and Judah (called “Israel” today) go to Assyria (or Germany—to prove this fact, request our free booklet Germany and the Holy Roman Empire).

Why do the Jews go to Germany, and what is Judah’s wound? The word wound is number 4205 in Strong’s Concordance; it means “in the sense of binding up: a bandage, i.e. remedy ….” GeseniusHebrew-Chaldee Lexicon defines it this way: “the pressing together, binding up of a wound; hence used figuratively of a remedy applied to the wounds of the state ….” In other words, the remedy IS the wound! …

Is the peace pact with the Arabs the Israeli wound that God refers to in Hosea 5:13? There would have been no peace pact if Judah would have trusted God instead of men.

The current terror war shows how this diplomatic two-state “remedy” is actually a big wound that seems unhealable.

There is hope, however. The same Bible that prophesies of Judah’s wound also prophesies of the solution to Israel’s problems. This won’t come by an agreement devised by men but through the direct intervention of God Himself. God promises to give Israel—and the whole world—the peace, safety and security that no two-state solution could ever bring.

To learn more, request a free copy of Jerusalem in Prophecy.