`The vanishing prospects for a two state solution´ - Views on the

Israeli-Palestinian conflict

by Johanna Ospina Garnica, UPEACE Centre The Hague

Review of the lecture presented by Robert H. Serry, a former Dutch career diplomat who
served to NATO and the UN, on September 9, 2015. (For more information on UPEACE Centre
The Hague and the lecture series “Peace Building in Progress” see: www.upeace.nl).

In his lecture on `The vanishing prospects for a two state solution´, Mr. Serry shared his
experience after having served seven years as the United Nations Special Coordinator for the
Middle East Peace Process in Jerusalem. He shared his views on the so-called `Two State
Solution´ (TSS), the current situation between Israel and Palestine and the persistent
direction towards a `One State reality´.

Mr. Serry started his lecture by explaining that, during his years serving in Jerusalem, the
American government led three failed peace initiatives that did not meet the urgent and
essential need to establish a Palestinian state as foreseen in the TSS. These peace initiatives
were followed by several events: The wars in the Gaza Strip that left the territory in
devastating conditions, the pursuit of statehood at UN level by the Palestinian government,
and joining the International Criminal Court in April 2015 – a move that was not well
accepted by Israel.

According to Mr. Serry, the interconnection of these three aspects (peace negotiations, war
in the Gaza Strip and pursuing state recognition at the UN level) has produced one of the
deepest crises that stand in the way of the TSS in the last 25 years. These circumstances
have led both parties to share an uncomfortable condition that he described as `living
unhappily like Siamese twins in one state´.

Before explaining his proposal about how to prevent the worsening of this situation, he
presented three drivers that in his opinion move parties away from peace and accordingly
are an obstacle to achieve a TSS in the near future: Settlements, Palestinian disunity, and
regional upheaval combined with international impotence.

1. Settlements: Building settlements across the `Green Line´ is illegal under

international law, as noted in the Fourth Geneva Convention, article 49, that forbids
individual or mass forcible transfers by the occupying Power and therefore is not
compatible with the TSS. Currently, there are more than 500,000 settlers living in
the `Area C´ which is 70% of the West Bank and remains under Israeli security
control. Mr. Serry pointed out that, to keep any real chance to achieve a TSS, Israel
must stop or at least restrain the settlement growing and take effective measures on
settler violence.
 2. Palestinian disunity: Another obstacle to achieve the TSS is the deep political
division between the Palestinian political forces, Fatah in the West Bank and Hamas
in the Gaza Strip. This internal division has a big impact in the attempt to accomplish
a peace agreement that leads to the end of the conflict. On the one hand, Hamas
refuses to recognize Israel as a legitimate state and has an important responsibility
in the terrorist attacks that undermined the Oslo Accords and have escalated the
conflict in the last years. On the other hand, the recent peace efforts have focused
on dialogues between Israel and Ramallah, setting aside Hamas´ position. Despite
the formation of the Government of National Consensus (GNC) last year it is still not
possible to know how Palestinian leaders will work together to meet the needs and
interests of their people.

3. Regional upheaval combined with uncertainty / international impotence: In

previous decades one the main affairs of the Middle East diplomacy was the Arab-
Israeli conflict, but nowadays the scenario has changed dramatically. The impacts
caused by the so-called `Arab Spring´ turned the hope for social change into an
`Islamic Summer´ characterised by high levels of violence and instability in several
countries in the region. In these circumstances the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its
peace process could seem like a low relevant issue. However, the conflict remains an
aggravating factor for the stability of the region, as it remains unsolved and
outbreaks as happened last year in Gaza continue to pour oil on the regional fire.

Mr. Serry explained that in order to make real progress to achieve a peace agreement
among the parties and thus contribute to the regional stability it is necessary to reconsider
the TSS paradigm, which has not worked so far. He shared two observations on the
importance to look for alternatives to the TSS, taking into account that the one-state
Solution is not desirable for both parties and the emerging one-state reality increases the
potential for tensions and the intensification of the conflict.

First, it is needed to deal with the Gaza Strip as an existential priority. The last wars have
generated dramatic conditions in the territory and have made reconstruction almost
impossible. Given the urgent need to take action, it is important to propose solutions that
progressively lead to full reconstruction of Gaza and end its isolation. These solutions
include rebuilding Shehaiya, developing projects on water and energy supply or connecting
Gaza with the West Bank through either a road or a railway. A Palestine Reconstruction
Authority under international auspices could be indispensable to achieve this goal.

Second, the current concept of TSS needs renewed scrutiny if future negotiations are going
to have any chance to succeed. In the last years some Israeli political leaders and experts
have expressed the idea that the TSS paradigm is almost dead and have introduced the idea
of `co-habitation´ and a `con-federation´ between Israel and Palestine instead. This `con-
federation´ would allow Israeli settlers to live in the West Bank in the same proportional
number of Palestinians that would be allowed to live inside the Israeli borders. In this
scenario Jerusalem would be divided as capital for both parties and an international force
could guarantee security in Palestine. The idea of a more hybrid TSS deserves further
consideration and might open the road to an arrangement in which connecting becomes
more important to both sides than dividing.