“The Economist” magazine thinks peace is possible. Their theory is that October 7 shook things up enough that both Israel and the Palestinians want things to change. October 7 and events since then have shaken me up, but I’ve come down on the opposite end of the teeter-totter. I see the end of Israel, and the increasing likelihood of another Holocaust. Perhaps the writers at the Economist don’t think pessimism sells as well as optimism? 

Here’s my reasoning: 1) Peace is unknown in the Middle East since the demise of the Ottoman Empire; 2) The two-state solution was conjured by the British in the 1920s and 30s, but it was never the preferred solution of either the Zionists or the Arabs/Palestinians. (In early iterations, Britain assumed it would be staying in the Middle East and could referee the unfriendly neighbors on occasion.) 3) Like it or not, Gaza voted for Hamas in 2005 just as Israel, through it multi-party system, voted for Netanyahu (many times over). Both want a single state solution (their own state). Israel has citizens who would opt for a two-state solution if it would bring peace, but they are currently not the majority. 

After WW II, when Britain could not get agreement on a solution, and everyone just wanted the Brits to go home, it placed the problem on the doorstep of the United Nations and left. The UN offered a two-state solution, which the Israelis reluctantly accepted. The Arabs and Palestinians rejected it, declared war when Israel declared independence, but lost the war. Jordan annexed the West Bank, Egypt took over Gaza, and Israel began governing the rest of Palestine. Many Arabs lost their homes during that war and continue to demand the “right to return.” Jordan accepted some of these as temporary refugees, but later sent them packing when they tried to take over Jordan. Meanwhile, Jews were purged by every Muslim country in the Middle East, but were accepted in Israel. 

The US tried carrots and sticks to push through a two-state solution in the ‘90s (Oslo Accords), but no deal was acceptable to all. And today, we have a horrendous situation. Currently, it seems the Palestinians are winning the PR war, at least with the “elite” members of European society and the Anglo-sphere. We are, it seems, unable to favor a winner and must always side with the underdog. For sure, the situation in Israel/Palestine is a long-standing, murky feud in which sad stories abound, and there is plenty of blame for all parties. 

But seriously, Israel has done some things right that seem to be ignored by those determined to commit both-sides-ism. Primary example: Arabs living within Israel, i.e. not in the West Bank or Gaza, are citizens, can vote, have representatives in the Knesset and on the Supreme Court. If Muslim or Christian, they can practice their religion unimpeded. Bedouins fare better within Israel than within the territories. 

Israeli citizens can and do protest, argue (eternally), speak and write of their concerns about every issue under the sun. No Arab country boasts such freedom. Who knows what the people of Gaza actually think of Hamas which has not held elections since it was voted into power in 2006. Do you ever wonder what improvements people might have enjoyed if all the money that has been poured into Gaza had gone for improved schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure rather than the immense network of fortified tunnels that shield their fighters? What if Hamas stopped firing rockets into Israel and focused on building an economy and Palestinian culture? 

The militant Islamists who run Gaza teach children every horrid prejudice of history about the Jews next door. They do not hate Zionists. They hate Jews. Honest. It’s that simple. There used to be Arabs who differentiated Zionists, who wanted a Jewish State, from Jews who simply wanted to live in their historic homeland. There were and still are Jews who are anti-Zionists, including a few in Israel. And I believe there are some Arabs who could still accept Jews as a minority population in a country run according to Sharia law. But I fear that most protesters who prance about shouting “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free!” haven’t bothered to even wonder what plans Hamas has for their Jewish neighbors living in Israel. Protesters may envisage a happy place where Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists and others will live peacefully side by side. I don’t for a single minute believe that that is what Hamas envisions. 

If you read some history of the pre-WW II era and then the role of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the War, this scenario is not what was envisioned. And no one really presses Hamas to describe what would happen to the Jews of Israel if Hamas succeeded in extinguishing the State of Israel. Given recent events, what’s your guess? 

You might share my concern about Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Many people do. But there’s actually a case to be made in support of the settlements (excluding those on land clearly owned by individual Palestinians). Yes, the settlements seem to be a thorn in the side of anyone who supports a two-state solution. But who is that today? Too few Israelis and certainly no Palestinians. In any event, I refer you to an intriguing explanation of why the settlements are legal.*

I have long been a fan of the two-state solution, but I now realize that no Palestinians support such a scheme. The optimists at the Economists think things are so bad right now that both Israel and Hamas need a way out, and a two-state solution might enable both to save face. I know they are way more informed than I am, and smarter too, but I think current circumstances only incentivize Israel to take over all of Palestine giving up all pretense of two states. Could some parts develop the level of autonomy of US states? Of Scotland? Of Cantons in Switzerland? I don’t know, but that’s the best outcome I can see. 

The other option I see is a second Holocaust, this one conducted by the Palestinians with the backing of Iran. Israel may use its nuclear weapons to try to forestall such an outcome, in which case, all hell breaks loose. Truly, that’s how worried I am. May I please be wrong.

Suggestions for further learning:
*Jesusalem and the Israeli settlements according to international law,
lecture by Natasha Hausdorff

Palestine 1936: The Great Revolt and the Roots of the Middle East Conflict, (readable book) by Oren Kessler, 2023