Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who has covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Vol. 1: The False Messiah, is a three-volume epic in its American edition. He blogs on

View Latest Posts >>>

The Palestinians’ only option

Flying the flag: A Palestinian at the border with Israel Photo: EPA

Editor’s note: Alan Hart’s view is probably spot-on! as  was Dr. Alan  Sabrosky’s  “Two-State Delusion,”  in 2009.  But, Matt Hill proposes a simple solution to the Israel-Palestine problem, “only political stubbornness, not popular support or irreconcilable differences, prevents the two-state solution from working;”  “…these facts need pointing out because Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists the conflict is “insoluble“, and that aiming for two states is unrealistic. After all, Netanyahu and his fellow Likud hardliners would much rather face a confused Palestinian movement in thrall to a chimerical non-solution than sustained, organized pressure to fulfil Israel’s legal obligations, argues Matt Hill in The Telegraph : “Perhaps a push for One-State” will pressure the Israelis into accepting Matt Hill’s already internationally recognized boundary – the 1967 line,  – which, with some minor adjustments, would form a natural border between the two states. Jerusalem would be partitioned, as it was until 1967, and serve as a shared capital.


By Alan Hart


In the final countdown to the UN General Assembly vote on recognition of Palestine as a non-member state, the PLO has indicated that it’s expecting “a pleasant surprise”, it being the number of European countries which will not do Zionism’s bidding on this occasion and will vote for the resolution. Victory for the Palestinians in this forum can be taken for granted, and it will help to further isolate the Israel of Netanyahu as a pariah state, but… It won’t be, can’t be, a substitute for a viable strategy to secure justice for the Palestinians.

In my analysis the Palestinians now have only one option.

For starters it requires the PLO to recognize and declare that the two-state solution is dead (not least because no Israeli prime minister is going to trigger a Jewish civil war in order to end the occupation of the West Bank including East Jerusalem).

Then what?

The next step should be winding up the Palestine Authority and handing total responsibility for the occupation back to Israel.

That would open the door to what I believe to be the only viable strategy for the Palestinians if they are ever to obtain justice.

With the two-state solution not only dead but formally buried, they could then campaign, with growing global support, for equal rights and security for all in one state (all of pre-1967 Israel plus all of the West Bank plus the Gaza Strip).

In one or two decades at the most, because the Palestinians would outnumber the Jews, one state would mean the end of Zionism, but it would also open the door to real security for the one state’s Jews.

As I have previously written and never tire of saying, the Jews are, generally speaking, the intellectual elite of the world. And the Palestinians are by far the intellectual elite of the Arab world. What they could do together in peace and partnership in one state really is the stuff that dreams are made of. They could change the region for the better and by doing so give new hope and inspiration to the whole world.

As things are and look like going, and given that the Palestinians are never going to surrender to Zionism’s will by accepting crumbs from its table, the only alternative to one state for all is a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine. That might buy Zionism some more time for the short term, but in the longer term it would most likely guarantee that the rising global tide of anti-Israelism was transformed into classical anti-Semitism, setting the stage for Holocaust II, shorthand for another great turning against Jews everywhere, and starting quite possibly in America.

The question arising from the summary analysis above is this. Where does UN General Assembly recognition of Palestine as a non-member state fit into what I have proposed?

Answer – it does not fit.

So what use could “President” Abbas make of it when he gets it?

When announcing that he was winding up the Palestine Authority and handing responsibility for the occupation back to Israel, he could say to the world something like this: “We are truly grateful for this recognition of our rights and claim for justice, but we must also be realistic. Zionism has no interest in a two-state solution so we must move on. One state with equal rights for all is the only way of preventing a “catastrophe for all.”


Related Posts:

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VNN, VNN authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. Notices

Posted by on November 26, 2012, With 0 Reads, Filed under Americas, Australia & Oceana, China & Asia, Europe, Middle East, Wars, World Affairs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

FaceBook Comments

6 Responses to "The Palestinians’ only option"

  1. Haitham  November 27, 2012 at 11:38 am

    I wish it was this simple and straigh forward as Hart puts it, but it’s not for several reasons:

    1. Dissolving the PA will be denied by Arab/Palestinians/Muslims resistance factions and might promote a civil war between palestinians. Existing PA can’t handle it and will be thrown out of the window the next day they announce such a thing.

    2. The existing PA is very corrupted and they made a big wealth out of doing business with the occupation. They will fight to protect their businesses, even if that means supporting the occupation.

    3. Dissolving the PA and handing Israel the responsibility of the West Bank and Gaza will give Israel a new reason for further ethnic cleansing. They will claim that Palestinians don’t want the “Land”.

    Israel was always an apartheid state, a terrorist state. No one could stop them until now, so what will stop them from comitting further worse massacres? Let’s say they killed 10,000 in their last assault on Gaza, if you think that the West will do more than what they did before (nothing), you are dreaming. What if they killed 100,000, or 500,000 Palestinians, will that change the fact that United States will support them? Again you are dreaming. Eventually it will be another Nakba and history will write that Israel won another “war”, and move. Result: Palestinians either killed, jailed, ran for their life across boarders… yes, this sounds extreme, but the fact of Israel’s existence now after 60 years of conflict is also extreme.

    4. Israel is not interested in a one state. Zionists jews know very well that they will be out numbered by Palestinians inside 1948. Imagine adding the 1967. Sooner than later.

    Do anyone think they are fool enough to accept a one state that will eventually take the system power from their hands (assuming that present and future laws will allow Arab equal civil rights in a real democracy). This will be the end of Zionist dream. Don’t forget Zionist Christians who support control of jews in Israel. Are they also fool to accept giving up their ultimate dream of Jesus return by handing over the holy land to Muslims?

    5. United States don’t want this conflict to end. Not until the age of oil is over. As long as wealth is buried under the sands of this part of the world, this conflict will always be a “good” and needed reason for US to be here. Unstability is the main means for US to control, not only the Middle East. We have to understand that Palestine/Israel conflict is the central part of all other conflicts in the region. Controlling the source means controlling the sub-branches.

  2. Finian Cunningham  November 27, 2012 at 11:28 am

    Alan Hart’s conclusion is correct. The Israeli regime does not want or
    is in the slightest way interested in facilitating a two-state
    solution. The latter so-called promise of a Palestinian statelet is
    but a cover for permanent procrastination in which no actual
    Palestinian governance will ever emerge and the Palestinian people
    will be slowly, gradually erased from the map. The two-state solution
    is therefore a futile dream for those who support it and a cynical
    deception for those who oppose it. The only solution, and the most
    appropriate one historically, morally and territorially is for all the
    people of the historic land of Palestine to live in one unviolated
    territory. This is not only morally appropriate, but politically it
    puts the pressure on the Zionist aggressors and occupiers and their
    Western backers to deal with their self-made problem. The late Arab
    scholar Edward Said and many others have advocated Hart’s conclusion
    over many years when it was unfashionable and the so-called two state
    solution was hyped as the only model. Ironically, the intransigence
    and lawlessness of Israeli political rulers and their Western sponors
    have destroyed the charade and have now made the real solution
    glaringly obvious.

    Finian Cunningham

  3. DaveE  November 27, 2012 at 12:41 am

    Mr. Hart, if it’s fair to say (or imply) that Jews are smarter than everyone else, it’s also fair to say (or imply) they’re more evil and degenerate than everyone else.

    Their extra intelligence seems to occupy the portion of the brain normally reserved for a CONSCIENCE in humans.

    Thus, we’re dealing with creatures who, for whatever reason, are incapable of things most humans consider common decency. For the Palestinians to trust these “people” for a nanosecond is THE VERY DEFINITION OF STUPIDITY.

    The Jews who stole Palestine have had 100 years to prove they are capable of decency. At this point, trusting them to grow a conscience even in the face of mounting external pressure is beyond crazy, it’s suicide.

    Your idea of “hanging in there” for a while until the world forces Israel to behave is more or less what the Palestinians have done for 500 years. However, they were betrayed by the Brits, betrayed by the Americans and shunned by the west in general. Hasn’t exactly worked out real well for them, has it?

    Personally, I think they WILL get help, but only because Zionists lost their only friend, the American people. 9/11 brought the zionist Master Plan home to American soil and many if not most Americans know it. The Jews still control the levers of power, but those Americans who are smart enough to think and talk at the same time are onto their game. War is almost inevitable, but some things are worth fighting for and I think many Americans are beginning to realize Israel needs to be taken out.

  4. John  November 26, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    We should keep in mind that one state which would be Israel and the West Bank would be perfectly okay with prominent members of Likud such as Speaker of the Knesset Reuven Rivlin and Moshe Arens, a former defense minister and foreign minister from Likud.

    Excerpted from an article published in a Jewish journal on August 2, 2010:

    “In one of the more curious twists in Israeli politics, prominent figures on Israel’s right wing have begun pushing for a one-state solution with Israelis and Palestinians as equal citizens with full voting rights.

    “The one-state solution previously had been the preserve of the post-Zionist left, Palestinian hard-liners and left-leaning European intellectuals who envisioned turning Israel proper, the West Bank and Gaza into a single state in which the Palestinians soon would become the majority and assume the reins of government.

    “For the overwhelming majority of Israelis, the idea has been anathema because it seemed to spell the end of the Zionist dream of a sovereign Jewish state.

    “So what has changed? In a word: Gaza.

    “For the new Greater Israel proponents of a one-state solution, the 2005 withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, which they opposed vehemently, suddenly has become a strategic game-changer.
    The single state they envision includes only Israel and the West Bank—an area of about 5.8 million Jews and 3.8 million Arabs. Without Gaza’s estimated 1.5 million Palestinians, the Jews would constitute a 60 percent majority in that territory—enough to preserve an enlarged Israel as a Jewish majority state for the foreseeable future.

    “As these proponents see it, there are several advantages to this solution: The settler movement would be able to keep intact its West Bank settlements; Israel would not have to withdraw from territory and expose itself to the sort of rocket fire it has seen from Gaza; and the international community would not be able to paint Israel as an apartheid state because the annexation of the West Bank would grant full citizenship and voting rights to West Bank Palestinians, perhaps putting Israel out of its international isolation in a single stroke.

    “While support in the Knesset for the one-state idea is limited, if Israeli-Palestinian negotiations make headway over the next few months, the one-state model could surface as a ploy to torpedo Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and the dismantling of dozens of Jewish settlements.

    “For now its most outspoken advocates in the Knesset are Speaker Reuven Rivlin and newcomer Tzipi Hotovely, both of the Likud Party.”

  5. Alan Sabrosky  November 26, 2012 at 3:53 pm

    Hart is correct, but Hill is 40-plus years too late, and the 1967 lines are as dead as Hadrian’s Wall. There are a half million reasons for this, all of them settlers, plus the growing prominence of both Orthodox religious Jews and settlers (often overlapping) in the IDF.

    Any attempt to pull anything back to the 1967 borders, with or without adjustments, minor or major, would produce among Jews a three-way civil war akin to the American civil war: central government versus settlers, and one part of the IDF against the other – and the concurrent instinct among all of them would be to so eviscerate the Palestinians that few if any would survive to capitalize on that internecine Jewish civil slaughter, for slaughter it would be.

  6. Kam Zarrabi  November 26, 2012 at 3:24 pm

    I share Alan Hart’s views regarding the one-state solution. Push towards a two-state resolution is, in my opinion, the real ploy to continue the occupation and settlement expansion process indefinitely.

    The ultimate fate of the Palestinian/Israeli drama is neither the final disappearance of the Palestinian people from the pages of history, nor the establishment of a Palestinian sate along pre-1967 borders.

    It will be the gradual changes within Israel itself that will finally lead to the acceptance of one land, maybe named some concocted name like “Ibrahamistan”, stretching from the Mediterranean to beyond Jordan. It might take a while, but that is the only solution.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

From Veterans Today Network