People who are clinging to the hope that the two state solution is the preferred way to the end the Israeli occupation of Palestine are having to confront the fact that the two state solution is less viable by the day. One two state believer is the U.S. government, but apparently some people in government are getting wise to that fact that you can't support a two state solution without opposing the occupation. In a super strongly worded (so strong) statement about Israeli settlement growth, which by this point is par for the course settlement growth, the U.S. State Department got serious. The statement reads "this new settlement is another step towards cementing a one-state reality of perpetual occupation" and it makes us wonder if the State Department has had it with Israeli defiance of their strongly worded (so strong) statements. And while Israel defies U.S. cautions against settlement growth, Israel is also trying to have its cake (settlement growth) and eat it too (two state solution). Check out this government twitter account try to make those ends meet. While the U.S. government and Israel are making some rhetorical affirmations of the two state solution, there are plenty of people ready to abandon the very idea of a two state. And looking down the barrel of what might come from the next U.S. president, we'd kindly suggest that President Obama finally puts his foot down on settlements at the bare minimum. For Trump, if we are right in forecasting Rudy Giuliani playing a major role in his administration, then we can not only expect a U.S. rejection of a two state solution but a U.S. abandonment of the Palestinian people. With Hillary Clinton, we have recently been given more reason to believe she is not abandoning Palestinians or the flailing possibility of a two state solution. But we also have to question the position her team took during the Platform debate, when there was reluctance to admit even the obvious – like the existence of the occupation. With so much changing so quickly on the ground, something must change in Washington.

comments powered by Disqus