The overwhelming majority of Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives urged President Donald Trump to reaffirm the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as U.S. policy.
The foreign minister of Saudi Arabia said on Sunday, February 19, that 2017 “will be a year” in which “progress can be made in the Arab-Israeli conflict.”
As liberals, we should be calling for this recognition of de facto annexation. That doesn’t mean acceptance, but it would force the issue and forestall the continued slow motion annexation and ethnic cleansing which are the reality of the expanded settlement project.
You thought we were chumps to believe that separation and sacrifice would ensure Israel’s future. So what’s your plan?
Six Jewish Democrats have spoken out so far against appointing David Friedman, a critic of the two-state solution, as ambassador to Israel.
Israel needs a two-state solution, urge Susie Gelman and the Israel Policy Forum. Will the Trump administration facilitate that process?
Rejecting decades-old policy, the Republican Party approved on July 12 a platform that does not include a call for a two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Instead, it defers to Israel to determine whether it is interested in negotiating a deal with the Palestinians, and omits any reference to a solution that would establish an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.
A new Israeli government that does not back a two-state solution will make the U.S. job of defending Israel “a lot tougher,” according to a top State Department official.
Israeli settlements on occupied land wanted by the Palestinians may have already killed a possible two-state solution, said the United Nations Middle East envoy on Thursday.
Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon inveighed against territorial compromise and blamed the Palestinian Authority for the recent failed peace talks in a wide-ranging policy address.