Two-state solution tabled, social media not surprised

A White House official says a two-state solution may not be the only option to solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict, signalling a major policy shift. No US President has ever endorsed a one-state solution, offered up such choice or so willfully appeared to distance himself from a concept that clearly faces long odds without knowing what comes next. “I can live with either one”, he said Wednesday during a joint press conference with visiting Israeli premier, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Trump also did not answer any questions about a startling new report about Russia’s contacts with Trump’s team in the period leading up to the November election. In fact, if The Donald puts a “veto” on the new legislation, Bibi will only have to wait for the Israeli Supreme Court’s decision, which will probably give a negative opinion on the law after almost twenty Israeli and Palestinian NGOs have filed an appeal stating that the law is not only contrary to global law, but also incompatible with the Israeli legal system.

“A two-state solution that doesn’t bring peace is not a goal that anybody wants to achieve”, the official said late Tuesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Secretary-General Saeb Erekat on Wednesday said that the only alternative to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be the creation of one-state sovereign democratic state in which all Palestinians are granted full and equal rights, warning that anything else would be ‘apartheid’. He has already tapped son-in-law Jared Kushner and lawyer Jason Greenblatt to lead his peace drive.

For his part, Netanyahu, who has strong support within the Republican caucus in both chambers, laid out his “two prerequisites for peace”. But Netanyahu at least knows that those interests won’t persuade the Sunni states to nudge the Palestinians into the kind of concessions that would be needed for the state-minus that the prime minister envisions for them. Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza have both called for the destruction of Israel.

Netanyahu and Trump hugged and shook hands at the White House on Wednesday as the two held a press conference ahead of a much anticipated meeting.

He said Wednesday the US was looking “very, very strongly” at moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Since taking office, Trump has backed away from the pledge, saying it is complicated. “I like the one that both parties like”.

“If the Trump Administration rejects this policy it would be destroying the chances for peace and undermining American interests, standing and credibility overseas”, Hanan Ashrawi, a senior member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), said in response to the USA official’s remarks. But following the Trump-Netanyahu meeting, enthusiasm on social media meant an eruption of the hashtag #Palestine_from_the_river_to_the_sea, referring to the pre-1948 borders spanning from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

It was another tumultuous day in Trump presidency. “It will enable Netanyahu the flexibility and the space to continue his policy without having global pressure”, said Dr. Goren.

“Gen. Flynn is a wonderful man”.

“I think that if we work together – and not just the United States and Israel, but so many others in the region who see eye to eye on the great magnitude and danger of the Iranian threat, then I think we can roll back Iran’s aggression and danger”.

While neither leader may have originally had settlements on his mind, the Israeli right wing has put the issue on the agenda.

“From intelligence, papers are being leaked, things are being leaked, it’s criminal action, a criminal act”, Mr. Trump said.