Why a One State Solution would Fail

Nahum Barnea calls the appeal of Muammar Gaddafi's call for a single state of "Isratine" a "mirage." He is correct. This is a fantasy, and a deadly one.

A one-state solution would result in a horrific civil war of unimaginable savagery, leading in the end to either the destruction of Israel by the neighboring countries and the subsequent slaughter of the Jews, or a very violent separation into two states and a flight by some Palestinians similar to 1948.

HAMAS and other Islamic supremacist and Arab supremacist groups are fundamentally unwilling to share even a centimeter of the land of Israel. They believe that it is "Muslim land" and that the Jews living there must be slaughtered. A one-state solution would bring these genocidal terrorists not just inside Israeli security lines but inside Israeli towns. The Jews would face constant and rapidly escalating terrorism. A one-state "solution" would thrust these groups together with Jews who are quite willing (unlike Palestinian Christians) to defend themselves, knowing the consequences of failing to do so. Escalating terrorism would require escalating responses. Violence would spiral out of control.

In addition, along with HAMAS terrorists, Israel would suddenly contain millions of Palestinians, many (though not all) brainwashed from birth to hate Jews. Add the fact that many Palestinians have been raised on a delusional vision: they expect to get a house back. But populations in the region have exploded. The house has been replaced by apartment blocks housing the descendants of Israelis who fled or were expelled from the Arab world, and who cannot, should not and will not move aside. There is no going back to 1920. When Palestinians who have been lied to systematically for decades encounter reality, the disillusion and anger will add to the explosive mixture of hatred and violence.

And let's face it: this is the middle east. Who actually thinks that the usual bunch of dictators, demagogues and terrorists will refrain from fomenting violence for their own gain?

A one-state "solution" would lead to a savage civil war which, on the Jewish side, would be a war for survival against the most horrific terrorists operating in the Muslim world today. It would make Black September look like a picnic. And it would (count on it) facilitate the invasion of "Isratine" by Syria and/or other regional powers, bent on dominating the territory (as Syria did in Lebanon and tried to do in Jordan in 1970) and on slaughtering as many Jews as possible. Arab propaganda would continue to blame the whole violent mess on the Jews, never on fellow Arabs, and would justify any level of violence against Jews.

In such circumstances, the only survivable outcome for the Jewish people would be that the Jews would win the civil war and fight off invading Arab armies. In such a scenario, it is inevitable that some Palestinians would have fled the violence. They would not be allowed to return. In other words, a one-state "solution" is a recipe for a reprise of 1948, this time with much more vicious weapons and much higher populations. Which means that the one-state "solution" is not a solution at all.

A two-state solution is the only way forward. It is time for dictators and demagogues, and the idiots who follow them, to accept reality.