For more than two decades, the most optimistic people about the final solution no longer expected a consensus on a real two-state solution, in accordance with international resolutions. This coincided with a remarkable successive shift of the electoral political trends in Israel towards the far right, the extreme right, and the extremist religious forces, with a noticeable and significant decline of the leftist forces from the scene.
This coincided and also paralleled collapses in the Arab strategic depth, which symbolically represented a source of Palestinian power, and things ended up leading to regional normalization processes with Israel by the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan, and serious Saudi discussions with the Americans and Israelis in this regard, putting the Palestinians in front of a new state of strategic exposure.
This seemed to have served the Israeli project to a large extent, especially with the term of former US President, Donald Trump, who moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and pressed towards accepting the deal of the century by Arabs and Palestinians, in addition to attempts to reduce the work and even end the role of the (UNRWA), which was a dangerous development that did not end with the end of the Trump era.
It is clear today that it represents the only path available, whether it goes quickly or slowly, there are no realistic and logical alternative plans presented before the Palestinians, or even the Jordanians who are very interested in the Palestinian internal situation because of the intertwining of Jordanian strategic interests with Palestine.
On the other hand, Jordanian, Palestinian, and even Western and American elites have begun to propose the Palestinian rights approach, which finds its main incubator in the one-state solution, an alternative to the two-state solution, considering that this scenario represents greater pressure on the Israeli side, is more realistic and serves Palestinian interests to a greater degree.
Jordan has adhered to the two-state solution in the past and also informally expressed reservations about the “Deal of the Century.” It has rejected the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem and participated in meetings in Aqaba and Sharm El-Sheikh to address the heightened tensions in Jerusalem and the West Bank. However, it is evident that this approach requires review, scrutiny, and discussion, especially if it does not align with the realistic calculations of the Israeli government after significant changes that have occurred.
A senior Jordanian official responds, questioning the shift towards any alternative approach. Who said that the Palestinians accept a one-state solution and have given up on the two-state solution? Furthermore, what guarantees can the Palestinians obtain from the international community if the two-state solution, bolstered by international decisions, treaties, and conferences, is not viable? Will another option succeed, which still represents ideas unsupported by power balances, and international and regional agendas?!
Are there other scenarios?! Some also propose isolated Palestinian cantons, and is it the only option that the Israeli side believes in? Is there really a “Jordanian option” on the table by the Israeli right and some American circles to get rid of the Palestinian demographic problem?
On the other hand, the ideal scenario is to end the occupation and achieve independence for the State of Palestine through multilateral efforts to achieve this goal by focusing on changing the balance of power and changing the facts on the ground and doing what is required to end the Palestinian division, achieve national unity and fruitful resistance, revive the PLO and restore the Arab depth of the Palestinian cause but also within the framework of the United Nations and through the format of an effective and fully-fledged international conference aimed at implementing the resolutions of international legitimacy rather than negotiating them.
This approach stems from the fact that the illusion of the theory of solutions at hand has fallen, as the two-state solution is not possible and it was not possible through negotiations only, and it seems that the one-state state of equal rights is also not possible, and is indeed much more difficult than the two-state solution. Thus, what is happening on the ground is the reality of the one state that is by nature a colonial-settler-Jewish-apartheid state, which may if not stood against, culminate in the displacement of large numbers of Palestinians to Jordan, Sinai, and other countries, especially after the collapse or dissolution of the PA and the spread of chaos in the occupied Palestinian territory, as influential circles in the government seek.
These are the issues that have called for and prompted the holding of two discussion workshops;
The first workshop came over two days on May 27 and 28 this year, hosting a group of Jordanian and Palestinian researchers and experts from the West Bank and Palestinians from the occupied interior, and the workshop divided its work into four axes:
First, what is happening in the West Bank and Jerusalem?
Second, what is happening in Israel?
Third, national security, Jordan’s strategic interests, and the relationship with the Palestinians.
Fourth, Strategic Approaches: The Two-State Solution, Palestinian Rights, Cantons, Jordanian Options
The second workshop, it was held at PSI headquarters (on June 22) to evaluate the outputs of the first workshop, which included a group of Jordanian researchers, academics, and experts, and we included the facts and results of the two workshops together in the following report.
To Download as a PDF Click Here