The Two-State 'Solution': Self-Defeat 101
August 29, 2012
An element of the two-state "solution" is the future giving away by the government of Israel of Jewish sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Aza. No country other than Israel, however, accepts a two-state solution for a territorial dispute, or gives away its territory.
Every country maintains its territorial integrity. China, for example, does not accept a two-state solution for Taiwan, Tibet, the Spratly Islands, or the Paracel Islands, and China will not give away its sovereignty over any of those places.
Another example is the United States, which did not accept a two-state solution in relation to the Confederates States of America. The United States did not give away its sovereignty over the states which were parts of the Confederate States. Rather, the United States fought the Confederated States, and destroyed it utterly.
Although the "international community" asserts that "international law" prohibits Israel from acquiring territory in consequence of the 1967 war, there are many instances of acceptance by the "international” community," under “international law,” of the territorial benefits of a successful war. Examples: China and Tibet; India and the Portuguese enclaves; Russia and former Japanese islands.
The government of Israel should walk away from the two-state "solution," and should maintain its territorial integrity, as does every other country, and should disregard "international law," as does every other country. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 8
Keywords: Arabs, international community, international law, Jerusalem, Jews, Quartet, two-state solution, United Nations
JEL Classification: K33working papers series
Date posted: August 13, 2009 ; Last revised: August 30, 2012
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.265 seconds