+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Florida's House joins Republicans in support of One-State solution

On February 29th 2012 Florida’s House of Representatives surprisingly passed a bill supporting the one-state solution. The bill quotes the Bible to prove the Jewish right of the whole land spanning Israel and Palestine, ignores the Palestinians’ historical connection to the land and omits their existence. However, the bill comes as surprise in the sense that it calls for one law for all people who live on the land.

[T]he members of the Florida House of Representatives commend Israel for its cordial and mutually beneficial relationship with the United States and with the State of  Florida and support Israel in its legal, historical, moral, and God-given right of self-governance and self-defense upon the entirety of its own lands, recognizing that Israel is neither an attacking force nor an occupier of the lands of others, and that peace can be afforded the region only through a whole and united Israel governed under one law for all people.

The bill’s bottom line is not that different from what many Palestinian activists have been calling for: one law for all people in the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. But what is ironic about this resolution is the absence of Pro-Israel groups’ rage against it. When Palestinians advocate for a one-state solution, they are quickly accused of plotting to destroy the state of Israel.  Florida’s House and Senate are using Bible references, denying the occupation, and proclaiming Israel’s right over the “unified land to endorse a one-state solution and there’s  no backlash.

Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti Defamation league (ADL) said in a recent op-ed condemning Palestinian activists advocating a one-state solution:  “Let’s be frank. The term “one-state solution” is a euphemism for the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.” However, the ADL and Foxman didn’t give attention or condemn the Florida house resolution.

Perhaps Foxman and other supporters of Israel realized the stakes in clashing with those in support of the bill. After all many Evangelical Christians support for Israel is based on “Biblical interpretations” that sees Jewish control of the whole land as a must and compromising that belief that would be heresy. Also, this wave of support for a one-state solution is not limited to Florida. Last January the Republican National Committee passed a resolution similar to Florida’s bill.

J Street, a Jewish American lobby group advocating for the two-state solution realized that this is a major shift in America and tweeted that the resolution “confirms the decades-long bipartisan consensus on a two-state solution is shattered.”

However the wind of change regarding the one-state solution is also storming Israel itself. There are a growing number of Israelis talking about alternatives to the two-state solution. Some settlers, nationalists and even politicians are now openly talking about the one-state solution. Israeli Knesset speaker Reuven Rivlin, a leading member of the Likud told my colleague Noam Shezif that he supports one state:

There is a conflict in the Middle East between two entities, and they’re both right, each in their own way. This is our only home, and therefore all kinds of solutions can be found. One could establish a system in one state in which Judea and Samaria are jointly held. The Jews would vote for a Jewish parliament and the Palestinians for an Arab parliament, and we would create a system in which life is shared. But these are things that will take time. Anyone who thinks that there are shortcuts is talking nonsense. As long as Islamic fundamentalism thinks that Jews are forbidden to settle in the Holy Land, we have a problem. It will not be resolved by an agreement, even if we obtain a promise from all the Arab states that it will be fine.

So if people say to me: Decide − one state or division of the Land of Israel, I say that division is the bigger danger.

For the two-state solution supporters, time is not on their side. More Palestinians are losing faith in the Palestinian Authority and Hamas promises of an independent state. They don’t see the 20-year peace process to have brought them any closer to independence. Many Palestinians see the last decade of negotiations to have only worsened their life conditions. Facts on the ground are changing perceptions for Palestinians, Israelis, and foreigners alike. Time is running out and chances of creating a Palestinian state are becoming slimmer day after day. Some doubt that we might have crossed into the no turning point. Others like J Street and the American Task Force on PAlestine  believe there is still hope for two-state solution. If they are right, they have very little time to make it happen.

 Read also:

Republican party appears to officially back one-state solution
Settler MK Uri Ariel call for one state
At Harvard conference, a one-state vision Israelis can live with

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. Henry Quinn

      I guess I’m not clear on how there’s still any lack of clarity here among anyone making declarations like this. There are four goods at stake for Israel, of which it gets to pick exactly three:

      1. Jewishness (of a particular type that arises from its citizens being mostly Jewish)
      2. Democratic-ness
      3. All the land from the mediterranean to jordan, and
      4. Not engaging in ethnic cleansing.

      You make a call for one state, you’re either saying that not everyone there’s going to get to be a citizen, or that the state’s not going to be jewish, in a rather important sense that’s related to the ethnicity of its citizenry, or that you’re going to have to ethnically cleanse the west bank, at least. You simply can’t have all of those things, not because of fairness but because of, you know, it being impossible.

      And given that the RNC’s pretty clear about its commitment to Israel as a jewish state, I just want to know which of the remaining two they’re calling for here: a single state where there’s different levels of citizenship based on ethnicity, or simply kicking all the arabs in the territories out.

      I mean, I get that there’s a fifth possibility, which is convincing all the existing and soon-to-be israeli arabs to assent to the jewish nature of the state so they don’t just decide to vote that part of the country out of the text one day, but given that that seems to include segregated buses and loyalty oaths, I don’t know how likely that scenario is.

      Reply to Comment
    2. aristeides

      This is a Christo-Zionist initiative, and thus doubtless based on the belief that the Ayrabs will be poofed out of existence along with the Jews when the Rapture comes. Of course some of the Ayrabs are Christians, but they’re not the right kind of Christians, so they don’t count.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Piotr Berman

      I wonder if the separation clause is violated when the State (here, Florida legislature) makes a determination what is “God-given right” and what is the extend of “the entirety of its own lands” given by God.

      Reply to Comment
    4. Kahled Mouammar

      The one-state solution will only come about if one of the the following scenarios happen:

      1)Christian and Jewish Zionists free themselves from the racist notion that the Holy Land of Palestine belongs only to Jews

      2)Palestinians backed by civil society activists acrosos the world escalalte their boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign by exposing the apartheid nature of Israel.

      I believe that only through the second alternative will humanity succeed in bringing about a democratic and egalitarian state for all its citzens in the land of Palestine.

      Reply to Comment
    5. izabella

      it’s a complex issue, no beginning no end, and soon it will be difficult to distinguish between left and right. on the one hand it is ironic that the solution extremists in each side support is quite similar, but on the other, a one state solution can be a percursor for the decline of democracy and a future civil war.
      on a different note, i recommend the following article about the conflict – https://hateandrelativism.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/how-to-react-to-a-peaceful-jesture-that-is-replied-with-anger/

      Reply to Comment
    6. aristeides

      Piotr – the article errs by calling the measure a “bill.” A bill is a proposed law. This was a resolution. US politicians love to waste their time and the taxpayers money by proposing meaningless resolutions which do nothing but express the opinion of the body, which have no force of law and no standing.

      Reply to Comment
    7. @Aristeides, I used the word “bill” because that’s what it is called on the website of Florida’s house of representatives. I am assuming a resolution is a non binding bill. See below:

      Bill # Subject Relationship
      HR 1447 Nation of Israel Similar

      If my memory is right, the declaration of Independence was a resolution and therefore I would say resolutions can be pretty important

      Reply to Comment
    8. aristeides

      Most resolutions are more along the lines of congratulating the dairy industry for selling milk. ie, sucking up to some interest group in a way that costs nothing.

      That seems to describe this one.

      Reply to Comment
    9. Steve

      Israel is a Jewish state. Next to 20-something Muslim states.
      Israel is going to continue being a Jewish state, forever. It will try to respect its minority population as much as any other modern country does.
      That’s about it.

      Reply to Comment
    10. Steve

      It makes me sick reading bigots and hatemongers pretend that Israel being a Jewish state is “racist.”
      So is the entire world outside of North America “racist” then? Is every single Muslim country “racist” against non-Muslims? Is every ethnic country (Japan, China, etc) “racist” against non-Japanese, non-Chinese, etc? Is the entire world “racist?” Or is it just that the people who pretend to want “all of Palestine to be democratic” only saying this because it’s a cute way to say “remove Israel from existence so Arab Muslims can be the majority and Jews can go back to being the minority and Israel can cease to exist?”

      Reply to Comment
    11. Aaron the Fascist Troll

      Cute article. A call for Jewish sovereignty over all of Palestine west of the Jordan is “not that different from what many Palestinian activists have been calling for.”
      Also, it’s incorrect to put quotation marks around “Biblical interpretations.” That’s what they are, undeniably, whether you agree with them or not.

      Reply to Comment
    12. Peter

      If one does research they see that if Israel annexes the West Bank the population will still be majority Jewish. I believe I have seen the numbers – 70 – 30 Jew to Arab after annexation of the West Bank. Gaza would make it 60 – 40. So even with full control Israel will keep its character. I believe the real reason that this is not being implemented is the State Department and globalists want to keep both sides at each others throats like they do elsewhere.

      Reply to Comment
    13. Larry Snider

      It’s not so much about time as about the will of two peoples, (not so much their governments who are caught in their own circular arguments), to pursue dialogue and build relations on the ground that unlock the foundering diplomatic process between their leaders and garner the popular support to require the negotiation of a substantive agreement that guarantees both security and peace for all.

      Reply to Comment
    14. Kolumn9

      It would appear that the right wing is rebuilding a ideological Jewish claim to the entirety of the land of Israel. This is very different from an actual call for a ‘one state solution’ in that it is really meant to allow Israel to disregard the 1967 lines and redraw the borders as it sees fit.

      I would also love to see a Palestinian leader make an argument for a one state solution based on a recognition of a Jewish right to settle anywhere in the land of Israel.

      Time is certainly not on the side of those that want the 1967 lines as the basis for two states. However, those particular lines are somewhat arbitrary so the next set of internationally accepted proposed solutions are probably going to go into the direction of a smaller Palestinian state in some kind of federation with Israel or Jordan rather than towards a one state solution.

      The one state solution is simply not feasible unless either the Israelis or the Palestinians or both give up their completely separate and exclusivist identities. That just isn’t going to happen. Too many differences and too much history make this impossible. There isn’t a single major political group or ideology pushing in this direction, except for… Hamas.

      Reply to Comment
    15. AIG

      You should be very careful with this argument because what the extreme right in Israel really wants to do is annex only area C thus not incorporating most of the Palestinians into Israel. If you start giving credence to their suggestions to annex all of the West Bank, what will you do when they say “you know what, we will annex just parts (area c) of it and of course give citizenship to the Palestinians there”. You will be stuck. You should hold a principled position against ANY annexation or unilateral solution or you will be shafted.

      Reply to Comment
    16. aristeides

      AIG – the settlers are already encroaching into Area B, without interference by the IDF. This suggests that the ambitions of the right are more extensive.

      Reply to Comment
    17. Kolumn9

      AIG, I agree that talking about annexation is a slippery slope, though I think it is legitimate for Israel to take unilateral steps to support its claims and to ensure secure borders in future negotiations in the absence of the current option of a peace agreement with the Palestinians. At the same time, I think the full annexation of the West Bank or even of area C is the worst possible step Israel can take, regardless of whether it grants the annexed Palestinians citizenship or not. However, a partial unilateral annexation of certain areas of the West Bank makes sense in retaliation for Palestinian unilateral steps under which they make the claim to the entirety of the West Bank. This is true even if the annexation is only of those 1.8% of areas that the Palestinians themselves have signaled that they are willing to concede. If the Palestinians proceed with unilateral steps to claim the entirety of the West Bank it is only reasonable to counterclaim certain areas.

      Aresteides, many of the settlers want to annex the entirety of the West Bank. They generally don’t have much respect for the Oslo accords.

      Reply to Comment
    18. humbye


      “I would also love to see a Palestinian leader make an argument for a one state solution based on a recognition of a Jewish right to settle anywhere in the land of Israel.”

      When Israel allows the Palestinians to settle freely in the Jewish-only settlements, then you can expect some sort of reciprocation.

      Reply to Comment
    19. CN

      And Israel then becomes an ARAB MAJORITY country – instantly, instead of in 20 years – fascinating.

      Reply to Comment
    20. Riga, Josef

      One-state-solution, not only in the opinion of jews like Hannah Arendt or Albert Einstein, will be the best and most human solution in Middle East for all, Jews and Arabs and christian people.

      Reply to Comment
    21. Click here to load previous comments