Why do I think the Two-State “Solution" is both a false hope and a distraction from the starvation and genocide in Gaza today?
I answer this in the video clip.
Interestingly, in the past few days some commentators have quoted Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention of 1933 which says:
"The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:
a) a permanent population;
b) a defined territory;
c) government; and
d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states."
The Zionist occupiers, with the support of their patrons in the West, expelled much of the permanent population.
The UN saw to it in 1948 that the Palestinians had no defined territory and the world has watched the occupiers steal more and more.
When Britain held a mandate over occupied Palestine they never allowed the Palestinian people to organise politically.
To this day, the world’s most powerful state refuses to acknowledge the existence of a Palestinian state - and Britain, France and Canada are merely promising to recognise something vague, ill-defined and not plausible to be a state.
None of this is accidental. It is a proposal that was never going to happen. So the sooner people look at alternatives futures outside of this false framework, the better.
Abdul Wahid has been active in Muslim affairs in the UK for over 25 years. He has been published on the websites of Foreign Policy, Open Democracy, the Times Higher Educational Supplement, and Prospect Magazine. You can follow him on X/Twitter @AbdulWahid_X.
