Key Points
- Israeli politicians supported Benjamin Netanyahu's rejection of 'unilateral' recognition of a Palestinian state.
- The move represents yet another barrier for the historically challenging proposal of a two-state solution.
- Many believe that recognition of a Palestinian state would reward Hamas for the events of 7 October, experts say.
Benjamin Netanyahu's rejection of any "unilateral" received overwhelming support from Israeli politicians on Wednesday, with 99 out of 120 voting in agreement with the prime minister.
The decision comes amid growing international calls to revive negotiations on the subject of Palestinian statehood.
Israel’s declaration, made in the Knesset, stated that any permanent accord with the Palestinians would not be dictated by international or external forces, but rather reached through direct negotiations between the two sides.
"The people of Israel and their elected representatives are united today as never before," Netanyahu said in the country’s parliament on Wednesday. "The Knesset voted overwhelmingly to oppose any attempt to unilaterally impose a Palestinian state on Israel."
Netanyahu went on to claim that such an attempt would endanger Israel and curtail aspirations for peace.
"Peace can only be achieved after we achieve total victory over Hamas and through direct negotiations with the parties — direct negotiations without preconditions."
The outcome, which reaffirmed a position that has long been Israel’s official policy, was condemned by the Palestinian Foreign Ministry, which said in a statement that "the State of Palestine's full membership in the United Nations and its recognition by other nations does not require permission from Netanyahu".
Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid supported the declaration but claimed the move was "spin" by Netanyahu, adding: "There is no single official in the world that offers a unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state."
The two-state solution explained
Official recognition of Palestine as an independent state has come to be known as the "two-state solution".
First proposed in 1937, the two-state solution would effectively partition the region west of the Jordan River into two distinct states — one governed by Israelis, the other by Palestinians. The details of how these partitioned areas are carved up, and who exactly gets to claim ownership of them, has been the subject of much contention, leading different parties over the years to reject proposals that they deem unreasonable.
Many around the world, including prominent members of the United Nations, view a two-state solution as the most desirable diplomatic resolution to the ongoing, decades-old conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
"We have two people vying over the same tiny piece of land, [and] after a hundred years, and even before that, the amount of violence hatred, revenge and fear has caused irreparable damage to any kind of trust and ability to coexist together," Eyal Mayroz, a senior lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney, told SBS News.
"So what do you do with that? … For me, and for many others, the only viable solution is a complete, or as much as possible complete, separation between the sides. At least for quite a long time until wounds heal and there is a bit more trust."
Israel’s aversion to a two-state solution
The problem, Mayroz added, is that ongoing disagreements, hostilities and clashes between the two sides have blocked this from happening.
"Until now, Israeli governments under Netanyahu — and Netanyahu is the primary instigator — have done all they could to avoid and prevent the creation of Palestinian states," he said. "[But] you can't only lay the blame on Israel, because Hamas played its role."
Israel has resisted calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, claiming that the only way to achieve peace is via the eradication of Hamas. Source: AAP / Hatem Ali/AP
Many in Israel — both in and outside of the government — likely oppose the idea of any agreement on Palestinian statehood being ratified before the end of the current conflict because they believe that doing so would reward Hamas for the events of 7 October, according to Mayroz.
Israel has bombarded Gaza since Hamas' 7 October attack in which more than 1,200 people, including an estimated 30 children, were killed and over 200 hostages taken, according to the Israeli government. More than 29,195 people have been killed in Gaza since 7 October, mostly women and children, according to the health ministry in Gaza.
Ran Porat, a research associate at Monash University’s Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation and lecturer and analyst on Israel and Middle Eastern affairs, made a similar point: that "many in the Israeli public don't see how Hamas … should be given a prize for the massacre they conducted".
Porat does not, however, believe that Wednesday’s vote in the Knesset represents a "setback" on the path towards a two-state solution.
"The voting was on rejecting unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state; it's not a rejection of Palestinian state per se. That is a very important difference," Porat told SBS News.
"Israel is not against the Palestinian state," he added. "Many of the members that voted for that resolution support a two-state solution — they just don't want it to be forced on Israel, because there are several benchmarks, several preconditions, that are red lines from Israel’s perspective."
Porat said Netanyahu is generally opposed to the formation of an independent Palestinian state, viewing it more as a potential problem than something to be aspired towards. But the 99 Israeli politicians who voted in agreement with his statement, he added, may have different reasons.
"It’s personal for Netanyahu — it's his agenda — but it's much more than that: it’s a statement from Palestinian-state supporters saying, 'We must be part of the negotiation, otherwise that state will be rejected, unviable, unacceptable and dangerous.'"
"I don't think it's a setback."
A way forward
In any case, the chances of Israel agreeing to a cessation of violence and a peaceful resolution to the current conflict, before securing what it views as "total victory over Hamas", appear to be shrinking by the day.
The United States on Tuesday vetoed, for the third time, a draft UN Security Council resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza. On Wednesday, the US similarly told the International Court of Justice that it should not order the unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Palestinian territories without first Israel's security needs more seriously.
While Netanyahu has rejected the notion that recognition of a Palestinian state can occur with external influence, Mayroz suggested such pressure would be necessary in finally brokering a peace agreement.
“My view is that nothing other than a very, very powerful international or external imposition on both sides, and mainly on Israel, will move any kind of meaningful peace negotiations forward," he said.
The precondition for that, he added, will need to be a change in government — "certainly" on the Israeli side, but also in terms of the Palestinian authorities, who he claimed have "lost all legitimacy in the eyes of most Palestinians, both in Gaza and in the West Bank".
"So there needs to be significant changes on the Palestinian side, but obviously mainly on the Israeli side."
Porat acknowledges the complicated and in many cases conflicting factors at play — but suggested that anyone "who's rational and not ideological or an extremist" considers a two-state solution to be a prerequisite for peace.
"It's complicated," he said. "But all the moderates understand that unless there is negotiation, unless there is agreement, unless there is acceptance of the existence of the state of Israel alongside the Palestinian state, there will not be a solution for this conflict."
