By Ian Parmeter
The growing rift between the Biden administration and the Netanyahu government over Israel’s war in Gaza is now in the open, with public disagreement between them on the viability of a two-state solution to the conflict.
US President Joe Biden literally embraced Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu within days of Hamas’ horrific attack in southern Israel on October 7, and the US has steadfastly protected Israel’s interests in the UN Security Council.
But tensions have mounted as the civilian death toll from Israel’s massive retaliation in Gaza has climbed to more than 25,000 – 70% of whom are women and children.
To put that in context, more non-combatants have been killed in less than four months in Gaza than in nearly two years of war in Ukraine, where the civilian death toll only recently exceeded 10,000.
Biden warned in December that Israel was losing international support over its “indiscriminate bombing” of Gaza. The administration has also made clear through background media briefings its concern that Netanyahu has no postwar plan for Gaza’s governance.
And following the preliminary order issued by the International Court of Justice in the genocide case against Israel this past weekend, White House commentary made clear the court’s orders aligned with US policy. Specifically, the court said Israel must take all possible steps to minimise civilian harm and increase the flow of humanitarian assistance to Gaza.
With criticism of Israel mounting on the global stage, the Biden administration has inserted the United States’ long-standing support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In response, Netanyahu has thrown down the gauntlet – flatly rejecting the creation of a separate Palestinian state. He posted on X: “I will not compromise on full Israeli security control over the entire area in the west of Jordan – and this is contrary to a Palestinian state”.
Butting heads with US presidents
This rift between the two leaders should not be a surprise. Netanyahu is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister and has the self-belief that goes with 16 years in office.
This is not the first time he has butted heads with a US president. In particular, he had a poisonous relationship with Barack Obama, notably visiting Washington to address a joint sitting of Congress in 2015 without bothering to call on the president – an extraordinary breach of protocol.
Despite the fact the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995, signed by former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, laid down a pathway to the creation of a Palestinian state, Netanyahu has never hidden his opposition to the concept.
In a recently published profile of Netanyahu in the New Yorker, David Remnick describes how the Israeli leader made a speech in 2009 in which he “conveyed a wary and highly conditional openness to a Palestinian state”. The conditions included:
- Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state
- no return of Palestinian refugees outside Israel
- the demilitarisation of a future Palestinian state
- and Jerusalem remaining the united capital of Israel.
None of these was likely to be acceptable to Palestinians.
Remnick comments the speech was a tactical move, with a larger goal in mind. He quotes the reaction of then-US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk:
We met a day or two after the speech. [Netanyahu] was all puffed up, and he said to me, ‘All right, I said it, now can we get back to dealing with Iran?‘
Is Biden or Netanyahu right?
This leads to the current – and more important – question: who is right about the future viability of a two-state solution, Biden or Netanyahu?
Putting aside questions of equity and morality, analysis of the evidence suggests the answer is Netanyahu.
The simple fact is the number of Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank (including East Jerusalem) – now about 700,000, who live alongside three million Palestinians – means there is not much space left for a Palestinian state.
That gap is narrowing, with population growth higher among settlers than Palestinians. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who comprise one-third of the settlers, have a fertility rate in Israel of 6.5 live births per woman. The current fertility rate among Palestinians is around 3.8 births per woman. If this trend continues, by mid-century, the Israeli-Palestinian population in the West Bank could be equal.
The only way space could be made for another state would be if the government were to dismantle the settlements and direct the settlers to live within the borders that existed before Israel seized the West Bank in the 1967 Six-Day War.
Despite the fact the settlements are illegal under international law – they violate the Fourth Geneva Convention – no Israeli government is likely to try to remove them for fear of violent domestic consequences. Some in Netanyahu’s government are already talking about Israel annexing the West Bank, in the way it annexed East Jerusalem in 1980.
Talk of land swaps usually ends with potential offers of land for Palestinians in the barely habitable Negev desert. The major Jewish settlement blocks in the West Bank, by contrast, are in prime real estate.
Then there is the question of Gaza, which is barely large enough to accommodate its current population of 2.3 million. With unemployment there at nearly 50%, it is a breeding ground for radicalism, as the Hamas attack in October demonstrated.
Most Israelis agree with Netanyahu
The other factor is that Netanyahu’s rejection of a Palestinian state reflects the current views of most Israelis.
Polling by the Pew Research Center in March and April 2023 – well before the Hamas attack – showed only 35% of Israelis (including both Jewish and Arab respondents) thought “a way could be found for Israel and an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully”. That was down nine percentage points from 2017 and 15 points from 2013.
Among Jewish Israelis, those who agreed with the statement dropped from 46% in 2013 to 32% last year. The decline was even sharper among Arab Israelis, who had been more optimistic in 2013, with 74% thinking peaceful coexistence was possible. By 2023, the proportion was just 41%.
The extent to which Netanyahu, in office throughout this period, might have influenced these declines is difficult to measure. But considering the current level of hatred and distrust between Israelis and Palestinians, it’s difficult to envisage any potential replacement for Netanyahu taking a different line on a Palestinian state.
That reality is reinforced by the Orthodox Jewish demographics noted above. Orthodox Jews tend to vote for conservative religious parties, which means growing numbers of Orthodox voters favour the formation of right-wing governments (given Israel’s strict proportional representation voting system). Netanyahu currently leads an extremist right-wing government, and it’s unlikely to be the last.
That means talk of a two-state solution by Western governments is simply kicking the can down the road. It’s not going to happen. Israelis respect the US and value the materiel and diplomatic support provided by US presidential administrations, but they won’t be ordered about by them.
And there could be a change in leadership in the US this year, too. The leading Republican candidate, Donald Trump, had a reputation as the most pro-Israel US leader since Harry Truman when he was in office. So, if Trump wins the election and Netanyahu is still in office next year, there will be little head-butting at all.
Ian Parmeter is a Research Scholar at the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies, Australian National University.
JimboXYZ says
Wow, those birth rates are alarming 6.5 & even 3.8 per woman. Who has that many children ? Obviously overpopulation for the land & infrastructure is an issue. Covid casualties didn’t slow that birth rate one bit.
https://www.emro.who.int/images/stories/palestine/documents/COVID-19_Gaza_epidemiological_bulletin_11Apr2021.pdf
I’m sure they’ll figure out a solution soon enough.
Deborah Coffey says
Bibi Netanyahu has butted heads with several presidents about settlements in the West Bank beginning with Ronald Reagan and almost every president thereafter, including Donald Trump. I don’t know what the answer is but, I do know that the problem is, and has always been…Bibi Netanyahu.
Samuel says
He is a war criminal.
JW says
Given the International Court of Justice position and tight relationship between the US and Israel, I think it is time to get others in the world involved. In addition to the big hug of Biden shortly after the Hamas attack, and then to have a (Jewish) Secretary of State do the impossible job to negotiate a “deal” between Israel and Hamas with help of other Arab nations (excluding Iran) is just not strategic. The US put itself in a corner.
We should also not forget that this war is between two parties with strongly OPPOSING RELIGIONS.
A month ago Chris Hedges wrote an opinion about the case for genocide based on the ICJ’s 84 page report.
What caught my eye is this: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu equated Gaza with Amalek, a nation hostile to the Israelites in the Bible, and cited the Biblical injunction to kill every Amalek man, woman, child or animal. Defence Minister Yoav Gallant called Palestinians “human animals”
That’s no coincidence but showing the influence of ultra conservative religious Jews. This is inhumane but keep in mind that Christian Bibles and the Koran contain some cruel content as well.
So, that’s what happens for thousands of years: religious wars instead of PEACE.
To let the Israelis get it their way with one state and remove (kill) ALL Palestinians (and their animals) from “their ” land, can not be justified. (Some US politicians have called for “leveling Gaza” instead of THINKING first)
For Americans, we may want to think about our own history where the English settlers also believed in a God given land for themselves; America.
I am sure this will never be taught in school, but the information is public but hidden
So, with the missteps made by Biden and Blinken (which have been admitted by the Administration), it’s time for other players (if the world can find them) to take over our unfortunate, failed, efforts in the Middle East. We have ignored Iran but, last year, China has managed a better relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Strategically, this may put Israel in the corner and can allow the US (with monetary and weapon supply) to step out of the Middle East.
This may be the best option for a justified two state solution and the US can spend its efforts on our own increasingly dysfunctional “democracy” at home.
don miller says
that is because it is not a solution.
Samuel L. Bronkowitz says
Give the land that we call Israel back to the Palestinians and then settle all of the displaced Israelis in Texas
R.S. says
This calamity is still part of the aftermath of colonialism. The Brits gave a country without people to European Jews, a people without land. Of course, the Brits overlooked the people who were there, just as the deity of ancient times overlooked the ancient Canaanites who inhabited the so-called “promised land.” If Mr. Balfour had thought for a minute that people in Palestine might have a stake in this decision before writing to Mr. Rothschild, the entire heartbreak might have been avoided. As things stand now, Israel has gone over the top with its murderous campaigns in Gaza and in the West Bank. That place is not an ally; it’s a serious handicap for the US. We have the leverage to stop the IDF, to insist on a negotiated peace, and to turn Israel from a nation state into a true democracy with equal rights for all in that region as well as a right to return for all Palestinian refugees.
ASF says
This ship has sailed. No less than five very viable two state solutions have been laid at the feet of the Palestinians since 1948. The one offered to them in 2000 alone at Camp David/Taba would have given them 95% of the disputed territories and control over parts of Jerusalem. The Palestinians have rejected every two state offer made to them out of hand. They have made it clear that only “From the River to Sea” is all they will ever accept. Understandably, that is a no-go for Israelis.
Abbas has made it clear in recent speeches that, if the Palestinian Authority is put in control of any new proposed Palestinian state, he will convene a “coalition” government that will include Hamas and what he has called “other Palestinian resistance forces.” Gee, let’s all all scratch our heads and ask why the Israelis might have a problem with that!
As for the Palestinian casualty count being based on Hamas Ministry numbers, that is less than credible, given Hamas’s Modus Operandi of dumping their militant death count in with their civilian casualty numbers, inflating the numbers further on top of that and refusing to own up to the numbers of Palestinian deaths that have actually resulted from the Palestinian militant factions own indiscriminate sniper fire, their own errant rocket fire (that often ends up falling into the Palestinians’ own backyards) and their use of the Pakestinian population at large as Human Shields, “Pallywood” props and operative enablers of Palestinian terrorist activity.
ASF says
You DO realize that Netanyahu has not always been in power in Israel, right? This fact is is in direct contrast to how Abbas is currently serving out his nineteenth year of a four year term in office in the Palestinian territories.
There have been several Left leaning Israeli governments and they couldn’t get anywhere further with the Palestinians than Netanyahu could–despite giving away many key concessions and “land for peace”–including ceding over control of the Gaza Strip over to the Palesitnians in 2005–which only resulted in the Palestinians INCREASING their violence and their threats of Israel’s extinction.
Facts matter. And while blaming Netanyahu for every sin in The Middle East may appeal to some people’s desire to find an convenient scapegoat to aviud the wider implications of a very complex and difficult situation, it isn’t even close to the full truth.
ASF says
Israel happens to be the historical homeland of those “people without a land” that you referred to above.
The Hebron Massacre of 1929 preceeded the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. It was a murderous attack upon Jews iving in the region by Arabs who had been riled up by the Grand Mufti who had exhorted his Anti Semitic troops with the battle cry, “The Jews are defuiling the Temple Mount–Go get ’em!”–sound familiar?
That attack was very remniscent of what occurred on October 7th. of 2023. Jewish infants in orphanages were swung by the feet against stone walls with their brains dashed out. Women were raped and men had their limbs chopped off.
Further attacks of a similar nature kept re-occurring, coming to crisis point in the years 1936-1938–wehreupon the British who governed the region decided to act by “evacuating” most of the Jews from the region…”evacuating” being a polite British euphemism at the time for exiling all the Jews from their homes and lands, at which point, Arabs just moved into them. Problem solved, I guess–as far as the British were concerned.
The fact that so many Mosques in the region are built over the conquered remains of synagogues and Churches are proof that certain other groups were already there when Muslims occupied/colonized the region. This is has been going on for a long time and politically convenient editing of the truth does not help matters improve.
endangered species says
Don’t worry if treasonous trump gets in there he will start ww3 before you know it.
R.S. says
I will never understand why supporters of Israel are so hell-bent on reviving the nation state when just about all nations have given up on that idea: Africans perforce because the Berlin conference of 1884 divided up the continent; Europeans voluntarily by founding the EU; the US by way of its aggressive settler colonialism; and many other countries by way of immigration and migrations. “From the river to the sea” is a slogan to call for a true democracy where all people in the region may unfold their individuality freely; it does not necessarily mean that there should be a bloodbath of the type that’s going on in Gaza, courtesy of the nation state. The intertwining of religion and state in Israel makes for a marvelous reminder for all other nations not to want to go on that kind of archaic path. And for god’s sake, get your facts straight: Netanyahu has boasted severally that he’s been successful in preventing a Palestinian state; snipers are members of IDF sitting on rooftops; and the IDF has used plenty of “friendly fire” on the October 7 attack. Or do you really believe that some guys on mopeds could damage buildings that severely?
R.S. says
Hmmm. I wonder on what piece of historical homeland of Native Americans you are sitting as we speak. ;-)
ASF says
It seems that the Palestinians are all in on the idea of a “nation-state.”
By the way, how many other “Majority Mulsim states (that rule by dent of theologically driven Sharia Law) are there already in the world? If just one majority Jewish state is one too many for some people to bear the thought of, we can guess why that is.
ASF says
My comment (which is really an observation based on verifiable history) was in response to your “European Jews, peope without a land” comment. You seem to be insinuating that the Jews living in Israel have no legitimate connection to the land. Jews have more of a connection to that particular area than the Arabs do. The Arabs come from the Arabian Peninsula. In particular, the people called “Palestinians” today come from all over the Arabian Peninsula. The Jews, by contrast, descend from Judea and Samaria.
Palestinians have been granted a definition of “refugee-ship” that is different from the deifintion accorded to all other groups of refugees throughout the world. They are the only group that enjoys that designation in perpetuity. The designation even includes what UNWRA calls “adopted family members.” It’s just another way to “stack the deck” in their favor.