If you want to appear “fair and balanced,” then it’s easy to say “both sides should have a state.” However, when you actually look at this honestly, you realize that the facts simply do not bear this out. The Arabs have done a great job making themselves look like an underdog but they are in fact the bully. The Muslims control 99% of the land mass in the Middle East, while the Jews who are often accused of colonialism and imperialism control less than 1%. Asking them to give up some of that less than 1% is pretty far from fair or balanced. Also, and let’s be honest here, what have the Arabs in Judeah and Samaria done to deserve a state? Exist? Blow up some airplanes? Kill an old man in a wheelchair? What exactly makes people believe they should have self-determination on someone else’s ancestral lands? Would you want to live in a terrorocracy/kleptocracy? Why do you think Arabs would?
“The Israelis support it.”
The simple truth is that the Israeli Government toes the line for 2 reasons, the main one being that it knows that the Arabs will never agree to a two-state solution, so they can say they do and appear to be more “fair and balanced” in the eyes of the world. And yes, it has worked, but it also has shown the world that the Jews are not strong in their position and will concede if pushed. Secondly, they do not really know what to do with a hostile population within their own “recognized” borders let alone Judeah and Samaria. And if we are really honest, there is a third reason: Jews tend to be far too empathetic and I think many of them simply want the Arabs to be happy and peaceful, but the only way that happens is if Jews go back to being dhimmis on their own land. You cannot meet someone part way when his position is your enslavement or destruction.
Because “everyone else does”
This is simply the worst argument. You should never determine your moral compass by the whims of the majority, that’s literally how every tyranny began. I have shown why it’s immoral to try to pressure Jews into giving up land, it really is that simple. If you have two people, one vastly wealthy and one poor, you do not ask them both to give the same amount, you would be thought of as heartless, so why is it ok to do it to Israel? 99% vs 1%.
There is a perception that anyone living over the Green Line is a crazy religious zealot, they are mean to their neighbors, oppress their women and cause all the problems. Only when you actually go to places like Gush Etzion and Karne Shomron and Yitzar, you suddenly see a different story,; women who are empowered and intelligent, working in many fields like psychotherapy, and while many are religious, its not oppressive like you have been told – it’s simply authentic. There is a real feeling of tribe there, and I urge people to go spend a Shabbat with a family in those places.
“The demographics argument seems insurmountable.”
What do you do with the extra three million hostile Arabs?” This argument is used as an excuse to do nothing, because if Israel absorbs them, they become an instant significant minority with potential to grow into a majority. Firstly, there are ways around that without becoming an apartheid state, and secondly, that doesn’t affect the morality of my argument. There will be challenges no matter which solutions are implemented.
Because it feels good and Jewish leadership doesn’t want to appear “hardline”.
it just sounds nice to say “everyone should have a state” and Jewish organizations have used that to appear conciliatory and willing to negotiate. But over the years, it has hardened into a mantra “if we just had two states we would have peace” – only the Arabs have been offered the two-state delusion multiple times and refused it every single time. I myself used to believe in the two-state delusion, until I realized how I would feel if Canada told my people we would have peace if we just gave up some of what we had left.
So lets recap. You have all those reasons that the two-state delusion won’t die, and you have the one single reason it should – the two-state delusion is neither fair nor balanced, it is not moral, and you are literally asking an indigenous people to give up significant sacred places to a hostile people who have already demonstrated a willingness to destroy those places and limit access. You are asking a people who control less than 1% of the land mass to give up some of the tiny amount they have, to sop the conscience of the West. I am not having it. I will speak up against this immoral and unjust solution at every opportunity and I will try to teach people why its unfair, unjust and wrong.