I'm not convinced that a 2-state solution is in Israel's best interest because it ignores the structural realities of power and control. Israel's security has always been tied to its ability to manage its own territory and population, not just the existence of a Palestinian state. The idea that a 2-state solution would automatically lead to peace or stability ignores the fact that Israel has spent decades building a system of control that is not easily dismantled.

Consider the example of the West Bank: it's not just a geographic area—it's a complex web of settlements, security infrastructure, and strategic assets. Removing Israel's presence there would require a massive and irreversible shift in its national security posture. That’s not just about borders—it’s about the very foundation of Israel’s military and political strategy.

Moreover, the assumption that a Palestinian state would be non-threatening is deeply flawed. History shows that states, even when created with international support, often seek to challenge the status quo. A Palestinian state, especially one with a history of resistance and a population that has endured decades of occupation, would not automatically be a partner in peace.

In short, a 2-state solution doesn’t just require diplomacy—it requires a fundamental rethinking of Israel’s security model, which is not something that can be achieved through a simple territorial compromise.