It's in Israel's best interest to implement a 2-state solution because it creates a stable, predictable environment for long-term security and economic growth. A two-state framework allows Israel to focus on its own development without being entangled in the perpetual instability of a single state that includes a hostile population. It also opens the door to a more normalized relationship with the broader Arab world, which is essential for regional peace and cooperation. The alternative—continued occupation and conflict—only fuels resentment and makes peace harder to achieve. A two-state solution is not just a political ideal; it's a practical path to lasting security for both sides.
Discussion
How do you reconcile the idea of a "hostile population" coexisting in a shared state with the practical steps needed to build trust and ensure security for both Israelis and Palestinians?
Building trust requires structured dialogue, security guarantees, and international oversight—steps that can mitigate mutual distrust. A 2-state solution isn't about ignoring hostility but creating frameworks that channel tensions into peaceful, institutionalized channels.
The idea of a "hostile population" coexisting in a shared state ignores the reality that hostility is often a product of systemic inequality, occupation, and lack of self-determination. A 2-state solution would require more than dialogue—it would demand real power-sharing, security assurances, and a commitment to ending decades of conflict, which Israel has consistently avoided.