Kerry's 'one state' comments cause consternation

John Kerry

US Secretary of State John Kerry has set off a furore in Israel by suggesting that Israel was destroying itself as a Jewish state.

Kerry told a conference on Israeli affairs in Washington on Saturday that through its continued occupation of the West Bank, Israel could make it impossible to partition the land between Jewish and Palestinian states.

 He said the alternative would have to be a "binational state" in which Jews and Palestinians live together in one state, ending Israel's Jewish majority.

"The one-state solution is no solution at all for a secure, Jewish, democratic Israel living in peace, it is simply not a viable option," Kerry said.

The US, along with most of the international community, has long argued that a "two-state solution" - establishing a Palestinian state and ending Israel's control over millions of Palestinians in territories occupied in the 1967 war - is the best way of creating a long-term peace.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted angrily on Sunday, telling his Cabinet that "Israel will not be a binational state" and blaming the Palestinians for the failure of peace efforts. But despite Netanyahu's pledges, Jewish settlement of the West Bank continues apace, while confusion over his true intentions grows by the day.

Meanwhile, Israel seems unable to stem a wave of stabbings and other attacks by Palestinian individuals, now in its third month, that has killed 19 Israelis and left over 100 Palestinians, most said by Israel to be attackers, dead.

This situation has sharpened the country's half-century-old debate over the Palestinians. Opposition politicians, intellectuals and retired military commanders are issuing increasingly strident warnings that never-ending violence awaits if Israel continues to occupy millions of angry Palestinians who cannot vote in its national elections.

"If Israel were the Titanic and the binational apartheid state its iceberg ... then the collision with the iceberg has already occurred," wrote columnist Rogel Alpher in the Haaretz daily. "Without a diplomatic solution, we will continue to slowly sink into an existence of knifings, hatred and fear."

Here's a look at the potential "one-state" outcome:
THE ARGUMENT FOR PULLING OUT OF THE WEST BANK

Ever since Israel seized the West Bank and Gaza from Jordan and Egypt in 1967, the question of the territories' fate has hung in the air. Israel's more doveish left wing has favoured a pull-out from most of the areas, hoping this will bring Israel recognition and peace in the region. But over two decades of failed peace talks have convinced many a deal is not possible.

The left still favours a pull-out, but the rationale has shifted to something more like nationalism: without a pull-out, Israel would no longer be a Jewish-majority democracy because half of its population in effect will be Palestinians, most of them without true democratic rights.

That's because while Israel proper - the area defined by 1949 cease-fire lines that ended the war surrounding Israel's establishment - has roughly 6.3 million Jews and 1.7 million Palestinian citizens of Israel. Adding the West Bank and Gaza, demographers believe, would make the Arab and Jewish populations essentially equal.

A pull-out from the West Bank is complicated by the presence of Jewish settlers, numbering 400 000 and growing. Eventually the situation may become irreversible, with the Palestinians abandoning efforts to set up their own state and instead demanding annexation and voting rights as citizens of a single "binational" state.

Israelis who fear this scenario and see a future of internecine conflict, global economic boycotts and increasing isolation want a pull-out now, from at least most of the West Bank, even without an agreement with the Palestinians.

"If the Israelis don't hurry up to implement the two-state solution on the ground, they will lose," said Ahmed Qurei, a long time Palestinian negotiator.