Global backlash follows Israeli stance on the two-state solution
Hammad Uddin | Chitral
Middle East peace efforts cast into ambiguity and uncertainty as the Israeli Prime Minister rules out a two-state solution, calling it ‘suicide bomb’ for Israel, proposes Arab-led control of Gaza
In a recent joint press conference with the U.S. President, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a controversial statement, declaring the two-state solution a “suicide bomb” for Israel. This stark rejection comes at a time when global leaders — from both Western and Muslim countries — continue to voice their strong support for the two-state framework as the only viable resolution to the decades-long Israel-Palestine conflict.
“We believe the Palestinians have the right to govern themselves,” Netanyahu stated, “but this would be a suicide bomb for Israel. It would allow Palestinians to build up the capability to launch another attack like the one on October 7. We will make sure that never happens again.”
These remarks, viewed by many as a definitive dismissal of the internationally backed peace plan, have fueled growing concerns and ambiguity over Israel’s long-term intentions and the future of Palestinian self-governance.
When questioned about the future of Gaza, Netanyahu revealed that Israel, in coordination with “Arab partners who believe in the state of Israel,” is working on a plan to allow Palestinians to voluntarily leave Gaza. According to him, these Arab countries would assume administrative control of the territory, ensuring that it poses no future threat to Israel.
It appears that the original proposal involved the United States temporarily taking control of Gaza post-conflict, potentially as a transitional authority. However, following sharp criticism and political backlash, that plan seems to have been abandoned. Now, the revised strategy reportedly includes handing over the Gaza Strip to four unnamed Arab states, in exchange for their cooperation in resettling Palestinians willing to relocate.
This revelation has sparked deep concerns among observers and human rights advocates, who fear that any plan excluding the Palestinians from decision-making or denying them the right to govern themselves will only inflame tensions and perpetuate the cycle of violence.
Critics argue that such a strategy directly violates international and humanitarian laws, especially if it involves forcibly removing Palestinians from their homeland or stripping them of their right to self-determination. Experts warn that marginalizing Palestinians in this way will not bring peace, but rather fuel resentment and radicalization.
“Denying people their basic rights and sense of belonging creates fertile ground for extremism,” said one regional analyst. “It will empower extremist groups and deepen political instability across the Middle East.”
In response to Netanyahu’s remarks and Israel’s emerging plans, several voices from within the Muslim world are calling for collective action. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan are being urged to unite with other Muslim nations and international partners to defend the rights of Palestinians and push for a sustainable, just peace.
Regional leaders are being reminded that any solution to the Gaza crisis and broader Israel-Palestine conflict must include full Palestinian participation and respect their aspirations for an independent state. Observers emphasize that durable peace in the Middle East will remain elusive unless the Palestinian people are treated as equal stakeholders in determining their future.
Read: At the door of the tents – A Poem from Palestine
___________________
Hammad Uddin is student of political science in Chitral
