Also from Ynet, Israeli news outlet, just this week.
'"Two states" an empty slogan'
'Op-ed: Palestinians (sic - CM) reiterate their 'commitment' to peace process, but refuse to recognize Israel as Jewish state.
'As pundits try to gauge the strength of the alliance between Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett, who have so far refused to enter a Netanyahu-led coalition, it is important to discuss the main disagreement between the leaders of the Yesh Atid and Habayit Hayehudi parties.
'Lapid has adopted the "two states for two peoples" paradigm, although he has refrained from talking about it in a pathetically obsessive way, as Tzipi Livni has.
'Bennett, on the other hand, has rejected the model out of hand.
'A diplomatic abyss separates Lapid and Bennett, but it has yet to damage their alliance, perhaps because they both assume the "two states for two peoples" idea will never materialize, at least not in the near future.
'The "two states for two peoples" slogan has no hold in reality, despite the fact that it is supported by many in Israel and the Western world.
'Apart from the fact that a Palestinian leader (sic: that should be, 'a "Palestinian" Arab Muslim leader '- CM) who would be willing to sign a peace agreement without demanding the return (sic: that should be 'return' , in quotation marks - CM) of a significant number of refugees (that should be, 'of so-called "refugees"' - CM) to Israel has yet to be born, senior Palestinian officials refuse to even utter the words "Jewish state".
'The Palestinian ethos and Palestinian literature (that is, 'the Arab/Muslim ethos and Arab/Muslim literature', period - CM) do not signal even the slightest willingness to make progress toward recognizing the Jewish state.
'The demand for the return of the refugees (that is, 'the return of the soi-disant "refugees"' - CM) is aimed at flooding Israel with Palestinians (that is, 'at flooding Israel with Levantine Arab Muslims' - CM) as part of the effort to strip the country of its Jewish character.
Mr Rosenfeld would understand exactly what is going on, and where this particular tactic comes from, if he were to read Sam Solomon and Elias El-Maqdisi's book on the hegira, "Modern-Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration"; for review and handy summary, see here:
'All this does not stop the majority of Palestinian officials from repeatedly telling Israel and the West of their "commitment to the idea of two states for two people", while at the same time objecting to any recognition of the Jewish state.
'It is one thing to speak of a withdrawal from Judea and Samaria (which would hand over the military high ground to the Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob, as a platform from which to prosecute the Jihad with redoubled force - CM) while accepting some part of the 'right of return' in exchange for a peace agreement (that is, a hudna, modelled on the tactical and temporary Treaty of Hudaybiyya - CM) which will most likely (which will most assuredly - CM) collapse like the Oslo Accords did, and it is an entirely different thing to view the "two states for two peoples" formula as the headline of the peace deal which is supposed to create a Palestinian (sic: a Muslim-dominated Levantine Arab - CM) nation state in the West Bank (that is, right on top of the heartland of ancestral eretz Israel, in Judea and Samaria - CM) alongside a Jewish nation state in Israel.
'The chances of realizing the second option do not exist anyway, unless "two states" means establishing a Jew-free Palestinian-Hamasnik nation state in Gaza and another PLO nation state, which will also be free of Jews, in Judea and Samaria.
On the military high ground, squatting sneeringly right on top of the historic heartland of eretz Israel. And one wonders how long it would be before such a state, should it be established, already Jew-free, became Christian-free as well, as the remaining Christians, outnumbered by Muslims, were force-converted, or killed, or simply driven out by threats and violence. - CM
'In the State of Israel, in which many leaders and important institutions are against giving preference to the Jewish nation over the large Arab minority, the idea of a Jewish nation state cannot be realized in the framework of the fictive "two states for two people" formula.
'However, since Lapid, Livni and the rest of the advocates of the "two states for two peoples" principle cannot publicly admit that the Palestinians are refusing to recognise Israel as a Jewish state, they are actually rejecting that same principle.
'This is what the sentence, "We do not need the Palestinians to recognize us as a Jewish state" was invented for. It means that our recognition as a jewish state, much like Shari Arison's peace, starts with us, and it also ends with us, just like the "two states for two peoples" idea - which has always been no more than a catchy marketing slogan devoid of any content.'
It's worse than a catchy marketing slogan, Mr Rosenfeld. It's a snare and a delusion.
At this juncture, it is appropriate to reproduce some lapidary paragraphs from New Englilsh Review's 'Hugh Fitzgerald', on the subject of the 'two-state solution', which appeared in the course of a discussion on the jihadwatch forum, many moons ago, and which one will still find there, in the archives (just scroll down):
"...the Lesser Jihad, against Israel, was disguised, for obvious reasons, as merely a matter of the 'legitimate rights of the Palestinian people'.
"Neither Israel itself, nor many in the outside world, seem willing to comprehend that there is no solution, one-state or two-state or n-state, to the Jihad.
"There is only the matter of remaining overwhelmingly - and perceptibly - more powerful, capable of wreaking great damage on those who would attack. No treaty with Infidel states, and Israel is such a state (and so, too, are India, and the Philippines, and Thailand, all of them ensnared in similarly futile and delusive 'peace processes', of one kind or another, with Muslim entities - CM), can conceivably be permanently honored by a Muslim signatory.
"Pacta sunt servanda is a Western idea. In the Muslim world, treaties are not to be obeyed, but if made with Infidels, to be violated, as soon as the Muslim side feels itself strong enough to press its advantage.
"The model for all time - see Majid Khadduri - is Muhammad's Treaty with the Meccans in 628 AD...".
And for good measure, here is the link for a whole article by Hugh - ' Waiting for Hudaibiyya' - on the same topic: