Kamala’s Two-State Solution Endorsement Cripples Chances for Middle East Peace

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

In a move that raises eyebrows and concerns alike, Vice President Kamala Harris has reiterated her support for a Palestinian state during her recent debate with former President Donald Trump. This endorsement, framed as a push for a two-state solution, is not just misguided; it threatens to further destabilize an already volatile region and could lead to an uptick in terrorism. Experts from both Israel and the United States are sounding the alarm, and rightly so.

Now, after seemingly rushing to align with a narrative that has repeatedly failed, Harris stated, “I will always give Israel the ability to defend itself, in particular as it relates … to Iran and any threat that Iran and its proxies pose to Israel. But we must have a two-state solution where we can rebuild Gaza, where the Palestinians have security, self-determination and the dignity they so rightly deserve.”

This rhetoric is not only naive but dangerously out of touch with the realities on the ground.

David Friedman, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, bluntly declared, “After Oct. 7th, the two-state became a dead letter. A Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan will destabilize both countries and bring only additional terror and misery.”

His words underscore the futility of pursuing a two-state solution in the current climate, where Palestinian leadership has shown nothing but rejectionism towards peace.

Friedman further criticized Harris, asserting, “Vice President Harris should stop parroting failed theories and trying to force a square peg into a round hole. She should empower Israel to reach a just and workable solution on its own and not interfere in matters where she is neither competent nor well-informed.”

This is a call for a more pragmatic approach, one that recognizes the complexities of the situation rather than clinging to outdated ideologies.

Jonathan Conricus, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, added, “The so-called two-state solution may have been possible to implement 31 years ago, but four straight Palestinian rejections of Israeli peace offers have made it clear that the current Palestinian leadership does not aspire to end the conflict and achieve peace.”

This stark reality should serve as a wake-up call for those in power who continue to push for a solution that has long been rejected by the very parties it aims to help.

Polling data reveals a troubling trend, as Conricus noted: “Polling of the Palestinian population in Gaza and Palestinian Authority-controlled areas shows clear popular Palestinian support for Hamas, signaling that the Palestinian population supports the genocidal vision of annihilating Israel through jihad, as demonstrated by Hamas on Oct. 7.”

This is not just a political issue; it’s a matter of life and death, and the implications of Harris’ stance could be catastrophic.

Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state, acknowledged the challenges, stating, “The two-state solution is on life support right now, but just because this is a difficult moment to envision a peaceful endgame between Israel and the Palestinians that’s rooted in diplomatic compromise, that does not mean it should not be the goal.”

Rubin also pointed out, “We have seen it achieved with Arab states. There is no reason that it can’t be done with the Palestinians as long as the political will is there, extremism is rooted out and security arrangements are solid. So, for Vice President Harris to make this a priority is an inherently pro-Israel position, one that seeks to provide Israel with the long-term security and stability that it still clearly does not have.”

This perspective highlights the need for a more nuanced approach, one that prioritizes Israel’s security while addressing the complexities of Palestinian aspirations.

In a previous interview, Harris reiterated her commitment, saying, “I remain committed since I’ve been on Oct. 8 to what we must do to work toward a two-state solution where Israel is secure and in equal measure the Palestinians have security and self-determination and dignity.”

Her commitment seems to ignore the stark realities of the current geopolitical landscape. The Biden administration’s funding for the Palestinian Authority (PA) raises further concerns.

Itamar Marcus, director of Palestinian Media Watch, revealed, “The American and European funding boosts the Palestinian Authority budget by $600 million. The Palestinian Authority pays the salaries of imprisoned terrorists and the family members of the martyrs, and the amount comes to $300 million a year.”

This financial support, which indirectly funds terrorism, is a glaring contradiction to the administration’s stated goals of peace and stability.

Moreover, Mahmoud Abbas, the PA president, has made inflammatory statements, declaring, “America is the plague, and the plague is America” and “We implement Shari’a law: victory or martyrdom.”

Such rhetoric from a supposed moderate leader only serves to highlight the futility of the Biden-Harris administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The endorsement of a Palestinian state by Vice President Harris is not just a political miscalculation; it is a dangerous gamble that could have far-reaching consequences for both Israel and the broader Middle East. As the 2024 election looms, one must question whether this administration is truly committed to peace or merely playing politics as usual.