It is outrageous, in the midst of an ongoing genocide where each day brings news of more tragedies and horrors, that we would have the luxury of addressing “final status” solutions. But, since we are always being asked what we want and how we envision the outcome, it may be worthwhile to address this question—even if the immediate task is to stop the genocide, achieve a ceasefire, release the hostages and prisoners, lift the siege of Gaza, and begin the process of rebuilding.
The often-misunderstood phrase, “From the River to the Sea,” refers to a solution that addresses the entirety of the Palestinian homeland. For a time, after the 1967 War, many people believed in the possibility of a two-state compromise, whereby Palestinians would abandon their claims to 78% of historic Palestine in return for an independent state in the areas occupied in 1967, namely the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza. This “Two-State Solution” (aka land for peace) was a Grand Compromise that was supposed to put an end to the occupation and the conflict, allowing for a pragmatic outcome that would not challenge the basic tenets of either Zionism or Palestinian Nationalism. Those who rejected this compromise or raised fundamental questions were labeled extremists uninterested in peace. This was indeed the premise of the Oslo peace process, and the agreements signed at that time were intended to create progress towards such a goal. ….more
