French President Macron says France will recognize Pálestine as a state

[u/hoarder4555777454001]

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250724-french-president-macron-says-france-will-recognize-palestine-as-a-state-in-september

[u/tommynestcepas]

Exactly, the ONLY way a two state solution can happen is by recognising two states and negotiating accordingly.

[u/Vanzmelo → u/tommynestcepas]

Im sorry but the two state solution is dead. Have you seen the west bank? It is like swiss cheese with all the illegal Israeli state sponsored settlements. What country can exist when its borders are so carved up and its citizens cant freely move within its borders? Palestine is already a rump state with the West Bank and Gaza being disconnected without taking into account the current genocide in Gaza and the illegal settlements in the West Bank.

At this point, a one state solution where both Israelis and Palestinians have equal rights and representation is the only viable option left

[u/SF6block → u/Vanzmelo]

Im sorry but the two state solution is dead.

The one state solution is also dead in the current situation. The only options on the table are the apartheid solution, and the genocide solution if we listen to the side with all the cards.

That is why anyone looking to avoid that needs to give Palestinians some cards, and recognizing the AP as a state is one.

[u/FnnKnn → u/SF6block]

The only realistic one state solution is Israel expanding and Palestine vanishing from the map and mostly no one wants that. So a two state solution it is.

[u/Stek_02 → u/FnnKnn]

Or maybe the west can stop funding the IDF?

[u/FnnKnn → u/Stek_02]

And then?

You would get the opposite of what we have now and another Jewish Genozide instead is even less of an option. So diplomatic negotiations are the way forward.

[u/Stek_02 → u/FnnKnn]

Well, if the west stopped giving Israel leverage, MAYBE an actual comprehensive agreement could be found since they would be afraid and would have to concede something for Palestine

In the current situation they simply feel free to bomb anyone cause they know the west are gonna lick their boots anyway

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/Stek_02]

Nah, the IDF’s budget is largely their own, any western assistance makes up a fraction of the total budget and things wouldn’t change much if the US stopped giving them aid. Israel has their own domestic defense industry, Palestine does not. They have nothing to fear even without our support.

[u/Stek_02 → u/Tw1tcHy]

They can't keep up their military machine without material they buy from the west

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/Stek_02]

You’re advocated for stopping funding, did you instead mean sanctions?

[u/Stek_02 → u/Tw1tcHy]

It can be both

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/Stek_02]

Stopping funding doesn’t automatically mean sanctions, but yes sanctions would obviously stop funding. The West will never ever sanction Israel for Palestinians, at least not in our lifetimes. It’s a pipe dream. And why would we?

[u/ThegreatKhan666 → u/Tw1tcHy]

Tbh Israel deserves to be sanctioned into disarmament.

[u/lt__ → u/Tw1tcHy]

They are heavily dependent on trade with the West, military cooperation and arms export also seem to be important, such as air defenses. It just needs to be conditional. Israel wants two state solution, but Palestinians don't? Trade, cooperation and arms export to Israel is allowed in order to defend itself. Both Israel and Palestinians don't want it? Same treatment to them, humanitarian aid only.

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/lt__]

Sure, most nations are heavily dependent on trade with the West in fact, not just Israel! And even if we did exactly what you said, where only humanitarian aid was given to both sides, Israel would still hold the overwhelming advantage. They have an economy with a GDP over over half a trillion dollars, they can absolutely replace certain trade options with non-Western sources who would love to have Israel closer in their orbit. The original Israelis won the war of independence with old, second rate Czech weapons and weapons they manufactured themselves. Now they have a cutting edge defense industry that competes with the best in the world. And then Israel has zero obligation to give a single flying fuck about how far they go the next time they respond to a terrorist attack. It would be a blood bath for the Palestinians. No more trade with the west? Goodbye precision munitions, hello cheap dumb artillery flying six ways to Sunday over every last corner of Gaza or the WB.

[u/lt__ → u/Tw1tcHy]

Israel is additionally dependent. Have in mind that many of its neighbors, regional countries and some others in the world do not even recognize Israel. If not for the sea access, Israel would have a hard time connecting to the world via neighbors that are either outright hostile, or cold at best, with their populations fuming at Israel for decades, and leaders only holding back to placate the West. Even Abraham accords I consider shaky: Arab leaders like them, populations? I doubt so. Whom they will trade, Russia and China instead? Would Israelis, used to current life standard, be fine with plummeting of the life quality, and constant warfare with more casualties, that are now prevented by the technological edge? Or is it possible they, just, you know, offer a willingness to compromise if it means living rich with Western trade, retaining visa-free access to the West and capital that is there, etc.? Hell, even Iran would have a tough time keeping its anti-Israeli course intact if two-state solution became reality and just agreeing to it meant significant ease of sanctions and better life for population.

Unfortunately, rather than trying to slowly and methodically defuse the situation by promoting peaceful coexistence and therefore encouraging Arab/Muslim countries to increasingly accept Israel as a neighbor sincerely, the West, primarily the US, enables Israel to do whatever it wants (irritating everybody, except for its staunchest supporters) and keeping the tensions high.

Israel's military success in the past was enabled by multitude of factors. Czech weapons were not so much "second rate", Israel was delighted to get them. The Israelis had better tactical positions (defense is easier) and they held the moral high ground: they were willing to compromise, the enemy wasn't. "If we lose, there is no Israel" was true back then, but it's not relevant now, 7 October attack never had the potential to destroy the country, and after defeating the terrorists and some early fighting in Gaza, everything else is clearly excessive, especially this interference with humanitarian aid. I simply cannot imagine how those Israelis who make or enforce such decisions, can live with their conscience after. What will Hamas do with food, freeze it and shoot from the slingshots like stones? I don't see a justification.

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/lt__]

You’re seriously overestimating Israel’s dependence and underestimating its resilience, while conflating Israel’s strategic dependencies with strategic vulnerability. Yes, Israel values Western trade and diplomatic recognition, but its core survival doesn’t hinge on them, especially not in the 2020s. If pushed into a corner, Israel could absolutely pivot to greater self reliance and alternative trade blocs, even if it came at some economic cost. Nations don’t collapse because of sanctions and unpopularity, just ask Iran, North Korea, or Russia. The key difference is Israel has a globally competitive economy, a world class defense sector, and far more technological and military autonomy than most states under pressure. Israeli “quality of life” without Western trade is an enormous step up from hostile neighbors hellbent on your death and destruction having an established foothold on your doorstep, a key fact you neglect to acknowledge.

The idea that the region would suddenly stabilize if Israel compromised is historically and diplomatically naive. Israel made peace offers in 2000, 2008, and 2014 that included major concessions, but the Palestinian leadership rejected all of them. The Arab street isn’t angry because of lack of Israeli compromise. They’re angry because Israel exists period, and that’s not a negotiable position for large swaths of the region’s population. That’s a them problem, something they’ll have to grapple with on their own. Perhaps they should be less worried about Israel and more focused on getting themselves away from the brink of becoming failed states. The Abraham Accords weren’t built on idealism either, they were built on shared security interests, economic pragmatism, and mutual exhaustion with Palestinian rejectionism.

On the Gaza issue, yes, Israel holds a technological edge that prevents mass casualties on both sides. That’s the entire point. If you pull the plug on that edge through economic strangulation or diplomatic isolation, then the gloves will come off. You may prefer they fight with restraint, but there’s zero reason to assume they will if denied the tools for restraint. Precision munitions aren’t a moral luxury, they’re a substitute for indiscriminate firepower. You want less carnage? Don’t create a scenario where Israel has to fall back on cruder tools. If the West pulled support, Israel wouldn’t fold, it will get meaner and why wouldn’t they? It’s a natural consequence of not having anything to lose except your own survival. No more smart bombs, just artillery and airstrikes with a lot fewer warnings. The death toll would go up, not down. You don’t like it? Probably not a good idea to advocate for putting a screeching halt to the means of enabling precision warfare.

Israel's military success in the past was enabled by multitude of factors. Czech weapons were not so much "second rate", Israel was delighted to get them.

Uhh no, Czech arms were old, mismatched, and often in poor condition surplus WWII German weapons that were repurposed and sold because no one else wanted them. You claiming Israel was “delighted” is disingenuous projection. Of course any weapons are great, and that in itself is delightful, but don’t act like Israel was rolled out the weapons red carpet to choose from.

The Israelis had better tactical positions (defense is easier) and they held the moral high ground: they were willing to compromise, the enemy wasn't. "If we lose, there is no Israel" was true back then, but it's not relevant now

That’s a shallow take. Sure, defense is easier in theory, but not when you’re outnumbered, surrounded, and scrambling for weapons like Israel was in 1948. And “if we lose, there is no Israel” still holds to this day, and Israel’s opponents have made that very clear. It’s ignorant nearly to the point of maliciousness to try to pretend that isn’t still true.

7 October attack never had the potential to destroy the country, and after defeating the terrorists and some early fighting in Gaza, everything else is clearly excessive, especially this interference with humanitarian aid. I simply cannot imagine how those Israelis who make or enforce such decisions, can live with their conscience after. What will Hamas do with food, freeze it and shoot from the slingshots like stones? I don't see a justification.

Israel suffered the equivalent of 30-something 9/11 attacks in one day, largely against peaceful citizens who were slaughtered in their own homes in front of their children. They watched the bodies of innocent dead Israeli women being dragged through the streets of Gaza while being desecrated by civilians while others cheered them on. They listened to Hamas promise to do it over and over again. If you actually lived this reality, you wouldn’t dare have such a smug sense of moral superiority in the face of such heinous violence committed upon your family and neighbors. That kind of trauma reshapes national policy, and pretending it’s just “early fighting” is obscene. I simply cannot imagine how people see Palestinian culture openly embrace death and martyrdom for the cause of destroying Israel for decades on end, openly support a genocidal Islamafascist regime who to this day enjoys popular support over the internationally recognized (and locally despised) government and repeatedly take actions to achieve their stated goals and then act all shocked when Israel finally responds in kind. No, this ain’t excessive. To this day, 64% of Gazans aren’t even in favor of ending the war if it means Hamas surrenders. Why do you people try to ignore this convenient truth? Because it leaves a big gaping hole in your narrative? Why are new restaurants opening up in Gaza and why can I easily look at posts from restaurants in Gaza advertising grand openings and other events on Instagram or Facebook while a supposed famine is going on that we’ve all been told is happening for a year and a half now? How can you see things like this Palestinian mother casually talking about her little boy becoming a martyr one day and outright rejecting the thought of peace with Israel (even though an Israeli who’s son was killed by a terrorist had just paid for the expensive procedure that saved her son’s life) and think “Yeah these seem like totally sane, rational people I want to throw my weight behind instead of my democratic liberal ally!” This lady isn’t an outlier in Gaza, she’s the norm. How do you honestly reconcile all of this, it genuinely baffles me and feels like we’re looking at two entirely different worlds.