I disagree with Chris McGreal that the two-state option offers the only sustainable solution to the Israel-Palestinian dispute (The two-state solution has been a diplomatic failure. It’s also still the best answer we’ve got, 6 November). The three-state alternative, whereby Gaza reverts to Egyptian control and the West Bank again becomes part of Jordan, has proven benefits.
We know this can succeed in stabilising the situation because it did so effectively from 1949 to 1967, when it was only upended by continuing interstate disputes between Israel and its Arab neighbours. In neither case was Egyptian and Jordanian control entirely free of coercive elements, so it is noteworthy that their rule provoked very little Palestinian resistance. They also acted effectively to limit armed attacks by Palestinian fighters on Israel.
Today, Israel has peace treaties with both neighbours and could negotiate the three-state option, unlike before, when it was carved out by territorial conquest. The costs of integrating Palestinian populations into the Arab states would be eased by hundreds of millions of dollars and euros in assistance from the US and the EU, which would pay handsomely to support any viable option.
Three states would end the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, the most pressing challenge currently, and generate momentum to positive negotiations on the other core issues relating to the status of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees. The three-state option has a singular advantage over both two- and one-state alternatives: it’s been tried before, and it worked.
Dr Martin A Smith
Camberley, Surrey
• Writing about a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, Chris McGreal says an outline is agreed “even if the result is deep injustice to the Palestinians”. Who agreed, then, I thought, and something nagged the back of my mind.
In his biography of Edward Said, Timothy Brennan wrote about Said’s response to the 1993 Oslo accord: “there was no agreement on the status of Jerusalem, the illegal settlements, the right of Palestinian return or recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state”. Later in the book, as I remember it, Brennan suggested that it was as if the Oslo agreement was that X and Y could speak for Palestine, but nothing substantial or meaningful would be discussed. McGreal seems to amplify this thought.
The ensemble of the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra, co-founded by Said and Daniel Barenboim, is playing this Saturday in London.
Janet Dubé
Peebles, Scottish Borders
• Your anonymous correspondent (Letters, 7 November) says: “Anyone demanding a ceasefire should also be demanding the release of the hostages … But I haven’t seen that demand on a single placard to date.” We invite them to come to St Peter’s Square, Manchester, any Friday between 5pm and 6pm, to witness the silent vigil organised by the Manchester branch of Amnesty International. Our placards say: “Hamas: Release all Hostages”; “Israel: No Collective Punishments”. And also: “Protect all Civilians, Uphold International Law, Protect Human Rights, Stop War Crimes.”
Mike Reed
Manchester Amnesty group
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
