Of all the things wrong with the Middle East today, the one thing that has the Obama administration up in arms is not the Ayatollah chanting, “Death to America.” Instead, it is Benjamin Netanayahu’s election statement that the situation on the ground will have to change in order for him to be willing to support the creation a Palestinian state. Netanyahu’s clarification that he supports a two-state solution, however, was not good enough for the Obama Administration.

Over the years, society has developed a blind devotion to the idea that the two-state solution is the answer to the problems between Israel and its neighbors.  However, the evidence suggests that the idea of a two-state solution is an abject failure.

The most pressing lie in the two-state solution’s narrative is that Israel is occupying Palestinian lands. Palestinian apologists generally point to the “occupation” as justification for the many terrorists attacks that come out of the “occupied territories,” even though Hamas attacks from Gaza–an area from which Israel uprooted itself  in 2005.  The core idea here is that some place called “Palestine” has always been a legitimate jurisdiction, and therefore Israel’s presence is unlawful.  The idea of Israeli occupation is a prime example of a lie being repeated enough times to where it has become the truth.

The key to debunking the myth of occupation is understanding the history of Israel and its pre-independence borders. Prior to its independence, Israel was the area that is today Israel and Jordan was known as the British Mandate for Palestine, the term Palestine referring to a generic region rather than a specific people group. The British promised that the Palestine mandate would eventually become the national home of the Jews. The Arab violent resistance eventually became so bad that the British capitulated and gave over 75% of the Mandate away in the form of what is today the country of Jordan.

When Israel declared its independence in 1948, it by definition took on the national borders of its former mandate status, which includes what many consider to be the “occupied territories.” The only argument that can be offered in response is the attempt by the newly created United Nations to re-partition the remaining territory in 1947. When the Arabs refused this offer, they effectively said “no” to the deal that would have left Palestinians a rightful claim to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).  Now, the Arabs are effectively arguing that they are entitled to what they said “no” to and rejected previously.  Immediately after declaring independence, Israel was invaded, and the borders that are commonly referred to as the 1967 borders are the ceasefire lines to which Israel was able to push back the pan-Arab invasion of 1948. It is as result of the 1948 war that Judea and Samaria were occupied by what was then Transjordan and forever after referred to as the West Bank, and Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip until 1967.

Given the fact that Israel’s latest land for peace initiatives in Gaza and Southern Lebanon have turned out to be catastrophic failures, it would seem obvious that Netanyahu is not going to give up land just to appease the Israel-haters at the United Nations, European Union, or the White House.

The peace process itself is a huge threat to Israel’s security. Former PLO head and master terrorist Yasir Arafat stated multiple times that any peace was temporary, and made open the fact that his plan was to destroy Israel in phases. Arafat’s lack of interest in genuine peace can be seen in his behavior at the 2000 Camp David Summit, where he refused to even consider giving Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak a counteroffer for his deal. Though Barak was prepared to sell the farm, Arafat launched the Second Intifada. The peace process has been shown to be little more than a ruse that allows the Palestinians to buy time and or destroy Israel from within. Mahmoud Abbas, who is currently in the eleventh year of what was supposed to be a four-year term as head of the Palestinian Authority, has refused to even consider recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. Abbas insists that any refugee who considers themselves to be Palestinian should be able to return to Israel, but there are up to 5 million “refugees” according to UN who could qualify for this “right of return.” Adding 5 million Arabs to Israel’s population would either end or come very close to ending Israel’s character as the Jewish state.

Despite all of this, the majority of people–including a majority of Israelis–still favor a two-state solution for two misleading reasons. The first reason is that, if Israel were to “annex” its own territory in the West Bank and Gaza, the international community would have a collective aneurysm. However, the world hates Israel enough already that, given a more pro-Israel administration, Israel should be able to “annex” its own territory without much more than strongly worded letters. Its Arab enemies are preoccupied with civil wars and other conflicts. Israel’s existence is enough for terrorists to attack it, so annexing its rightful territory would likely just be another excuse. The second, more complicated reason is based on the idea that Israel could only remain a Jewish state would be to become a true apartheid state (which it is not, despite critics’ claims to the contrary) to control a rapidly expanding Arab population. However, this slanderous charge is based on a lie spread by the Palestinian populations in Judea and Samaria and based on inflated Arab versus Jewish birth rates. The lie of demographic doom for the Jewish state is just another way the Palestinian leadership wages diplomatic war against Israel.

It’s high time that people learn the truth.  The two-state solution has been used all along as a political tool by Israel’s enemies, creating an increasingly bad political situation for the state of Israel and the

For more information on Israel, the lies of occupation and demographics, possible international reaction, and how Palestinian nationalism can trace its origins back to the Third Reich, read Caroline Glick’s book, “The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for peace in the Middle East.”