“I’m looking at two-state and one-state, and I like the one that both parties like, I can live with either one,” President Trump said on Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2017 during a joint news conference with his Israeli counterpart, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“I would like to see a deal be made,” said Trump. This would not be a deal for a two-state solution, but a deal for peace, with or without a two-state solution. If the creation of a Palestinian state creates peace, then that’s good, but it simply does not need to be the only road to peace.
The principle of two states for two peoples became such a basic truth that in the conflict’s lexicon, it was defined as synonymous with peace. Those who support peace want a two-state solution and those who don’t oppose it.
For decades the two-state solution has been the centerpiece of U.S. policy, and the goal of Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy. The leadership in Ramallah, and the aging center-left “peace camp” in Jerusalem, cannot conceive of an alternative vision—even when they admit that the two-state solution is no longer realistic.
However Trump’s comments are to be interpreted, it is a breath of fresh air compared to the Obama administration’s final “act of arrogance and petty vengeance” against Israel by refusing to veto the United Nation’s resolution last December declaring Israel’s building houses and communities for its people, within its own borders, even in its own capital city as violations of international law.
No one is without excuse that Word further tells us in Romans 1:19-21: “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”
Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Meir Turgeman told AFP: “Now we can finally build.”
At the start of his cabinet meeting on Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he would speak to Mr Trump later on Sunday evening.
“There are many issues between us, including the Israeli-Palestinian issue, the situation in Syria and the Iranian threat,” he said.
Meanwhile, the headline for the same story in the New York Times, once a respected news outlet, conveys a different tone altogether…
“A Defiant Israel Vows to Expand Its Settlements”
“To give you an idea of how appalling this resolution is, it declares that any Jew who lives in the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem, the Jewish quarter, inhabited for 1,000 years, is illegal, breaking international law, essentially an outlaw, can be hauled into the international criminal court and international courts in Europe, which is one of the consequences. The Jewish quarter has been populated by Jews for 1,000 years.
In 2012, running for re-election, Obama spoke at the meeting of AIPAC, the big Jewish lobby. He said, “Is there any doubt that I have Israel’s back?”
In 2016, in the final month of his 2 terms as president, Obama refuses to exercise veto against UN Security Council’s resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank, resulting in harsh criticism for “stabbing Israel in the back”.
Prime Minister Netanyahu stated that Israel is “encouraged by the statements of our friends in the United States, Republicans and Democrats alike, they (the US) understand that the Western Wall isn’t occupied territory”.
Trump says on Twitter, “As to the U.N., things will be different after January 20th.”
Read more at: