Two states or one? Why the world can’t ignore Israel’s apartheid reality

THEODOR Herzl, founder of Zionism, once wrote: “We shall try to spirit the penniless [Palestinian] population across the border by procuring employment for it in transit countries, while denying it employment in our own … the process of expropriation and removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”

In October 1955, Dr A Carlebach, writing in Ma’ariv, warned: “The danger stems from the [Islamic] totalitarian conception of the world … Occupation by force of arms, in their own eyes and in the eyes of Islam, is not associated with injustice. To the contrary, it constitutes a certificate of authentic ownership.”

As the genocide in Gaza recently marked its first anniversary, the world appears to have lost its moral compass. In that region, reality has been turned inside out. The historical injustice inflicted upon the Palestinians is devastating — a wound that shapes their worldview, rooted in betrayal, oppression, and the denial of their humanity.

The right of return is not merely symbolic; it is enshrined in international law. Palestinians have every legitimate right to fight for the restoration of their homeland — including through armed resistance against occupation. Israeli leaders must understand: killing Palestinians will not kill the idea of a Palestinian state. The people have the right to reclaim stolen land and defend themselves by any means necessary.

It is against this backdrop that Hamas’s October 7 attack must be understood. Mohammed Mhawish observed that no people can endure endless oppression without eventually responding. Malcolm Harris, author and social critic, called Hamas’s actions “the response of the most marginalised people on earth when all other options have been foreclosed”. David Klion, in his writing, refused to defend Hamas’s methods or ideology, yet questioned the utility of condemnation: “When nonviolent resistance is criminalised, as it is in 34 US states targeting the BDS movement, objecting to violent resistance in principle feels almost absurd.”

None of these writers explicitly endorsed violence, but their collective argument implies a grim logic: when nonviolence is blocked, resistance turns desperate. Historian Gabriel Winant added that grieving an Israeli Jewish life lost to violence inevitably entails ideological alignment with the IDF.

For over 55 years, Palestinians have lived under brutal military occupation — imprisoned without trial, tortured, and subjected to collective punishment. In the past year alone, over 40 000 Gazans, mostly civilians, have been killed. Israeli officials have declared: “We are fighting human animals,” and openly vowed to “roll out the Gaza Nakba.” The cruelty inflicted on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza — an open-air prison — represents inhumanity at its most grotesque.

Benjamin Netanyahu insists Jerusalem has always been Israel’s capital and demands Palestinians “come to grips with this reality”. He dismisses critics such as Turkish President Erdogan, who rightly labels Israel an oppressive occupying power. Palestinians live in squalor — denied electricity, running water, and the right to build homes or even toilets.

When they do construct shelters, Israeli authorities demolish them. Settlers attack Palestinian children on their way to school. Despite decades of UN resolutions declaring Israel’s occupation illegal, settlements expand, fueling endless regional hatred.

Jimmy Carter’s book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, remains one of the most significant works on the conflict — not only because of his role in the Camp David Accords, but because he dared to invoke the word “apartheid”. The separation wall, whatever its stated purpose, carves the West Bank into disconnected enclaves, reducing Palestine to a patchwork of Bantustans — shattering any hope of a viable state. Homes are demolished daily under pretexts of lacking permits or posing “security risks”, forcing families into rubble or exile. As scholar David Shulman warns, “malignant racism and proto-fascist nationalism” are now mainstream in Israel.

Tony Klug, in his essay It’s the Occupation, Stupid!, argues that if Israel refuses to end the occupation — and if global Jewish communities continue to support it — we will see a surge in antisemitism, potentially unleashing darker forces. This is not a justification, but a sober prediction.

Klug warns that uncritical alignment with policies universally condemned as unjust — policies no Jewish moral authority would accept if applied elsewhere — leads us to misdiagnose rising antisemitism. We wrongly label human rights advocates as covert antisemites simply because they extend their principles to Palestinians. He recounts an acquaintance’s quip: “I thought an antisemite was someone who hated Jews, not someone Jews hated.”

Ending the occupation, Klug insists, is not only the path to reversing Israel’s global delegitimisation — it is essential to halting the rise of antisemitism fueled by its continuation. This is not abstract; it is personal for Jews worldwide.

The comforting myth of an imminent Palestinian state has been shattered by Israel’s far-right government. We now face the reality of a state that proclaims its Jewishness while indefinitely denying basic rights to millions. Klug poses a moral challenge: How complicit are we, as Jews, willing to be in this injustice? What does such complicity do to Jewish values — freedom, justice, equality — that have long defined our identity and contribution to humanity?

Drawing on an idea developed with Palestinian-American thinker Sam Bahour, Klug proposes that Israel be pressured to make an immediate choice: either recognise an independent Palestinian state and help build it, or — pending a final settlement — grant full civil and political rights to all under its control. The slogan: “We can accept either, but not neither.”

This is not a call for a unitary state. Klug acknowledges that neither side currently supports a one-state solution. Instead, he likens it to Scotland’s status within the UK — full rights now, with the option of independence later. The goal is to spark debate and recenter the two-state solution in Israeli politics before it’s too late. Such a move would benefit all: Israel could reclaim its soul; Palestinians could finally stand in the sun; and peace might be rekindled, perhaps under a revived Arab Peace Initiative.

In their article Two States or One? The Future of Israelis and Palestinians, Ian Lustick and colleagues argue that the debate isn’t about which solution is better — but whether we agree on the problem. Two-state advocates see demographics as the issue, solvable by drawing a line. Lustick sees the problem as the entrenched political system that birthed, expanded, and protects the settlements — a system rooted in ideology, culture, and American political support. Transforming it will require forces beyond conventional Israeli or UN politics.

The prolonged statelessness of Palestinians has destabilised the region, nearly dragging the US into war. Too many lives have been lost. Too much suffering endured. The conflict must end.

The only sustainable resolution must meet the basic needs of both peoples: security, independence, and self-determination. Palestinians must have their rights recognised and their wounds healed. Jews must have their national home in Israel secured and respected. Two successful, neighbouring states — bound by shared economic and cultural interests rather than division — offer the only viable path forward. Anything else perpetuates the conflict.

Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians has distorted the Middle East for too long. It is time to end the infamy of half a century of military occupation — and let both peoples reclaim their futures. As Hannah Arendt urged, we must adapt our minds to present realities and imagine new paths.

Ultimately, Israelis and Palestinians will decide their fate. But a comprehensive, fair proposal from the world’s most powerful nations can empower those on both sides who believe peace, justice, and mutual dignity are possible.

The cure for this nightmare is clear: Israel must return to its original borders and allow Palestinians a homeland of their own. The two-state solution is endorsed by nearly the entire world. Tragically, Israel’s oppressive government refuses to budge.

* Dr Vusi Shongwe works in the Department of Sport, Arts, and Culture in KwaZulu-Natal and writes in his personal capacity.

** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, IOL, or Independent Media.

Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.