Skip to main content

PALESTINE: Two State Solution is No Solution




The passing of a motion by British MPs, with 274 votes in favour to 12 against has caused a wave of excitement amongst some Muslim and pro-Palestinian supporters. With claims that this is recognition of the Palestinian right to self-determination, or that the international community and Britain specifically is beginning to take some responsibility for the legacy it left behind in the Middle East. Demonstrated by the criticism levelled by MPs at Israel during the House of Commons debate, especially for its settlement policies
We need to question is this non-binding vote in which less than half of MP’s took part in, really the  “symbolic” day and a stepping stone towards Palestinian liberation?
Friends of Israel
The claim that Britain is at last taking some responsibility for the historic wrongs it had committed against the Palestinian people, is exaggerated. The political parties and their MPs who voted for the motion are supportive of Israel and will continue to do so. It is British foreign policy interests that created the state of Israel and continue to be the reason for its support.
This wasn’t a vote about how the UK arms Israel, with arms and commercial trade worth over 7.8 billion. It was a simply a motion to placate public opinion after Israel’s 2014 Gaza massacre. But more importantly it was designed to create an international public opinion to accept the two state solution.
It’s not the first time staunch allies of Israel have criticised its policies, the EU recently joined Washington in harshly criticising the announcement by Israel of 2,600 new housing units in a settlement across the green line. But yet the support offered to the Zionist entity by Washington and London continues unabated. The Zionist entity was conceived by the British government in the Balfour declaration and has been nurtured and strengthened by the West for decades, for their national interests. The attempts, to resume the ‘Road Map’ to a ‘two-state solution’ are in their national interests, but for Muslims in Palestine, such a road would be little more than institutionalising imprisonment and subjugation.
The two state solution – Rewarding Israeli aggression
The Mps who voted in favour of a Palestinian state, voted for the two state model.  Which means Israel gets to keep over 80 per cent of the land it stole, while the Palestinians have to make do with a de-militarised open prison that will be dependent on Israeli generosity.
The terms of the proposed two-state solution include:
  • Israel would recognise a Palestinian State based on the 1967 borders with mutual territorial swap, which would leave the Palestinians with 22% of historic Palestine, allowing Israel to keep the remaining 78%
  • The Palestinian State would be demilitarised and all irregular militias disarmed including those who are defending themselves from occupation
  • There would be no right of return for Palestinian refugees to Israel
  • Israeli troops would remain along border crossings between the Palestinian state and its Arab neighbours, eventually to be replaced by international forces
  • This means a Palestinian state wouldn’t be able to prevent another military incursion, the last one in 2014 saw 1462 Palestinians civilians killed, of whom 495 were children and 253 women. Previous incursionsinclude 643 cumulative murders in 2006, 2158 murders in 2008 and 2332 murders in 2012.
A ‘two-state solution’ would institutionalise the imprisonment and oppression of Muslims. The two state solution is seen as Israel’s last chance to protect its illegal gains. Israel has significant challenges in the years ahead which threatens it. This is why former Israeli Prime Minister Olmert is on record in saying the following “If the day comes when the two state solution collapses and we face a South African style struggle for equal voting rights, then as soon as that happens, the state of Israel is finished.”
A Palestinian state created out of the remnants of pre 1967 is not a viable state, it will have no real resources, no real sovereignty and would be reliant on Israel for its survival. Just look at Israel’s repeated interventions in Gaza, a territory Israel claims it has left.  The recognition of Palestine as a state will legitimise the permanent recognition of Israel and continue the plight of the Palestinian people.
Barak Obama previously stated the  ‘two-state solution’ – is  conditional on  the Palestinians recognize Israel – also mentioning Israel had a right to maintain its own security but the future Palestine should be demilitarized.
“If we resume negotiations,” said Barack Obama, “then I think the Palestinians will have to recognise Israel as a Jewish state and also enable Israel to have the means to defend itself.”
The only solution is the Islamic solution
The two state solution and its explicit recognition of “Israel” is considered by the west as an essential part of the solution. But we must realise the so-called two state solution is nothing but an incorrect solution that forsakes a major part of Palestine- which belongs to the Muslim Ummah- to the occupiers, recognising as a result the legitimacy of the occupying entity. This recognition from the Islamic viewpoint is a betrayal to Allah (swt), His Messenger (saw), and to the believers.
Giving up any land to foreign occupiers is prohibited from the texts of Islam. “Allah forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your deen, and drive you out of your homes, and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for support/protection. Such that do so are zaalimun (wrongdoers)” [TMQ Mumtahana:9]
Allah SWT demands the return of all occupied land to the authority of Islam and Muslims. There can be no compromise on this hukm despite the immense pressures from the enemies of Islam. It is a historic fact that the division of Muslim lands was only achievable after the destruction of the Khilafah. When Sultan Abdul Hamid II was asked to relinquish Palestine to the Zionists in return for a large sum of money, his response was:
“Please advise Dr Hertzel not to make any serious move in this mater. I cannot give up even one small patch of land in Palestine. It is not something that I own as a part of my personal estate. Palestine in fact belongs to the Muslim Nation as a whole. My people have fought with their blood and sweat to protect this land, let the Jews keep their millions and if the Khilafah is torn apart one day, then they can take Palestine without a price. To have the scalpel cut my body is less painful than to witness Palestine being detached from the Khilafah state and this is not going to happen”
Muslims today should unequivocally reject the two state solution for Palestine and campaign for the return for the Khilafah. It’s through articulating an intellectual case for Islam to be established in society that the confidence will return to the Ummah to bring about the Khilafah state, insha’Allah. Through a genuine political authority based on Islam can the Ummah’s problems be effectively solved like the occupation of Palestine.
Indeed the natural situation of Palestine is under the authority of the Khilafah with Bait ul-Maqdis (Jerusalem) as its capital and it is only under the Khilafah that the both the Muslims and the Non-Muslims (Dhimmi) will receive permanent indemnity of their lives as they did in the past.
The Messenger of Allah PBUH said: “This matter (Khilafah) will continue after me in Al-Madina, then (move to) Al-Shaam, then to the peninsula, then to Iraq, then to the city (Constantinople), then to Bait-ul-Maqdis. So if it reaches Bait-ul-Maqdis, then it would have reached its (natural resting place); and no people who remove it (i.e. the capital of the Khilafah) from their land will ever get it back again (for them to be the capital again).” [Narrated by Ibn ‘Asaakir, from Maseerah b. Jaleese]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran