Yesterday, Senator Chris Van Hollen called for a change in direction from Democrats on funding Israel. Essentially he said it’s time for us to force Israel to begin moving towards a two-state solution with the Palestinians by attaching pre-conditions for all funding from the U.S. Government. You know, as a purely practical matter, I can’t argue with this. We shouldn’t give any other country a dime of aide to do things we don’t want them to do- full stop. I don’t care if we’re talking about close allies or developing nations who are poor. It’s American money and it should be spent in ways we at a minimum support, if not benefit from. I realize I’m taking a position that puts me at odds with say, AIPAC, but well, I think this should be a uniform, across the board policy.

Let’s not bullshit though, we shouldn’t pre-condition aid to any allied nation on crazy ass things that aren’t going to happen though. If we’re going to tell Israel they need to accept a two-state solution right now, we might as well ask them to create a flying cow. There’s a better chance of that turning out okay. Granting independence to any new nation is hard, and while it should always be our goal to make sure all populations in the world are living under a sovereign government they have a say in, some groups are prepared for that and some are not. If we created a nation called Palestine tomorrow, it would be a disaster.

Let’s set the politics aside for a second and look at this as a matter of pragmatism. What would be the borders of this nation? I know the assumption is that it would be Gaza and the West Bank, but there’s a shit ton of assumptions there. Next, there’s the question of who would lead this nation, and how they would be chosen. Remember, after the 2006 elections in Gaza (the last ones) were won by Hamas, they turned around and began killing members of Fatah and other political rivals, essentially creating a one party state. In the West Bank, Mahmoud Abbas serves as the President of the Palestinian Authority and is the leader of Fatah, but he is considered weak and has no reach into Gaza. These two areas are essentially two different places at this point, and probably wouldn’t agree on any set of rules for an election, let alone concede power if they lost it. If you somehow got the power players to the table and to an agreement on elections, there’s still the matter of the neighboring Arab states, who are less than enthusiastic about this idea. In the past, Jordan has wanted the West Bank, and they’re not super crazy about either side governing next door to them. There’s also the question of whether the Golan Heights would be a part of this state or be given back to Syria, and of course Syria has feelings about this. In short, you basically have two “Palestines” right now, your choices to lead it are a weak old man and a terrorist organization, and it’s not at all clear the neighbors would even be okay with this.

Next question, and it’s a big one- what the hell would a Palestinian government be taking over? Gaza has been pretty much bombed out at this point, and basically has a couple million (living, yes, they weren’t “genocided”) people who lack shelter, infrastructure, adequate health care, food, and civil government. Hamas has been leading them, and well, they haven’t been very good to their people. If I were from Gaza, I’d probably be terrified of both the IDF and Hamas at this point. In the West Bank, it’s sort of better, but you do have violence with Israeli settlers and Palestinians regularly. There’s also just the problem of the government the Palestinians have there being a disaster. Abbas’ term ended in 2009. Their government is broke, lacks legitimacy, has corruption issues, and is weak. If Hamas cannot be allowed to rule the Gaza Strip because they’re fanatical terrorists, the Palestinian Authority cannot rule because it’s simply incapable of taking care of the nation. Health issues are rampant. Violence is rampant. Most of the people lack shelter. Poverty and hunger is ever present. It’s a disaster.

Then there is the issue of Benjamin Netanyahu and he and Ariel Sharon’s tenures leading Israel for most of the 21st century. After Oslo I the plan was to give the Palestinians a state in the West Bank and Gaza. The right-wing Israeli leaders have made that nearly impossible. Aside from Netanyahu propping up Hamas as a useful foil for many years, and making sure any effort at self-governance by Palestinians fails, he’s also made the geography nearly impossible. By allowing settlers to take over and seize territory in the West Bank, he’s basically made the West Bank less Palestinian. While most American liberals aren’t big fans of these folks, there’s a very fundamental question of what you would do with these people? Would they just stay there? Would they be governed by Palestine or Israel? Netanyahu set out decades ago to make sure that the Oslo Accords could never be realized. He has literally, physically made that almost impossible.

Finally, there is the politics. In Israel, bringing up a Palestinian State after October 7th has been rejected roundly. There is no way they are going to hand a state over to Hamas, or to a leader too weak to control Hamas, even assuming Israelis would back it at all. If you did create this state, it would be one of the poorest in the world at the outset and if the United States is going to help establish it, we’re going to be responsible for making sure it works. That requires boots on the ground possibly, and lots of money. An electorate that voted for Donald Trump two years ago isn’t going to want to give money to Palestine, or Hamas, or whoever the hell we put in charge there. It’s politically impossible to build support for this state in Israel, and damn near the same in America. Now the surprise- it’s hard in the Arab world too. The neighboring countries aren’t crazy about it. There’s probably not a majority among Palestinians either. There’s probably a sizable number of people in the country that would only accept overtaking Israel and subjugating them in Palestine. A majority? I have no idea. The number is nowhere near zero. My guess is the number of Palestinians for a two-state solution is way less than 50%, and may actually be the weakest number amongst all options.

Look, I appreciate Senator Van Hollen stating the obvious, that handing Netanyahu money hasn’t worked out well for American interests or our stated position. I’m all for some sort of conditions on all foreign aid. The nation of Palestine has not existed for centuries though (to the extent it or Israel ever really did) and it is nowhere near ready to exist now. Attach conditions stopping the settlements, maybe pushing the Israelis on one or two other key policy wants we have in the immediate. Try to stop the fighting for some level of permanent time- maybe a year? Set goals that actually have a chance of happening and won’t just sound good to folks in Park Slope who couldn’t tell you who ruled the Holy Land before the British mandate. Proposals like he wrote, while sounding nice and hopeful to liberals who want the world to be better than it is, are unserious and set everyone up to fail. There’s enough death and failure now. There’s no point to promising unicorns and golden paved roads to peace.